I guess it depends on how you disect the paragraph. The reference of $18,780 refers to the first 3 months. (939 units) What your suggesting is that the $47,980 refers to the total for the first six months and not just the second quarter. In this case second Q royalties were $29,200 representing 1460 units. Which is as you so noted a total of 2399 units for the first 6 months. It is a confusing way of wording the royalty picture. It still represents a trend in the right direction but not nearly as exponential as what I had understood it to say.