I don't know how anyone could take action agains RG/PTSC just for reviewing and dissecting the agreement. He is CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER of a public company. It is completely within his job description, and in fact part of his responsibility to make sure the company is SEC compliant, and for him to knowingly and perhaps even unknowingly, through an act of omission, allow it to not be, is actually what is actionable. That's not to say they are not SEC compliant, and perhaps he's done it already, who knows. The problem is exactly ALL of the issues Brian, I and others have raised in my opinion, and the lack of transparency on those issues is what leaves the perception that they probably haven't done anything about it.

As for whether PTSC can challenge or renegotiate, keep in mind, all it is is a CONTRACT. Of course it can be revisited, renegotiated, terminated, etc. etc. Doesn't mean doing so (with the exception of termination) will result in anything positive or negative, or in changes at all, but the reason contracts are made is to define terms so that if there ARE revisions, questions, new issues, etc., the agreement is defined so each party to the contract knows what is in and what is out, and therefore knows what would NEED to change if one sought that change.

The only issue is, are PTSC Management and BOD fulfilling their fiduciary responsiblity to the shareholders of the company? By you post, you cleary have suspicions they haven't or are not. I'd say that's the general perception, IMO. Management and BOD clearly hope that we'll all live with that perception without the willingness to do anything about it. So far, they're correct.