Hard to argue against your logic. Aside from and even with the obvious caveat you mention that the numbers have to indicate positive progress, it all boils down to communication. Consistent, clear, and strategic communication.

Additionally, since BY AGREEMENT, PTSC has to APPROVE all of TPL's MMP related PRs just as TPL has to APPROVE all of PTSC's PRs, anything that TPL or Allicense releases with respect to the MMP is just as though PTSC released it.

That being said, it would also be beneficial if they remained consistent in their disclosures amongst and between licensing partners. For example, if they said "over 85" in one PR or filing, it should NOT be indicated in a later PR that "over 80" licenses were signed as Alliacense has done. Additionally, PTSC should be able to do as you indicated, either announce the licenses sold absent naming the companies who bought, and/or include aggregate license fees earned.

You gotta wonder why they don't!