We are on the same page. It's absolutely not about what may or may not have been done in the past, as some will no doubt suggest, in hindsight, and without full knowledge of all the facts, merely to continue berating the BoD, but about moving forwards.

Litigation takes time, and until or unless there is agreement, it's a waiting game for all concerned, even the parties to the litigation.

I also hope that the original contracts are reviewed in light of the allegations, and amended to give PTSC greater oversight and protection, who wouldn't?

The actual amounts attributed to licenses are seldom disclosed and while this might be good for the share price in the short term, I don't see the industry norm of NDAs being overcome or usurped. Full disclosure of total fees received will be in the 10's filings.

Agreed on higher fees too.

Hiring an IR at this point in time would be a waste of precious capital as there isn't much more to say that can't be found in the filings. The time for that will be at the conclusion of the PTSC/TPL litigation and further licencees. Perhaps, a PR could be placed when licensing revenues exceed, in total, $400m, and then again at $500m?

.

.

.

Be well