"negative" divergence - good idea in general?

Wicked Lasers' "Pulsar" lasers are among the few lasers that have a "negative" divergence - in other words, the beam converges to a point and then diverges again. This would obviously increase the burning distance. However, very few laser models have this feature. Is it generally a bad idea to use a "negative" divergence?

i mainly use my lasers outside for long distance pointing. i noticed with the pulsar that the divergence was pretty good, u could see the dot at night well over a KM away.
for me a less diverging beam would be a better choice.

Mine has a positive divergence of 0.93mRad and a horrible beam diameter @ aperture as usual. before the RMA I had one with 0.08mRad (very noce beam). I don't know why every WLs I had were diverging.

Sorry, but I disagree with you ixdf64. Any laser that is well collimated will converge first. The pulsar has a large initial diameter and its easier to see this with despite the fact that the laser never actually converges to a tight focus (its focus still has a relatively large diameter). Greenies are the same but it may be harder to see the smaller change in diameter from the aperture to the focus

Yeah my laser starts off with a 'big dot' in front of the focal point and at some point the focal point is obvious and as you move away the dot becomes big again. Unless of course I focus it to 'infinity'

The Pulsar lasers probably have a further focal distance on its lense.

My laser can shine miles away and still be visible as well. I'm only using a Sony 16x diode with 240mA in an AixiZ housing.