Just so you don't think I'm deranged. I went back a few pages in your post history and cut and pasted 2 posts below that seem to imply what I was suggesting in my previous post about the expectations bubble. I am certainly not claiming some sort of hollow victory here and acknowledge that there are continuing gray areas in a lot of the rhetoric going around. Apologies all around if I seem to be prone to hyperbole and overstatements lately. Been pretty worked up about all of the collateral damage the Q seemed to cause.

Feb 4th Sorry, busy day. That time of year.

Between jumpqua(?)'s post and yours here it sound like you understand everything correctly. Once the amount is earned and determinable it is recorded in income and either payment is received or it is a receivable. Only way around that is if the "earning" part is not fully consumated or the amount is contingent on some happening in the future. Could they string it out somehow? Well, milestone has mentioned in the past that he thinks we will get "x" amount for past infringement and another "y" amount for future infringement (royalties). That's possible. And not necessarily a bad thing for obvious reasons.

Feb 22nd Paying in installments does not affect when the income part of the transaction is reflected in "Sales". If there are contingencies, such as the amount to be paid is based on a percentage of the licensees sales, then our income is not recorded until the licensee records their sales (you can't record income if you don't know what the actual income number is).

In a nutshell, if the money has been "earned", it will be recorded in OUR income, regardless of when we recieve the money.