Thanks to all who have contributed, especially in last week, to painting a reasonably understandable picture of how this PTSC melodrama is playing out. I should point out that I agree with those holding that PTSC's directors and their management minions are just short of thieves. Despite their siphoning tens of millions out of the company, I think there may still be a last spurt in PPS.

One of my deepest concerns since the first announced licensing agreements is the structure of those agreements. I have a fondness for that old adage applied to all physical asset transactions (gold, houses, horses, whiskey, etc.): "You can name the price if you'll let me name the terms."

Occasionally posters on this board have mentioned the possibility of, or even evidence of, recurring payments associated with the settlements. But to date I've seen no strong evidence of such. Correct terms could mitigate the need for really huge up-front, one-time settlements. Payments appropriately calibrated on verifiable, volumetric measures would suffice.

It would be most gratifying to learn of recurring payments via an 8-K ...