"Since you were not there - how could you possibly know "

Exactly! YOU don't KNOW either, but yet you raise this as a defense. For starters, some of that BOD guided the company to a position that presumably NEEDED the last ditch financing effort. So, who in retrospect should be held accountable for being in that position?

Secondly, where in the pattern of deals do you find support for your skepticism, whether it's the:

• S&L financing
• the warrantholder divy awards
• the one-sided master and commericial agreeements
• the legally questionable tying of a public company's disclosure rights and control of its main assets and revenue source by a private company
• the allowing of a TPL employee to remain as the "independent" member of the PDS management committee
• the rotating door of CEO's
• the myriad of acquisitions that have been written off for losses
• the questionable viabitity of PDSG
• the questionable deal made in acquiring Crossflo, only to turn around and sue the people they made a deal with
• the tying up of all of its liquid resources in one vehicle (ARS)
• the questionable private communications of BOD members with certain shareholders
• the UNSECURED loan to TPL
• the FACT that despite years of questions, only AFTER HTC made a disclosure in a court filing (as if PTSC wasn't aware that would be coming), ONLY THEN does PTSC file action against TPL (especially knowing that was the timing the patents were likely to begin emerging from the USPTO reexam process)
• the CONTINUED gluttonous compensation that the remaining BOD members reward themselves with in light of their ongoing failures

Let's see, there's educated guesses and analysis, and there's blind faith. I'd say BaNosser and most of the other critical analysis of the BOD are founded in a HISTORY of RESULTS of poor performance by the BOD, and NOT on some kind of cherry-picking 20/20 hindsight and monday morning quarterbacking that you want to suggest.

But feel free to provide the RESULTS that back up your more positive view of the BOD, and why you think KEEPING them is a move that will draw NEW investors to the table. I'm all ears for a perspective that supports your optimistic outlook. I'd say though that typically, when a BOD and management team share the type of optimism that you have, they DEMONSTRATE that by OWNING shares in the company and sending the market the message that they are aligned with investors.

Complain about people who have sold some shares here and there all you want, but when a company trades at 8-15 cents, and the BOD and Management buy none or a drop in the bucket in shares, the REAL deterrent to NEW investors is the BOD and Managements total lack of support in their own abilities and company. You're barking at the wrong people.