For the first moment after a brief look at the tablets, it will become obvious that they are poor in content. The scribes did their best to abbreviate everything they could, using logograms for wares, numerical characters for numbers and single-sign abbreviations for transactions. They were so devoted to this tendency, so that most of the words written are almost exclusively personal names. The only common exception is the header of tablets, where the scribes often added one or two words to record the event or significance of making the balance ledger.
Fortunately, there are a few tablets (and really low in number) that contain more than just logograms. They contain written-out names or qualifiers of some goods - almost certainly because logograms were not enough or not good enough to record the goods precisely.
There are three tablets: HT6, HT23 and HT31 of special interest, regarding this matter. For the current post, I will only write about the tablet HT6 (the rest comes later).
This is how side A of the HT6 tablet looks like (interpreted as referring to multiple commodities):
|KA-PA • DA-TA-RA • TE •||NI (figs)||15|
|DA-QE-RA •||QE PI-TA||22.75|
The main proof of this tablet being a multiple-commodity one is the occurrance of a ligature: RU+JA or JA+RU. Both the Linear A and Linear B scripts are very orthodox in one thing: personal names or transaction terms are never abbreviated like this, therefore ligatures can only signify a logogram used for a commodity. But that means, this tablet has at least two different commodities (NI = FIC = figs and RU+JA/JA+RU). This hits that the words caught in-between of the two signs (PI-TA-JA) and likely all the other following ones (until another transaction term comes in) are all names for commodities, and not personal names.
The occurrances of the sign QE in second half of side A were always a bit of mystery to me. This sign would not normally stand as a prefix or postfix to words. Also keep in mind that the Minoan language does not seem to use (grammatical) prefixes too frequently (you can find more on this matter in Glen Gordon's Paleoglot). Therefore its interpretation as a logogram (perhaps the same type of ware the words PI-TA and PI-TA-JA are referring to) helps to yield a better understanding of the structure of this tablet.
'TE' is obviously a transaction term. It is commonly occurring on tablets that refer to the collection of goods (probably as a tax, e.g. HT13), therefore a meaning like "gives" seems more than appropriate. Its usage here merely reinforces the multiple-commodity theory. The goods are collected, not paid: but the ubiquitious summing-up term KU-RO (total) is missing from the tablet's end. The best reasoning is that one cannot sum up different types of goods to get a single number, explaining the lack of totalling the goods.
KA-PA looks more like a transaction term ("taxation", "payment", "additional" or such) than a name. Its repetition on side A together with QE does not necessarily mean a new subject: it is possible that DA-TA-RA gave a further 5 JE quantity of QE or PI-TA. Remember, in the next line, QE and PI-TA stand together: it is thus most probable that these refer to exactly the same commodity.
DA-QE-RA is perhaps a name: it occurs on other tablets' headers as well (HT57, HT120). The other possibility is that this one, too is a transaction term: on HT120 it stands with DA-ME, a putative place-name. DA-TA-RA, on the other hand, is unique to this tablet. It does not seem to be related to DA-QE-RA (unless 'TA' is a scribal mistake), so its meaning remains unknown.
Now that we have a bunch of terms that refer to goods, the question arises: what kind of wares do they mean? The meaning of the sign 'NI' as figs is already well-known. RU+JA on the other hand, resembles the Greek word for pomegrenates, 'Rhoia'. This would mean that the tablet refer to special agricultural goods: edible fruits and other comsumables.
PI-TA(-JA) is a harder nut to crack. If it really stood as an explanation for the logogram QE, it might have meant something other than a fruit: the shape of sign 'QE' closely resembles some sort of "cake" or "flat bread". Then it is perhaps not impossible to see a similarity between PI-TA and the Aramaic flat bread, also called 'Pita' since ancient times (funny thing, but flat pastas under the name pita are still a popular food today...). A potential problem with this interpretation lies in the quantities: fractons can only be understood if the numbers stood for some (unknown) weight-units, and not the actual number of breads or fruits.
For the last remain words like MA-*321 and O-RA2-DI-NE. While I have no idea about the former one's meaning, the latter does show some faint similarity to the Greek Rhétiné = resin. I have no clue whether this identification is linguistically correct or not, yet it is clear that resins are used in Greece since olden times (maybe since the Minoan era) for the conservation of wine. For this aspect, they can be regarded as "consumables".