I understand your point, but when you consider the actual monetary values involved, it seems illogical as you say. According to the filing, we're talking about $5.2M in par value of ARS. PTSC already has a credit facility that allows them to borrow 50% of the value. So the actual maximum LIQUID cash gain we're talking about is $2.6M. So if PTSC is settling for as little as 65% as Brian suggests, or even as much as 90% as seems possible through the "substantial" description, we're actually talking about a cash liquidity gain of maybe $1.7M to $2.3M (but also representative of a LOSS of $300K to $900K in value).

Even if the cash had dropped $500K per month since the beginning of June, they should still have substantially MORE cash than TPL if your read on TPL is correct, and loads more assets and access to cash through conventional financing or dilutive offerings.

I'm not saying staying power isn't an issue, I'm simply observing that moving at best $2.5M from their long term assets to their cash line on the balance sheet, when they were already getting at par redemptions periodically anyway, and while they still had relatively plenty of cash seems peculiar at best. I don't see how a 20% gain in the cash line when it results in a larger than that amount loss in the asset line is strenghthening the staying power.

Perhaps I should add that if there was a history of strong financial moves, and adept planning and execution, I'd be more likely to see something more along what you're suggesting, but......