If Greg Baroni was the guy hired, and was the guy performing the strategic assessment, it doesn't affect my ability to come to some conclusions about how his involvement might affect PTSC, and thus my investment.

On the other hand, if Baroni Management Company LLC was who was hired, and other unknown people "under the diretion of Greg Baroni" though perhaps with no real substantial involvement by Greg Baroni were performing the strategic assessment (no way to tell from the PR), doing so utilziing an entitiy that may have numerous other "important" interest involved in it, with a completely unrelated mission compared to for example Eclat Consulting, or other entities that Baroni is involved with/in may on the other hand have completely other conclusions that can be drawn.

The point is, based on the PR PTSC issued, there is no ability by the interested investor to make any serious conclusions about what this hiring might mean, EXCEPT to ASSUME that it somehow equates to something that WASN'T spelled out in the PR. Based on the market's reaction to the PR, I'd venture to guess that my view is shared by many in the investment community as it clearly has had no positive impact on the market's view of PTSC despite the IR rep's characterization of it as a "very good" thing. So, should we infer from the PR that PTSC meant something completely different than what they wrote, or should we infer that Baroni was deceptive in how he presented himself to PTSC, or should we infer that this is just a matter of semantics and has no real import to the situation? Please feel free to tell us what door we should pick and show me the facts that support your conclusion. Even if the LLC issue were deemed a mere technicality, is there any public record like a website, mailing address, phone number, that can help to clarify/analyze Baroni Management Company?

With respect to Brian, your constrant reasserting that Brian hasn't responded, doesn't make it so, any more so than your repeated stating that the MOU had to mean more than others proposed. Simply do the DD. It's been responded to, directly and indirectly, and clearly posting it again will serve no purpose as PROVEN by the constant rehashing of the issue.