"...but the company has to show investors why they show invest in ptsc."

Sorry, but it's always the same babble.

People invested in PTSC because of the patents - and as long as the patents were not fully approved (through the USPTO) no infringer was willing to pay more than a nuisance fee.

And just as TPL/PTSC demand higher licence fees (at least this is my guess why we are in litigation with 14 companies, 2 at NDOC, 12 at the ITC) those infringers are refusing to pay.

So please tell me, what the company should do other what they did with calling the ITC and going the long way to trial with Acer/HTC (instead of capitulating and accepting nuisance fees again)?

You don't have to answer because everyone (?) knows the answer:
NOTHING.

In contrast to what some people on this board are telling the company has no chance to act proactive resp. is legally not allowed to act.
Now we are in the hands of two judges and a jury - and only AFTER their hopefully favorable decisions the company is in the position and has the obligation to show investors why they should invest in PTSC.

Until then it's a gamble - but you know this already, don't you?

GLTA