KT, thank you for your response. Just a couple of points. You asked, "I don't see calls for more transparency and proactivism regarding the stock price being addressed by the posts that make unsubstantiated claims of ineptness or illegal activity, do you?" I don't know about other posters, but there are some of us who are simply saying: It's time to place a shot across management's bow by siding against them on all their recommendations regarding stockholder voting. I agree: we will not change anything for lack of shares, but we will serve notice that the natives are getting restless -- and they must be looking at what has happened with PDLI as at least something for them to think about.
You said, "Avid earnings are up, but not enough to cover much of PPHM operating costs." Why not? This is something as stockholders that we should know.
You asked, "Do you think that the timing of the CTL litigation resolution may be influencing what PPHM can do to best leverage value of technology licensing?" I don't know. But you make my point: I'm weary of speculating because there is no desire for management to keep us informed -- or even provide hints.
Will you answer me a question which haunts: Why doesn't management attempt to license any PPHM technology outside of Bavi? If they've tried and failed tell us -- and then tell us the reason. Is it because BP is trying to box us in -- or is it because the tech is not as good as we have been led to believe? If the former, what's the harm in telling us? If the latter, then we need to be asking a lot MORE questions -- not fewer.
TIA, Sean
