I've kicked this around a bit further with the thought that there must be reasons for why PTSC's Audit Committee and Compensation Committee Chairpersons are receiving compensation that appears overly generous.

I offer only one thought, and it relates to one of my earlier posts in this thread; most companies have support staff that performs the leg-work for these activities (as specified in the Sarbanes-Oxley info you kindly and patiently provided), and the Chairpeople review and attest as to whether the info is current, complete and correct. Thus, IMO, the comparison with Rambus may not be too revealing, as Rambus undoubtedly has plenty of staff to perform the leg-work and advise. With this in mind, it would appear that what Rambus pays is overly generous.

Where is PTSC's support staff? Very limited, most likely. This suggests that (unlike Rambus and other larger companies), PTSC's Chairpeople not only serve as the figurehead party authorized to attest with associated accountability (which IMO is basically what Sarbanes-Oxley is all about), but also the person performing at least a significant portion of the required work.

What's it worth, realistically? Obviously difficult to assess. But based on the descriptions for these roles, it appears that the Compensation Committee Chair pretty much has to be an astute corporate attorney, and the Audit Committee Chair pretty much has to be an astute corporate accountant. Both have to be not only intimately knowledgable looking at PTSC, but also very aware of prevailing costs associated with securing litigation support and financial audit support in the general marketplace.

Actual effort required, even by properly equipped talent? Unknown.

FWIW,

SGE