I'm not sure what you mean by your question. Denso, DMP, APC, & Philips all signed in Q2. The first three for an aggregate of $1.43M & Philips for $18M. TEAC was not mentioned in the 10q as a license even though the PR for TEAC was issued in Mid November. Based on the TEAC omission, the income you refer to was from the other four license signings, if that's what you're asking.

It does raise an interesting point though, to me. Based on the figure noted of $5.486M to PTSC for Q2, we'd expect PDS' NET income for the quater to be at least DOUBLE that (to account for TPL's half as well), or $10.972M. However, when you take the 6 month net income figure shown in the 10q of $7.447M and subtract out the net loss from the previous quater of $2.401M, that would give you and ACTUAL net income for Q2 alone of $9.848M or $1.124M LESS than what it seems it should be. I wonder why that is. I don't know if that means that this was expenses NOT related to the four signings included in this quarter, and thus it came off the top before the rest of the accounting was figured, or what it could mean. Any CPA's out there that can clarify?

Does PTSC/TPL split the proceeds from the license fees after expenses associated with JUST those particular licenses signed in that quarter 9847908 If PTSC received $5,486,000 from PDS, then by agreement TPL received the same. So NET income AFTER expenses from the FOUR Q2 licenses mentioned in the 10q was $10,972,000. We also know that in comparing the PDS numbers from the last 10Q to this 10Q that there were expenses of $9,632,217. Similarly, we know that there was $47,125 in interest earned last quarter. Based on that, you'd expect that the net income for PDS for the quarter would be the sum of those three,numbers which equals $20,651,342. Instead, we see it at $19,480,125. If that's true, then it could be that the only expenses NOT associated with the four licenses signed in the quarter is $1,171,217. If that's true, then the cost to sign four licenses was $8,461,000