Caterpillar was announced as the 70th licensee of the MMP. If you list all of the announced companies prior to Caterpillar (as shown on the license spreadsheet that I post on occassion), we see that we know all 69 prior licensees. After Caterpillar, Optoma and Leica Camera were annoucned that same quarter bringing the total licensees through 2/19/10 to 72.

If you tally up all of the licensing reported in the 10q's for PTSC up to and including that quarter, it totals $295.4M in license fees collected. That averages out to $4.1M per license.

Looking a little deeper into the numbers 38 licenses were signed during or prior to the quarter that included the J3 settlement. Those 38 licenses brought in a total of $242.67 in fees or $6.38 per license on average.

By contrast, the next 34 of those 72 licenses brought in $52.72M in fees or $1.55M per license.

In the 2 years since the quarter that included the milestone 70th MMP License, we learn through various blurbs in PR's and in court filings that there are now over 90 MMP licensees of the MMP. For anlaysis sake, let's call it conservatively and say there were as of the end of this past February, an even 20 licenses sold since the Leica Camera deal, bringing the overall total to 92. Considering the "over 90" language is also accompanied by the revelation that GE & Motorola are among these last 20, and we also know Apple, TYCO, Cummins, TE Connectivity and others are among them as well, and that we also know Disney has licensed the MMP though AFTER the quarter to be reported, it seems logical that at worst, the $1.55M per deal figure could be used to figure what may have been collected.

With that in mind, 20 x $1.55M would yield $31M in fees. In looking at the 10q's and 10K's that have followed the quarter that included Caterpillar, we know only $13.03M has been reported, NOT COUNTING this quarter to be revealed on Monday. So it seems that this quarter we'll learn of Monday should reflect AT LEAST $18M in MMP licensing ($31M - $13M).

When you factor in the fact that we've been in the state for months now where the patents have emerged pretty much victorious through the USPTO re-exam process, were postively constructed (at least according to our side) in the PREVIOUS Markman Ruling, and that we're on the verge of what could be a significant reinforcement of that previous ruling, in my mind it begs the question that IF we're signing the GEs, Motorolas, Apples and Disneys of the world prior to the Markman ruling instead making them wait until later where they'd have to potentially pay top dollar, why wouldn't we AT THE LEAST be requiring the historical average of $4.1M per license. To be clear, that would be an AVERAGE over the 20 licenses, NOT what I'd expect a top 50 company like Motorola or GE to pay.

So, that brings me to the question again of what should we expect the 10q to show? IMO, anything less than $18M to PDS would be VERY DISAPPOINTING. Logically, $40M to $60M shouldn't be surprising considering the historical average license pricing, and the current status of USPTO ReCertification and impact a MMP FAVORABLE Markman Ruling could have on large infringers.

If we DON'T see MMP revs of at least $20M and hopefully closer to $40M or above, then in my mind we'd have to ask WHY is our licensing partner settling for such paltry fees from these huge companies, and why did our BOD allow it? If we DO see fees in this range, then it seems progress is being made. If we see fees higher, than perhaps we'll be re-entering interesting times!

72 hrs from..... which? Thoughts?