When I make mention to my "deep concerns," the issues each of you raise are at the heart of them. It should be evident by now that my particular view is trained more on the future and less on the past. This is not to say I am blind to the past, or that I particularly enjoy the elegantly gritty, yet dry bouquet of a mouthful of well-aged sand ;-).

I, too, have always felt that those behind the TPL curtain (so to speak) have had an unfair advantage with regard to information before it is made public. This is especially true for those holding PTSC shares, such as Leckrone. I do not find expressed anywhere in the Master Agreement or Commercialization Agreement the need for Patriot, as the public company that it is and accountable as such to its shareholders, to be given the consideration that one would assume is demanded by regulation. In fact, the language seems to go out of its way to ensure that this very thing is avoided, meaning that TPL has the power regarding any information that might affect, negatively or positively, the success of the "project." I understand that there are areas that can be legally circumventing, but they do not make this any more palatable. If TPL's employees have the knowledge but are not expressly required to account for PTSC stock purchases made in light of possessing that knowledge, what is an investor to think? I hearken back to kiddtrader's post of November 18, 2008, the point at which this really hit home for me...

http://agoracom.com/ir/patriot/forum...

Perhaps all of this is moot if one considers the share price and the lack of any reliable or predictable reaction to any news of late, but it still stands on principle.

I agree that Patriot's new PDSG branding is one good and definite way to distance its new core businesses from the legacy of the MMP, good and bad. I see it as a necessary, critical step, in my opinion, if Patriot is to exit from this fog of uncertainty with a chance to grow a revenue-generating business of its own.

(Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. My comments on the Master Agreement and Commercialization Agreement and their relationship are a layman's paraphrasing, at best, so those who have a more thorough understanding of the please correct any misunderstanding I might erroneously introduce here; my apologies if this occurs and my advanced thank you for all corrections).