While I agree with most of what you say, I do have to take exception to the "revolving door on the CEO's office" bit. While there have been changes, I have seen no indications that the BoD "forced" out Pohl, or Turley for that matter.

Pohl announced his intent to retire almost a year in advance. If the BoD were "forcing" him out, I doubt they would have let him hang around that long.

Turley, per his parting words, left out of frustration. Now, perhaps his frustration grew out of his inability to get approvals of his desired actions by the BoD. Or perhaps over the lack of any control, and possibly even visibility, of income via TPL. Or perhaps it was because his otherwise active mouthpiece was muzzled. Forced out? Questionable.

"If you want safe stocks buy IBM or GE. If you want to bet on a long shot, try PTSC. You pay your money and you take your ride."

Safe? IBM down $1.26 at the moment (~1%). GE down a buck (~4%). Not so significant, but still.

There is one thing you leave out - perhaps because it is univerally understood. And that's the potential upside of PTSC. Get through the re-exams relatively unscathed and, well, I think you KNOW.

So in a market where everything is tredding water, if they're lucky, the risk gets kind of skewed. IMO, a complete failure at the PTO is already pretty much "priced in" to our PPS. So anything positive out of the PTO and good things should happen, real fast. What's going turn the likes of IBM and GE around in the near term?

So IMO the "risk equation", thanks to the overmarket, is a bit more palatable for PTSC. And if we can "home run" the PTO - on just one patent - the risk equation should give everyone the munchies.

JMHO,

SGE