There is no argument from me that today's PR about a license agreement is good news.

What I don't understand is, if Lamberts is correct, in that there may have been other license agreements signed in the 2nd quarter, why didn't PTSC tell us? Why mention one but not any others? I can certainly understand honoring a non disclosure not to mention a company by name. However, it doesn't help our share price to remain quiet regarding licensing activity.

We shall see.....10Q due Jan 17.

I am hoping for an announcement of a dividend before or at the SHAM.