Our BOD has been so wrong, so often, I don't think they could identify their own car in an otherwise empty parking lot.

It seems to me:

-former infringers who only paid pennys on the infringment use dollar,

-TPL, who apparently defrauded and breached it's fiduciary duty to it's business partners, and threatened PTSC to cut off licensing unless he was loaned money outside of PDS

-TPL insiders and a group of creditors who likely couldn't care less what happens to the MMP and future licensing once they recover enough percentage of their listed debt,

-and PTSC Leadership, who helped negotiate the original unequal and limited access/oversight Agreement, made multiple million dollar cash loans to TPL, and who elected to not force greater control/ownership of PDS when they relieved TPL of the requirement to make their PDS contributions (see Felcyn's sworn declaration); among countless other foolish, selfish and shortsided judgment failures (see the past 5 years)....

If all of these folks with opposing personal interests are all on the same side of the page, it means that the Moore Plan threatens to dismantle and disrupt the same players and status quo that he feels lead to his ruin, and also likely imploded our company too.

This "going along to get along" strategy will end in disaster for those who own the MMP; but it's a great plan for those entrenched individuals who will receive a regular feeding off the Joint Reorganization plan's implicit necessity to have continuous license revenue generation; no matter how reduced it may be when compared to hard negotiated but irregular collection and extended prosecution timelines needed to recover higher actual infringment damages.

The Joint Plan of Reorganization is endorsed by the Creditors because it is about paying back the creditors, it is NOT about maximizing MMP licenses so that MMP owners too are made whole for the unauthorized past use or future use of the technology. It appears to me that the value of MMP licenses going forward will likely be discounted just as badly or worse than they were before.

Moore objects to the Joint Plan because fundamentally he does not want his own MMP revenue potential and payouts to be penalized due to TPL's individual independent obligations; neither should PTSC Shareholders. Moore is also looking to end his (and PTSC Shareholders) continued suffering of the inherent weakness of NPEs and Patent Troll vulnerabilities in the eyes of the Courts; as well as overbilling and Work Product access restrictions long suspected of being practiced by TPL related entities...and so much more.

I believe that if our BOD members held more company stock than 1/3 of 1%, and didn't already guarantee themselves such generous and non performance related monthly cash pay, they would oppose the Joint Plan and the Creditors plan, and endorse or submit one that was more beneficial toward PTSC Shareholders, or more MMP Owner friendly.