From the 10-Q
"We have a 50% interest in PDS (see Note 6). As of the date of this filing, PDS is a variable interest entity (“VIE”) of which we are not the primary beneficiary and therefore will not consolidate PDS’ financial statements with our own as we cannot direct the licensing activity of TPL on behalf of PDS.
This investment is accounted for using the equity method of accounting since the investment provides us the ability to exercise significant influence, but not control, over the investee. Significant influence is generally deemed to exist if we have an ownership interest in the voting stock of the investee of between 20% and 50%, although other factors, such as representation on the investee’s board of directors, are considered in determining whether the equity method of accounting is appropriate. Under the equity method of accounting, the investment, originally recorded at cost, is adjusted to recognize our share of net earnings or losses of the investee which is presented in the condensed consolidated statements of operations in the caption “Equity in loss of affiliated company” and also is adjusted by contributions to and distributions from PDS."
Since the above is "as of the date of this filing" (i.e. today) there is an implication that the "settlement" had no material impact on PTSC's ability to better control TPL. We remain at the mercy of Carlton Johnson being able to persuade one of the other two PDS BOD members to vote in PTSC's interests (assuming that is why CJ was nominated by PTSC to the PDS BOD).
So - what exactly changed except our bank balance?
