I have followed dozens of patent licensing companies for a long time.
It is not uncommon for licensing deals to be structured in such a manner that a one time-payment is made for past damages while the agreement is still royalty bearing going forward. That means the companies agree to a structure whereby future payments will begin at a specified point in the future. This happens.
Nothing in the reporting is prohibitive of such a structure. Conversely, nothing in the reporting points to this being the case. We simply do not know.
Is it possible that the payment of $800K was a one time payment that represents a fully-paid up license and no further payments will ever be made? Yes, quite certainly it is possible.
But it's not impossible.
Your "facts" aren't all factual. You are making a number of assumptions that we simply can't make with any certainty. Most notably, that any ongoing per unit (per subscriber) royalties would begin immediately. There are many components and elements of modern day licensing deals and almost all contain many advanced provisions that are impossible to "guess" at due to the confidential nature of the contracts.
In short, your assessment is flawed when it makes unequivocal statements that one simply cannot make with the limited information available. Anyone who reviews the licensing history of companies such as IDCC, WILN, ACTG, etc. can see there are many instances where one time payments are made, accounted for in identical fashion as VRNG's one time payment has been, and still an ongoing royalty bearing component existed with regards to future licensing royalties.
I'm not saying that VRNG's agreement is royalty bearing going forward. I am saying it is impossible to make that determination based on the limited information publicly available. My hunch is that it is probably not royalty bearing going forward, but that's not the issue at hand. The issue is speaking in absolute terms when the information doesn't support such statements.
As to VRNG "failing", that's a matter of individual perspective. I never thought ADT/TYCO opportunities were significant in the first place. I believe it is great that they recovered anything from such a small, niche area of the market and proves that Nokia patents that were purchased can be monetized in many ways that most would have never imagined.
