TPL repaid repaid the loan because we got some substantial licensing fees (enough so that PDS retained $7M). Had that not occurred, I don't think for a minute that TPL would have paid the loan off, litigation or not.

Also, considering the lincensing , I just hope that TPL/PTSC didn't provide another early move discount to some marquee infringer just ot settle up the books with TPL on the loan.

Don't get me wrong, relative to no licensing, and continued unmet obligations from TPL, the news is good. However, IMO, it's all in the framework of the same people who have been outmaneuvered time after time. So the question remains, as to what is the "opportunity cost" of these people being at the helm at a time when these huge issues are being revisited and litigated. Based on experience, it tells me that if you want to characterize the outcomes we're seeing as a 4 out of 10, then better qualified people would likely deliver a 7 out of 10. Obviously 4 is better than 0, but if it could be a 9 but for the skill of our representatives, that's the consistent issue IMO. I

That's the problem I see. We'll never know that cost or what was left on the table that others would have scooped up on our behalf. When they get rid of everyone else but the ones who got us in the mess, and still continue to reward themselves and not show confidence in thier efforts in the form of substantial share purchases a such crappy pps levels, it broadcasts the doubt and questions that are reflected on this board, and in the 9 cent share price.

Are we sure the progress that seems to be being made isn't just settling by our BOD to show progress to ease the pressure? Also, withOUT the pressure that HAS been applied, would we have realized the changes you list? I think the discussion of history as prologue is important, and will be what leads to a BETTER history for the future prologue.