"PTSC should demand a third director of PDS as required by the Master Agreement/ComAg. Why are Carl and Dan the only directors sitting on the BoD for PDS when three are required? I believe that Carl is ineffective against the demands of Leckrone and a third and totally independent person might make a huge difference in how things happen in the future (assuming a future)"

Unless this is how CJ (still employed by Swartz, no?) wants or has been told to keep it. It also assumes than Dan and CJ are in lock-step on any decisions, as there is no third to breaks "ties".

I suppose it's not dissimilar to the PTSC BOD. How often do you think Gloria disagrees with CJ and Cliff steps in with the decider?

The big question - to whom does CJ pledge his allegiance on PTSC matters? To whom does he turn for advice and guidance? Swartz? Leckrone? PTSC shareholders?

Can anyone recall a statement by PTSC to the Shareholders and/or SEC explaining the long period during which this required third-party of an entity 50% owned by PTSC has not been there? Or does Leckrone control that PR stream too?

I don't even see the need for PDS and the money it costs in overhead (including CJ's EXTRA stipends and expenses). Surely an escrow account would suffice with an indpendent trustee (e.g a bank).