Facts are that Cliff Flowers took the position as CEO of PTSC on 10/9/09 and....

According to PTSC's financials, PTSC closed August of 2009 with nearly $33M in assets, and closed November of 2009, with over $29M in assets., so it's safe to say that PTSC had roughly $30M in total assets with nearly $19M of it in liquid assets (cash or marketable securities) at the time Cliff assumed the helm, and ......

The day after Cliff took the CEO position, PTSC closed at 30 cents.

So what are the results of him "doing his job" since that time?

As of the close of May of this year, PTSC had $8.1M in total assets with just under $5M of them being in cash or marketable securities. So in 3 years time, CLIFF FLOWERS has stewarded the company to over a $22M loss on the balance sheet. Of the over $14M drop in "liquid" assets, he's personally received $1.24M of it himself, and that's not counting the nearly $150K he's received since May 31.

As of today, PTSC trades at 9 cents. So in 3 years time, CLIFF FLOWERS has stewarded the company to a 70% loss of its market value.

So he's PERSONALLY overseen and as CEO is responsible for those things. In ADDITION to that data, the MMP has earned $27M in license fees since the quarter he took over. To earn that $27M, PDS spent rougly $22M, so ostensibly, PTSC received $2.5M in NET profit from PDS (half of the $5M net licensing profit). In addition to that revenue, PTSC ALSO received $1.1M in revenue from PDSG during this 3 year period. So in reality, CLIFF FLOWERS has stewarded the company to a $25.4M loss in assets INCLUDING a $17.6M loss in cash or marketable securities.

In addition to those "REMARKABLE" accomplishments, under his watch, PTSC loaned TPL $1.95M of which $1M was UNSECURED! PTSC then had to SUE its business partner in order to collect on this debt. In the process of settling this suit, PTSC not only paid its own legal fees, but ALSO agreed to pay TPL even MORE money through PDS in the form of lobbying fees and other compensation.

What's the most confounding thing about the above paragraph is that the lawsuits came just months AFTER the MMP was emerging from the USPTO process, a time that the licensing partnership should have been providing a UNIFIED and STRONG front, not fighting EACH OTHER in court. IMO, this was HUGELY detrimental to the licensing effort / momentum / fee structure, and the REAL COSTS of that set of wholly CONTROLLABLE circumstances will never truly be known.

In ADDITION to the above sad set of facts, during Cliff's tenure, PTSC has managed to estrange the other 50% MMP owner by settling their TPL lawsuit withOUT securing Chuck Moore's future as well, which is something Mr. Moore claims was promised by PTSC. So, while it may never impact PTSC ultimately, there is a POSSIBILITY that if / when Moore clears the TPL hurdle, depending on how that occurs, he could similarly throw PTSC under the bus and cause total chaos in the MMP licensing by licensing the MMP on his own. I doubt this would happen, but a pissed off at PTSC Chuck Moore isn't really a strength for us, IMO.

If these are the type of results you expected, then I'd have to agree with you, that he's "MANAGED YOUR EXPECTATIONS" quite well! lol.