I spoke with Mr. Flowers today and was impressed with his feelings on a variety of subjects.

He is opposed to the Newsletter partially as a result of what happened when David Pohl tried to do one and it blew up in his face and ended up causing more problems than it solved. They will continue to use PR newswire when there is actual news.

I talked with him on Bod members and PDSG, specifically getting more input from Mistry and Schrock especially on PDSG. He said I was probably expecting too much from board members in that look at any other board in the country and what do they produce. I stated you are only one person and how much could one person do. He went on to say that the money going into PDSG had to be limited. I said because they have no contracts yet. He agreed. They are working with Baroni and time will tell if things are going to work out. As of right now, they need to start producing. This is and seems obvious.

The only other thing of concern is the court case and MMP of which he could not give me any details but this is obviously their highest priority. It is hoped that they will get back to licensing and this is and will be a major source of revenue. From Mr. Flowers perspective, if we can get back to a good licensing revenue stream then we could look at consistent dividends from the portfolio. This could set PTSC apart from all OTC Securities which would be both a marketing tool and an SP appreciator. In the past, I was opposed to this, I was wrong. I believe that had we constantly received dividends ( look at the work of Lamberts on the licensure fees we would have paid for every share we purchased over the years. Ain't that a kick in the.....Think of it this way, if we got a nickel dividend right now that would be a 50% ROI.

I believe that the company believes that an error was made with the numerous efforts of the previous CEO that was flushing our earnings down the drain. Earnings that could have been divies to you and me.

It is up to PDSG to prove them wrong which they have thus far been unable to do. His idea is to grow a constant revenue stream that

The relationship with TPL is crucial of which he could not really discuss and I didn't ask. This seems obvious. As I've said so often on so many posts, PTSC needs to be true partners and we need to make sure TPL is not pulling the wool over the eyes as they have apparently done ad infinitum.

I was impressed with Mr. Flowers and the dialogue that we had showed that he is a coomen sense type person that is not up for any bull but looking at the bottem line and how he can make a profit for PTSC now not tomorrow.

Many of these same points were intiimated at SHM according to participants. Mr Flowers is a straight shooter. Somebody does wrong, and he is going to take them to court. No pussy footing around. I think that they are ready to stand up to TPL and the chips will fall where justice lies with PTSC. He said that we must remember that this is a small company and they must live within their means. They intend on getting the money due and standing up for their rights.

In my opinion, what a lot of us wanted, a company growing leaps and bounds, will probably not occur in the near term. The Interim CEO is prudent and focused on keeping us solvent.

Ilet him know that I would report to Agora on what we discussed. He eased much frustration. We have the right to vote members on or off the board and we should exercise this right. If PDSG goes, I know that we have little or no need for Mistry or Schrock and little for Felcyn or Falk. You are either adding to the bottem line or you are not. Why pay someone just to sit their and vote themselves another pay raise if they are not in some fashion contributing to the bottem line.

Mr Flowers is doing his job, effectively from what I can observe. I can't speak positively for any other board member. Does this mean we should have any board members? Probably not......especially if they are doing nothing for the bottem line. PTSC cannot afford otherwise.