59er>if we are talking about 66% than if we are talking about 5%
well, from public documents, we're not talking about 66%, and it's (to me) unclear that we're talking about 5% either.
the only information we have is that it -- for some dishearteningly-unclear definition of "it" -- is 5%.
which, using the P1.0 mechanics of lifetime $145 Billion gross revenue, results in
i) if it's a straight-line 5% of the 8.17% per-unit royalty, totals a little over $7.25 Billon thru 2033 for UConn.
or
ii) if it's shaved off the top of the 8.17 (ie, before PTK sees it), totals a little under $89 Billion thru 2033 for UConn.
keep in mind, that's lifetime numbers. jam them into a NPV calculator to come out with something that can be comprehended as today's money.
the pot o'Gold going to UConn is still a 12x spread, depending on which way the 5% is read.
however, if there exists a legally-binding technology-transfer agreement to the benefit of UConn, between Taylor, Opel**, or whomever, I don't know that we've ever seen it.
further, I don't know that UConn's employee-invention policy is applicable, especially given that so much of the funding was provided by POET rather than from academic R&D grants.
so ... without seeing evidence of an actual contractual obligation to UConn demonstrated (of whatever magnitude), the 5% "suggested reward" (that's what I'm going to call it) to UConn presented in P1.0 is only thing we have to go on.
I welcome that they are going to clear this up, since right now it's pretty hazy.
GLTA,
R.
** -- would the hypothetical obligation to UConn have survived Opel's transition into PTK? Would a $75 Billion lifetime-royalties-owing differential be enough motivation to de-list and collapse PTK.V as an entity, only to renew it as the unimpeded POET.Q? (a division of AAPL. heh) Dunno.
