Actually, the story talks about the $5 share price being a threshold at which institutions are allowed to OWN a stock, meaning they can't buy it if it is below $5 and must sell it if it goes below $5. I'm not sure how much latitude these institutions have in that, but I'm assuming that all the reports and stories we read are at least accurate to the idea that there are institutions who have those restrictions. And as you point out, the $5 pps only puts them into the realm of possibilities, HOWEVER, arguing that it's useless to do what it takes to get into that realm is simply that, an argument!

It is up to PTSC to promote itself and provide enough visibility into its operations and financials to ENTICE these guys to want to buy once the opportunity to buy is unlocked for them. That's why companies go on road shows and conferences and issue reports and releases. To say no one will touch them for years is to ingnore all of the start up and emerging companies, many who have less promise and finanicial support than PTSC, yet have significant instititional ownership. There are hundreds to point to, but if you want to check, look at the nearly 50% ownership of CRIS, or the 98% ownership of SGEN, or ......etc. etc. etc.

If PTSC shows, as RG claims he'll present a plan showing, that Crossflo will be proiftable in the next fiscal year, and Holocom is profitable already, and they can show that that will continue and grow, and they continue to grow the balance sheet, and PDS continues to provide profit, even if widly inconsistent, there is no reason to expect that institutions wouldn't invest. Many different funds and investors, have different risk levels and market sectors they want to own, so it's just a matter of REMOVING the obstacles to institutional ownership, one of the largest ones seeming to be the PPS.

As for P/E's, etc: Currently, based on the last 12 months (previous 4 qtrs - not counting the one to be revealed tomorrow), PTSC is trading at a P/E of 4.2 or so, based on net income of 14.5M over those 4 quarters. Most of that revenue has been unpredictable as to its repeatability because it's MMP related. Hence the VERY LOW P/E. If PTSC can show even $10M of predictable, repeatable, and growable net income, then I think it can move into a more typical P/E ratio for EMERGING COMPANIES, that's typically in the neighborhood of 15 to 25, and can reach over 30 depending on the company.

So assuming that RG's preaching truth in his Crossflo profitability prognosis, if we apply a P/E of 20 based on a net revenue annually of $10M and growing, that would equate to a market cap of $200M. At 410M shares, that about 49 cent/sh and a EPS of $0.024 per share. HOWEVER, if PTSC were to R/S at 1 share for each 15 shares outstanding, then all things being equal, the PPS would increase to about $7.30 per share opening the door for these institutions to buy, and perhaps even more importantly, the EPS would now reflect $0.36 per share, which is a much sexier and attractive number than 2.3 cents per share, even though they mean the same thing in reality.

I assume PTSC can, (and I'm expecting RG to soon outline the path to, and the timing required), earn $10M per year ASIDE from the MMP. Add in the MMP revs that may come with a USPTO recertification, and the whole model gets ratcheted up considerably. Eliminate the MMP, and the model still works.

PTSC may still be a lotto ticket as you say, but RG has a window to stand and deliver on the acquisitions that if he does so in the next 6 to 12 months, and provides the visibility that proves it, I'd think that an R/S will come by the end of the year, and the institutions will follow.