I've taken the time to compare this with the actual results, and...

I've taken the time to compare this with the actual results, and wanted to provide some comments.

First, I made an error in including the KPMG Work Order 1 amount in the licence revenue, rather than services.

Second, once this is excluded from the licence revenue, and the ADF services and licence revenue amounts for the quarter are excluded, we arrive at a similar amount to what was recognised in this quarterly.

Management has indicated that the services and equipment components were delayed due to supply chain shortages - it seems this in turn has a flow-on effect with the ability for licence revenue to be recognised. I wish this delay was conveyed to shareholders sooner rather than later - supply chain issues aren't exactly new since COVID arose. It's pleasing to read it's been rectified, but we now need to wait another quarter to see that it's true, and then we have the logical flow-on effects in licencing revenue being recognised after the services have been rendered.

Had the ADF services and licence revenue amounts been recognised according to the previous 4C, this would have been an outstanding quarterly. Instead, it's one I'm ambivalent about, but still appears to be one the market likes.

Perhaps the half yearly report will shed some more light on the situation. Judgement better reserved over the next 3 required reports (half yearly and 2 4Cs), and any price sensitive announcements.