Not sure if your being sarcastic or not? I'll assume the latter. That was my opinion on how I chose to interpret some of the information put out by Alliacense. I would use the "supply chain disruption" as an example. I don't remember who commented on it first but, immediately someone siezed on the statement. They posted how they love hearing such strong language. Really? They've been using the "supply chain" rhetoric for the last 3 years. Why should an investor care about that kind of verbiage? Do you think it was put out there to make investors feel better? It's all part of the PR chess game between TPL and potential infringers. We don't sit in the meeting so, there's no way to prove or disprove how forcefully they use that tactic while negotiating. That was my point and I made it very clear. I value the information Alliacense provides that is proven fact, like a signing. The rest is just mind games, IMO.