The sublicense is already completed. Otherwise cilag would not have taken it to the EMMA. I figure eisai gets a straight rate on dacogen sales in this territory, maybe 35%? They have to pay astx from those revenues. I don't know who manufactures dacogen, but if Eisai does, they see the profits from that side also.
The way the Quarterly report is written, "In 2006, Eisai executed an agreement to sublicense Dacogen to Cilag Gmbh International ("Cilag"), a Johnson & Johnson company, granting exclusive development and commercialization rights in all territories outside North America." and it later says ASTEX gets 50% of all sublicenses. It is ambiguous if this includes 50% of the J&J/Cilag deal but as written, I would argue it does. So my real point was ASTEX gets: 50% of Eisai's receipts from J&J - and NOT - 30% royalty on sales (since it would all presumably be over the $200 mil threshold to reach the 30% royalty rate). Does my quandary make any sense?