"Some 100+ nuisance value settlements have resulted in PTSC's share price being where it is today"

While I wholeheartedly agree with both of your posts, Ronran and Lambertslunatics, I think the cited part of your post is only correct to a certain degree.

First, the massice decline of the shareprice is due to the ongoing challenge of the patents since 2008 and the inability of PTSC's management to get rid of Leckrone with all the consequences we faced the last years.
Furthermore the change of the US patent system and the more and more negative "legal sentiment" against patent holders in the last years have made it quite difficult to sell a license for more than nuisance value.

Which leads me to the second reason why I see things a little different regarding your statement:
There were several "high" value settlements from 2005 until the end of 2007 (if I remember correctly), which is reflected in the MMP revenues in the years 2006 and 2007 (2008 began the decrease of settlement values parallel to the USPTO examinations).

With that said the main issue of my post is the following question:

Why did Fujitsu, HP, Sony or "my" german company Bosch et al. pay that much money for a MMP-license, if they could have taken the same way as LG or Samsung?

I don' think they were not smart enough or had the wrong lawyers, something must have happened in the "world" or the patent environment - from outside of the US (and the legal system) this is quite hard to understand for me.
And more interesting:
Will we ever see the same values of MMP licenses as we did in 2006 and 2007 or do we have to accept these times have gone?