From which document does your quote come? I must be blind because I cannot find it in the 10Q or the associated PR.

In any case, does it not sound in conflict with what is implied by:

"Cash shortfalls and liquidity issues currently experienced by PDS and TPL, and continued negative cash flows incurred by PDSG, will have an adverse effect on our liquidity. Accordingly, we are in the process of examining alternatives that could allow for the partnering or divestiture of PDSG. If successful, these measures may provide for a further reduction in expenses and cash use, or additionally in the event of divestiture, cash proceeds."

Perhaps I'm reading too much in, but the inclusion of TPL/PDS funding issues suggests there is a need for liquidity perhaps to support, basically, PDS (Alliacense). To be a bit more specific, the inclusion of TPL in this statement is what leads me to this conclusion. IMO, it suggests a need to maintain a capability to fund PDS - our contribution AND TPL's, to keep the licensing engine running.

However, combining the two quotes could possibly suggest intent similar to what I suggested as a possible (but admittedly unlikely) remedy to the current TPL/PTSC dispute over the unsecured loan. That is, a possible intent to exercise that clause regarding shifts in PDS (MMP) percentage ownership due to fund contribution failures by TPL.

It is hard to believe TPL would let this happen, allowing a shift in ownership percentage. It seems that they would go after funds from ANYWHERE to avoid this from happening.

So now we throw in the Moore/TPL dispute and potential "deeper" ramifications, and it really gets confusing, or at least more interesting (in our relative blindness).

The good news is that IMO the headache is for TPL, not PTSC. We are in relatively good shape. IMO we are not really subject to losing anything, but perhaps gaining something.

But there is also this quote from the 10Q:

"Through the date of this filing we and TPL each contributed $580,000 to fund the working capital of Phoenix Digital Solutions, LLC ("PDS"). We expect the contributions to continue in the future due to the working capital demands of PDS."

This quote suggests there is no real issue/concern.

AAARGH!!!

Same bottom line: When the PTO gets off its butt and does the right thing ('336), these funding issues should fall away PDQ.

JMHOs, spec, and confusion! It may be a case of "trying too hard" to sort all this out when, recognizing the "bottom line", it's much ado about nothing.

SGE