It's simply NOT the case that many, if ANY, public companies put the BULK of their available cash into the ARS. And yes, I understand full well the type of vehicle it WAS prior the freezing of the market.

In fact, the majority of comapanies affected by the ARS issue are LARGE comapnies with LARGE cash reserves, who put their money in the ARS as a LONG-TERM investment strategy. Almost NONE of them list their ARS investment as a "SHORT-TERM INVESTMENT" as PTSC did. For the most part, the money they placed there was NOT cash that they potentially needed to survive or necessary to execute on its business plan. If you think otherwise, please show me and I'll stand corrected. I've actually researched it, and the best I can find is close to 40% of funds being placed in the ARS, but again, that was with a company with 10 fold cash amounts, and a STEADY revenue source, as compared to PTSC.

Also, while we all know many companies were "caught" in the ARS freeze, it's a myth that there was no warning. There were various analysts and financial advisors that preached warnings as far back as 2004. For example:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/auction-rate-warnings-fell-on-deaf-ears

But that's not the point. You guys keep referencing all these companies that were caught as though PTSC should be lumped in with them. You seem to ignore that at the time PTSC was making these moves, they were battling for the life of the MMP and also negotiating a less than favorable settlement with the J3. Also, the companies you want to compare srategies with all have PROVEN business models, with STEADY and PREDICTABLE cash generating revenue streams. PTSC simply did and does not....yet and we're nearly 2 years down the road. It's Apples to Oranges comparison. Our CFO and BOD should have been more fiduciarily prudent. And as Brian has pointed out with the Cayman Island account, they haven't seemed to learn their lesson. Probably, because the downside to them is nearly nil.