You need to detach the share price performance of PTSC with the patent environment. PTSC's share price performance is MOSTLY a direct result of 3 things:

1. The ineptitude of our manangement and BOD to take $130M in windfall from the MMP and do anything productive with it. That alone should've created a sustainable and increasing revenue stream for PTSC that should have self supported the company with the MMP revenues being gravy on top.

2. The opaque nature of PTSC's operations and the shareholder unfriendly posturing of the BOD and management.

3. PTSC's continual cowtowing and caving to TPL/Leckrone and their abdication of control of the MMP licensing, and their fiduciary irresponsibilty of granting control of a public company's main (and now ONLY) asset to a private company, and all of the obvious conflicts that entails.

As for the license fees, what you suggest about the "high" fees that HP and Fujitsu and Sony, etc. paid is actually incorrect. If you go back and look, they paid on average, $1 in license fee for each $2,400 - $,3,000 in annual revenue.

This same ratio can be seen being collected even all the way up through the 2010 time frame. The way PTSC was pitching it to us shareholders is that HP and other "first movers" were getting "discounted" rates. So to characterize some of that early license activities as "high value" is misleading. On average, licensing PRIOR to the APPLE deal, was relatively steady in value. At the least, it wasn't hugely different.

What seems to be the most impactful issue is TPL's multi-licensing practices, and their gutting of the MMP value in the Apple deal in 2010. Despite shareholders' realizing and warning management of the possible catastrophic nature of the deal with TPL, and admonitions and requests for action, and even though court documents have revealed that PTSC was aware that shareholders fears had come true as early as 2007/8 time frame, our BOD didn't do anything about it until it was brought to PUBLIC light through other court filings where shareholders could latch on to it.

The rest is history. Just when the USPTO was FINALLY reaffirming the validity issues of the MMP, and PDS/PTSC/TPL should have been able to come out unified and swinging HARD at the infringing community, INSTEAD, PTSC was filing lawsuits against its business partner, and Leckrone was giving PTSC & Chuck Moore the proverbial finger.

While there may be some impact in the patent world regarding licensing, and PTSC management would like to divert your attention to that as the culprit, the truth is, the MMP was in it's strongest position to attack infringers back at the end of 2009, and instead of a strong united and resolute front going after INFRINGERS, there was nothing but infighting between TPL, MOORE & PTSC.

THAT is why licensing essentially stopped for the MMP. And before you try to argue against that, go back and read the court filings for PTSC v TPL. Our side admits as much in the arguments presented there. TPL was basically threatening shutting down licensing if PTSC didnt' cave to demands. That TPL was in that position of strength can be laid nowhere else but at the feet of Carlton Johnson and Gloria Felcyn of our current BOD.