I am saying that most dissatisfied shareholders are voicing displeasure with the one-sided agreement which allowed another entity to screw PTSC shareholders"

I substantially agree with you, but would place the emphasis of the displeasure differently. In my opinion, though the MA & CA are written in favor of TPL, there are PLENTY of checks and balances in the agreement that PTSC COULD HAVE employed that would have prevented Leckrone from doing what they allege he had done. From as simple as assuring an INDEPENDENT, independent member of the management committee of PDS, to constant vigilance about the licenses signed, the negotiation process, and the expenses reimbursed.

Just because they unwisely (and quite frankly IMO legally questionable for a public company) agreed to language in those agreements that opened the door to such shenanigans by TPL and Moore and subordinated to a private company, their rights and responsibilities, doesn't mean, that PTSC shouldn't have had someone standing guard to prevent unlawful passage through that door. That PTSC DID allow that to happen, despite continued and vociferous warnings from many sharehoders, me included, dating back as early as 2007 is unconcionable. That we heard assurances TO THE CONTRARY from the BOD as late as 2010 proves their lack truthfulness of exercising their fiduciary responsibility. That it wasn't UNTIL REVEALED IN A COURT FILING BY AN INFRINGER that PTSC FINALLY TOOK ACTION, raises the SERIOUS question as to whether PTSC BOD members / management were not somehow complicit and/or being rewarded "for their efforts" yet again, in some fashion not recorded in PTSC & PDS' financials. That these BOD members are holding on tooth and nail to their positions, despite their self-acknowledged frustration and inability to steer the company out if the ditch REINFORCES the idea that they are doing so mainly to give them the opportunity to PROTECT THEMSELVES, even if to the detriment of shareholders.

Additionally, when you look at the players involved in the M&A activities, and the histories of those acquired companies, was there a "good old boy network" in play that used these activities to transfer money from the company treasury to others involved with these companies? Were those companies WORTH what PTSC paid? History proves otherwise. My understanding is that at the least Crossflo had been on the market for quite a while with no takers. Then all of a sudden, PTSC comes into the picture and spends $10M in cash & stock to pick it up. Was the execution of that M&A more geared toward rewarding Renny Senn for past relationships, or in reality a properly valued acquisition? How about the others?

IMO, considering the history of their agreements with TPL, and the level of oversight that the PTSC BOD & Management apparently has provided over citical company affairs, ALL OF THESE ARE LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS, IMO, and deserve A LOT MORE ATTENTION FROM THE COMPANY TO SHAREHOLDERS, than the MINIMALLY COMPLIANT tact they and others here are so proud of them for providing.