I scan this Board on occasion, and all I see are your wild speculations and stretched promotional versions of events yet to take place; just highly selective linking, optimistic opinions, or possibly even spokeswords of some third party (not you) with a vested interest to direct specific investor beliefs and behavior

Ahh, you mean like this?:

If it were an insignificant matter that was reflected or misstated only in "press releases" for business and licensing puffery or posture, why would there be a need for Moore to have "ownership clarified in court" ? What is the resistance of PTL that brought it to this stage ? Why would he be forced to make the dispute public ?

The deeper immediate issue beyond the resolving of the actual ownership question, is the realistic breakdown in relations which have likely occurred, and will that impact other ancillary issues, including Moores willingness to continue to allow TPL to License his interest in the MMP. We already know TPL ended Moore's latest joint efforts, "They terminated the project", "I'll discuss availability when the dust clears."

I have not rereviewed those assignments, but if Moore felt TPL was trying to defraud or steal or somehow unscrupilously take his ownership interests in the MMP, do you think things will be back to normal for his licensing relations with them if he has to fight them legally for ownership; win or lose. The preceeding question brings a whole slew of very interesting and likely problematic PTSC related questions to mind.

spin away

Be well