With regard to the J's.... it is DD along with many thumbs up people, who seem to be saying that the J's were/are NOT YET licensees. In my post, I'm trying to ask how that was/is possible. His post was long and confusing at times so maybe I misunderstood. He says this tho:

"By not using a strait forward language, not listing J3 as licensees on PTSC website, and not using the word "license" in the 12/18 settlements PR, how can we believe 12/18 settlements are no differences than any other settlements/licenses, and J3 were paid in full by Q3?"

As for Feb. and all licensees, as I told you not long ago, yes..I would think they know. RG's over 45...all being front end lump sum seems to back that up, for me anyway. And that is a big part of the "ignorance is bliss" that kills some of the better theories, imo. joe

BTW, What did you think of the Seiko language?