Your post only serves to reinforce my earlier comments about your paradigm through which you read and comment on my posts. You want to conveniently ignore what has been the consistent and ongoing set of historical facts and refuse to acknowledge the optimistic future possiblities I include.

As for repetition, you should answer your own question yourself. A quick glance at your posting history shows you've been posting the same refrain from 72 cents down to below 8 cents over the last 5 years. Always coming up with and excuse and defense as to why things weren't better, and always hinting paradise it's just around the corner. I'd think you'd be bored of that, or perhaps you have a reason for ignoring reality and trying to persuade others to do so as well.

Did the following "formidable strategies" serve the MMP well?

• all out war between TPL and Chuck Moore.
• initiation of lawsuits between TPL and PTSC just as the re-exam processes were coming to a close served the MMP well?
• discounting the MMP in order to get licensees to license other of TPL's portfolios has served the MMP well?
• TPL's possible insolvency and threats of shutting down the MMP program if PTSC didn't accept certain terms has served the MMP well?

While I know you love to repeat the claim, was it really JUST the re-exams that resulted in the slow down in both number and values of MMP licenses or could perhaps some of these other issues have played a part? A large part perhaps? As an infringer, how much of a hurry would you be in to sign a deal with multiple partners of a property that are all suing each other, possibly insolvent, or pissing away corporate treasury that might be used to take you to court with?

What exactly gives you the impression that DL is a "formidable strategist"? Is it the one sided agreements he forges, or the disregard he has for his business partners, or the willingness to structure multi-portfolio license agreements so that he personally benefits the most despite the damage it does to the MMP program or his partners? Please expound on this analysis that provides you with this formidable impression of Mr. Leckrone. So far, to me he seems more a bully and slick salesman than a "formidable strategist". Granted, I've never met him so my impressions come only from others' reported comments and actions.

If your closed mind needs to assign an agenda to my posting, perhaps you could categorize it as hoping to illuminate the facts where others attempt to hide them. My agenda would be to push for transparency and accountabilty that would have AVOIDED stiffing Chuck Moore, that would have AVOIDED comingling of licensing and associated expenses, that would have AVOIDED discounted MMP licenses to the benefit of other less valuable portfolios, and to have avoided the unneccary pissing away of PTSC's treasury due to poor stewardship that allowed these things to happen.

Just imagine if PTSC had maintained the 40 cent range pps it had acheived after the '336 was first re-certified in 2009 and still had over $32M in assets it had then when yesterday's PR was issued. We'd be flirting with 50 cents rather than 11 cents based on the 16% bump in pps we saw today.

Is that enough elaboration on the desired effect?