Covance (CVD) (USA)
●
Eurofins (ERF)Extrasynthese (France)
Silliker Canada Co. (Canada)
For technical and regulatory consulting services provided by Spherix,operations, there are numerous competitors, including some that are much larger companies with more resources. The success in winning and retaining clients is heavily dependent on the efforts and reputation of our consultants. We believe the barriers to entry in particular areas of our consulting expertise are low.
Patents, Trademarks, Licenses, Franchises, Concessions, Royalty Agreements or Labor Contracts, Including Duration
We currently protect our intellectual property through patents, trademarks, designs and copyrights on our products and services. We currently have existing patents for products such as pterostilbene methods of use for lowering cholesterol, nicotinamide riboside methods, and anthocyanin production that require additional capital for product development, commercialization and marketing.
One of ourOur business strategiesstrategy is to use the intellectual property harnessed in the supply of reference materials to the industryfrom our core standards and contract services segment as the basis for providing new and alternative mass marketable productsproprietary ingredients to our customers. Our strategy is to develop these productsproprietary ingredients on our own as well as to license our intellectual property to companies who will commercialize it. We anticipate that the net result will be a long termlong-term flow of intellectual property milestone and royalty payments forto us.
The following table sets forth our existing patents and those to which we have licensed rights:
Patent Number | Title | Filing Date | Issued Date | Expires | Licensor |
6,852,342 | Compounds for altering food intake in humans | 3/26/2002 | 2/8/2005 | 2/12/2022 | Co-owned by Avoca, Inc. and ChromaDex |
7,205,284 | Potent immunostimulants from microalgae | 7/10/2001 | 4/17/2007 | 3/9/2022 | Licensed from University of Mississippi |
7,338,791 | Production of Flavanoids by Recombinant Microorganisms | 7/11/2005 | 3/4/2008 | 7/11/2025 | Licensed from The Research Foundation of State University of New York |
7,776,326 | Methods and compositions for treating neuropathies | 6/3/2005 | 8/17/2010 | 6/3/2025 | Licensed from Washington University |
7,807,422 | Production of Flavanoids by Recombinant Microorganisms | 3/3/2008 | 10/5/2010 | 3/3/2028 | Licensed from The Research Foundation of State University of New York |
7,846,452 | Potent immunostimulatory extracts from microalgae | 7/28/2005 | 10/7/2010 | 7/28/2025 | Licensed from University of Mississippi |
8,106,184 | Nicotinyl Riboside Compositions and Methods of Use | 11/17/2006 | 1/31/2012 | 11/17/2026 | Licensed from Cornell University |
8,114,626 | Yeast strain and method for using the same to produce Nicotinamide Riboside | 3/26/2009 | 2/14/2012 | 3/26/2029 | Licensed from Dartmouth College |
8,133,917 | Pterostilbene as an agonist for the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha isoform | 10/25/2010 | 3/13/2012 | 10/25/2030 | Licensed from the University of Mississippi and U.S. Department of Agriculture |
8,197,807 | Nicotinamide Riboside Kinase compositions and Methods for using the same | 11/20/2007 | 6/12/2012 | 11/20/2027 | Licensed from Dartmouth College |
8,227,510 | Combine use of pterostilbene and quercetin for the production ofto produce cancer treatment medicaments | 7/19/2005 | 7/24/2012 | 7/19/2025 | Licensed from Green Molecular S.L. |
8,252,845 | Pterostilbene as an agonist for the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha isoform | 2/1/2012 | 8/28/2012 | 2/1/2032 | Licensed from the University of Mississippi and U.S. Department of Agriculture |
8,318,807 | Pterostilbene Caffeine Co-Crystal Forms | 7/30/2010 | 11/27/2012 | 7/30/2030 | Licensed from Laurus Labs Private Limited |
8,383,086 | Nicotinamide Riboside Kinase compositions and Methods for using the same | 4/12/2012 | 2/26/2013 | 4/12/2032 | Licensed from Dartmouth College |
8,399,712 | Pterostilbene cocrystals | 7/30/2010 | 3/19/2013 | 7/30/2020 | Licensed from Laurus Labs Private Limited |
8,524,782 | Key intermediate for the preparation of Stilbenes, solid forms of Pterostilbene, and methods for making the same | 6/1/2009 | 9/3/2013 | 6/1/2029 | Licensed from Laurus Labs Private Limited |
8,809,400 | Method to Ameliorate Oxidative Stress and Improve Working Memory Via Pterostilbene Administration | 6/10/2008 | 8/19/2014 | 6/10/2028 | Licensed from the University of Mississippi and U.S. Department of Agriculture |
8,841,350 | Method for treating non-melanoma skin cancer by inducing UDP-Glucuronosyltransferase activity using pterostilbene | 5/8/2012 | 9/22/2014 | 5/8/2032 | Co-owned by ChromaDex and University of California |
8,945,653 | Extracted whole kernels and improved processed and processable corn produced thereby | 5/23/2011 | 2/3/2015 | 5/23/2031 | Licensed from Suntava, LLC |
9,028,887 | Method improve spatial memory via pterostilbene administration | 5/22/2014 | 5/12/2015 | 5/22/2034 | Licensed from the University of Mississippi and U.S. Department of Agriculture |
9,439,875 | Anxiolytic effect of pterostilbene | 5/11/2011 | 9/13/2016 | 5/11/2031 | Licensed from the University of Mississippi and U.S. Department of Agriculture |
Manufacturing
For reference standards, Chromadex Analytics operates laboratory operations and a manufacturing facility. We currently maintain our own manufacturing equipmentutilize third-party manufacturers to produce and havesupply the ability to manufacture certain products in limited quantities, ranging from milligrams to kilograms. We intend to contract for the manufacturing of products that we develop and enter into strategic relationships or license agreements for sales and marketing of products that we develop when the quantities we require exceed our capacity at our Boulder, Colorado facility.
We intend to work with manufacturing companies that can meet the standards imposed by the FDA, the International Organization for Standardization, or “ISO,” and the quality standards that we will require for our own internal policies and procedures. We expect to monitor and manage supplier performance through a corrective action program developed by us. We believe these manufacturing relationships can minimize our capital investment, help control costs, and allow us to compete with larger volume manufacturers of dietary supplements, phytochemicalsingredients, products, and ingredients.
services. Following the receipt of products or product components from third-party manufacturers, we currently inspect products, as needed. We expect to reserve the right to inspect and ensure conformance of each product and product component to our specifications. We will also consider manufacturing certain products or product components internally, if our capacity permits, when demand or quality requirements make it appropriate to do so.
We intend to work with manufacturing companies that can meet the standards imposed by the FDA, the International Organization for Standardization and the quality standards that we will require for our own internal policies and procedures. We expect to monitor and manage supplier performance through a corrective action program developed by us. We believe these manufacturing relationships can minimize our capital investment, help control costs, and allow us to compete with larger volume manufacturers of dietary supplements, phytochemicals and ingredients.
Sources and Availability of Raw Materials and the Names of Principal Suppliers
WeFor all three business segments, we believe that we have identified reliable sources and suppliers of ingredients, chemicals, phytochemicals ingredients and reference materials that will provide products in compliance with our guidelines.
Research and Development
We have successfully conducted a clinical trial, together with the University of Mississippi, on our proprietary compound pterostilbene for its blood pressure lowering effects. We expect to conduct additional clinical trials on this compound and we anticipate entering the dietary supplement and, if clinical results are favorable, possibly the pharmaceutical markets as well. We also have completed a study on our proprietary compound pterostilbene with caffeine co-crystal. The first human study of this ingredient demonstrated that it delivers 30 percent more caffeine, stays in the blood stream longer, and is absorbed more slowly than ordinary caffeine.
We also have completed the first human clinical trial on our proprietary compound nicotinamide riboside (“NR”)ingredient NR and the results demonstrated that a single dose of NR resulted in statistically significant increases in the co-enzyme nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+)NAD+ in healthy human volunteers. In addition, NR was also found to be safe as no adverse events were observed. In 2015, NR was recognized by the FDA as a “New Dietary Ingredient.” NR was also “Generally Recognized as Safe” by an independent panel of expert toxicologists and in August 2016, the FDA issued a GRAS No Objection Letter.
We are currently analyzing the molecular data obtained from thecompleting a second human clinical trial relating to NAD+ metabolome, which is an important cellular co-factor for improvement of mitochondrial performance and energy metabolism. We anticipate conducting additional clinical trials on NR which evaluated the effect of repeated doses of NIAGEN® on NAD+ metabolite concentrations in blood, urine and other compoundsmuscle in our pipelinehealthy adults. This study evaluated the impacts of three dose levels of NIAGEN® compared to provide differentiation as we market these ingredientsa placebo. One quarter of subjects received the low dose of NIAGEN® (100 mg), one quarter received the moderate dose of NIAGEN® (300 mg), one quarter received the higher dose of NIAGEN® (1,000 mg) and support various health-related claims or obtain additional regulatory clearances.one quarter received the placebo. Preliminary results show that NAD levels rose in response to the dose of NIAGEN® and the elevated blood NAD levels were sustained throughout the 8-week treatment period.
In addition, we are focused on developing products and services within our core standards and service offerings. Our own laboratory group has extensive experience in developing products related to our field of interest and worksWe have also been working closely with our sales and marketing group to design products and services that are intended to increase revenue. To support development, we also havethe National Institute of Health under a numbercollaborative agreement on a therapeutic indication for NR as a treatment of contracts with outside labs that aid us inCockayne Syndrome, a rare pediatric orphan disease.
Through our research and development process.laboratory in Longmont, Colorado, we intend to manufacture at a process scale for products that we are planning to take to market as well as explore cost saving processes for existing products.
We plan to utilize our expertise in natural products to license and develop new intellectual property that can be sold to clients in our target industries.
Research and development costs for the fiscal years ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 20132, 2016 were approximately $514,000$4.0 million, $2.5 million and $134,000,$0.9 million, respectively. Please refer to Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for research and development costs for each of the business segments for the last three fiscal years.
Environmental Compliance
We will incur significant expense in complying with GMPs and safe handling and disposal of materials used in our research and manufacturing activities. We do not anticipate incurring additional material expense in order to comply with Federal,federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations.
Working Capital
The Company’s working capital at the end of years 2017 and 2016 was approximately $7.4 million and $7.8 million, respectively. The Company measures working capital by adding trade receivables and inventories, and subtracting accounts payable. Most of the working capital is consumed by our consumer products segment and ingredients segment as the operations require a large amount of inventory to be on hand. As the consumer products segment and ingredients segment grow, more working capital will likely be needed to support the operations.
Backlog Orders
For our consumer products segment where we ship products internationally to a distributor, we may have a backlog from time to time as the production of TRU NIAGEN® finished bottles require up to three months lead time by our third-party contract manufacturers. As of December 30, 2017, we did not have any backlog orders from the distributor as all orders received have been shipped. For products that are directly shipped to consumers, we have minimal backlog orders as we carry inventory on hand to ship upon the receipt of order.
For our ingredients segment, we also have minimal backlog orders as we carry inventory on hand for most of the products we offer and we ship upon the receipt of customer’s order.
For our core standards and contract services segment, we normally have a small backlog of orders for reference standards. These orders amount to approximately $25,000 or less. Because we list over 1,800 phytochemicals and 400 botanical reference materials in our catalog, we may not always have the items in stock at the time of customers’ orders. These backlog orders are normally fulfilled within 2 to 3 months.
Facilities
For information on our facilities, see “Properties” in Item 2 of this Form 10-K.
Employees
As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, ChromaDex (including ChromadexHealthspan Research LLC and ChromaDex Analytics, and Spherix Consulting, Inc.) had 74 employees, 6771 of whom were full-time and 7three of whom were part-time. We consider our relationships with our employees to be satisfactory. None of our employees is covered by a collective bargaining agreement.
Financial Information about Geographic Areas
Please refer to Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for financial information about geographic areas.
Available Information
Our Internet website address is www.chromadex.com. We make available free of charge on our website our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practical after we file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. This information is also available in print to any shareholder who requests it, with any such requests addressed to ChromaDex Corporation, 10005 Muirlands Blvd. Ste G, Irvine, CA 92618. Certain of these documents may also be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains an Internet website that contains reports, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov. We also make available free of charge on our website our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, and the Charters of our Audit Committee, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Current investors and potential investors should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties described below together with all other information contained in this Form 10-K before making investment decisions with respect to our common stock. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations and our future growth prospects would be materially and adversely affected. Under these circumstances, the trading price and value of our common stock could decline, resulting in a loss of all or part of your investment. The risks and uncertainties described in this Form 10-K are not the only ones facing our Company. Additional risks and uncertainties of which we are not presently aware, or that we currently consider immaterial, may also affect our business operations.
Risks Related to our Company and our Business
Our cash flows and capital resources may be insufficient to make required payments on our indebtedness and future indebtedness.
On September 29, 2014, we entered into a loan and security agreement (the “Loan Agreement”) with Hercules Technology II, L.P., as lender (“Lender”) and Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc., as agent. Lender will provide us with access to a term loan of up to $5 million. The first $2.5 million of the term loan was funded at closing, and is repayable in installments over 30 months, following an initial interest-only period of twelve months after closing. The remaining $2.5 million of the term loan can be drawn down at our option at any time but no later than July 31, 2015. The term loan bears interest at the rate per year equal to the greater of either (i) 9.35% plus the prime rate as reported in The Wall Street Journal minus 3.25%, or (ii) 9.35%. For further details on the Loan Agreement, please refer to Note 8. Loan Payable appearing on Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
As of January 3, 2015 and March 12, 2015, we had $2.5 million of indebtedness under the Loan Agreement. Such indebtedness could have important consequences to you. For example, it could:
make it difficult for us to satisfy our other debt obligations;
make us more vulnerable to general adverse economic and industry conditions;
limit our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and other general corporate requirements;
expose us to interest rate fluctuations because the interest rate on the debt under the Loan Agreement is variable;
require us to dedicate a portion of our cash flow from operations to payments on our debt, thereby reducing the availability of our cash flow for operations and other purposes;
limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate; and
place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to competitors that may have proportionately less debt and greater financial resources.
In addition, our ability to make scheduled payments or refinance our obligations depends on our successful financial and operating performance, cash flows and capital resources, which in turn depend upon prevailing economic conditions and certain financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include, among others:
economic and demand factors affecting our industry;
increased operating costs;
competitive conditions; and
other operating difficulties.
If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell material assets or operations, obtain additional capital or restructure our debt. In the event that we are required to dispose of material assets or operations to meet our debt service and other obligations, the value realized on such assets or operations will depend on market conditions and the availability of buyers. Accordingly, any such sale may not, among other things, be for a sufficient dollar amount. Our obligations pursuant to the Loan Agreement are secured by a security interest in all of our assets, exclusive of intellectual property. The foregoing encumbrances may limit our ability to dispose of material assets or operations. We also may not be able to restructure our indebtedness on favorable economic terms, if at all.
We may incur additional indebtedness in the future, including pursuant to the Loan Agreement. Our incurrence of additional indebtedness would intensify the risks described above.
The Loan Agreement contains various covenants limiting the discretion of our management in operating our business.
The Loan Agreement contains, subject to certain carve-outs, various restrictive covenants that limit our management's discretion in operating our business. In particular, these instruments limit our ability to, among other things:
make investments, including capital expenditures;
sell or acquire assets outside the ordinary course of business; and
make fundamental business changes.
If we fail to comply with the restrictions in the Loan Agreement, a default may allow the creditors under the relevant instruments to accelerate the related debt and to exercise their remedies under these agreements, which will typically include the right to declare the principal amount of that debt, together with accrued and unpaid interest and other related amounts, immediately due and payable, to exercise any remedies the creditors may have to foreclose on assets that are subject to liens securing that debt and to terminate any commitments they had made to supply further funds. The Loan Agreement governing our indebtedness also contains various covenants that may limit our ability to pay dividends.
We have a history of operating losses, and we may need additional financing to meet our future long-term capital requirements.requirements and may be unable to raise sufficient capital on favorable terms or at all.
We have a history of losses and may continue to incur operating and net losses for the foreseeable future. We incurred a net losslosses of approximately $5,388,000$11.4 million, $2.9 million and $2.8 million for the year ended January 3, 2015 and a net loss of approximately $4,420,000 for the yearyears ended December 28, 2013.30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016, respectively. As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, our accumulated deficit was approximately $39,524,000.$56.6 million. We have not achieved profitability on an annual basis. We may not be able to reach a level of revenue to continue to achieve and sustain profitability. If our revenues grow slower than anticipated, or if operating expenses exceed expectations, then we may not be able to achieve and sustain profitability in the near future or at all, which may depress our stock price.
As of December 30, 2017, our cash and cash equivalents totaled approximately $45.4 million. While we anticipate that our current cash, cash equivalents and cash to be generated from operations and $2.5 million we can additionally draw down at our option pursuant to the Loan Agreement will be sufficient to meet our projected operating plans through at least March 20, 2016,into 2019, we may require additional funds, either through additional equity or debt financings or collaborative agreements or from other sources. We have no commitments to obtain such additional financing, and we may not be able to obtain any such additional financing on terms favorable to us, or at all. InIf adequate financing is not available, the event that we are unableCompany will further delay, postpone or terminate product and service expansion and curtail certain selling, general and administrative operations. The inability to obtainraise additional financing we may be unable to implement our business plan. Even with such financing, we have a historymaterial adverse effect on the future performance of operating losses and there can be no assurance that we will ever become profitable.
Our short-term capital needs are uncertain and we may need to raise additional funds. Basedrequirements will depend on current market conditions, such funds may not be available on acceptable terms or at all.many factors.
We anticipate that our current cash and cash equivalents and cash generated from operations and $2.5 million we can additionally draw down at our option pursuant to the Loan Agreement will be sufficient to implement our operating plan through at least March 20, 2016. Our capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:
●
the revenues generated by sales of our products;
●
the costs associated with expanding our sales and marketing efforts, including efforts to hire independent agents and sales representatives and obtain required regulatory approvals and clearances;
●
the expenses we incur in developing and commercializing our products, including the cost of obtaining and maintaining regulatory approvals; and
●
unanticipated general and administrative expenses.expenses, including expenses involved with our ongoing litigation with Elysium.
Because of these factors, we may seek to raise additional capital prior to March 20, 20162019 both to meet our projected operating plans after March 20, 20162019 and to fund our longer term strategic objectives. Additional capital may come from public and private equity or debt offerings, borrowings under lines of credit or other sources. These additional funds may not be available on favorable terms, or at all. There can be no assurance we will be successful in raising these additional funds. Furthermore, if we issue equity or debt securities to raise additional funds, our existing stockholders may experience dilution and the new equity or debt securities we issue may have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of our existing stockholders. In addition, if we raise additional funds through collaboration, licensing or other similar arrangements, it may be necessary to relinquish valuable rights to our products or proprietary technologies, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. If we cannot raise funds on acceptable terms, we may not be able to develop or enhance our products, obtain the required regulatory clearances or approvals, execute our business plan, take advantage of future opportunities, or respond to competitive pressures or unanticipated customer requirements. Any of these events could adversely affect our ability to achieve our development and commercialization goals, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We are currently engaged in substantial and complex litigation with Elysium Health, Inc. and Elysium Health LLC (“Elysium”), the outcome of which could materially harm our business and financial results.
We are currently engaged in litigation with Elysium, a customer that represented 19% of our net sales for the year ended December 31, 2016. Elysium has made no purchases from us since August 9, 2016. The litigation includes multiple complaints and counterclaims by us and Elysium in venues in California and New York, as well as a petition by Elysium with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for inter partes review of one patent to which we are the exclusive licensee. For further details on this litigation, please refer to Part I, Item 3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The litigation is substantial and complex, and it has and could continue to cause us to incur significant costs, as well as distract our management over an extended period. The litigation may substantially disrupt our business and we cannot assure you that we will be able to resolve the litigation on terms favorable to us. If we are unsuccessful in resolving the litigation on favorable terms to us, we may be forced to pay compensatory and punitive damages and restitution for any royalty payments that we received from Elysium, which payments could materially harm our business, or be subject to other remedies, including injunctive relief. Further, if we are unsuccessful in resolving the Patent Claim on favorable terms, or if the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office invalidates the patent subject to the inter partes review, we may lose the competitive advantage that is provided by the subject intellectual property rights, which would have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, Elysium has not paid us approximately $2.7 million for previous purchase orders. We may not collect the full amount owed to us by Elysium, and as a result, we may have to write off a large portion of that amount as uncollectible expense. We cannot predict the outcome of our litigation with Elysium, which could have any of the results described above or other results that could materially harm our business.
Interruptions in our relationships or declines in our business with major customers could materially ham our business and financial results.
Two of our customers accounted for approximately 30% of our sales during the year ended December 30, 2017. Any interruption in our relationship or decline in our business with these customers or other customers upon whom we become highly dependent could cause harm to our business. Factors that could influence our relationship with our customers upon whom we may become highly dependent include:
●
our ability to maintain our products at prices that are competitive with those of our competitors;
●
our ability to maintain quality levels for our products sufficient to meet the expectations of our customers;
●
our ability to produce, ship and deliver a sufficient quantity of our products in a timely manner to meet the needs of our customers;
●
our ability to continue to develop and launch new products that our customers feel meet their needs and requirements, with respect to cost, timeliness, features, performance and other factors;
●
our ability to provide timely, responsive and accurate customer support to our customers; and
●
the ability of our customers to effectively deliver, market and increase sales of their own products based on ours.
In an effort to promote and better market our consumer products, we have made a strategic decision to not ship NIAGEN® to certain ingredient segment customers, which could potentially harm our overall sales.
By developing and selling TRU NIAGEN®, our own consumer standalone NIAGEN® supplement product, we are in direct competition with some of our current ingredients segment customers that use NIAGEN® in the products that are sold to consumers. In an effort to promote and better market our consumer product, we have made a strategic decision not to ship NIAGEN® to certain ingredients segment customers, which will have a negative effect on our ingredient segment sales. For example, sales for our ingredients segment for the year ended December 30, 2017 decreased 34% compared to the year ended December 31, 2016. Additionally, as our own consumer product becomes more prominent and widely adopted by consumers, the competition with our consumer product could potentially further harm the sales of our ingredients segment business, and our sales of NIAGEN® for our ingredients segment may further decrease. The sales of our consumer product may not outweigh the decrease in sales of our ingredients segment, which would lead to an overall decrease in our sales. Sales for our ingredients segment represented approximately 53% of the Company’s revenue for 2017, and sales of NIAGEN® accounted for approximately 70% of our ingredient segment’s total sales in 2017, or 37% of our overall revenue, so any harm to our NIAGEN® ingredient sales, if not compensated for by sales of our consumer product, may materially and negatively affect our business.
Our future success largely depends on sales of our TRU NIAGEN®product.
In connection with our strategic shift from an ingredient and testing company to a consumer focused company, we expect to generate a significant percentage of our future revenue from sales of our TRU NIAGEN® product. As a result, the market acceptance of TRU NIAGEN® is critical to our continued success, and if we are unable to expand market acceptance of TRU NIAGEN®, our business, results of operations, financial condition, liquidity and growth prospects would be adversely affected.
Decline in the state of the global economy and financial market conditions could adversely affect our ability to conduct business and our results of operations.
Global economic and financial market conditions, including disruptions in the credit markets and the impact of the global economic deterioration may materially impact our customers and other parties with whom we do business. These conditions could negatively affect our future sales of our ingredient linelines as many consumers consider the purchase of nutritional products discretionary. Decline in general economic and financial market conditions could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Specifically, the impact of these volatile and negative conditions may include decreased demand for our products and services, a decrease in our ability to accurately forecast future product trends and demand, and a negative impact on our ability to timely collect receivables from our customers. The foregoing economic conditions may lead to increased levels of bankruptcies, restructurings and liquidations for our customers, scaling back of research and development expenditures, delays in planned projects and shifts in business strategies for many of our customers. Such events could, in turn, adversely affect our business through loss of sales.
No AssuranceWe may need to increase the size of Successful Expansion of Operations.our organization, and we can provide no assurance that we will successfully expand operations or manage growth effectively.
Our significant increase in the scope and the scale of our product launch,launches, including the hiring of additional personnel, has resulted in significantly higher operating expenses. As a result, we anticipate that our operating expenses will continue to increase. Expansion of our operations may also cause a significant demand on our management, finances and other resources. Our ability to manage the anticipated future growth, should it occur, will depend upon a significant expansion of our accounting and other internal management systems and the implementation and subsequent improvement of a variety of systems, procedures and controls. There can be no assurance that significant problems in these areas will not occur. Any failure to expand these areas and implement and improve such systems, procedures and controls in an efficient manner at a pace consistent with our business could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. There can be no assurance that our attempts to expand our marketing, sales, manufacturing and customer support efforts will be successful or will result in additional sales or profitability in any future period. As a result of the expansion of our operations and the anticipated increase in our operating expenses, as well as the difficulty in forecasting revenue levels, we expect to continue to experience significant fluctuations in itsour results of operations.
Changes in our business strategy, including entering the consumer product market, or restructuring of our businesses may increase our costs or otherwise affect the profitability of our businesses.
As changes in our business environment occur we may adjust our business strategies to meet these changes or we may otherwise decide to restructure our operations or businesses or assets. In addition, external events including changing technology, changing consumer patterns and changes in macroeconomic conditions may impair the value of our assets. When these changes or events occur, we may incur costs to change our business strategy and may need to write down the value of assets. In any of these events, our costs may increase, we may have significant charges associated with the write-down of assets or returns on new investments may be lower than prior to the change in strategy or restructuring. For example, if we are not successful in developing our consumer product business, our sales may decrease and our costs may increase.
The success of our consumer product and ingredient business is linked to the size and growth rate of the vitamin, mineral and dietary supplement market and an adverse change in the size or growth rate of that market could have a material adverse effect on us.
An adverse change in the size or growth rate of the vitamin, mineral and dietary supplement market could have a material adverse effect on our business. Underlying market conditions are subject to change based on economic conditions, consumer preferences and other factors that are beyond our control, including media attention and scientific research, which may be positive or negative.
Our future growth and profitability of our consumer product business will depend in large part upon the effectiveness and efficiency of our marketing efforts and our ability to select effective markets and media in which to advertise.
Our consumer products business success depends on our ability to attract and retain customers, which significantly depends on our marketing practices. Our future growth and profitability will depend in large part upon the effectiveness and efficiency of our marketing efforts, including our ability to:
●
create greater awareness of our brand;
●
identify the most effective and efficient levels of spending in each market, media and specific media vehicle;
●
determine the appropriate creative messages and media mix for advertising, marketing and promotional expenditures;
●
effectively manage marketing costs (including creative and media) to maintain acceptable customer acquisition costs;
●
acquire cost-effective television advertising;
●
select the most effective markets, media and specific media vehicles in which to advertise; and
●
convert consumer inquiries into actual orders.
Unfavorable publicity or consumer perception of our products and any similar products distributed by other companies could have a material adverse effect on our business.
We believe the nutritional supplement market is highly dependent upon consumer perception regarding the safety, efficacy and quality of nutritional supplements generally, as well as of products distributed specifically by us. Consumer perception of our products can be significantly influenced by scientific research or findings, regulatory investigations, litigation, national media attention and other publicity regarding the consumption of nutritional supplements. We cannot assure you that future scientific research, findings, regulatory proceedings, litigation, media attention or other favorable research findings or publicity will be favorable to the nutritional supplement market or any particular product, or consistent with earlier publicity. Future research reports, findings, regulatory proceedings, litigation, media attention or other publicity that are perceived as less favorable than, or that question, such earlier research reports, findings or publicity could have a material adverse effect on the demand for our products and consequently on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Our dependence upon consumer perceptions means that adverse scientific research reports, findings, regulatory proceedings, litigation, media attention or other publicity, whether or notif accurate or with merit, could have a material adverse effect on the demand for our products, the availability and pricing of our ingredients, and our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. Further, adverse public reports or other media attention regarding the safety, efficacy and quality of nutritional supplements in general, or our products specifically, or associating the consumption of nutritional supplements with illness, could have such a material adverse effect. Any such adverse public reports or other media attention could arise even if the adverse effects associated with such products resulted from consumers’ failure to consume such products appropriately or as directed and the content of such public reports and other media attention may be beyond our control.
We may incur material product liability claims, which could increase our costs and adversely affect our reputation, revenues and operating income.
As ana consumer product and ingredient supplier marketerwe market and manufacturer ofmanufacture products designed for human and animal consumption, we are subject to product liability claims if the use of our products is alleged to have resulted in injury. Our products consist of vitamins, minerals, herbs and other ingredients that are classified as foods, dietary supplements, or natural health products, and, in most cases, are not necessarily subject to pre-market regulatory approval in the United States. Some of our products contain innovative ingredients that do not have long histories of human consumption. Previously unknown adverse reactions resulting from human consumption of these ingredients could occur. In addition, some of the products we sell are produced by third-party manufacturers. As a marketer of products manufactured by third parties, we also may be liable for various product liability claims for products we do not manufacture. We may, in the future, be subject to various product liability claims, including, among others, that our products include inadequate instructions for use or inadequate warnings concerning possible side effects and interactions with other substances. A product liability claim against us could result in increased costs and could adversely affect our reputation with our customers, which, in turn, could have a materially adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
We acquire a significant amount of key ingredients for our products from foreign suppliers, and may be negatively affected by the risks associated with international trade and importation issues.
We acquire a significant amount of key ingredients for a number of our products from suppliers outside of the United States, particularly India and China. Accordingly, the acquisition of these ingredients is subject to the risks generally associated with importing raw materials, including, among other factors, delays in shipments, changes in economic and political conditions, quality assurance, nonconformity to specifications or laws and regulations, tariffs, trade disputes and foreign currency fluctuations. While we have a supplier certification program and audit and inspect our suppliers’ facilities as necessary both in the United States and internationally, we cannot assure you that raw materials received from suppliers outside of the United States will conform to all specifications, laws and regulations. There have in the past been quality and safety issues in our industry with certain items imported from overseas. We may incur additional expenses and experience shipment delays due to preventative measures adopted by the Indian and U.S. governments, our suppliers and our company.
The insurance industry has become more selective in offering some types of coverage and we may not be able to obtain insurance coverage in the future.
The insurance industry has become more selective in offering some types of insurance, such as product liability, product recall, property and directors’ and officers’ liability insurance. Our current insurance program is consistent with both our past level of coverage and our risk management policies. However, we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain comparable insurance coverage on favorable terms, or at all, in the future. Certain of our customers as well as prospective customers require that we maintain minimum levels of coverage for our products. Lack of coverage or coverage below these minimum required levels could cause these customers to materially change business terms or to cease doing business with us entirely.
If we experience product recalls, we may incur significant and unexpected costs, and our business reputation could be adversely affected.
We may be exposed to product recalls and adverse public relations if our products are alleged to be mislabeled or cause injury or illness, or if we are alleged to have violated governmental regulations. A product recall could result in substantial and unexpected expenditures, which would reduce operating profit and cash flow. In addition, a product recall may require significant management attention. Product recalls may hurt the value of our brands and lead to decreased demand for our products. Product recalls also may lead to increased scrutiny by federal, state or international regulatory agencies of our operations and increased litigation and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
We depend on key personnel, the loss of any of which could negatively affect our business.
We depend greatly on Frank L. Jaksch Jr., Thomas C. VarvaroRobert N. Fried, Kevin M. Farr, Mark J. Friedman and Troy A. Rhonemus, who are our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial OfficerPresident and Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, General Counsel and Executive Vice President, respectively. We also depend greatly on other key employees, including key scientific and marketing personnel. In general, only highly qualified and trained scientists have the necessary skills to develop our products and provide our services. Only marketing personnel with specific experience and knowledge in health care are able to effectively market our products. In addition, some of our manufacturing, quality control, safety and compliance, information technology, sales and e-commerce related positions are highly technical as well. We face intense competition for these professionals from our competitors, customers, marketing partners and other companies throughout the industries in which we compete. Our success will depend, in part, upon our ability to attract and retain additional skilled personnel, which will require substantial additional funds. There can be no assurance that we will be able to find and attract additional qualified employees or retain any such personnel. Our inability to hire qualified personnel, the loss of services of our key personnel, or the loss of services of executive officers or key employees that may be hired in the future may have a material and adverse effect on our business.
Our operating results may fluctuate significantly as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control.
We are subject to the following factors, among others, that may negatively affect our operating results:
●
the announcement or introduction of new products by our competitors;
●
our ability to upgrade and develop our systems and infrastructure to accommodate growth;
●
the decision by significant customers to reduce purchases;
●
disputes and litigation with competitors;
●
our ability to attract and retain key personnel in a timely and cost effectivecost-effective manner;
●
the amount and timing of operating costs and capital expenditures relating to the expansion of our business, operations and infrastructure;
●
regulation by federal, state or local governments; and
●
general economic conditions as well as economic conditions specific to the healthcare industry.
As a result of our limited operating history and the nature of the markets in which we compete, it is extremely difficult for us to make accurate forecasts. We have based our current and future expense levels largely on our investment plans and estimates of future events although certain of our expense levels are, to a large extent, fixed. Assuming our products reach the market, we may be unable to adjust spending in a timely manner to compensate for any unexpected revenue shortfall. Accordingly, any significant shortfall in revenues relative to our planned expenditures would have an immediate adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Further, as a strategic response to changes in the competitive environment, we may from time to time make certain pricing, service or marketing decisions that could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Due to the foregoing factors, our revenues and operating results are and will remain difficult to forecast.
We face significant competition, including changes in pricing.
The markets for our products and services are both competitive and price sensitive. Many of our competitors have significant financial, operations, sales and marketing resources and experience in research and development. Competitors could develop new technologies that compete with our products and services or even render our products obsolete. If a competitor develops superior technology or cost-effective alternatives to our products and services, our business could be seriously harmed.
The markets for some of our products are also subject to specific competitive risks because these markets are highly price competitive. Our competitors have competed in the past by lowering prices on certain products. If they do so again, we may be forced to respond by lowering our prices. This would reduce sales revenues and increase losses. Failure to anticipate and respond to price competition may also impact sales and aggravate losses.
We believe that customers in our markets display a significant amount of loyalty to their supplier of a particular product. To the extent we are not the first to develop, offer and/or supply new products, customers may buy from our competitors or make materials themselves, causing our competitive position to suffer.
Many of our competitors are larger and have greater financial and other resources than we do.
Our products compete and will compete with other similar products produced by our competitors. These competitive products could be marketed by well-established, successful companies that possess greater financial, marketing, distributional, personnel and other resources than we possess. Using these resources, these companies can implement extensive advertising and promotional campaigns, both generally and in response to specific marketing efforts by competitors, and enter into new markets more rapidly to introduce new products. In certain instances, competitors with greater financial resources also may be able to enter a market in direct competition with us, offering attractive marketing tools to encourage the sale of products that compete with our products or present cost features that consumers may find attractive.
We may never develop any additional products to commercialize.
We have invested a substantial amount of our time and resources in developing various new products. Commercialization of these products will require additional development, clinical evaluation, regulatory approval, significant marketing efforts and substantial additional investment before they can provide us with any revenue. Despite our efforts, these products may not become commercially successful products for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:
●
we may not be able to obtain regulatory approvals for our products, or the approved indication may be narrower than we seek;
●
our products may not prove to be safe and effective in clinical trials;
●
we may experience delays in our development program;
●
any products that are approved may not be accepted in the marketplace;
●
we may not have adequate financial or other resources to complete the development or to commence the commercialization of our products or will not have adequate financial or other resources to achieve significant commercialization of our products;
●
we may not be able to manufacture any of our products in commercial quantities or at an acceptable cost;
●
rapid technological change may make our products obsolete;
●
we may be unable to effectively protect our intellectual property rights or we may become subject to claims that our activities have infringed the intellectual property rights of others; and
●
we may be unable to obtain or defend patent rights for our products.
We may not be able to partner with others for technological capabilities and new products and services.
Our ability to remain competitive may depend, in part, on our ability to continue to seek partners that can offer technological improvements and improve existing products and services that are offered to our customers. We are committed to attempting to keep pace with technological change, to stay abreast of technology changes and to look for partners that will develop new products and services for our customer base. We cannot assure prospective investors that we will be successful in finding partners or be able to continue to incorporate new developments in technology, to improve existing products and services, or to develop successful new products and services, nor can we be certain that newly-developednewly developed products and services will perform satisfactorily or be widely accepted in the marketplace or that the costs involved in these efforts will not be substantial.
If we fail to maintain adequate quality standards for our products and services, our business may be adverselyaffectedadversely affected and our reputation harmed.
Dietary supplement, nutraceutical, food and beverage, functional food, analytical laboratories, pharmaceutical and cosmetic customers are often subject to rigorous quality standards to obtain and maintain regulatory approval of their products and the manufacturing processes that generate them. A failure to maintain, or, in some instances, upgrade our quality standards to meet our customers’ needs, could cause damage to our reputation and potentially substantial sales losses.
Our ability to protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology through patents and other means is uncertain and may be inadequate, which would have a material and adverse effect on us.
Our success depends significantly on our ability to protect our proprietary rights to the technologies used in our products. We rely on patent protection, as well as a combination of copyright, trade secret and trademark laws and nondisclosure, confidentiality and other contractual restrictions to protect our proprietary technology, including our licensed technology. However, these legal means afford only limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. For example, our pending United States and foreign patent applications may not issue as patents in a form that will be advantageous to us or may issue and be subsequently successfully challenged by others and invalidated. In addition, our pending patent applications include claims to material aspects of our products and procedures that are not currently protected by issued patents. Both the patent application process and the process of managing patent disputes can be time-consumingtime consuming and expensive. Competitors may be able to design around our patents or develop products which provide outcomes which are comparable or even superior to ours. Steps that we have taken to protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology, including entering into confidentiality agreements and intellectual property assignment agreements with some of our officers, employees, consultants and advisors, may not provide us with meaningful protection for our trade secrets or other proprietary information in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure or other breaches of the agreements. Furthermore, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States.
In the event a competitor infringes upon our licensed or pending patent or other intellectual property rights, enforcing those rights may be costly, uncertain, difficult and time consuming. Even if successful, litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights or to defend our patents against challenge could be expensive and time consuming and could divert our management’s attention. As further described in Part I, Item 3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we are currently involved in patent litigation, as Elysium is claiming that we misused certain patent rights, and has filed a petition with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for inter partes review of two patents to which we are the exclusive licensee. The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of an inter partes review for one patent, but granted institution on an inter partes review as to certain claims for the other patent. If we are unsuccessful in resolving the patent misuse claim on favorable terms, or if the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office invalidates the patent still subject to the inter partes review, we may lose the competitive advantage that is provided by the subject intellectual property rights, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. We may not have sufficient resources to enforce our intellectual property rights or to defend our patents rights against a challenge. The failure to obtain patents and/or protect our intellectual property rights could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Our patents and licenses may be subject to challenge on validity grounds, and our patent applications may be rejected.
We rely on our patents, patent applications, licenses and other intellectual property rights to give us a competitive advantage. Whether a patent is valid, or whether a patent application should be granted, is a complex matter of science and law, and therefore we cannot be certain that, if challenged, our patents, patent applications and/or other intellectual property rights would be upheld. If one or more of those patents, patent applications, licenses and other intellectual property rights are invalidated, rejected or found unenforceable, that could reduce or eliminate any competitive advantage we might otherwise have had. For example, as further described in Part I, Item 3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we are currently involved in patent litigation, as Elysium is claiming that we misused certain patent rights, and has filed a petition with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for inter partes review of two patents to which we are the exclusive licensee. The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of an inter partes review for one patent, but granted institution on an inter partes review as to certain claims for the other patent. If we are unsuccessful in resolving the patent misuse claim on favorable terms, or if the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office invalidates the patent subject to the inter partes review, we may lose the competitive advantage that is provided by the subject intellectual property rights, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
We may become subject to claims of infringement or misappropriation of the intellectual property rights of others, which could prohibit us from developing our products, require us to obtain licenses from third parties or to develop non-infringing alternatives and subject us to substantial monetary damages.
Third parties could, in the future, assert infringement or misappropriation claims against us with respect to products we develop. Whether a product infringes a patent or misappropriates other intellectual property involves complex legal and factual issues, the determination of which is often uncertain. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we have not infringed the intellectual property rights of others. OurThere may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for use related to the use or manufacture of our products, and our potential competitors may assert that some aspect of our product infringes their patents. Because patent applications may take years to issue, there also may be applications now pending of which we are unaware that may later result in issued patents upon which our products could infringe. There also may be existing patents or pending patent applications of which we are unaware upon which our products may inadvertently infringe.
Any infringement or misappropriation claim could cause us to incur significant costs, place significant strain on our financial resources, divert management’s attention from our business and harm our reputation. If the relevant patents in such claim were upheld as valid and enforceable and we were found to infringe them, we could be prohibited from manufacturing or selling any product that is found to infringe unless we could obtain licenses to use the technology covered by the patent or are able to design around the patent. We may be unable to obtain such a license on terms acceptable to us, if at all, and we may not be able to redesign our products to avoid infringement.infringement, which could materially impact our revenue. A court could also order us to pay compensatory damages for such infringement, plus prejudgment interest and could, in addition, treble the compensatory damages and award attorney fees. These damages could be substantial and could harm our reputation, business, financial condition and operating results. A court also could enter orders that temporarily, preliminarily or permanently enjoin us and our customers from making, using, or selling products, and could enter an order mandating that we undertake certain remedial activities. Depending on the nature of the relief ordered by the court, we could become liable for additional damages to third parties.
The prosecution and enforcement of patents licensed to us by third parties are not within our control. WithouttheseWithout these technologies, our productproducts may not be successful and our business would be harmed if the patents wereinfringedwere infringed on or misappropriated without action by such third parties.
We have obtained licenses from third parties for patents and patent application rights related to the products we are developing, allowing us to use intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to these third parties. We do not control the maintenance, prosecution, enforcement or strategy for many of these patents or patent application rights and as such are dependent in part on the owners of the intellectual property rights to maintain their viability. If any third party licensor is unable to successfully maintain, prosecute or enforce the licensed patents and/or patent application rights related to our products, we may become subject to infringement or misappropriate claims or lose our competitive advantage. Without access to these technologies or suitable design-around or alternative technology options, our ability to conduct our business could be impaired significantly. As further described in Part I, Item 3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, Elysium has filed a petition with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for inter partes review of two patents to which we are the exclusive licensee. The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of an inter partes review for one patent, but granted institution on an inter partes review as to certain claims for the other patent. Pursuant to the exclusive license agreement with the Trustees of Dartmouth College (“Dartmouth”), Dartmouth controls all future preparation, filing, prosecution and maintenance of the patent subject to such inter partes review.
We may be subject to damages resulting from claims that we, our employees, or our independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of others.
Some of our employees were previously employed at other dietary supplement, nutraceutical, food and beverage, functional food, analytical laboratories, pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies. We may also hire additional employees who are currently employed at other such companies, including our competitors. Additionally, consultants or other independent agents with which we may contract may be or have been in a contractual arrangement with one or more of our competitors. We may be subject to claims that these employees or independent contractors have used or disclosed such other party’s trade secrets or other proprietary information. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management. If we fail to defend such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. A loss of key personnel or their work product could hamper or prevent our ability to market existing or new products, which could severely harm our business.
Litigation may harm our business.
Substantial, complex or extended litigation could cause us to incur significant costs and distract our management. For example, lawsuits by employees, stockholders, collaborators, distributors, customers, competitors or others could be very costly and substantially disrupt our business. Disputes from time to time with such companies, organizations or individuals are not uncommon, and we cannot assure you that we will always be able to resolve such disputes or on terms favorable to us. As further described in Part I, Item 3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we are currently involved in substantial and complex litigation with Elysium. Unexpected results could cause us to have financial exposure in these matters in excess of recorded reserves and insurance coverage, requiring us to provide additional reserves to address these liabilities, therefore impacting profits.
Our sales and results of operations for our core standards and contract services segment depend on our customers’ research and development efforts and their ability to obtain funding for these efforts.
Our core standards and contract services segment customers include researchers at pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, chemical and related companies, academic institutions, government laboratories and private foundations. Fluctuations in the research and development budgets of these researchers and their organizations could have a significant effect on the demand for our products. Our customers determine their research and development budgets based on several factors, including the need to develop new products, the availability of governmental and other funding, competition and the general availability of resources. As we continue to expand our international operations, we expect research and development spending levels in markets outside of the United States will become increasingly important to us.
Research and development budgets fluctuate due to changes in available resources, spending priorities, general economic conditions, institutional and governmental budgetary limitations and mergers of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Our business could be harmed by any significant decrease in life science and high technology research and development expenditures by our customers. In particular, a small portion of our sales has been to researchers whose funding is dependent on grants from government agencies such as the United States National Institute of Health, the National Science Foundation, the National Cancer Institute and similar agencies or organizations. Government funding of research and development is subject to the political process, which is often unpredictable. Other departments, such as Homeland Security or Defense, or general efforts to reduce the United States federal budget deficit could be viewed by the government as a higher priority. Any shift away from funding of life science and high technology research and development or delays surrounding the approval of governmental budget proposals may cause our customers to delay or forego purchases of our products and services, which could seriously damage our business.
Some of our customers receive funds from approved grants at a particular time of year, many times set by government budget cycles. In the past, such grants have been frozen for extended periods or have otherwise become unavailable to various institutions without notice. The timing of the receipt of grant funds may affect the timing of purchase decisions by our customers and, as a result, cause fluctuations in our sales and operating results.
Demand for our products and services are subject to the commercial success of our customers’ products, which may vary for reasons outside our control.
Even if we are successful in securing utilization of our products in a customer’s manufacturing process, sales of many of our products and services remain dependent on the timing and volume of the customer’s production, over which we have no control. The demand for our products depends on regulatory approvals and frequently depends on the commercial success of the customer’s supported product. Regulatory processes are complex, lengthy, expensive, and can often take years to complete.
We may bear financial risk if we under-price our contracts or overrun cost estimates.
In cases where our contracts are structured as fixed price or fee-for-service with a cap, we bear the financial risk if we initially under-price our contracts or otherwise overrun our cost estimates. Such underpricing or significant cost overruns could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
We rely on single or a limited number of third-party suppliers for the raw materials required to produce our products.
Our dependence on a limited number of third-party suppliers or on a single supplier, and the challenges we may face in obtaining adequate supplies of raw materials, involve several risks, including limited control over pricing, availability, quality and delivery schedules. We cannot be certain that our current suppliers will continue to provide us with the quantities of these raw materials that we require or satisfy our anticipated specifications and quality requirements. Any supply interruption in limited or sole sourced raw materials could materially harm our ability to manufacture our products until a new source of supply, if any, could be identified and qualified. Although we believe there are other suppliers of these raw materials, we may be unable to find a sufficient alternative supply channel in a reasonable time or on commercially reasonable terms. Any performance failure on the part of our suppliers could delay the development and commercialization of our products, or interrupt production of then existing products that are already marketed, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
We maynot be successful in acquiring complementary businesses or products on favorable terms.
As part of our business strategy, we intend to consider acquisitions of similar or complementary businesses or products. No assurance can be given that we will be successful in identifying attractive acquisition candidates or completing acquisitions on favorable terms. In addition, any future acquisitions will be accompanied by the risks commonly associated with acquisitions. These risks include potential exposure to unknown liabilities of acquired companies or to acquisition costs and expenses, the difficulty and expense of integrating the operations and personnel of the acquired companies, the potential disruption to the business of the combined company and potential diversion of our management's time and attention, the impairment of relationships with and the possible loss of key employees and clients as a result of the changes in management, the incurrence of amortization expenses and write-downs and dilution to the shareholders of the combined company if the acquisition is made for stock of the combined company. In addition, successful completion of an acquisition may depend on consents from third parties, including regulatory authorities and private parties, which consents are beyond our control. There can be no assurance that products, technologies or businesses of acquired companies will be effectively assimilated into the business or product offerings of the combined company or will have a positive effect on the combined company's revenues or earnings. Further, the combined company may incur significant expense to complete acquisitions and to support the acquired products and businesses. Any such acquisitions may be funded with cash, debt or equity, which could have the effect of diluting or otherwise adversely affecting the holdings or the rights of our existing stockholders.
If we experience a significant disruption in our information technology systems or if we fail to implement new systems and software successfully, our business could be adversely affected.
We depend on information systems throughout our company to control our manufacturing processes, process orders, manage inventory, process and bill shipments and collect cash from our customers, respond to customer inquiries, contribute to our overall internal control processes, maintain records of our property, plant and equipment, and record and pay amounts due vendors and other creditors. If we were to experience a prolonged disruption in our information systems that involve interactions with customers and suppliers, it could result in the loss of sales and customers and/or increased costs, which could adversely affect our overall business operation.
Our cash flows and capital resources may be insufficient to make required payments on future indebtedness.
On November 4, 2016, we entered into entered into a business financing agreement (the “Financing Agreement”) with Western Alliance Bank (“Western Alliance”), to establish a formula based revolving credit line pursuant to which the Company may borrow an aggregate principal amount of up to $5,000,000, subject to the terms and conditions of the Financing Agreement. The interest rate will be calculated at a floating rate per month equal to (a) the greater of (i) 3.50% per year or (ii) the Prime Rate published in the Money Rates section of the Western Edition of The Wall Street Journal, or such other rate of interest publicly announced by Lender as its Prime Rate, plus (b) 2.50 percentage points. Any borrowings, interest or other fees or obligations that the Company owes Western Alliance pursuant to the Financing Agreement (the “Obligations”) will be become due and payable on November 4, 2018.
As of December 30, 2017, and March 14, 2018, we did not have any indebtedness under the Financing Agreement. However, we may incur indebtedness in the future and such indebtedness could have important consequences to you. For example, it could:
●
make it difficult for us to satisfy our other debt obligations;
●
make us more vulnerable to general adverse economic and industry conditions;
●
limit our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and other general corporate requirements;
●
expose us to interest rate fluctuations because the interest rate on the debt under the Financing Agreement is variable;
●
require us to dedicate a portion of our cash flow from operations to payments on our debt, thereby reducing the availability of our cash flow for operations and other purposes;
●
limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate; and
●
place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to competitors that may have proportionately less debt and greater financial resources.
In addition, our ability to make payments or refinance our obligations depends on our successful financial and operating performance, cash flows and capital resources, which in turn depend upon prevailing economic conditions and certain financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include, among others:
●
economic and demand factors affecting our industry;
●
increased operating costs;
●
competitive conditions; and
●
other operating difficulties.
If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell material assets or operations, obtain additional capital or restructure our debt. In the event that we are required to dispose of material assets or operations to meet our debt service and other obligations, the value realized on such assets or operations will depend on market conditions and the availability of buyers. Accordingly, any such sale may not, among other things, be for a sufficient dollar amount. Our obligations pursuant to the Financing Agreement are secured by a security interest in all of our assets, exclusive of intellectual property. The foregoing encumbrances may limit our ability to dispose of material assets or operations. We also may not be able to restructure our indebtedness on favorable economic terms, if at all.
We may incur additional indebtedness in the future. Our incurrence of additional indebtedness would intensify the risks described above.
The Financing Agreement contains various covenants limiting the discretion of our management in operating our business.
The Financing Agreement contains various restrictive covenants that limit our management's discretion in operating our business. These instruments limit our ability to, among other things:
●
make investments, including capital expenditures;
●
sell or acquire assets outside the ordinary course of business; and
●
make fundamental business changes.
If we fail to comply with the restrictions in the Financing Agreement, a default may allow the creditors under the relevant instruments to accelerate the related debt and to exercise their remedies under these agreements, which will typically include the right to declare the principal amount of that debt, together with accrued and unpaid interest and other related amounts, immediately due and payable, to exercise any remedies the creditors may have to foreclose on assets that are subject to liens securing that debt and to terminate any commitments they had made to supply further funds.
If we are unable to establish or maintain sales, marketing and distribution capabilities or enter into and maintain arrangements with third parties to sell, market and distribute our products, our business may be harmed.
To achieve commercial success for our products, we must sell rights to our product lines and/or technologies at favorable prices, develop a sales and marketing force, or enter into arrangements with others to market and sell our products.prices. In addition to being expensive, developing and maintaining such a sales force is time-consuming, and could delay or limit the success of any product launch. We may not be able to develop this capacity on a timely basis or at all.time-consuming. Qualified direct sales personnel with experience in the phytochemicalnatural products industry are in high demand, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to hire or retain an effective direct sales team. Similarly, qualified independent sales representatives both within and outside the United States are in high demand, and we may not be able to build an effective network for the distribution of our product through such representatives. There can be no assurance that we will be able to enter into contracts with representatives on terms acceptable to us. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that we will be able to build an alternate distribution framework should we attempt to do so.
We may also need to contract with third parties in order to market our products. To the extent that we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform marketing and distribution services, our product revenue could be lower and our costs higher than if we directly marketed our products. Furthermore, to the extent that we enter into co-promotion or other marketing and sales arrangements with other companies, any revenue received will depend on the skills and efforts of others, and we do not know whether these efforts will be successful. If we are unable to establish and maintain adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, independently or with others, we will not be able to generate product revenue, and may not become profitable.
Our sales and results of operations depend on our customers’ research and development efforts and their ability to obtain funding for these efforts.
Our customers include researchers at pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, chemical and related companies, academic institutions, government laboratories and private foundations. Fluctuations in the research and development budgets of these researchers and their organizations could have a significant effect on the demand for our products. Our customers determine their research and development budgets based on several factors, including the need to develop new products, the availability of governmental and other funding, competition and the general availability of resources. As we continue to expand our international operations, we expect research and development spending levels in markets outside of the United States will become increasingly important to us.
Research and development budgets fluctuate due to changes in available resources, spending priorities, general economic conditions, institutional and governmental budgetary limitations and mergers of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. Our business could be seriously harmed by any significant decrease in life science and high technology research and development expenditures by our customers. In particular, a small portion of our sales has been to researchers whose funding is dependent on grants from government agencies such as the United States National Institute of Health, the National Science Foundation, the National Cancer Institute and similar agencies or organizations. Government funding of research and development is subject to the political process, which is often unpredictable. Other departments, such as Homeland Security or Defense, or general efforts to reduce the United States federal budget deficit could be viewed by the government as a higher priority. Any shift away from funding of life science and high technology research and development or delays surrounding the approval of governmental budget proposals may cause our customers to delay or forego purchases of our products and services, which could seriously damage our business.
Some of our customers receive funds from approved grants at a particular time of year, many times set by government budget cycles. In the past, such grants have been frozen for extended periods or have otherwise become unavailable to various institutions without advance notice. The timing of the receipt of grant funds may affect the timing of purchase decisions by our customers and, as a result, cause fluctuations in our sales and operating results.
Demand for our products and services are subject to the commercial success of our customers’ products, which may vary for reasons outside our control.
Even if we are successful in securing utilization of our products in a customer’s manufacturing process, sales of many of our products and services remain dependent on the timing and volume of the customer’s production, over which we have no control. The demand for our products depends on regulatory approvals and frequently depends on the commercial success of the customer’s supported product. Regulatory processes are complex, lengthy, expensive, and can often take years to complete.
We may bear financial risk if we under-price our contracts or overrun cost estimates.
In cases where our contracts are structured as fixed price or fee-for-service with a cap, we bear the financial risk if we initially under-price our contracts or otherwise overrun our cost estimates. Such under-pricing or significant cost overruns could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
We rely on single or a limited number of third-party suppliers for the raw materials required for the production of our products.
Our dependence on a limited number of third-party suppliers or on a single supplier, and the challenges we may face in obtaining adequate supplies of raw materials, involve several risks, including limited control over pricing, availability, quality and delivery schedules. We cannot be certain that our current suppliers will continue to provide us with the quantities of these raw materials that we require or satisfy our anticipated specifications and quality requirements. Any supply interruption in limited or sole sourced raw materials could materially harm our ability to manufacture our products until a new source of supply, if any, could be identified and qualified. Although we believe there are other suppliers of these raw materials, we may be unable to find a sufficient alternative supply channel in a reasonable time or on commercially reasonable terms. Any performance failure on the part of our suppliers could delay the development and commercialization of our products, or interrupt production of then existing products that are already marketed, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
We may need to increase the size of our organization, and we may be unable to manage rapid growth effectively.
Our failure to manage growth effectively could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. We anticipate that a period of significant expansion will be required to address possible acquisitions of business, products, or rights, and potential internal growth to handle licensing and research activities. This expansion will place a significant strain on management, operational and financial resources. To manage the expected growth of our operations and personnel, we must both improve our existing operational and financial systems, procedures and controls and implement new systems, procedures and controls. We must also expand our finance, administrative, and operations staff. Our current personnel, systems, procedures and controls may not adequately support future operations. Management may be unable to hire, train, retain, motivate and manage necessary personnel or to identify, manage and exploit existing and potential strategic relationships and market opportunities.
Risks Associated with Acquisition Strategy.
As part of our business strategy, we intend to consider acquisitions of similar or complementary businesses. No assurance can be given that we will be successful in identifying attractive acquisition candidates or completing acquisitions on favorable terms. In addition, any future acquisitions will be accompanied by the risks commonly associated with acquisitions. These risks include potential exposure to unknown liabilities of acquired companies or to acquisition costs and expenses, the difficulty and expense of integrating the operations and personnel of the acquired companies, the potential disruption to the business of the combined company and potential diversion of our management's time and attention, the impairment of relationships with and the possible loss of key employees and clients as a result of the changes in management, the incurrence of amortization expenses and dilution to the shareholders of the combined company if the acquisition is made for stock of the combined company. In addition, successful completion of an acquisition may depend on consents from third parties, including regulatory authorities and private parties, which consents are beyond our control. There can be no assurance that products, technologies or businesses of acquired companies will be effectively assimilated into the business or product offerings of the combined company or will have a positive effect on the combined company's revenues or earnings. Further, the combined company may incur significant expense to complete acquisitions and to support the acquired products and businesses. Any such acquisitions may be funded with cash, debt or equity, which could have the effect of diluting or otherwise adversely affecting the holdings or the rights of our existing stockholders.
If we experience a significant disruption in our information technology systems or if we fail to implement newsystems and software successfully, our business could be adversely affected.
We depend on information systems throughout our company to control our manufacturing processes, process orders, manage inventory, process and bill shipments and collect cash from our customers, respond to customer inquiries, contribute to our overall internal control processes, maintain records of our property, plant and equipment, and record and pay amounts due vendors and other creditors. If we were to experience a prolonged disruption in our information systems that involve interactions with customers and suppliers, it could result in the loss of sales and customers and/or increased costs, which could adversely affect our overall business operation.
Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of Our Products and Other Government Regulations
We are subject to regulation by various federal, state and foreign agencies that require us to comply with a wide variety of regulations, including those regarding the manufacture of products, advertising and product label claims, the distribution of our products and environmental matters. Failure to comply with these regulations could subject us to fines, penalties and additional costs.
Some of our operations are subject to regulation by various United States federal agencies and similar state and international agencies, including the Department of Commerce, the FDA, the FTC, the Department of Transportation and the Department of Agriculture. These regulations govern a wide variety of product activities, from design and development to labeling, manufacturing, handling, sales and distribution of products. If we fail to comply with any of these regulations, we may be subject to fines or penalties, have to recall products and/or cease their manufacture and distribution, which would increase our costs and reduce our sales.
We are also subject to various federal, state, local and international laws and regulations that govern the handling, transportation, manufacture, use and sale of substances that are or could be classified as toxic or hazardous substances. Some risk of environmental damage is inherent in our operations and the products we manufacture, sell, or distribute. Any failure by us to comply with the applicable government regulations could also result in product recalls or impositions of fines and restrictions on our ability to carry on with or expand in a portion or possibly all of our operations. If we fail to comply with any or all of these regulations, we may be subject to fines or penalties, have to recall products and/or cease their manufacture and distribution, which would increase our costs and reduce our sales.
Government regulations of our customer’s business are extensive and are constantly changing. Changes in these regulations can significantly affect customer demand for our products and services.
The process by which our customer’scustomers’ industries are regulated is controlled by government agencies and depending on the market segment can be very expensive, time-consuming,time consuming, and uncertain. Changes in regulations or the enforcement practices of current regulations could have a negative impact on our customers and, in turn, our business. At this time, it is unknown how the FDA will interpret and to what extent it will enforce GMPs, regulations that will likely affect many of our customers. These uncertainties may have a material impact on our results of operations, as lack of enforcement or an interpretation of the regulations that lessens the burden of compliance for the dietary supplement marketplace may cause a reduced demand for our products and services.
Changes in government regulation or in practices relating to the pharmaceutical, dietary supplement, food and cosmetic industry could decrease the need for the services we provide.
Governmental agencies throughout the world, including in the United States, strictly regulate thesethe pharmaceutical, dietary supplement, food and cosmetic industries. Our business involves helping pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies navigate the regulatory drug approval process. Changes in regulation, such as a relaxation in regulatory requirements or the introduction of simplified drug approval procedures, or an increase in regulatory requirements that we have difficulty satisfying or that make our services less competitive, could eliminate or substantially reduce the demand for our services. Also, if the government makes efforts to contain drug costs and pharmaceutical and biotechnology company profits from new drugs, our customers may spend less, or reduce their spending on research and development. If health insurers were to change their practices with respect to reimbursements for pharmaceutical products, our customers may spend less, or reduce their spending on research and development.
If we should in the future become required to obtain regulatory approval to market and sell our goods we will not be able to generate any revenues until such approval is received.
The pharmaceutical industry is subject to stringent regulation by a wide range of authorities. While we believe that, given our present business, we are not currently required to obtain regulatory approval to market our goods because, among other things, we do not (i) produce or market any clinical devices or other products, or (ii) sell any medical products or services to the customer, we cannot predict whether regulatory clearance will be required in the future and, if so, whether such clearance will at such time be obtained for any products that we are developing or may attempt to develop. Should such regulatory approval in the future be required, our goods may be suspended or may not be able to be marketed and sold in the United States until we have completed the regulatory clearance process as and if implemented by the FDA. Satisfaction of regulatory requirements typically takes many years, is dependent upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product or service and would require the expenditure of substantial resources.
If regulatory clearance of a good that we propose to propose to market and sell is granted, this clearance may be limited to those particular states and conditions for which the good is demonstrated to be safe and effective, which would limit our ability to generate revenue. We cannot ensure that any good that we develop will meet all of the applicable regulatory requirements needed to receive marketing clearance. Failure to obtain regulatory approval will prevent commercialization of our goods where such clearance is necessary. There can be no assurance that we will obtain regulatory approval of our proposed goods that may require it.
Risks Related to the Securities Markets and Ownership of our Equity Securities
The market price of our common stock may be volatile and adversely affected by several factors.
The market price of our common stock could fluctuate significantly in response to various factors and events, including, but not limited to:
●
our ability to integrate operations, technology, products and services;
●
our ability to execute our business plan;
●
our operating results are below expectations;
●
our issuance of additional securities, including debt or equity or a combination thereof,;
●
announcements of technological innovations or new products by us or our competitors;
●
acceptance of and demand for our products by consumers;
●
media coverage regarding our industry or us;
●
disputes with or our inability to collect from significant customers;
●
loss of any strategic relationship;
●
industry developments, including, without limitation, changes in healthcare policies or practices;
●
economic and other external factors;
●
reductions in purchases from our large customers;
●
period-to-period fluctuations in our financial results; and
●
whether an active trading market in our common stock develops and is maintained.
In addition, the securities markets have from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that are unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. These market fluctuations may also materially and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
Our common stock is and likely will remain subject to the SEC’s “penny stock” rules, which may make our shares more difficult to sell.
Because the price of our common stock is currently and is likely to remain less than $5.00 per share, it is expected to be classified as a “penny stock.” The SEC’s rules regarding penny stocks have the effect of reducing trading activity in our shares, making it more difficult for investors to sell them. Under these rules, broker-dealers who recommend such securities to persons other than institutional accredited investors must:
make a special written suitability determination for the purchaser;
receive the purchaser’s written agreement to a transaction prior to sale;
provide the purchaser with risk disclosure documents which identify certain risks associated with investing in “penny stocks” and which describe the market for these “penny stocks” as well as a purchaser’s legal remedies;
obtain a signed and dated acknowledgment from the purchaser demonstrating that the purchaser has received the required risk disclosure document before a transaction in a “penny stock” can be completed; and
give bid and offer quotations and broker and salesperson compensation information to the customer orally or in writing before or with the confirmation.
These rules make it more difficult for broker-dealers to effectuate customer transactions and trading activity in our securities and may result in a lower trading volume of our common stock and lower trading prices.
Our shares of common stock may be thinly traded, so you may be unable to sell at or near ask prices or at all.
We cannot predict the extent to which an active public market for our common stock will develop or be sustained. Our common stock is currently traded on the OTC Markets where they have historically been thinly traded, if at all, meaning that the number of persons interested in purchasing our common stock at or near bid prices at any given time may be relatively small or non-existent.
This situation may be attributable to a number of factors, including the fact that we are a small company that is relatively unknown to stock analysts, stock brokers, institutional investors and others in the investment community who generate or influence sales volume, and that even if we came to the attention of such persons, they tend to be risk averse and would be reluctant to follow an unproven company such as ours or purchase or recommend the purchase of our shares until such time as we have become more seasoned and viable. As a consequence, there may be periods of several days weeks or monthsweeks when trading activity in our shares is minimal or non-existent, as compared to a seasoned issuer which has a large and steady volume of trading activity that will generally support continuous sales without an adverse effect on share price. We cannot assure you that a broader or more active public trading market for our common stock will develop or be sustained, or that current trading levels will be sustained or not diminish.
We have not paid cash dividends in the past and do not expect to pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Any return on investment may be limited to the value of our common stock.
We have never paid cash dividends on our capital stock and do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable future. The payment of dividends on our capital stock will depend on our earnings, financial condition and other business and economic factors affecting us at such time as the board of directors may consider relevant. If we do not pay dividends, our common stock may be less valuable because a return on your investment will only occur if the common stock price appreciates.
The recently passed comprehensive tax reform bill could adversely affect our business and financial condition.
1986, as amended. The newly enacted federal income tax law, among other things, contains significant changes to corporate taxation, including reduction of the corporate tax rate from a top marginal rate of 35% to a flat rate of 21%, limitation of the tax deduction for interest expense to 30% of adjusted earnings (except for certain small businesses), limitation of the deduction for net operating losses to 80% of current year taxable income and elimination of net operating loss carrybacks, one time taxation of offshore earnings at reduced rates regardless of whether they are repatriated, elimination of U.S. tax on foreign earnings (subject to certain important exceptions), immediate deductions for certain new investments instead of deductions for depreciation expense over time, and modifying or repealing many business deductions and credits (including reducing the business tax credit for certain clinical testing expenses incurred in the testing of certain drugs for rare diseases or conditions). Notwithstanding the reduction in the corporate income tax rate, the overall impact of the new federal tax law is uncertain and our business and financial condition could be adversely affected. In addition, it is unknown if and to what extent various states will conform to the newly enacted federal tax law. The impact of this tax reform on holders of our common stock is likewise uncertain and could be adverse. We urge our stockholders to consult with their legal and tax advisors with respect to this legislation and the potential tax consequences of investing in or holding our common stock.
Stockholders may experience significant dilution if future equity offerings are used to fund operations or acquire complementary businesses.
If future operations or acquisitions are financed through the issuance of additional equity securities, stockholders could experience significant dilution. Securities issued in connection with future financing activities or potential acquisitions may have rights and preferences senior to the rights and preferences of our common stock. In addition, the issuance of shares of our common stock upon the exercise of outstanding options or warrants may result in dilution to our stockholders.
We may become involved in securities class action litigation that could divert management’s attention and harm our business.
The stock market in general, and the stocks of early stage companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. These fluctuations have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of the companies involved. If these fluctuations occur in the future, the market price of our shares could fall regardless of our operating performance. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a particular company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been brought against that company. If the market price or volume of our shares suffers extreme fluctuations, then we may become involved in this type of litigation, which would be expensive and divert management’s attention and resources from managing our business.
As a public company, we may also from time to time make forward-looking statements about future operating results and provide some financial guidance to the public markets. The management has limited experience as a management team in a public company and as a result projectionsProjections may not be made in a timely manner or set atwe might fail to reach expected performance levels and could materially affect the price of our shares. Any failure to meet published forward-looking statements that adversely affect the stock price could result in losses to investors, stockholder lawsuits or other litigation, sanctions or restrictions issued by the SEC.
We have a significant number of outstanding options and warrants, and future sales of these shares could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, we had outstanding options exercisable for an aggregate of 13,974,0526,534,167 shares of common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $1.14$3.59 per share and outstanding warrants exercisable for an aggregate of 469,020470,444 shares of common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $1.07$4.15 per share. The holders may sell many of these shares in the public markets from time to time, without limitations on the timing, amount or method of sale. As and when our stock price rises, if at all, more outstanding options and warrants will be in-the-money and the holders may exercise their options and warrants and sell a large number of shares. This could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.
Item 2. Properties Item 1B. | Unresolved Staff Comments |
None.
As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, we lease approximately 15,000 square feet of office space in Irvine, California with 62 years remaining on the lease, approximately 13,00010,000 square feet of space for research and development laboratory manufacturing in Boulder,Longmont, Colorado with 16 months7 years remaining on the lease, approximately 4,500 square feet of office space in Los Angeles, California with 4 years remaining on the lease and approximately 1,7002,300 square feet of office space in Rockville, Maryland with 16 months3 years remaining on the lease. The below table illustrates the use of each property by our business segments.
Business Segment | Property Used |
Ingredients | All properties |
Consumer Products | All properties |
Core Standards and Contract Services | Irvine, CA, Longmont, CO and Rockville, MD |
We also rent an apartment with approximately 1,000 square feet in Foothill Ranch, California, and an apartment with less than 1,100 square feet in Longmont, Colorado. We use the apartments to accommodate our traveling employees to each of our California and Colorado locations. We do not own any real estate. For the year ended January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, our total annual rental expense was approximately $537,000$729,000.
WeOn December 29, 2016, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, naming Elysium Health, Inc. (together with Elysium Health, LLC, “Elysium”) as defendant. Among other allegations, ChromaDex, Inc. alleged in the Complaint that (i) Elysium breached the Supply Agreement, dated June 26, 2014, by and between ChromaDex, Inc. and Elysium (the “pTeroPure® Supply Agreement”), by failing to make payments to ChromaDex, Inc. for purchases of pTeroPure® pursuant to the pTeroPure® Supply Agreement, (ii) Elysium breached the Supply Agreement, dated February 3, 2014, by and between ChromaDex, Inc. and Elysium, as amended (the “NIAGEN® Supply Agreement”), by failing to make payments to ChromaDex, Inc. for purchases of NIAGEN® pursuant to the NIAGEN® Supply Agreement, (iii) Elysium breached the Trademark License and Royalty Agreement, dated February 3, 2014, by and between ChromaDex, Inc. and Elysium (the “License Agreement”), by failing to make payments to ChromaDex, Inc. for royalties due pursuant to the License Agreement and (iv) certain officers of Elysium made false promises and representations to induce ChromaDex, Inc. into providing large supplies of pTeroPure® and NIAGEN® to Elysium pursuant to the pTeroPure® Supply Agreement and NIAGEN® Supply Agreement. ChromaDex, Inc. is seeking punitive damages, money damages and interest.
On January 25, 2017, Elysium filed an answer and counterclaims (the “Counterclaim”) in response to the Complaint. Among other allegations, Elysium alleges in the Counterclaim that (i) ChromaDex, Inc. breached the NIAGEN® Supply Agreement by not issuing certain refunds or credits to Elysium and for violating certain confidential information provisions, (ii) ChromaDex, Inc. breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing pursuant to the NIAGEN® Supply Agreement, (iii) ChromaDex, Inc. breached certain confidential provisions of the pTeroPure® Supply Agreement, (iv) ChromaDex, Inc. fraudulently induced Elysium into entering into the License Agreement (the “Fraud Claim”), (v) ChromaDex, Inc.’s conduct constitutes misuse of its patent rights (the “Patent Claim”) and (vi) ChromaDex, Inc. has engaged in unlawful or unfair competition under California state law (the “Unfair Competition Claim”). Elysium is seeking damages for ChromaDex, Inc.’s alleged breaches of the NIAGEN® Supply Agreement and pTeroPure® Supply Agreement, and compensatory damages, punitive damages and/or rescission of the License Agreement and restitution of any royalty payments conveyed by Elysium pursuant to the License Agreement, and a declaratory judgment that ChromaDex, Inc. has engaged in patent misuse.
On February 15, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed an amended complaint. In the amended complaint, ChromaDex, Inc. re-alleges the claims in the Complaint, and also alleges that Elysium willfully and maliciously misappropriated ChromaDex, Inc.’s trade secrets. On February 15, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. also filed a motion to dismiss the Fraud Claim, the Patent Claim and the Unfair Competition Claim. On March 1, 2017, Elysium filed a motion to dismiss ChromaDex, Inc.'s fraud and trade secret misappropriation causes of action. On March 6, 2017, Elysium filed a first amended counterclaim. On March 20, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. moved to dismiss Elysium's amended fraud, declaratory judgment of patent misuse and the Unfair Competition Claim. On May 10, 2017, the court ruled on the motions to dismiss, denying ChromaDex, Inc.’s motion as to Elysium’s fraud and declaratory judgment claims and granting ChromaDex, Inc.’s motion with prejudice as to Elysium’s Unfair Competition Claim. With respect to Elysium’s motion, the court granted the motion with prejudice as to ChromaDex, Inc.’s fraud claim and granted with leave to amend the motion as to ChromaDex, Inc.’s trade secret misappropriation claims. On May 24, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. answered the first amended counterclaim and asserted several affirmative defenses. Also on May 24, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a second amended complaint, amending the trade secret misappropriation claims and addressing Elysium’s declaratory judgment of patent misuse counterclaim. On June 7, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a third amended complaint dismissing the trade secret misappropriation claims and asserting two breach of contract claims for Elysium’s failure to pay for the product delivered. On June 16, 2017, Elysium answered the third amended complaint. On August 14, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. moved for judgment on the pleadings as to Elysium’s declaratory judgment of patent misuse counterclaim. On September 26, 2017, the court denied ChromaDex’s motion without prejudice and directed Elysium to file an amended counterclaim if it intended to maintain its declaratory judgment counterclaim. On October 11, 2017, Elysium filed a second amended counterclaim, re-alleging the claims in the first amended counterclaim and adding a claim for unjust enrichment and restitution of the royalties Elysium paid to ChromaDex, Inc. pursuant to the License Agreement. On October 25, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss the declaratory judgment of patent misuse and unjust enrichment claims and/or strike allegations in the unjust enrichment claim contained in the second amended counterclaim. On November 28, 2017, the court denied the motion. ChromaDex, Inc. answered the second amended counterclaim on December 12, 2017. The parties are not involvedcurrently in anydiscovery.
On July 17, 2017, Elysium filed petitions with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,197,807 (the “’807 Patent”) and 8,383,086 (the “’086 Patent”), patents to which ChromaDex, Inc. is the exclusive licensee. The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) denied institution of an inter partes review for the ’807 Patent on January 18, 2018. For the ’086 patent, on January 29, 2018 the PTAB granted institution of an inter partes review as to claims 1, 3, 4, and 5 and denied institution as to claim 2.
On September 27, 2017, Elysium Health Inc. ("Elysium Health") filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, against ChromaDex, Inc. (the “SDNY Complaint”). Elysium Health alleges in the SDNY Complaint that ChromaDex, Inc. made false and misleading statements in a citizen petition to the Food and Drug Administration it filed on or about August 18, 2017. Among other allegations, Elysium Health avers that the citizen petition made Elysium Health’s product appear dangerous, while casting ChromaDex, Inc.’s own product as safe. The SDNY Complaint asserts four claims for relief: (i) false advertising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (ii) trade libel; (iii) deceptive business practices under New York General Business Law § 349; and (iv) tortious interference with prospective economic relations. ChromaDex, Inc. denies the claims in the SDNY Complaint and intends to defend against them vigorously. On October 26, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. moved to dismiss the SDNY Complaint on the grounds that, inter alia, its statements in the citizen petition are immune from liability under the Noerr-Pennington Doctrine, the litigation privilege, and New York’s Anti-SLAPP statute, and that the SDNY Complaint failed to state a claim. Elysium Health opposed the motion on November 2, 2017. ChromaDex, Inc. filed its reply on November 9, 2017. The motion is currently pending.
On October 26, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Elysium Health (the “ChromaDex SDNY Complaint”). ChromaDex alleges that Elysium Health made material false and misleading statements to consumers in the promotion, marketing, and sale of its health supplement product, Basis, and asserts five claims for relief: (i) false advertising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(a); (ii) unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (iii) deceptive practices under New York General Business Law § 349; (iv) deceptive practices under New York General Business Law § 350; and (v) tortious interference with prospective economic advantage. On November 16, 2017, Elysium Health moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim. ChromaDex, Inc. opposed the motion on November 30, 2017 and Elysium Health filed a reply on December 7, 2017. On November 3, 2017, the Court consolidated the SDNY Complaint and the ChromaDex SDNY Complaint actions under the caption In re Elysium Health-ChromaDex Litigation, 17-cv-7394, and stayed discovery in the consolidated action pending a Court-ordered mediation. The mediation was unsuccessful and the motion is currently pending.
The Company is unable to predict the outcome of these matters and, at this time, cannot reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss with respect to the legal proceedings which managementdiscussed herein. As of December 31, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. did not accrue a potential loss for the Counterclaim or the SDNY Complaint because ChromaDex, Inc. believes may havethat the allegations are without merit and thus it is not probable that a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operations, cash flows, or prospects. However, the Company fromliability has been incurred.
From time to time iswe are involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business, which can include employment claims, product claims and patent infringements.business. We do not believe that any of these claims and proceedings against us as they arise arethere is no other litigation pending that is likely to have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
Not applicable.
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity SecuritiesPART II
Item 5. | Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities |
Since April 25, 2016, our common stock has been traded on The NASDAQ Capital Market (“NASDAQ”) under the symbol “CDXC.” From November 10, 2014 we haveto April 22, 2016, our common stock had been quotedtraded on the top tier of the OTC Markets Group, Inc. (the “OTCQX”) under the symbol “CDXC.” From
On April 201013, 2016, the Company effected a 1-for-3 reverse stock split. All information presented herein has been retrospectively adjusted to November 2014, we have been quoted onreflect the middle tierreverse stock split as if it took place as of the OTC Markets Group, Inc. (the “OTCQB”) underearliest period presented. An additional 1,632 shares were issued to round up fractional shares as a result of the symbol “CDXC.” OTCQX and OTCQB are networks of securities dealers who buy and sell stock. The dealers are connected by a computer network that provides information on current “bids” and “asks”, as well as volume information.reverse stock split.
The following table sets forth the range of high and low closing bid quotations for ChromaDexsale prices of our common stock for each of the periods indicated as reported by OTCQXNASDAQ and OTCQB.OTCQX. Closing sale prices were used for the period when our common stock was traded on NASDAQ and closing bid quotations were used for the period when our common stock was traded on OTCQX. These quotationsprices reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
Fiscal Year Ending January 3, 2015 | |
Quarter Ended | | High | | | Low | |
January 3, 2015 | | $ | 1.25 | | | $ | 0.84 | |
September 27, 2014 | | $ | 1.46 | | | $ | 1.02 | |
June 28, 2014 | | $ | 1.90 | | | $ | 1.21 | |
March 29, 2014 | | $ | 2.08 | | | $ | 1.41 | |
Fiscal Year Ending December 30, 2017 |
| | |
December 30, 2017 | $6.96 | $3.88 |
September 30, 2017 | $4.71 | $2.91 |
July 1, 2017 | $3.96 | $2.26 |
April 1, 2017 | $3.67 | $2.50 |
Fiscal Year Ending December 28, 2013 | |
Quarter Ended | | High | | | Low | |
December 28, 2013 | | $ | 1.58 | | | $ | 0.78 | |
September 28, 2013 | | $ | 0.95 | | | $ | 0.68 | |
June 29, 2013 | | $ | 0.86 | | | $ | 0.61 | |
March 30, 2013 | | $ | 0.80 | | | $ | 0.50 | |
Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2016 |
| | |
December 31, 2016 | $3.31 | $2.31 |
October 1, 2016 | $4.39 | $2.88 |
July 2, 2016 | $5.76 | $2.84 |
April 2, 2016 | $4.77 | $3.60 |
On March 12, 2015,8, 2018, the closing bid quotationsale price was $1.26.$5.16.
Penny StockSecurities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans
Information about our equity compensation plans is incorporated herein by reference to Item 12 of Part III of this Annual Report.
Performance Graph
The SEC has adopted rules that regulate broker-dealer practicesperformance graph below compares the annual percentage change in connection the cumulative total return on our common stock with transactions in penny stocks. Penny stocks are generally equity securities with a market price of less than $5.00, other than securities registered on certain national securities exchanges, provided that current price and volume information with respect to transactions in such securities is provided by the exchange or system. The penny stock rules require a broker-dealer, prior to a transaction in a penny stock, to deliver a standardized risk disclosure document prepared by the SEC, that: (a) contains a description of the nature and level of risk in the market for penny stocks in both public offerings and secondary trading; (b) contains a description of the broker’s or dealer’s duties to the customer and of the rights and remedies available to the customer with respect to a violation of such duties or other requirements of the securities laws; (c) contains a brief, clear, narrative description of a dealer market, including bid and ask prices for penny stocksNASDAQ Capital Market Composite Index and the significanceS&P Small Cap 600 Health Care Index. The chart shows the value as of the spread between the bid and ask price; (d) contains a toll-free telephone number for inquiriesDecember 30, 2017, of $100 invested on disciplinary actions; (e) defines significant terms in the disclosure document or in the conductDecember 29, 2012. The stock price performance below is not necessarily indicative of trading in penny stocks; and (f) contains such other information and is in such form, including language, type size and format, as the SEC shall require by rule or regulation.future performance.
The broker-dealer also must provide, prior to effectingperformance graph below is not “soliciting material,” shall not be deemed “filed” with the SEC and shall not be incorporated by reference into any transactionof our filings under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in a penny stock, the customer with (a) bid and offer quotations for the penny stock; (b) the compensation of the broker-dealer and its salespersonany such filing, except as shall be expressly set forth by specific reference in the transaction; (c) the number of shares to which such bid and ask prices apply, or other comparable information relating to the depth and liquidity of the market for such stock; and (d) a monthly account statement showing the market value of each penny stock held in the customer’s account.filing.
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
ChromaDex Corporation | 100.00 | 288.03 | 162.02 | 219.62 | 198.62 | 352.84 |
NASDAQ Composite | 100.00 | 141.58 | 162.13 | 173.35 | 187.34 | 242.49 |
S&P Small Cap 600 Health Care Index | 100.00 | 135.35 | 152.67 | 165.19 | 159.35 | 211.40 |
In addition, the penny stock rules require that prior to a transaction in a penny stock not otherwise exempt from those rules, the broker-dealer must make a special written determination that the penny stock is a suitable investment for the purchaser and receive the purchaser’s written acknowledgment of the receipt of a risk disclosure statement, a written agreement as to transactions involving penny stocks, and a signed and dated copy of a written suitability statement.
These disclosure requirements may have the effect of reducing the trading activity for our common stock. Therefore, stockholders may have difficulty selling our securities.
Holders of Our Common Stock
As of March 12, 2015,8, 2018, we had approximately 8258 registered holders of record of our common stock.
DividendsDividend Policy
We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock during either of the two most recent fiscal years and have no current intention to pay any cash dividends. Our ability to pay cash dividends is governed by applicable provisions of Delaware law and is subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors.
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
Other than as previously disclosed in our past Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K, the Company did not have any sales of unregistered securities for the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Item 6.
| Selected Financial DataData |
Not Applicable.The annual financial information set forth below has been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements. The information should be read together with, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” the consolidated financial statements and notes included elsewhere in this Form 10-K and in our SEC filings. The selected financial data in this section are not intended to replace our consolidated financial statements and the related notes. Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected in the future and results of interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results for the entire year.
| Years Ended |
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data | | | | | |
| | | | | |
Sales, net | $21,201,482 | $21,664,648 | $17,884,886 | $11,861,099 | $7,438,857 |
Cost of sales | 10,724,177 | 11,274,114 | 10,350,281 | 6,855,690 | 3,926,765 |
Gross profit | 10,477,305 | 10,390,534 | 7,534,605 | 5,005,409 | 3,512,092 |
| | | | | |
Operating expenses: | | | | | |
Sales and marketing | 4,459,224 | 1,558,213 | 1,507,868 | 1,482,784 | 1,627,795 |
Research and development | 4,007,381 | 2,522,768 | 891,601 | 513,671 | 134,040 |
General and administrative | 17,641,889 | 9,214,763 | 7,201,231 | 7,648,773 | 4,747,561 |
Loss from investment in affiliate | - | - | - | 45,829 | 44,961 |
Other | 745,773 | - | - | - | - |
Operating expenses | 26,854,267 | 13,295,744 | 9,600,700 | 9,691,057 | 6,554,357 |
Operating loss | (16,376,962) | (2,905,210) | (2,066,095) | (4,685,648) | (3,042,265) |
| | | | | |
Nonoperating income (expense): | | | | | |
Interest expense, net | (152,784) | (333,286) | (566,917) | (123,976) | (4,006) |
Loss on debt extinguishment | - | (313,099) | - | - | - |
Nonoperating expenses | (152,784) | (646,385) | (566,917) | (123,976) | (4,006) |
Loss before income taxes | (16,529,746) | (3,551,595) | (2,633,012) | (4,809,624) | (3,046,271) |
Provision for income taxes | - | - | (4,527) | - | - |
Loss from continuing operations | (16,529,746) | (3,551,595) | (2,637,539) | (4,809,624) | (3,046,271) |
| | | | | |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations | (315,140) | 623,410 | (133,528) | (578,561) | (1,373,254) |
Gain on sale of discontinued operations | 5,467,268 | - | - | - | - |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net | 5,152,128 | 623,410 | (133,528) | (578,561) | (1,373,254) |
Net loss | $(11,377,618) | $(2,928,185) | $(2,771,067) | $(5,388,185) | $(4,419,525) |
| | | | | |
Basic and diluted earnings (loss) per common share: | | | | | |
Loss from continuing operations | $(0.37) | $(0.10) | $(0.07) | $(0.14) | $(0.09) |
Earnings (loss) from discontinued operations | $0.11 | $0.02 | $(0.01) | $(0.01) | $(0.04) |
Basic and diluted loss per common share | $(0.26) | $(0.08) | $(0.08) | $(0.15) | $(0.13) |
Basic and diluted weighted average | | | | | |
common shares outstanding | 44,598,879 | 37,294,321 | 35,877,341 | 35,486,460 | 33,329,148 |
| At The End of Year
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Cash | $45,388,848 | $1,642,429 | $5,549,672 | $3,964,750 | $2,261,336 |
Working capital (1) | 7,415,742 | 7,786,372 | 4,400,432 | 2,189,442 | 1,602,008 |
Total assets | 62,723,600 | 19,752,068 | 18,749,209 | 11,516,847 | 8,986,892 |
Long term debt | - | - | 3,345,335 | 1,977,113 | - |
Total stockholders' equity | $53,833,668 | $9,974,358 | $5,274,674 | $3,998,391 | $5,665,451 |
| | | | | |
(1) Trade receivables plus inventories less accounts payable. | | | | |
| Years Ended
|
Consolidated Cash Flow Data
| 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 |
| | | | | |
Net cash used in operating activities | $(9,804,178) | $(2,936,596) | $(2,111,138) | $(2,580,406) | $(3,906,011) |
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities | 4,601,926 | (1,724,922) | (647,731) | 1,590,275 | 998,651 |
Net cash provided by financing activities | $48,948,671 | $754,275 | $4,343,791 | $2,693,545 | $4,648,696 |
Item 7.
| Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
You should read the following discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operation together with “Selected Financial Data,” the consolidated financial statements and the related notes appearingincluded elsewhere this Form 10-K. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. When reviewing the discussion below, you should keep in mind the substantial risks and uncertainties that impact our business. In particular, we encourage you to review the risks and uncertainties described in “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 8 of1A in this report.Form 10-K. These risks and uncertainties could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in forward-looking statements contained in this report or implied by past results and trends.
Overview
We discover, acquire,ChromaDex Corporation and its wholly owned subsidiaries, ChromaDex, Inc., Healthspan Research, LLC and ChromaDex Analytics, Inc. (collectively, the “Company” or, in the first person as “we” “us” and “our”) are an integrated, global nutraceutical company devoted to improving the way people age. The Company's scientists partner with leading universities and research institutions worldwide to uncover the full potential of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide ("NAD") and identify and develop novel, science-based ingredients. ChromaDex's flagship ingredient, NIAGEN® nicotinamide riboside, sold directly to consumers as TRU NIAGEN®, is backed with clinical and commercialize proprietary-based ingredient technologies through our business model which utilizes our wholly-owned synergistic business units. These units include the supply of phytochemical referencescientific research, as well as intellectual property protection. The Company also has a core standards which are small quantities of plant-based compounds typically used to research an array of potential attributes, and reference materials, related contract services and proprietary ingredients. We perform chemistry-based analyticalsegment, which focuses on natural product fine chemicals (known as “phytochemicals”), chemistry services, at our laboratory in Boulder, Colorado, typically in support of quality control or quality assurance activities within the dietary supplement industry. Through our subsidiary Spherix Consulting, Inc., we also provide scientific and regulatory consulting to clients in the food, supplement and pharmaceutical industries to manage potential health and regulatory risks.consulting.
The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on the ChromaDex financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these financial statements requires making estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported revenues, if any, and expenses during the reporting periods. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate such estimates and judgments, including those described in greater detail below. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other factors that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
On September 29, 2014, we entered into a loanAs of December 30, 2017, the cash and security agreement (the “Loan Agreement”) with Hercules Technology II, L.P., as lender (“Lender”) and Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc., as agent. Lender will provide us with access to a term loan of up to $5cash equivalents totaled approximately $45.4 million. The first $2.5 million of the term loan was funded at closing, and is repayable in installments over 30 months, following an initial interest-only period of twelve months after closing. The remaining $2.5 million of the term loan can be drawn down at our option at any time but no later than July 31, 2015.
With the term loan described above, we anticipateCompany anticipates that ourits current cash, cash equivalents and cash to be generated from operations will be sufficient to meet ourits projected operating plans through at least March 20, 2016. We16, 2019. The Company may, however, seek additional capital prior to March 20, 2016,16, 2019, both to meet ourits projected operating plans after March 20, 201616, 2019 and/or to fund ourits longer term strategic objectives.
Additional capital may come from public and/or private stock or debt offerings, borrowings under lines of credit or other sources. These additional funds may not be available on favorable terms, or at all. Further, if we issue equity or debt securities to raise additional funds, our existing stockholders may experience dilution and the new equity or debt securities we issue may have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of our existing stockholders. In addition, if we raise additional funds through collaboration, licensing or other similar arrangements, it may be necessary to relinquish valuable rights to our products or proprietary technologies, or to grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. If we cannot raise funds on acceptable terms, we may not be able to develop or enhance our products, obtain the required regulatory clearances or approvals, achieve long term strategic objectives, take advantage of future opportunities, or respond to competitive pressures or unanticipated customer requirements. Any of these events could adversely affect our ability to achieve our development and commercialization goals, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. If we are unable to establish small to medium scale production capabilities through our own plant or though collaboration we may be unable to fulfill our customers’ requirements. This may cause a loss of future revenue streams as well as require us to look for third party vendors to provide these services. These vendors may not be available, or charge fees that prevent us from pricing competitively within our markets.
Some of our operations are subject to regulation by various state and federal agencies. In addition, we expect a significant increase in the regulation of our target markets. Dietary supplements are subject to FDA, FTC and U.S. Department of Agriculture regulations relating to composition, labeling and advertising claims. These regulations may in some cases, particularly with respect to those applicable to new ingredients, require a notification that must be submitted to the FDA along with evidence of safety. There are similar regulations related to food additives.
Results of Operations
Our net saleslosses per basic and diluted share were $0.26, $0.08 and $0.08 for the twelve-month periods ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013 were approximately $15,313,000 and $10,161,000,2, 2016, respectively. We incurred a net loss of approximately $5,388,000 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 and a net loss of approximately $4,420,000 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. This equated to a $0.05 loss per basic and diluted share for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 versus a $0.04 loss per basic and diluted share for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013.
Over the next two years, we plan to continue to increase marketing, research and development efforts for our line of proprietary ingredients, subject to available financial resources.flagship ingredient, NIAGEN® nicotinamide riboside, and our consumer branded product TRU NIAGEN®.
| | Twelve months ending | | |
| | January 3, 2015 | | | December 28, 2013 | | | Change | | | | |
Sales | | $ | 15,313,179 | | | $ | 10,160,964 | | | | 51 | % | $21,201,482 | $21,664,648 | $17,884,886 |
Cost of sales | | | 9,987,514 | | | | 7,027,828 | | | | 42 | % | 10,724,177 | 11,274,114 | 10,350,281 |
Gross profit | | | 5,325,665 | | | | 3,133,136 | | | | 70 | % | 10,477,305 | 10,390,534 | 7,534,605 |
Operating expenses-Sales and marketing | | | 2,136,584 | | | | 2,357,605 | | | | -9 | % | |
Operating expenses -Sales and marketing | | 4,459,224 | 1,558,213 | 1,507,868 |
-Research and development | | 4,007,381 | 2,522,768 | 891,601 |
-General and administrative | | | 8,374,601 | | | | 5,117,016 | | | | 64 | % | 17,641,889 | 9,214,763 | 7,201,231 |
-Loss from investment in affiliate | | | 45,829 | | | | 44,961 | | | | 2 | % | |
Nonoperating-Interest income | | | 2,013 | | | | 1,251 | | | | 61 | % | |
-Interest expenses | | | (158,849 | ) | | | (34,330 | ) | | | 363 | % | |
-Other | | 745,773 | - |
Nonoperating -Interest expense, net | | (152,784) | (333,286) | (566,917) |
-Loss on debt extinguishment | | - | (313,099) | - |
Provision for income taxes | | - | (4,527) |
Loss from continuing operations | | (16,529,746) | (3,551,595) | (2,637,539) |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net | | 5,152,128 | 623,410 | (133,528) |
Net loss | | $ | (5,388,185 | ) | | $ | (4,419,525 | ) | | | 22 | % | $(11,377,618) | $(2,928,185) | $(2,771,067) |
Net SalesYear Ended December 30, 2017 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2016
Net Sales.Net sales consist of gross sales less discounts and returns. Net
| |
| | | |
Net sales: | | | |
Ingredients | $11,153,000 | $16,775,000 | -34% |
Consumer Products | 5,465,000 | - | - |
Core standards and contract services | 4,583,000 | 4,890,000 | -6% |
| | | |
Total net sales | $21,201,000 | $21,665,000 | -2% |
●
The decrease in sales increased by 51% to $15,313,179 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 as comparedingredients segment is mainly due to $10,160,964decreased sales of NIAGEN®. The Company made a strategic decision to transition from an ingredient and testing company to a consumer driven nutraceutical company. This has resulted in a shift in our sales away from resellers of NIAGEN® to our TRU NIAGEN® branded consumer product.
●
With the acquisition of Healthspan Research LLC in March 2017, the Company began selling consumer products that contain the Company's branded NIAGEN® ingredient. Segregation of the financial results for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013.consumer products segment coincides with the Company's strategic shift towards the consumer products. The Company expects the sales for consumer products segment to grow over the next twelve months.
●
The decrease in sales for the core standards and contract services segment generated netis primarily due to decreased sales of $7,487,189 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015. This is an increase of 13%, compared to $6,643,832 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. This increase was due to increased sales of both phytochemicalanalytical reference standards and contract services. The ingredients segment generated net sales of $6,857,177 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015. This is an increase of 182%, compared to $2,430,699 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. This increase was due to the increased sales throughout most of the ingredients we sell, “NIAGEN®” in particular, which we launched in the third quarter of 2013. The scientific and regulatory consulting segment generated net sales of $968,813 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015. This is a decrease of 16%, compared to $1,146,718 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. There were fewer consulting projects completed during the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 than during the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013.standards.
Cost of Sales
Cost of Sales.Costs of sales include raw materials, labor, overhead, and delivery costs.Cost
| |
| | |
| | | | |
Cost of sales: | | | | |
Ingredients | $5,492,000 | 49% | $7,920,000 | 47% |
Consumer Products | 2,189,000 | 40% | - | - |
Core standards and contract services | 3,043,000 | 66% | 3,354,000 | 69% |
| | | | |
Total cost of sales | $10,724,000 | 51% | $11,274,000 | 52% |
The cost of sales, for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 was $9,987,514 as compared with $7,027,828 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. As a percentage of net sales, this representeddecreased 1%.
●
The cost of sales, as a 4% decreasepercentage of net sales, for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 comparedingredients segment increased 2%. This increase as a percentage of net sales was primarily due to the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. a write-off of our NIAGEN® related inventory of approximately $183,000 in 2017.
●
The cost of sales, as a percentage of net sales for the core standards and contract services segment, for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 was 69% compareddecreased 3%. We were able to 74% for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. This percentage decrease in cost of sales is largely due to increased sales in analytical testing and contract services area, which the sales increased about 16% compared to the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. Fixed laborlower our reference standards purchasing costs make up the majority of costs for analytical testing and contract services and these fixed labor costs did not increase in proportion to sales. The cost of sales as a percentage of net sales for the ingredients segment for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 was 62%. This percentage was also 62% for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. The cost of sales as a percentage of net sales for the scientific and regulatory consulting segment for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 was 61% compared to 55% for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. The increase in cost of sales was largely due to completing fewer consulting projects during the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 than during the comparable period in 2013.by diversifying our sources.
Gross Profit
Gross Profit.Gross profit is net sales less the cost of sales and is affected by a number of factors including product mix, competitive pricing and costs of products and services. Our
| |
| | | |
Gross profit: | | | |
Ingredients | $5,661,000 | $8,855,000 | -36% |
Consumer Products | 3,276,000 | - | - |
Core standards and contract services | 1,540,000 | 1,536,000 | 0% |
| | | |
Total gross profit | $10,477,000 | $10,391,000 | 1% |
●
The decreased gross profit increased 70% to $5,325,665 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015ingredients segment is due to the decreased sales of NIAGEN®. The Company made a strategic decision to transition from $3,133,136an ingredient and testing company to a consumer driven nutraceutical company. This has resulted in a shift in our sales away from resellers of NIAGEN® to our TRU NIAGEN® branded consumer product.
●
The consumer products segment posted gross profit of $3.3 million for the twelve-month period endedyear ending in December 28, 2013. For30, 2017. The Company expects the sales and gross profit for consumer products segment to grow over the next twelve months.
●
The gross profit for the core standards and contract services segment our gross profit increased 34% to $2,345,522 forremained the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 from $1,750,183 forsame as the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. The increased sales of analytical testing and contract services which resulted in a higher labor utilization rate as well as increased fixed cost coverage, was the primary reason for the increase in gross profit. For the ingredients segment, our gross profit increased to $2,599,830 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 from $929,512 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. The increased sales throughout our ingredient portfolio, especially for our recently launched “NIAGEN®” was the main factor for the increase in gross profit. For the scientific and regulatory consulting segment, our gross profit decreased 26% to $380,313 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 from $514,681 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. The decrease in sales which resulted in a lower labor utilization rate was the reason for the decrease in gross profit.
offset by improved profitability.
Operating Expenses - Sales and Marketing
Operating Expenses – Sales and Marketing.Sales and Marketing Expenses consist of salaries, advertising and marketing expenses.Sales and
| |
| | | |
Sales and marketing expenses: | | | |
Ingredients | $1,280,000 | $1,197,000 | 7% |
Consumer Products | 2,673,000 | - | - |
Core standards and contract services | 506,000 | 361,000 | 40% |
| | | |
Total sales and marketing expenses | $4,459,000 | $1,558,000 | 186% |
●
For the ingredients segment, the increase is largely due to increased marketing efforts to raise consumer awareness for our line of proprietary ingredients.
●
For the consumer products segment, we have increased staffing as well as direct marketing expenses for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 were $2,136,584associated with social media and other customer awareness and acquisition programs. We will continue to expand both staffing as compared to $2,357,605 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. well as increase other marketing expense as we invest in building out our own global branded consumer product business.
●
For the core standards and contract services segment, sales and marketing expenses for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015, decreased to $975,800 as compared to $1,459,620 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. This decrease was largely due to operational changes in sales and marketing staff and a decrease in marketing and advertising spend. For the ingredients segment, sales and marketing expenses for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 increased to $1,081,209 as compared to $752,121 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. The increase was largely due to increased marketing efforts for our line of proprietary ingredients. For the scientific and regulatory consulting segment, sales and marketing expenses for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 were $79,575 as compared to $14,705 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. This increase was largelyis mainly due to our increased marketing efforts to raise the awareness of our consulting services within the industry. Lastly, we incurred $131,159 in sales and marketing expenses for our BluScience product line during the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. We did not have such expenses for the comparable period in 2014 as we sold the BluScience product line on March 28, 2013.efforts.
Operating Expenses - General and Administrative
Operating Expenses – Research and Development. Research and Development Expenses consist of clinical trials and process development expenses.
| |
| | | |
Research and development expenses: | | | |
Ingredients | $2,903,000 | $2,488,000 | 17% |
Consumer Products | 1,104,000 | - | - |
Core standards and contract services | - | 35,000 | -100% |
| | | |
Total research and development expenses | $4,007,000 | $2,523,000 | 59% |
●
In 2017, we began allocating the research and development expenses related to our NIAGEN® branded ingredient to the ingredients and consumer products segment, proportional to revenues recorded. Previously, these expenses were recorded all in the ingredients segment. Overall, we increased our research and development efforts compared to 2016 and we plan to continue to increase research and development efforts for our flagship ingredient, NIAGEN® nicotinamide riboside.
●
For the core standards and contract services segment, we explored processes to develop certain compounds at a larger scale during the year ended December 31, 2016.
Operating Expenses – General and Administrative.General and Administrative Expenses consist of research and development, general company administration, IT, accounting and executive management.management expenses. General and administrative expenses for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 increased to $8,374,601 as compared to $5,117,016 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. One
| |
| | | |
| | | |
General and administrative | $17,642,000 | $9,215,000 | 91% |
| | | |
The following expenses for the 1,090,000 shares of restricted stock granted to the Company’s officers and members of the board of directors, which resulted in the increase in share-based compensation expenses. Another factor that contributed to the increase in general and administrative expenses was anin 2017:
●
An increase in legal expenses. Our legal expenses increased to approximately $5.1 million in 2017 compared to approximately $1.3 million in 2016. The ongoing litigation with Elysium and our increased efforts to file and maintain patents related to the patents we license, including maintenance, consulting, filing and related royalty expenses. Our patent related expenses increased to $815,195 as compared to $293,643proprietary ingredient technologies were the main reasons for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. Another factor that contributed to the increase in general and administrative expenses was anlegal expenses.
●
An increase in research and development expensesshare-based compensation. Our share-based compensation expense for our line of proprietary ingredients. Our research and development expenses2017 increased to $513,671 asapproximately $4.6 million compared to $134,040approximately $1.2 million for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. In addition, during the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015, there was an increase of approximately $176,000 in wages and related expenses as a result of hiring additional personnel to support our operations, including an in-house legal counsel. Lastly, there was one-time expense for $125,000 during the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015, which we have paid as a settlement fee to a certain claimant.2016.
Nonoperating - Interest Income●
Severance payments related our former Chief Financial Officer, Thomas Varvaro. The Company made an accrual of $0.6 million for future payments to be made over the next two years.
●
An increaseof approximately $0.4 million in expenses associated with information and technology. We invested in additional staff and as well as external consulting in developing and maintaining our Ecommerce platform, which we use to sell our branded consumer product TRU NIAGEN®.
Interest incomeOperating Expenses – Other. Other expense consists of interest earned on money market accounts. Interest income for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015, was $2,013 as compared to $1,251 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013.loss from an ongoing litigation.
Nonoperating - Interest Expense●
In relation to the ongoing litigation, the Company incurred a write-off of approximately $746,000 in gross trade receivable from Elysium related to royalties billed as part of the existing Trademark License and Royalty Agreement.
Nonoperating – Interest Expense, net.Interest expense, net consists of interest on loan payable and capital leases.leases offset by interest income.
| |
| | | |
| | | |
Interest expense, net | $153,000 | $333,000 | -54% |
●
The decrease in interest expense was mainly due to the term loan from Hercules Technology II, L.P. which the Company drew down an initial $2.5 million on September 29, 2014 and a second $2.5 million on June 18, 2015. The Company fully repaid the loan on June 14, 2016.
Depreciation and Amortization. Interest expense forFor the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015, was $158,849 asDecember 30, 2017, we recorded approximately $0.5 million in depreciation compared to $34,330approximately $0.3 million for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. This increase was largely related to the Loan Agreement the Company entered into with Hercules Technology II, L.P., which the Company has drawn down $2.5 million on September 29, 2014.
Depreciation and Amortization
For the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015, we recorded approximately $222,721 in depreciation compared to approximately $246,175 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013.31, 2016. We depreciate our assets on a straight-line basis, based on the estimated useful lives of the respective assets. We amortize intangible assets using a straight-line method, generally over 10 years. For licensed patent rights, the useful lives are 10 years or the remaining term of the patents underlying licensing rights, whichever is shorter. The useful lives of subsequent milestone payments that are capitalized are the remaining useful life of the initial licensing payment that was capitalized. In the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, we recorded amortization on intangible assets of approximately $35,589$0.2 million compared to approximately $23,532$0.1 million for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013.31, 2016.
Income Taxes
Taxes.At January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 2013,31, 2016, the Company maintained a full valuation allowance against the entire deferred income tax balance which resulted in an effective tax rate of zero0% for each of 2017 and 2016.
Net cash used in operating activities. Net cash used in operating activities for the twelve-month period ended December 30, 2017 was approximately $9.8 million as compared to approximately $2.9 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016. Along with the net loss, a decrease in accounts payable was the largest use of cash during the twelve-month period ended December 30, 2017. Net cash used in operating activities for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016 largely reflects increase in trade receivables along with the net loss.
We expect our operating cash flows to fluctuate significantly in future periods as a result of fluctuations in our operating results, shipment timetables, accounts receivable collections, inventory management, and the timing of our payments, among other factors.
Net cash used in investing activities. Net cash provided by investing activities was approximately $4.6 million for the twelve-month period ended December 30, 2017, compared to approximately $1.7 million used in for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016. Net cash provided by investing activities for the twelve-month period ended December 30, 2017 mainly consisted of proceeds from disposal of assets, offset by purchases of leasehold improvements and equipment and intangible assets. Net cash used in investing activities for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016 mainly consisted of purchases of leasehold improvements and equipment and intangible assets.
Net cash provided by financing activities. Net cash provided by financing activities was approximately $48.9 million for the twelve-month period ended December 30, 2017, compared to approximately $0.8 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016. Net cash provided by financing activities for 2017 mainly consisted of proceeds from issuances of our common stock and exercise of stock options, offset by principal payments on capital leases. Net cash provided by financing activities for 2016 mainly consisted of proceeds from issuances of our common stock and warrants through a private offering to our existing stockholders and exercise of stock options, offset by principal payments on loan payable and capital leases.
Trade Receivables. As of December 30, 2017, we had approximately $5.3 million in trade receivables as compared to approximately $5.9 million as of December 31, 2016.
Inventories. As of December 30, 2017, we had approximately $5.8 million in inventory, compared to approximately $7.9 million as of December 31, 2016. As of December 30, 2017, our inventory consisted of approximately $4.2 million of bulk ingredients, approximately $0.7 million of consumer products and approximately $0.9 million of phytochemical reference standards. Bulk ingredients are proprietary compounds sold to customers in larger quantities, typically in kilograms. These ingredients are used by our customers in the dietary supplement, food and beverage, animal health, cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries to manufacture their final products. Consumer products inventory consists of TRU NIAGEN® branded finished bottles of dietary supplement products that contain NIAGEN® ingredient and related work-in-process inventory. Phytochemical reference standards are small quantities of plan-based compounds typically used to research an array of potential attributes or for quality control purposes. The Company currently lists over 1,800 phytochemicals and 400 botanical reference materials in our catalog and holds a lot of these as inventory in small quantities, mostly in grams and milligrams.
Our normal operating cycle for reference standards is currently longer than one year. Due to the large number of different items we carry, certain groups of these reference standards have a sales frequency that is slower than others and varies greatly year to year. In addition, for certain reference standards, the cost saving is advantageous when purchased in larger quantities and we have taken advantage of such opportunities when available. Such factors have resulted in an operating cycle to be more than one year on average. The Company gains competitive advantage through the broad offering of reference standards and it is critical for the Company to continue to expand its library of reference standards it offers for the growth of business. Nevertheless, the Company has recently made changes in its reference standards inventory purchasing practice, which the management believes will result in an improved turnover rate and shorter operating cycle without impacting our competitive advantage.
The Company regularly reviews inventories on hand and reduces the carrying value for slow-moving and obsolete inventory, inventory not meeting quality standards and inventory subject to expiration. The reduction of the carrying value for slow-moving and obsolete inventory is based on current estimates of future product demand, market conditions and related management judgment. Any significant unanticipated changes in future product demand or market conditions that vary from current expectations could have an impact on the value of inventories.
We strive to optimize our supply chain as we constantly search for better and more reliable sources and suppliers of bulk ingredients and phytochemical reference standards. By doing so, we believe we can lower the costs of our inventory, which we can then pass along the savings to our customers. In addition, we are working with our suppliers and partners to develop more efficient manufacturing methods of the raw materials, in an effort to lower the costs of our inventory.
Accounts Payable. As of December 30, 2017, we had $3.7 million in accounts payable compared to approximately $6.0 million as of December 31, 2016.
Advances from Customers. As of December 30, 2017, we had approximately $0.4 million in advances from customers compared to approximately $0.4 million as of December 31, 2016. These advances are for large-scale consulting projects, contract services and contract research projects where we require a deposit before beginning work.
Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared to Year Ended January 2, 2016
Net Sales. Net sales consist of gross sales less discounts and returns.
| |
| | | |
Net sales: | | | |
Ingredients | $16,775,000 | $12,542,000 | 34% |
Core standards and contract services | 4,890,000 | 5,343,000 | -8% |
| | | |
Total net sales | $21,665,000 | $17,885,000 | 21% |
●
The increase in sales for the ingredients segment is due to increased sales of NIAGEN® and PTEROPURE®.
●
The decrease in sales for the core standards and contract services segment is primarily due to decreased sales from our regulatory consulting operations. For regulatory consulting operations, we put a further emphasis on intercompany work supporting our ingredients segment.
Cost of Sales. Costs of sales include raw materials, labor, overhead, and delivery costs.
| |
| | |
| | | | |
Cost of sales: | | | | |
Ingredients | $7,920,000 | 47% | $6,664,000 | 53% |
Core standards and contract services | 3,354,000 | 69% | 3,686,000 | 69% |
| | | | |
Total cost of sales | $11,274,000 | 52% | $10,350,000 | 58% |
The cost of sales, as a percentage of net sales, decreased 6%.
●
The decrease in cost of sales, as a percentage of net sales, for the ingredients segment is largely due to price reductions from our suppliers through increased purchase volumes.
●
The cost of sales, as a percentage of net sales for the core standards and contract services segment remained the same at 69%.
Gross Profit. Gross profit is net sales less the cost of sales and is affected by a number of factors including product mix, competitive pricing and costs of products and services.
| |
| | | |
Gross profit: | | | |
Ingredients | $8,855,000 | $5,878,000 | 51% |
Core standards and contract services | 1,536,000 | 1,657,000 | -7% |
| | | |
Total gross profit | $10,391,000 | $7,535,000 | 38% |
| | | |
●
The gross profit for the ingredients segment increased due to the increased sales of the ingredient portfolio we offer, coupled with lower prices from our suppliers due to increased purchase volumes.
●
The decreased gross profit for the core standards and contract services segment is largely due to decreased sales from our regulatory consulting operations, which put a greater focus on intercompany work supporting our ingredients segment.
Operating Expenses – Sales and Marketing. Sales and Marketing Expenses consist of salaries, advertising and marketing expenses.
| |
| | | |
Sales and marketing expenses: | | | |
Ingredients | $1,197,000 | $1,112,000 | 8% |
Core standards and contract services | 361,000 | 396,000 | -9% |
| | | |
Total sales and marketing expenses | $1,558,000 | $1,508,000 | 3% |
| | | |
●
For the ingredients segment, the increase is largely due to increased marketing efforts to raise the consumer awareness for our line of proprietary ingredients.
●
For the core standards and contract services segment, the decrease is largely due to making certain operational changes as certain personnel who were previously assigned to the sales and marketing group were moved to an administrative group.
Operating Expenses – Research and Development. Research and Development Expenses consist of clinical trials and process development expenses.
| |
| | | |
Research and development expenses: | | | |
Ingredients | $2,488,000 | $892,000 | 179% |
Core standards and contract services | 35,000 | - | - |
| | | |
Total research and development expenses | $2,523,000 | $892,000 | 183% |
●
For the ingredients segment, we increased our research and development efforts with a focus on NIAGEN®.
●
For the core standards and contract services segment, the expense is mainly associated with exploring processes to develop certain compounds at a larger scale.
Operating Expenses – General and Administrative. General and Administrative Expenses consist of general company administration, IT, accounting and executive management expenses.
| |
| | | |
| | | |
General and administrative | $9,215,000 | $7,201,000 | 28% |
●
One of the factors that contributed to the increase in general and administrative expenses was an increase in bad debt expense. Our bad debt expense for 2016 increased to approximately $0.9 million compared to $0.4 million for 2015. In December 2016, we recorded an allowance of $0.5 million for a certain doubtful account against bad debt expenses.
●
Another factor that contributed to the increase was an increase in patent maintenance expense. Our patent maintenance expense for 2016 increased to approximately $0.7 million compared to approximately $0.4 million for 2015.
●
Another factor that contributed to the increase was an increase of approximately $0.5 million in expenses associated with administrative staff. We made certain operational changes as certain personnel who were previously assigned to our sales and marketing group were moved to an administrative group in 2016.
●
Another factor that contributed to the increase in general and administrative expense was an increase in royalties we pay to patent holders as the sales for licensed products increased in 2016. For 2016, royalty expense increased to approximately $0.7 million, compared to approximately $0.5 million for 2015.
●
Also, there were one-time expenses of approximately $0.1 million associated with the initial listing of the Company’s stock on the NASDAQ Capital Market in 2016.
●
These increases in expenses were offset by the decrease in share-based compensation expense. For 2016, our share-based compensation expense decreased to approximately $1.2 million compared to approximately $2.0 million for 2015.
Nonoperating – Interest Expense, net. Interest expense consists of interest on loan payable and capital leases offset by interest income.
| |
| | | |
| | | |
Interest expense, net | $333,000 | $567,000 | -41% |
| | | |
●
The decrease in interest expense was mainly related to the Term Loan Agreement dated September 29, 2014, between the Company and Hercules Technology II, L.P, which the Company drew down an initial $2.5 million on September 29, 2014 and 2013.a second $2.5 million on June 18, 2015. The Company fully repaid the loan on June 14, 2016.
Depreciation and Amortization. For the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016, we recorded approximately $0.3 million in depreciation compared to approximately $0.3 million for the twelve-month period ended January 2, 2016. We depreciate our assets on a straight-line basis, based on the estimated useful lives of the respective assets. We amortize intangible assets using a straight-line method, generally over 10 years. For licensed patent rights, the useful lives are 10 years or the remaining term of the patents underlying licensing rights, whichever is shorter. The useful lives of subsequent milestone payments that are capitalized are the remaining useful life of the initial licensing payment that was capitalized. In the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016, we recorded amortization on intangible assets of approximately $88,000 compared to approximately $45,000 for the twelve-month period ended January 2, 2016.
Income Taxes. At December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016, the Company maintained a full valuation allowance against the entire deferred income tax balance which resulted in an effective tax rate of 0% for 2016 and 0.2% for 2015.
Net cash used in operating activities. Net cash used in operating activities for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016 was approximately $2.9 million as compared to approximately $2.1 million for the twelve-month period ended January 2, 2016. Along with the net loss, an increase in trade receivables were the largest uses of cash during the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016. Net cash used in operating activities for the twelve-month period ended January 2, 2016 largely reflects increase in inventories, trade receivables along with the net loss, as well.
We expect our operating cash flows to fluctuate significantly in future periods as a result of fluctuations in our operating results, shipment timetables, accounts receivable collections, inventory management, and the timing of our payments, among other factors.
Net cash used in investing activities. Net cash used in investing activities was approximately $1.7 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016, compared to approximately $0.6 million for the twelve-month period ended January 2, 2016. Net cash used in investing activities for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016 mainly consisted of purchases of leasehold improvements and equipment and intangible assets. Net cash used in investing activities for the twelve-month period ended January 2, 2016 also consisted of purchases of leasehold improvements and equipment and intangible assets.
Net cash provided by financing activities. Net cash provided by financing activities was approximately $0.8 million for the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2016, compared to approximately $4.3 million for the twelve-month period ended January 2, 2016. Net cash provided by financing activities for 2016 mainly consisted of proceeds from issuances of our common stock and warrants through a private offering to our existing stockholders and exercise of stock options, offset by principal payments on loan payable and capital leases. Net cash provided by financing activities for 2015 consisted of proceeds from loan payable and issuances of our common stock and warrants through a private offering to our existing stockholders.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
For the twelve-month periods ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013,2, 2016, the Company has incurred operating losses from continuing operations of approximately $5,231,000$16.5 million, $3.6 million and $4,386,000,$2.6 million, respectively. Net cash used in operating activities for the twelve-month periods ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 20152, 2016 was approximately $9.8 million, $2.9 million and December 28, 2013 were approximately $2,580,000 and $3,906,000,$2.1 million, respectively. The losses and the uses of cash are primarily due to expenses associated with the development and expansion of our operations. These operations have been financed through capital contributions, the issuance of common stock and warrants through private placements, and the issuance of debt.
Our Board of Directors periodically reviews our capital requirements in light of our proposed business plan. Our future capital requirements will remain dependent upon a variety of factors, including cash flow from operations, the ability to increase sales, increasing our gross profits from current levels, reducing sales and administrative expenses as a percentage of net sales, continued development of customer relationships, and our ability to market our new products successfully. However, based on our results from operations, we may determine that we need additional financing to implement our business plan. Additional financing may come from public and private equity or debt offerings, borrowings under lines of credit or other sources. These additional funds may not be available on favorable terms, or at all. There can be no assurance that any such financingwe will be available on terms favorable to us or at all.successful in raising these additional funds. Without adequate financing we may have to further delay or terminate product or service expansion plans. Any inability to raise additional financing would have a material adverse effect on us.
On September 29, 2014, we entered into a loanAs of December 30, 2017, the cash and security agreement (the “Loan Agreement”) with Hercules Technology II, L.P., as lender (“Lender”) and Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc., as agent. Lender will provide us with access to a term loan of up to $5cash equivalents totaled approximately $45.4 million. The first $2.5 million of the term loan was funded at closing, and is repayable in installments over 30 months, following an initial interest-only period of twelve months after closing. The remaining $2.5 million of the term loan can be drawn down at our option at any time but no later than July 31, 2015.
While we anticipateCompany anticipates that ourits current cash, cash equivalents and cash to be generated from operations and $2.5 million we can additionally draw down at our option pursuant to the Loan Agreement will be sufficient to meet ourits projected operating plans through at least March 20, 2016, we16, 2019. The Company may, however, seek additional capital prior to March 20, 2016,16, 2019, both to meet ourits projected operating plans through and after March 20, 2016 and16, 2019 and/or to fund ourits longer term strategic objectives. To the extent we are unable to raise additional cash or generate sufficient revenue to meet our projected operating plans prior to March 20, 2016, we will revise our projected operating plans accordingly.
Net cash used in operating activities
Net cash used in operating activities for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 was approximately $2,580,000 as compared to approximately $3,906,000 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. Along with the net loss, an increase in inventories and trade receivables were the largest uses of cash during the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015. Net cash used in operating activities for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013 largely reflects decrease in accounts payable and increase in inventories, along with the net loss.
We expect our operating cash flows to fluctuate significantly in future periods as a result of fluctuations in our operating results, shipment timetables, accounts receivable collections, inventory management, and the timing of our payments, among other factors.
Net cash provided by investing activities
Net cash provided by investing activities was approximately $1,590,000 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015, compared to approximately $999,000 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. Net cash provided by investing activities for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 principally consisted of proceeds received from unrelated third parties from the assignment of the Senior Note and the sale of the Preferred Shares. NeutriSci originally issued the Senior Note and the Preferred Shares to the Company as a part of the consideration for the purchase of BluScience product line. Net cash provided investing activities for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013 mainly consisted of cash consideration received from NeutriSci from the sale of BluScience product line as well as a repayment received from the Senior Note issued by NeutriSci.
Net cash provided by financing activities
Net cash provided by financing activities was approximately $2,694,000 for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015, compared to approximately $4,649,000 for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013. Net cash provided by financing activities for the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 mainly consisted of proceeds from the loan we entered into with Hercules Technology II, L.P. Net cash provided by financing activities for the twelve-month period ended December 28, 2013 mainly consisted of proceeds from issuance of our common stock through a private offering as well as from the exercise of warrants.
Dividend Policy
We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock. We presently intend to retain earnings for use in our operations and to finance our business. Any change in our dividend policy is within the discretion of our board of directors and will depend, among other things, on our earnings, debt service and capital requirements, restrictions in financing agreements, if any, business conditions, legal restrictions and other factors that our board of directors deems relevant.
Trade Receivables
As of January 3, 2015, we had $1,906,709 in trade receivables as compared to $838,793 as of December 28, 2013. This increase was largely due to the increase in our sales from the ingredients segment.
Other Receivable
As of January 3, 2015, the Company did not have any other receivable, however, as of December 28, 2013, we had $215,000 in other receivable. This amount was from a legal settlement agreement related to a lawsuit over the violation of the Company’s trademarks. The counterparty had already remitted the payment to a third party escrow agent prior to December 28, 2013 and this payment was deposited by the Company on January 14, 2014.
Inventories
As of January 3, 2015, we had $3,734,341 in inventory, compared to $2,204,125 as of December 28, 2013. This increase was mainly due to increase in inventory for the ingredients business segment. As of January 3, 2015, our inventory consisted of approximately $2,276,000 of bulk ingredients and approximately $1,458,000 of phytochemical reference standards. Bulk ingredients are proprietary compounds sold to customers in larger quantities, typically in kilograms. These ingredients are used by our customers in the dietary supplement, food and beverage, animal health, cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries to manufacture their final products. Phytochemical reference standards are small quantities of plan-based compounds typically used to research an array of potential attributes or for quality control purposes. The Company has approximately 5,000 defined standards and holds a lot of these standards as inventory in small quantities, mostly in grams and milligrams.
Our normal operating cycle for reference standards is currently longer than one year. Due to the large number of different items we carry, certain groups of these reference standards have sales frequency that is slower than others and varies greatly year to year. In addition, for certain reference standards, the cost saving is advantageous when purchased in larger quantities and we have taken advantage of such opportunities when available. Such factors have resulted in an operating cycle to be more than one year on average. The Company gains competitive advantage through the broad offering of reference standards and it is critical for the Company to continue to expand its library of reference standards it offers for the growth of business. Nevertheless, the Company has recently made changes in its reference standards inventory purchasing practice, which the management believes will result in an improved turnover rate and shorter operating cycle without impacting our competitive advantage.
The Company regularly reviews inventories on hand and records a provision for slow-moving and obsolete inventory, inventory not meeting quality standards and inventory subject to expiration. The provision for slow-moving and obsolete inventory is based on current estimates of future product demand, market conditions and related management judgment. Any significant unanticipated changes in future product demand or market conditions that vary from current expectations could have an impact on the value of inventories.
We strive to optimize our supply chain as we constantly search for better and more reliable sources and suppliers of bulk ingredients and phytochemical reference standards. By doing so, we believe we can lower the costs of our inventory, which we can then pass along the savings to our customers. In addition, we are working with our suppliers and partners to develop more efficient manufacturing methods of the raw materials, in an effort to lower the costs of our inventory.
Accounts Payable
As of January 3, 2015, we had $3,451,608 in accounts payable compared to $1,440,910 as of December 28, 2013. This increase was primarily due the growth in our ingredients business segment and reflects the timing of payments related to our purchases of inventory.
Advances from Customers
As of January 3, 2015, we had $243,435 in advances from customers compared to $546,044 as of December 28, 2013. These advances are for large-scale consulting projects, contract services and contract research projects where we require a deposit before beginning work. This decrease was due to completion of certain large-scale research projects during the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 which the advances were outstanding as of December 28, 2013.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
During the fiscal years ended January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 2013,31, 2016, we had no off-balance sheet arrangements other than ordinary operating leases as disclosed in the accompanying financial statements.
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations and other commitments as of December 30, 2017:
| |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Capital leases | $576,000 | $236,000 | $196,000 | $126,000 | $18,000 | $- |
Operating leases | 2,093,000 | 601,000 | 590,000 | 424,000 | 340,000 | 138,000 |
Purchase obligations | 3,571,000 | 3,489,000 | 82,000 | - | - | - |
Total | $6,240,000 | $4,326,000 | $868,000 | $550,000 | $358,000 | $138,000 |
Capital leases. We lease equipment under capitalized lease obligations with a term of typically 4 or 5 years. We make monthly instalment payments for these leases.
Operating leases. We lease our office and research facilities in California, Colorado and Maryland under operating lease agreements that expire at various dates from September 2018 through February 2024. We make monthly payments on these leases.
Purchase obligations. We enter into purchase obligations with various vendors for goods and services that we need for our operations. The purchase obligations for goods and services include inventory, research and development, and laboratory supplies.
Critical Accounting Policies
The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate these estimates, including those related to the valuation of share-based payments. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
We believe that of our significant accounting policies, which are described in Note 2 of the Financial Statements, set forth in Item 8, the following accounting policies involve the greatest degree of judgment and complexity. Accordingly, these are the policies we believe are the most critical to aid in fully understanding and evaluating our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
Revenue recognition: The Company recognizes sales and the related cost of sales at the time the merchandise is shipped to customers or service is performed, when each of the following conditions have been met: an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, there is a fixed price, and collectability is reasonably assured. Discounts, returns and allowances related to sales, including an estimated reserve for returns and allowances, are recorded as reduction of revenue.
Shipping and handling fees billed to customers and the cost of shipping and handling fees billed to customers are included in Net sales. Shipping and handling fees not billed to customers are recognized as cost of sales.
Taxes collected from customers and remitted to governmental authorities are excluded from revenue, which is presented on a net basis in the statement of operations.
In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Topic 606 (ASU 2014-09), to supersede nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"). The core principle of ASU 2014-09 is to recognize revenues when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration that is expected to be received for those goods or services. ASU 2014-09 defines a five step process to achieve this core principle and, in doing so, it is possible more judgment and estimates may be required within the revenue recognition process than required under existing U.S. GAAP including identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each separate performance obligation. ASU 2014-09 is effective for us in our first quarter of fiscal 2018 using either of two methods: (i) retrospective to each prior reporting period presented with the option to elect certain practical expedients as defined within ASU 2014-09; or (ii) retrospective with the cumulative effect of initially applying ASU 2014-09 recognized at the date of initial application and providing certain additional disclosures as defined per ASU 2014-09.
The Company will adopt ASU 2014-09, effective the first day of our fiscal year 2018, using the modified retrospective transition method. Under this method, the Company could elect to apply the cumulative effect method to either all contracts as of the date of initial application or only to contracts that are not complete as of that date. The Company elected to apply the modified retrospective method to contracts that are not complete as of December 31, 2017. We do not expect the adoption of ASU 2014-09 to have a material impact on our financial statements.
Inventories: Inventories are comprised of raw materials, work-in-process and finished goods. They are stated at the lower of cost, determined by the first-in, first-out method, (FIFO) method, or market. The inventory on the balance sheet is recordedreflected net of valuation allowances. Labor and overhead has been added to inventory that was manufactured or characterized by the Company.
The Company regularly reviews inventories on hand and records a provisionreduces the carrying value for slow-moving and obsolete inventory, inventory not meeting quality standards and inventory subject to expiration. The provisionreduction of the carrying value for slow-moving and obsolete inventory is based on current estimates of future product demand, market conditions and related management judgment. Any significant unanticipated changes in future product demand or market conditions that vary from current expectations could have an impact on the value of inventories.
Share-based compensation: The Company has anUnder the Company's 2017 Equity Incentive Plan, under whichas amended, the Board of Directors may grant restricted stock or stock options to employees and non-employees. For employees, share-based compensation cost is recorded for all option grants and awards of non-vested stock based on the grant date fair value of the award, and is recognized over the period the employee is required to provide services for the award. For non-employees, share-based compensation cost is recorded for all option grants and awards of non-vested stock and is remeasured over the vesting term as earned. The expense is recognized over the period the non-employee is required to provide services for the award.
The Company recognizes compensation expense over the requisite service period using the straight-line method for option grants without performance conditions. For stock options that have both service and performance conditions, the Company recognizes compensation expense using the graded attribution method. Compensation expense for stock options with performance conditions is recognized only for those awards expected to vest.
From time to time, the Company awards shares of its common stock to non-employees for services provided or to be provided. The fair value of the awards are measured either based on the fair market value of stock at the date of grant or the value of the services provided, based on which is more reliably measurable. Since these stock awards are fully vested and non-forfeitable, upon issuance the measurement date for the award is usually reached on the date of the award.
Item 7A. Item 7A. | Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
Interest Rate Risk
Not Applicable.
We may become exposed to risks associated with changes in interest rates in connection with our credit facility with Western Alliance. As of December 30, 2017, we did not have an outstanding loan payable balance, however, we established a formula based revolving credit line with Western Alliance Bank, pursuant to which we may borrow an aggregate principal amount of up to $5,000,000, subject to certain terms and conditions. If we decide to borrow from this credit line, the interest rate will be calculated at a floating rate per month equal to the greater of 3.50% per year or the Prime Rate published in the Money Rates section of the Western Edition of The Wall Street Journal, or such other rate of interest publicly announced by Lender as its Prime Rate, plus 2.50 percentage points, plus an additional 5.00 percentage points during any period that an event of default has occurred and is continuing. If the Prime Rate rises, we will incur more interest expenses. Any borrowing, interest or other fees or obligations that we owe Western Alliance will become due and payable on November 4, 2018.
Our capital lease obligations bear interest at a fixed rate and therefore have no exposure to changes in interest rates.
The Company’s cash consists of short term, highly liquid investments in money market funds managed by banks. Due to the short-term duration of our investment portfolio and the relatively low risk profile of our investments, a sudden change in interest rates would not have a material effect on either the fair market value of our portfolio, our operating results or our cash flows.
Foreign Currency Risk
All of our long-lived assets are located within the United States and we do not hold any foreign currency denominated financial instruments. Our international sales are denominated in U.S. dollars and we collect in U.S. dollars.
Effects of Inflation
We do not believe that inflation has had a material effect on our results of operations or financial condition during the periods presented.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Item 8. | Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |
The financial statements are set forth in the pages listed below.
| Page |
Report | 39 54 |
| 40 56 |
| 41 57 |
| 42 58 |
| 43 59 |
| 44 60 |
REPORTREPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Audit Committee of the
Shareholders and Board of Directors and Shareholders of
ChromaDex Corporation
Opinion on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 2013, and31, 2016, the related consolidated statements of operations,stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the years then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibilityeach of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosuresthree years in the financial statements, assessingperiod ended December 30 2017, and the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management,related notes(collectively referred to as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
“financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries,the Company as of January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 2013,31, 2016, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended January 3, 2015 and December 28, 201330, 2017, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
We also have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) ("PCAOB"), ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries’the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, based onthe criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in 2013 and our report dated March 19, 201515, 2018, expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Basis for Opinion
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
/s/ Marcum llp
/s/Marcum LLP
We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2013.
New York, NY
March 19, 2015
ChromaDex Corporation and SubsidiariesConsolidated Balance SheetsJanuary 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013
| | | 2014 | | | 2013 | |
Assets | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Current Assets | | | | | | | |
Cash | | | $ | 3,964,750 | | | $ | 2,261,336 | |
Trade receivables, less allowance for doubtful accounts and returns 2014 $38,000; 2013 $9,000 | | | | 1,906,709 | | | | 838,793 | |
Other receivable | | | | - | | | | 215,000 | |
Inventories | | | | 3,734,341 | | | | 2,204,125 | |
Prepaid expenses and other assets | | | | 292,891 | | | | 271,445 | |
Total current assets | | | | 9,898,691 | | | | 5,790,699 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Leasehold Improvements and Equipment, net | | | | 1,264,660 | | | | 1,063,239 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Other Noncurrent Assets | | | | | | | | | |
Deposits and other | | | | 148,796 | | | | 43,460 | |
Long-term investment in affiliate | | | | - | | | | 1,887,844 | |
Intangible assets, net | | | | 296,061 | | | | 201,650 | |
Total other noncurrent assets | | | | 444,857 | | | | 2,132,954 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Total assets | | | $ | 11,608,208 | | | $ | 8,986,892 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Current Liabilities | | | | | | | | | |
Accounts payable | | | $ | 3,451,608 | | | $ | 1,440,910 | |
Accrued expenses | | | | 853,685 | | | | 656,707 | |
Current maturities of loan payable | | | | 223,358 | | | | - | |
Current maturities of capital lease obligations | | | | 148,278 | | | | 138,887 | |
Customer deposits and other | | | | 234,435 | | | | 546,044 | |
Deferred rent, current | | | | 69,456 | | | | 55,586 | |
Total current liabilities | | | | 4,980,820 | | | | 2,838,134 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Loan payable, less current maturities, net | | | | 2,068,474 | | | | - | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Capital lease obligations, less current maturities | | | | 423,015 | | | | 280,342 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Deferred rent, less current | | | | 137,508 | | | | 202,965 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Total liabilities | | | | 7,609,817 | | | | 3,321,441 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Commitments and contingencies | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Stockholders' Equity | | | | | | | | | |
Common stock, $.001 par value; authorized 150,000,000 shares; | | | | | | | | | |
issued and outstanding 2014 105,271,058 and 2013 104,524,738 shares | | | | 105,271 | | | | 104,525 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | | 43,417,442 | | | | 39,697,063 | |
Accumulated deficit | | | | (39,524,322 | ) | | | (34,136,137 | ) |
Total stockholders' equity | | | | 3,998,391 | | | | 5,665,451 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity | | | $ | 11,608,208 | | | $ | 8,986,892 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | | | | | | | | | |
ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Consolidated Statements of Operations | | | | | | |
Years Ended January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013 | | | | | | |
| | 2014 | | | 2013 | |
| | | | | | |
Sales, net | | $ | 15,313,179 | | | $ | 10,160,964 | |
Cost of sales | | | 9,987,514 | | | | 7,027,828 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Gross profit | | | 5,325,665 | | | | 3,133,136 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Operating expenses: | | | | | | | | |
Sales and marketing | | | 2,136,584 | | | | 2,357,605 | |
General and administrative | | | 8,374,601 | | | | 5,117,016 | |
Loss from investment in affiliate | | | 45,829 | | | | 44,961 | |
Operating expenses | | | 10,557,014 | | | | 7,519,582 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Operating loss | | | (5,231,349 | ) | | | (4,386,446 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Nonoperating income (expense): | | | | | | | | |
Interest income | | | 2,013 | | | | 1,251 | |
Interest expense | | | (158,849 | ) | | | (34,330 | ) |
Nonoperating expenses | | | (156,836 | ) | | | (33,079 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net loss | | $ | (5,388,185 | ) | | $ | (4,419,525 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Basic and Diluted loss per common share | | $ | (0.05 | ) | | $ | (0.04 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Basic and Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding | | | 106,459,379 | | | | 99,987,443 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | | | | | | | | |
ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders' Equity | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Years Ended January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Total | |
| | Common Stock | | | Additional | | | Accumulated | | | Stockholders' | |
| | Shares | | | Amount | | | Paid-in Capital | | | Deficit | | | Equity | |
Balance, December 29, 2012 | | | 92,140,062 | | | $ | 92,140 | | | $ | 33,617,801 | | | $ | (29,716,612 | ) | | $ | 3,993,329 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Issuance of common stock, net of | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
offering costs of $20,000 | | | 3,529,411 | | | | 3,529 | | | | 2,976,471 | | | | - | | | | 2,980,000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Exercise of stock options | | | 276,038 | | | | 276 | | | | 138,093 | | | | - | | | | 138,369 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Exercise of warrants | | | 7,979,227 | | | | 7,979 | | | | 1,630,769 | | | | - | | | | 1,638,748 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Share-based compensation | | | 600,000 | | | | 600 | | | | 1,333,930 | | | | - | | | | 1,334,530 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net loss | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | (4,419,525 | ) | | | (4,419,525 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance, December 28, 2013 | | | 104,524,738 | | | | 104,525 | | | | 39,697,063 | | | | (34,136,137 | ) | | | 5,665,451 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Issuance of warrant | | | - | | | | - | | | | 246,189 | | | | - | | | | 246,189 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Exercise of stock options | | | 534,715 | | | | 535 | | | | 466,614 | | | | - | | | | 467,149 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Issuance of unvested restricted stock | | | 1,186,000 | | | | 1,186 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 1,186 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Unvested restricted stock | | | (1,186,000 | ) | | | (1,186 | ) | | | - | | | | - | | | | (1,186 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Share-based compensation | | | 85,000 | | | | 85 | | | | 2,861,208 | | | | - | | | | 2,861,293 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Stock issued to settle outstanding payable balance | | | 126,605 | | | | 126 | | | | 146,368 | | | | - | | | | 146,494 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net loss | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | (5,388,185 | ) | | | (5,388,185 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance, January 3, 2015 | | | 105,271,058 | | | $ | 105,271 | | | $ | 43,417,442 | | | $ | (39,524,322 | ) | | $ | 3,998,391 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
15, 2018
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM ON
ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows | | | | | | |
Years Ended January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013 | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | 2014 | | | 2013 | |
| | | | | | |
Cash Flows From Operating Activities | | | | | | |
Net loss | | $ | (5,388,185 | ) | | $ | (4,419,525 | ) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: | | | | | | | | |
Depreciation of leasehold improvements and equipment | | | 222,721 | | | | 246,175 | |
Amortization of intangibles | | | 35,589 | | | | 23,532 | |
Share-based compensation expense | | | 2,916,924 | | | | 1,287,917 | |
Loss from disposal of equipment | | | 20,400 | | | | 66,378 | |
Loss from investment in affiliate | | | 45,829 | | | | 44,961 | |
Non-cash financing costs | | | 49,527 | | | | - | |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: | | | | | | | | |
Trade receivables | | | (1,067,916 | ) | | | 1,118,730 | |
Other receivable | | | 215,000 | | | | (215,000 | ) |
Inventories | | | (1,530,216 | ) | | | (466,352 | ) |
Prepaid expenses and other assets | | | (91,053 | ) | | | (62,913 | ) |
Accounts payable | | | 2,157,192 | | | | (1,618,450 | ) |
Accrued expenses | | | 196,978 | | | | (204,891 | ) |
Customer deposits and other | | | (311,609 | ) | | | 235,777 | |
Deferred rent | | | (51,587 | ) | | | 57,650 | |
Net cash used in operating activities | | | (2,580,406 | ) | | | (3,906,011 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Cash Flows From Investing Activities | | | | | | | | |
Purchases of leasehold improvements and equipment | | | (123,096 | ) | | | (137,349 | ) |
Purchase of intangible assets | | | (130,000 | ) | | | (89,000 | ) |
Proceeds from sales of assets | | | - | | | | 1,000,000 | |
Proceeds from sales of equipment | | | 1,356 | | | | - | |
Proceeds from investment in affiliate | | | 1,842,015 | | | | 225,000 | |
Net cash provided by investing activities | | | 1,590,275 | | | | 998,651 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Cash Flows From Financing Activities | | | | | | | | |
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs | | | - | | | | 2,980,000 | |
Proceeds from exercise of stock options | | | 467,149 | | | | 138,369 | |
Proceeds from exercise of warrants | | | - | | | | 1,638,748 | |
Proceeds from loan payable | | | 2,500,000 | | | | - | |
Payment of debt issuance costs | | | (102,866 | ) | | | - | |
Principal payments on capital leases | | | (170,738 | ) | | | (108,421 | ) |
Net cash provided by financing activities | | | 2,693,545 | | | | 4,648,696 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase in cash | | | 1,703,414 | | | | 1,741,336 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Cash Beginning of Year | | | 2,261,336 | | | | 520,000 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Cash Ending of Year | | $ | 3,964,750 | | | $ | 2,261,336 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Supplemental Disclosures of Cash Flow Information | | | | | | | | |
Cash payments for interest | | $ | 74,996 | | | $ | 34,330 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Supplemental Schedule of Noncash Investing Activity | | | | | | | | |
Capital lease obligation incurred for the purchase of equipment | | $ | 322,802 | | | $ | 302,017 | |
Retirement of fully depreciated equipment - cost | | $ | 56,110 | | | $ | - | |
Retirement of fully depreciated equipment - accumulated depreciation | | $ | (56,110 | ) | | $ | - | |
| | | | | | | | |
Supplemental Schedule of Noncash Operating Activity | | | | | | | | |
Stock issued to settle outstanding payable balance | | $ | 146,494 | | | $ | - | |
| | | | | | | | |
Supplemental Schedule of Noncash Share-based Compensation | | | | | | | | |
Stock awards issued for services rendered in prior period | | $ | - | | | $ | 14,560 | |
Changes in prepaid expenses associated with share-based compensation | | $ | 55,631 | | | $ | 32,053 | |
Warrant issued, net of offering costs | | $ | 246,189 | | | $ | - | |
| | | | | | | | |
Supplemental Schedule of Noncash Activities Related to | | | | | | | | |
Sale of BluScience Consumer Product Line | | | | | | | | |
Assets transferred | | $ | - | | | $ | 3,526,677 | |
Liabilities transferred | | $ | - | | | $ | 368,873 | |
Carrying value of long-term investment in affiliate, net of $1,000,000 cash proceeds | | $ | - | | | $ | 2,157,804 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | | | | | | | | |
INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTINGTo the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
ChromaDex Corporation
Opinion on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
We have audited ChromaDex Corporation's (the “Company”) internal control over financial reporting as of December 30, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 30, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”), the consolidated balance sheets as of December 30, 2017 and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for the years then ended of the Company and our report dated March 15, 2018 expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.
Basis for Opinion
The Company's management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying “Management Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting”. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company's internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
/s/ Marcum LLP
Marcum llp
New York, NY
March 15, 2018
Note 1. NatureChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries | | |
Consolidated Balance Sheets | | |
December 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016 | | |
| | |
Assets | | |
| | |
Current Assets | | |
Cash | $45,388,848 | $1,642,429 |
Trade receivables, net of allowance of $0.7 million and $1.1 million, repectively; | | |
Receivables from Related Party: $1.0 million and $0, respectively | 5,337,868 | 5,852,030 |
Inventories | 5,796,281 | 7,912,630 |
Prepaid expenses and other assets | 655,321 | 311,539 |
Current assets held for sale | - | 18,315 |
Total current assets | 57,178,318 | 15,736,943 |
| | |
Leasehold Improvements and Equipment, net | 2,871,886 | 1,778,171 |
Deposits | 271,631 | 377,532 |
Receivable held at escrow | 750,358 | - |
Intangible assets, net | 1,651,407 | 486,226 |
Long-term investment, related party | - | 20,318 |
Noncurrent assets held for sale | - | 1,352,878 |
Total assets | $62,723,600 | $19,752,068 |
| | |
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity | | |
| | |
Current Liabilities | | |
Accounts payable | $3,718,407 | $5,978,288 |
Accrued expenses | 3,645,355 | 2,170,172 |
Current maturities of capital lease obligations | 195,533 | 255,461 |
Customer deposits and other | 314,335 | 389,010 |
Deferred rent, current | 114,304 | 76,219 |
Due to officer | 100,000 | - |
Total current liabilities | 8,087,934 | 8,869,150 |
| | |
Capital lease obligations, less current maturities | 310,089 | 343,589 |
Deferred rent, less current | 491,909 | 380,205 |
Noncurrent liabilities held for sale | - | 184,766 |
Total liabilities | 8,889,932 | 9,777,710 |
| | |
Commitments and contingencies | | |
| | |
Stockholders' Equity | | |
Common stock, $.001 par value; authorized 150,000,000 shares; | | |
issued and outstanding 2017 54,696,741 shares and 2016 37,544,531 shares | 54,697 | 37,545 |
Additional paid-in capital | 110,380,163 | 55,160,387 |
Accumulated deficit | (56,601,192) | (45,223,574) |
Total stockholders' equity | 53,833,668 | 9,974,358 |
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity | $62,723,600 | $19,752,068 |
| | |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. |
ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries | | | |
Consolidated Statements of Operations | | | |
Years Ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016 | | |
| | | |
| | | |
Sales, net | $21,201,482 | $21,664,648 | $17,884,886 |
Cost of sales | 10,724,177 | 11,274,114 | 10,350,281 |
| | | |
Gross profit | 10,477,305 | 10,390,534 | 7,534,605 |
| | | |
Operating expenses: | | | |
Sales and marketing | 4,459,224 | 1,558,213 | 1,507,868 |
Research and development | 4,007,381 | 2,522,768 | 891,601 |
General and administrative | 17,641,889 | 9,214,763 | 7,201,231 |
Other | 745,773 | - | - |
Operating expenses | 26,854,267 | 13,295,744 | 9,600,700 |
| | | |
Operating loss | (16,376,962) | (2,905,210) | (2,066,095) |
| | | |
Nonoperating income (expense): | | | |
Interest expense, net | (152,784) | (333,286) | (566,917) |
Loss on debt extinguishment | - | (313,099) | - |
Nonoperating expenses | (152,784) | (646,385) | (566,917) |
| | | |
Loss before income taxes | (16,529,746) | (3,551,595) | (2,633,012) |
Provision for income taxes | - | - | (4,527) |
| | | |
Loss from continuing operations | (16,529,746) | (3,551,595) | (2,637,539) |
| | | |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations | (315,140) | 623,410 | (133,528) |
Gain on sale of discontinued operations | 5,467,268 | - | - |
| | | |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net | 5,152,128 | 623,410 | (133,528) |
| | | |
Net loss | $(11,377,618) | $(2,928,185) | $(2,771,067) |
| | | |
Basic and diluted earnings (loss) per common share: | | | |
Loss from continuing operations | $(0.37) | $(0.10) | $(0.07) |
Earnings (loss) from discontinued operations | $0.11 | $0.02 | $(0.01) |
| | | |
Basic and diluted loss per common share | $(0.26) | $(0.08) | $(0.08) |
| | | |
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares outstanding | 44,598,879 | 37,294,321 | 35,877,341 |
| | | |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. |
ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries | | | | | |
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders' Equity | | | | | |
Years Ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016 | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Balance, January 3, 2015 | 35,090,352 | 35,090 | 43,487,623 | (39,524,322) | 3,998,391 |
| | | | | |
Issuance of common stock, net of | | | | | |
offering costs of $25,000 | 533,334 | 534 | 1,974,359 | - | 1,974,893 |
| | | | | |
Exercise of stock options | 40,236 | 40 | 94,806 | - | 94,846 |
| | | | | |
Vested restricted stock | 228,000 | 228 | (228) | - | - |
| | | | | |
Share-based compensation | 111,667 | 112 | 1,977,499 | - | 1,977,611 |
| | | | | |
Net loss | - | - | - | (2,771,067) | (2,771,067) |
| | | | | |
Balance, January 2, 2016 | 36,003,589 | 36,004 | 47,534,059 | (42,295,389) | 5,274,674 |
| | | | | |
1 for 3 reverse stock split, isssuance | | | | | |
due to fractional shares round up | 1,632 | 2 | (2) | - | - |
| | | | | |
Issuance of common stock, net of | | | | | |
offering costs of $33,000 | 1,245,227 | 1,245 | 5,716,230 | - | 5,717,475 |
| | | | | |
Exercise of stock options | 280,086 | 280 | 716,332 | - | 716,612 |
| | | | | |
Vested restricted stock | 13,997 | 14 | (14) | - | - |
| | | | | |
Share-based compensation | - | - | 1,193,782 | - | 1,193,782 |
| | | | | |
Net loss | - | - | - | (2,928,185) | (2,928,185) |
| | | | | |
Balance, December 31, 2016 | 37,544,531 | $37,545 | $55,160,387 | $(45,223,574) | $9,974,358 |
| | | | | |
Issuance of common stock, net of | | | | | |
offering costs of $1,420,000 | 15,592,788 | 15,593 | 47,578,626 | - | 47,594,219 |
| | | | | |
Exercise of stock options | 884,754 | 885 | 3,037,075 | - | 3,037,960 |
| | | | | |
Vested restricted stock | 674,668 | 674 | (674) | - | - |
| | | | | |
Share-based compensation | | | 4,604,749 | - | 4,604,749 |
| | | | | |
Net loss | - | - | - | (11,377,618) | (11,377,618) |
| | | | | |
Balance, December 30, 2017 | 54,696,741 | $54,697 | $110,380,163 | $(56,601,192) | $53,833,668 |
| | | | | |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | | | | | |
ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries | | | |
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows | | | |
Years Ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016 | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
Cash Flows From Operating Activities | | | |
Net loss | $(11,377,618) | $(2,928,185) | $(2,771,067) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: | | | |
Depreciation of leasehold improvements and equipment | 509,933 | 331,734 | 285,536 |
Amortization of intangibles | 206,208 | 87,826 | 45,014 |
Share-based compensation expense | 4,604,749 | 1,193,782 | 1,977,611 |
Allowance for doubtful trade receivables | (411,475) | 713,122 | 329,844 |
Gain from disposal of assets | (5,467,268) | - | - |
Loss from disposal of equipment | 4,649 | 7,114 | 19,643 |
Loss from impairment of intangibles | - | - | 19,495 |
Loss on debt extinguishment | - | 313,099 | - |
Non-cash financing costs | 120,759 | 110,161 | 188,442 |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: | | | |
Trade receivables | 937,093 | (4,114,561) | (873,726) |
Inventories | 2,177,263 | 240,851 | (4,439,458) |
Prepaid expenses and other assets | (296,312) | (133,855) | (82,124) |
Accounts payable | (2,363,653) | (245,670) | 2,772,350 |
Accrued expenses | 1,471,976 | 867,307 | 449,180 |
Customer deposits and other | (67,855) | 117,008 | 37,567 |
Deferred rent | 179,873 | 503,671 | (69,445) |
Due to officer | (32,500) | - | - |
Net cash used in operating activities | (9,804,178) | (2,936,596) | (2,111,138) |
| | | |
Cash Flows From Investing Activities | | | |
Proceeds from disposal of assets, net of transaction costs | 5,953,390 | - | - |
Purchases of leasehold improvements and equipment | (1,167,506) | (1,504,922) | (525,231) |
Purchases of intangible assets | (183,958) | (220,000) | (122,500) |
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities | 4,601,926 | (1,724,922) | (647,731) |
| | | |
Cash Flows From Financing Activities | | | |
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs | 46,594,216 | 5,717,474 | 1,974,893 |
Proceeds from exercise of stock options | 3,037,960 | 716,612 | 94,846 |
Proceeds from loan payable | - | - | 2,500,000 |
Payment of debt issuance costs | (75,178) | (176,836) | (15,000) |
Principal payment on loan payable | - | (5,000,000) | - |
Cash paid for debt extinguishment costs | - | (281,092) | - |
Principal payments on capital leases | (608,327) | (221,883) | (210,948) |
Net cash provided by financing activities | 48,948,671 | 754,275 | 4,343,791 |
| | | |
Net increase (decrease) in cash | 43,746,419 | (3,907,243) | 1,584,922 |
| | | |
Cash Beginning of Year | 1,642,429 | 5,549,672 | 3,964,750 |
| | | |
Cash Ending of Year | $45,388,848 | $1,642,429 | $5,549,672 |
| | | |
Supplemental Disclosures of Cash Flow Information | | | |
Cash payments for interest | $57,024 | $261,738 | $427,591 |
| | | |
Supplemental Schedule of Noncash Investing Activity | | | |
Noncash consideration transferred for the acquisition of Healthspan Research LLC | $1,187,430 | $- | $- |
Capital lease obligation incurred for the purchase of equipment | $514,899 | $156,655 | $303,933 |
Receivable from disposal of assets held at escrow | $750,000 | $- | $- |
Inventory supplied to Healthspan Research, LLC for equity interest, at cost | $- | $20,318 | $- |
Retirement of fully depreciated equipment - cost | $57,424 | $90,803 | $121,213 |
Retirement of fully depreciated equipment - accumulated depreciation | $(57,424) | $(90,803) | $(121,213) |
| | | |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. |
| Nature of Business and Liquidity |
Nature of business: ChromaDex Corporation and its wholly owned subsidiaries, ChromaDex, Inc., ChromadexHealthspan Research, LLC and ChromaDex Analytics, Inc. and Spherix Consulting, Inc. (collectively, the “Company” or, in the first person as “we” “us” and “our”) are a natural productsan integrated, global nutraceutical company that discovers, acquires, developsdevoted to improving the way people age. The Company's scientists partner with leading universities and commercializes proprietary-basedresearch institutions worldwide to uncover the full potential of NAD and identify and develop novel, science-based ingredients. Its flagship ingredient, technologies through its business model that utilizes its wholly owned business units, including ingredient technologies, catalog ofNIAGEN® nicotinamide riboside, sold directly to consumers as TRU NIAGEN®, is backed with clinical and scientific research, as well as intellectual property protection. The Company also has core standards and contract services segment, which focuses on natural product fine chemicals (known as “phytochemicals”), chemistry and analytical testing services, and product regulatory and safety consulting services. The Company provides science-based solutions to the nutritional supplement, food and beverage, animal health, cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries. The Company acquired Spherix Consulting, Inc. on December 3, 2012, which provides scientific and regulatory consulting to the clients in the food, supplement and pharmaceutical industries to manage potential health and regulatory risks. In 2011, the Company launched its BluScience retail consumer line based on its proprietary ingredients. However, on March 28, 2013, the Company entered into an asset purchase and sale agreement with NeutriSci International Inc. and consummated the sale of BluScience consumer product line to NeutriSci.consulting.
Liquidity: The Company has incurred a loss from continuing operations of approximately $5.2$16.5 million and a net loss of approximately $5.4 million for the year ended January 3, 2015, and a net loss of approximately $4.4$11.4 million for the year ended December 28, 2013.30, 2017, and net losses of approximately $2.9 million and $2.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016, respectively. As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, the cash and cash equivalents totaled approximately $3,965,000.$45.4 million.
On September 29, 2014, we entered into a loan and security agreement (the “Loan Agreement”) with Hercules Technology II, L.P., as lender (“Lender”) and Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc., as agent. Lender will provide us with access to a term loan of up to $5 million. The first $2.5 million of the term loan was funded at closing, and is repayable in installments over 30 months, following an initial interest-only period of twelve months after closing. The remaining $2.5 million of the term loan can be drawn down at our option at any time but no later than July 31, 2015. The term loan bears interest at the rate per year equal to the greater of either (i) 9.35% plus the prime rate as reported in The Wall Street Journal minus 3.25%, or (ii) 9.35%. For further details on the Loan Agreement, please refer to Note 8. Loan Payable.
While we anticipateCompany anticipates that ourits current cash, cash equivalents and cash to be generated from operations and $2.5 million we can additionally draw down at our option pursuant to the Loan Agreement will be sufficient to meet ourits projected operating plans through at least March 20, 2016, we16, 2019. The Company may, requirehowever, seek additional funds, either through additional equity capital prior to March 16, 2019, both to meet its projected operating plans after March 16, 2019 and/or debt financings or collaborative agreements or from other sources. We have no commitments to obtain such additional financing, and we may not be able to obtain any such additional financing on terms favorable to us, or at all. If adequate financing is not available, the Company will further delay, postpone or terminate product and service expansion and curtail certain selling, general and administrative operations. The inability to raise additional financing may have a material adverse effect on the future performance of the Company.fund its longer term strategic objectives.
Note 2. | Significant Accounting Policies |
Significant accounting policies are as follows:
Basis of presentation:The financial statements and accompanying notes have been prepared on a consolidated basis and reflect the consolidated financial position of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated from these financial statements. The Company's fiscal years 2017, 2016 and 2015 ended on the Saturday closest to December 31.
Change in Fiscal Year: On January 25, 2018, the Board of Directors of ChromaDex Corporation approved a resolution to change the Company’s fiscal year from a 52/53-week fiscal year that ends on the Saturday closest to December 31. The31 to a calendar year. As such, the Company’s 2018 fiscal year endedwill be extended from December 29, 2018 to December 31, 2018, with subsequent fiscal years beginning on January 3, 2015 (referred to as 2014) consisted1 and ending on December 31 of 53 weeks and theeach year. Effective fiscal year ended December 28, 2013 (referred to as 2013) consisted of 52 weeks. Every fifth or sixth fiscal year, the inclusion of an extra week occurs due to2018, the Company’s floating year-end date.quarterly results will be for the periods ending March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31.
Adopted Accounting Pronouncements Fiscal 2017: In January 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business. The fiscal year 2015 will include 52 weeks.ASU 2017-01 clarifies the definition of a business with the objective of adding guidance to assist companies and other reporting organizations with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions of assets or businesses. The Company early adopted the amendments in this ASU effective as of January 1, 2017. On March 12, 2017, the Company acquired all the outstanding equity interests of Healthspan Research, LLC ("Healthspan") pursuant to a Membership Interest Purchase Agreement by and among (i) Robert Fried, Jeffrey Allen and Dr. Charles Brenner (the “Sellers”) and (ii) ChromaDex Corporation. Under ASU 2017-01, this transaction was treated as an acquisition of assets, rather than a business.
In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting to simplify the accounting for stock compensation. It focuses on income tax accounting, award classification, estimating forfeitures, and cash flow presentation. The Company adopted the amendments in this ASU effective as of January 1, 2017. The adoption of ASU 2016-09 did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-11, Inventory (Topic 330) - Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory, which requires that inventories, other than those accounted for under Last-In-First-Out, will be reported at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Net realizable value is the estimated selling price less costs of completion, disposal and transportation. The Company adopted the amendments in this ASU effective as of January 1, 2017. The adoption of ASU 2015-11 did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
Use of accounting estimates: The preparation of financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Changes in accounting estimates: During the year ended January 3, 2015, the Company evaluated assumptions for estimating the fair value of the Company’s stock options. The Company uses the Black-Scholes based option valuation model, which requires assumptions on (i) volatility, (ii) expected dividends, (iii) expected term and (iv) risk-free rate. While evaluating the assumptions on volatility, the Company determined that the historical volatility the Company’s common stock needs to be considered when estimating the expected volatility. Previously, the Company calculated expected volatility based principally on the volatility rates of similarly situated publicly held companies, as the historical measurement period that was available to compute the volatility rate of the Company’s common stock was shorter than the expected life of the options.
For stock options granted during the year ended January 3, 2015, the Company calculated expected volatility rate based on the combined volatility of publicly held companies in similar industries and volatility of the Company’s common stock. Based on the expected term of stock options, a 20~75% weight was assigned to the volatility of the Company’s common stock as the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock from June 2008 through April 2010 was exceptionally high due to a thinly traded market. Below table illustrates the Company’s historical volatility and the average daily trading volume of the Company’s common stock from June 2008 through April 2010 and from April 2010 through December 2014.
Period | | Volatility | | | Average Daily Trading Volume | |
6/20/2008 ~ 4/19/2010 | | | 402 | % | | | 11,455 | |
4/20/2010 ~ 1/2/2015 | | | 77 | % | | | 155,111 | |
The weighted average expected volatility for the stock options granted during the twelve-month period ended January 3, 2015 following the update to our estimate is approximately 75%. The weighted average expected volatility would have been approximately 30%, had we computed solely based on the volatility rates of similarly situated public companies. For the year ended December 28, 2013, the weighted average expected volatility the Company used to estimate the fair value of the Company’s stock options granted was approximately 33%.
The following is a pro-forma disclosure of our historical calculation of estimated volatility over the expected term based on a grant with an expected term of 6 years:
Fiscal Year 2013 | | | Fiscal Year 2013 | |
Name | | Use | | | Volatility | | | Name | | Use | | | Volatility | |
Covance, Inc. | | | 50 | % | | | 35 | % | | ChromaDex Corp. | | | 20 | % | | | 243 | % |
Sigma-Aldrich Corp. | | | 50 | % | | | 30 | % | | Covance Inc. | | | 40 | % | | | 35 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | Sigma-Aldrich Corp. | | | 40 | % | | | 30 | % |
Weighted Average | | | | | | | 33 | % | | Weighted Average | | | | | | | 75 | % |
The change in our estimate of volatility did not result to a material additional expense to our statement of operations.
Revenue recognition: The Company recognizes sales and the related cost of sales at the time the merchandise is shipped to customers or service is performed, when each of the following conditions have been met: an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, there is a fixed price, and collectability is reasonably assured. Discounts, returns and allowances related to sales, including an estimated reserve for the returns and allowances, are recorded as reduction of revenue.
Shipping and handling fees billed to customers and the cost of shipping and handling fees billed to customers are included in net sales. For the year ending in January 3, 2015, shippingShipping and handling fees billed to customers were approximately $115,000 and the cost of shipping and handling fees billed to customers was approximately $130,000. Forfor the yearyears ending in December 28, 2013, shipping30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and handling fees billed to customers were approximately $110,000 and the cost of shipping and handling fees billed to customers was approximately $128,000. January 2, 2016 are as follows:
| | | |
Shipping and handling fees billed | $137,000 | $110,000 | $113,000 |
Cost of shipping and handling fees billed | $185,000 | $108,000 | $112,000 |
Shipping and handling fees not billed to customers are recognized as cost of sales.
Taxes collected from customers and remitted to governmental authorities are excluded from revenue, which is presented on a net basis in the statement of operations.
Cash concentration: The Company maintains substantially all of its cash in three different accounts in one bank.
Trade accounts receivable, net: Trade accounts receivable are carried at original invoice amount less an estimate made for doubtful receivables based on monthly and quarterly reviews of all outstanding amounts. Management determines the allowance for doubtful accounts by identifying troubled accounts and by using historical experience applied to an aging of accounts. The allowance amounts for the periods ended December 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016 are as follows:
| | |
Allowances Related to | | |
Customer C | $500,000 | $800,000 |
Customer E | - | 198,000 |
Other Allowances | 169,000 | 83,000 |
| $669,000 | $1,081,000 |
Trade accounts receivable are written off when deemed uncollectible. Recoveries of trade accounts receivable previously written off are recorded when received.
Other receivablesCredit risk: OtherFinancial instruments that potentially subject us to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents and trade receivables. For cash and cash equivalents, the Company has them either in a form of bank deposits or highly liquid debt instruments in investment-grade pursuant to the Company's investment policy. Accounts at each institution are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") up to $250,000. As of December 30, 2017, we held a total deposit of approximately $45.4 million with one institution which exceeded the FDIC limit. We, however, believe we have very little credit risk exposure for our cash and cash equivalents. Our trade receivables are amountsderived from sales to our customers. We assess credit risk of our customers through quantitative and qualitative analysis. From this analysis, we establish credit limits and manage the risk exposure. We, however, incur credit losses due for payment to the Companybankruptcy or other than the Company’s normal customer invoices for merchandise shipped or services performed. The other receivable amount as of December 28, 2013 was from a legal settlement agreement, which the settlement was reached at arbitration form a lawsuit for the violationfailure of the Company’s trademarks. The counterparty had already remitted the paymentcustomer to a third party escrow agent prior to December 28, 2013. This payment was deposited by the Company on January 14, 2014. The other receivable amount was recorded as a gain in general and administrative expenses in the statement of operations for the period ended December 28, 2013.pay.
Inventories: Inventories are comprised of raw materials, work-in-process andprimarily finished goods. They are stated at the lower of cost, determined by the first-in, first-out method, (FIFO) method, or market.net realizable value. The inventory on the balance sheet is recorded net of valuation allowances. Labor and overhead has been added to inventory that was manufactured or characterized by the Company. The amounts of major classes of inventory for the periods ended January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 201331, 2016 are as follows:
| | 2014 | | | 2013 | | | |
Bulk ingredients | | $4,159,000 | $7,044,000 |
Reference standards | | $ | 1,760,305 | | | $ | 1,769,160 | | 1,027,000 | 1,033,000 |
Bulk ingredients | | | 2,298,036 | | | | 694,965 | | |
Consumer Products - Finished Goods | | 503,000 | - |
Consumer Products - Work in Process | | 249,000 | - |
| | | 4,058,341 | | | | 2,464,125 | | 5,938,000 | 8,077,000 |
Less valuation allowance | | | 324,000 | | | | 260,000 | | 142,000 | 164,000 |
| | $ | 3,734,341 | | | $ | 2,204,125 | | $5,796,000 | $7,913,000 |
Our normal operating cycle for reference standards is currently longer than one year. The Company has approximately 5,000 defined standards and holds a lot of these standards as inventory in small quantities, mostly in grams and milligrams. Due to the large number of different items we carry, certain groups of these reference standards have sales frequency that is slower than others and varies greatly year to year. In addition, for certain reference standards, the cost saving is advantageous when purchased in larger quantities and we have taken advantage of such opportunities when available. Such factors have resulted in an operating cycle to be more than one year on average. The Company gains competitive advantage through the broad offering of reference standards and it is critical for the Company to continue to expand its library of reference standards it offers for the growth of business. Nevertheless, the Company has recently made changes in its reference standards inventory purchasing practice, which the management believes will result in an improved turnover rate and shorter operating cycle without impacting our competitive advantage.
The Company regularly reviews inventories on hand and records a provisionreduces the carrying value for slow-moving and obsolete inventory, inventory not meeting quality standards and inventory subject to expiration. The provisionreduction of the carrying value for slow-moving and obsolete inventory is based on current estimates of future product demand, market conditions and related management judgment. Any significant unanticipated changes in future product demand or market conditions that vary from current expectations could have an impact on the value of inventories.
Intangible assets: Intangible assets include licensing rights and are accounted for based on the fair value of consideration given or the fair value of the net assets acquired, whichever is more reliable. Intangible assets with finite useful lives are amortized using the straight-line method over a period of 10 years, or, for licensed patent rights, the remaining term of the patents underlying licensing rights (considered to be the remaining useful life of the license)., whichever is shorter. The useful lives of subsequent milestone payments that are capitalized are the remaining useful life of the initial licensing payment that was capitalized.
Leasehold improvements and equipment, net: Leasehold improvements and equipment are carried at cost and depreciated on the straight-line method over the lesser of the estimated useful life of each asset or lease term. Leasehold improvements and equipment are comprised of leasehold improvements, laboratory equipment, furniture and fixtures, and computer equipment. Depreciation on equipment under capital lease is included with depreciation on owned assets. Maintenance and repairs are charged to operating expenses as they are incurred. Improvements and betterments, which extend the lives of the assets, are capitalized. Useful lives of leasehold improvements and equipment for each of the category are as follows:
| Useful Life |
Leasehold improvements | Until the end of the lease term |
Computer equipment | 3 to 5 years |
Furniture and fixtures | 7 years |
Laboratory equipment | 10 years |
Long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment on a periodic basis and when changes in circumstances indicate the possibility that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. Long-lived assets are grouped at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets. If the forecast of undiscounted future cash flows is less than the carrying amount of the assets, an impairment charge would be recognized to reduce the carrying value of the assets to fair value. If a possible impairment is identified, the asset group’s fair value is measured relying primarily on a discounted cash flow methodology.
Long-term investment in affiliate: The Company accounts for its investment in affiliate under the equity method. The Company records equity method adjustments in gains (losses) on equity method investments, net, and may do so with up to a three-month lag, pending on the timely availability of financial information of the investee. Equity method adjustments include: our proportionate share of investee income or loss, gains or losses resulting from investee capital transactions, and other adjustments required by the equity method. The long-term investment in affiliate is subject to a periodic impairment review and is considered to be impaired when a decline in carrying value is judged to be other-than-temporary. Evidence of a loss in value might include (i) absence of an ability to recover the carrying amount of the investment or (ii) inability of the investee to sustain an earnings capacity that would justify the carrying amount of the investment.
Customer deposits and other: Customer deposits and other represent either (i) cash received from customers in advance of product shipment or delivery of services; or (ii) cash received from government as research grants, which the Company has yet to complete the research activities.services.
The cash received from government as research grants is recognized as a liability until the research is performed. Other than a nominal management fee, which the Company is entitled to earn when the research is performed, the research activities related to the grants are excluded from revenue and are presented on a net basis in the statement
Income taxes: Deferred taxes are provided on a liability method whereby deferred tax assets are recognized for deductible temporary differences and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards and deferred liabilities are recognized for taxable temporary temporary differences. Temporary differences are the differences between the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and their tax bases. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance when, in the opinion of management, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted for the effects of changes in tax laws and rates on the date of enactment.
The Company has not recorded a reserve for any tax positions for which the ultimate deductibility is highly certain but for which there is uncertainty about the timing of such deductibility. The Company files tax returns in all appropriate jurisdictions, which include a federal tax return and various state tax returns. Open tax years for these jurisdictions are 20112014 to 2014,2017, which statutes expire in 20152018 to 2018,2021, respectively. When and if applicable, potential interest and penalty costs are accrued as incurred, with expenses recognized in general and administrative expenses in the statements of operations. As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, the Company has no liability for unrecognized tax benefits.
Research and development costs: Research and development costs consist of direct and indirect costs associated with the development of the Company’s technologies. These costs are expensed as incurred. Research and development costs for the periods ended January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013 were approximately $514,000 and $134,000, respectively.
Advertising:The Company expenses the production costs of advertising the first time the advertising takes place. Advertising expense for the periods ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 20132, 2016 were approximately $171,000$1,914,000, $58,000 and $355,000,$104,000, respectively.
Share-based compensation: The Company has an Equity Incentive Plan under which the Board of Directors may grant restricted stock or stock options to employees and non-employees. For employees, share-based compensation cost is recorded for all option grants and awards of non-vested stock based on the grant date fair value of the award, and is recognized over the period the employee is required to provide services for the award. For non-employees, share-based compensation cost is recorded for all option grants and awards of non-vested stock and is remeasured over the vesting term as earned. The expense is recognized over the period the non-employee is required to provide services for the award.
The fair value of the Company’s stock options is estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes based option valuation model. The volatility assumption is based on the historical volatility of the Company's common stock. The dividend yield assumption is based on the Company’s history and expectation of future dividend payouts on the common stock. The risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield available on U.S. treasury zero-coupon issues with an equivalent remaining term. For the expected term, the Company uses SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107 simplified method since most of the options granted were “plain vanilla” options with following characteristics: (i) the share options are granted at the market price on the grant date; (ii) exercisability is conditional on performing service through the vesting date on most options; (iii) if an employee terminates service prior to vesting, the employee would forfeit the share options; (iv) if an employee terminates service after vesting, the employee would have 30 to 90 days to exercise the share options; and (v) the share options are nontransferable and nonhedgeable.
Market conditions that affect vesting of stock options are considered in the grant-date fair value. The issues surrounding the valuation for such awards can be complex and consideration needs to be given for how the market condition should be incorporated into the valuation of the award. The Company considers using other valuation techniques, such as Monte Carlo simulations based on a lattice approach, to value awards with market conditions.
The Company recognizes compensation expense over the requisite service period using the straight-line method for option grants without performance conditions. For stock options that have both service and performance conditions, the Company recognizes compensation expense using the graded attribution method. Compensation expense for stock options with performance conditions is recognized only for those awards expected to vest.
Effective January 1, 2017, the Company made an election to recognize forfeitures when they occur as a result of the adoption of ASU 2016-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting to simplify the accounting for stock compensation.
From time to time, the Company awards shares of its common stock to non-employees for services provided or to be provided. The fair value of the awards are measured either based on the fair market value of stock at the date of grant or the value of the services provided, based on which is more reliably measureable. Since these stock awards are fully vested and non-forfeitable, upon issuance the measurement date for the award is usually reached on the date of the award.
Fair Value Measurement: The Company follows the provisions of the accounting standard which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and enhances fair value measurement disclosure. Under these provisions, fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (i.e., the “exit price”) in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.
The standard establishes a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use on unobservable inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Company. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect the Company’s assumptions about the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on the best information available in the circumstances. The hierarchy is described below:
Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for assets or liabilities. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1 inputs.
Level 2: Observable prices that are based on inputs not quoted on active markets, but corroborated by market data.
Level 3: Unobservable inputs are used when little or no market data is available. The fair value hierarchy gives the lowest priority to Level 3 inputs.
Financial instruments: The estimated fair value of financial instruments has been determined based on the Company’s assessment of available market information and appropriate valuation methodologies. The fair value of the Company’s financial instruments that are included in current assets and current liabilities are recorded at cost in the consolidated balance sheets. The estimated fair value of these financial instruments approximates their carrying value due to their short-term nature.
The carrying amounts reported in the balance sheet for capital lease obligations are present values of the obligations, excluding the interest portion. Capital lease obligations with maturities less than one year are classified as current liabilities.
The carrying amounts reported in the balance sheet for loan payable are present values net of discount, excluding the interest portion. The carrying value of long-term portion of the loan payable approximates fair value because the Company’s interest rate yield based on the credit rating of the Company is believed to be near current market rates. The long-term portion of the Company’s loan payable is considered a Level 3 liability within the fair value hierarchy. Loan payable with maturities less than one year are classified as current liabilities.
Recent accounting standards: In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Topic 606 (ASU 2014-09), to supersede nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under U.S. GAAP.Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"). The core principle of ASU 2014-09 is to recognize revenues when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration that is expected to be received for those goods or services. ASU 2014-09 defines a five step process to achieve this core principle and, in doing so, it is possible more judgment and estimates may be required within the revenue recognition process than required under existing U.S. GAAP including identifying performance obligations in the contract, estimating the amount of variable consideration to include in the transaction price and allocating the transaction price to each separate performance obligation. ASU 2014-09 is effective for us in our first quarter of fiscal 2018 using either of two methods: (i) retrospective to each prior reporting period presented with the option to elect certain practical expedients as defined within ASU 2014-09; or (ii) retrospective with the cumulative effect of initially applying ASU 2014-09 recognized at the date of initial application and providing certain additional disclosures as defined per ASU 2014-09.
The Company will adopt ASU 2014-09, effective the first day of our fiscal year 2018, using the modified retrospective transition method. Under this method, the Company could elect to apply the cumulative effect method to either all contracts as of the date of initial application or only to contracts that are not complete as of that date. The Company elected to apply the modified retrospective method to contracts that are not complete as of the first day of our fiscal year 2018. In 2017, approximately $19.7 million of the Company's total revenue of $21.2 million, or 93% of the total revenue, was as a result of shipping physical goods to the customers. For such revenue streams which we ship physical goods, we believe that there will be a minimal impact compared to our current accounting policies as the duration of the contract term is short and it ends when control of the goods transfers to the customer. We also have a revenue stream which we provide regulatory consulting services to our clients. In 2017, our revenue from this stream was approximately $0.7 million, or 3% of the total revenue. For some of these services, we are currently recognizing revenue based on achievements of milestones as prescribed in the contracts with the customers. ASU 2014-09 states that an entity should recognize revenue over time by measuring the progress toward complete satisfaction of the performance obligation. This revenue stream will be impacted by the adoption of ASU 2014-09.
We have begun the implementation process of adopting ASU 2014-09 and we do not believe there are any significant implementation matters that have not yet been addressed. We do not expect the adoption of ASU 2014-09 to have a material impact on our financial statements.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). ASU 2016-02 requires that a lessee recognize the assets and liabilities that arise from operating leases. A lessee should recognize in the statement of financial position a liability to make lease payments (the lease liability) and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, a lessee is permitted to make an accounting policy election by class of underlying asset not to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities. In transition, lessees and lessors are required to recognize and measure leases at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach. Public business entities should apply the amendments in ASU 2016-02 for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early application is permitted for all public business entities and all nonpublic business entities upon issuance. We are currently evaluating the impact of our pending adoption of ASU 2014-092016-02 on our consolidated financial statements.
In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15 on “Presentation of Financial Statements Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40) - Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern.” Currently, there is no guidance in U.S. GAAP about management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern or to provide related footnote disclosures. The amendments in this ASU provide that guidance. In doing so, the amendments are intended to reduce diversity in the timing and content of footnote disclosures. The amendments require management to assess an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern by incorporating and expanding upon certain principles that are currently in U.S. auditing standards. Specifically, the amendments (1) provide a definition of the term substantial doubt, (2) require an evaluation every reporting period including interim periods, (3) provide principles for considering the mitigating effect of management’s plans, (4) require certain disclosures when substantial doubt is alleviated as a result of consideration of management’s plans, (5) require an express statement and other disclosures when substantial doubt is not alleviated, and (6) require an assessment for a period of one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued). The amendments in this ASU are effective for public and nonpublic entities for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is permitted. On September 27, 2014, the Company early adopted ASU 2014-15. The adoption of ASU 2014-15 had no impacts on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
Note 3. | Loss Per Share Applicable to Common Stockholders |
The following table sets forth the computations of loss per share amounts applicable to common stockholders for the year ended January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013.
| | Years Ended | |
| | 2014 | | | 2013 | |
| | | | | | |
Net loss | | $ | (5,388,185 | ) | | $ | (4,419,525 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Basic and diluted loss per common share | | $ | (0.05 | ) | | $ | (0.04 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Weighted average common shares outstanding (1): | | | 106,459,379 | | | | 99,987,443 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Potentially dilutive securities (2): | | | | | | | | |
Stock options | | | 13,974,052 | | | | 13,160,955 | |
Warrants | | | 469,020 | | | | - | |
Convertible Debt | | | 773,395 | | | | - | |
| | | | | | | | |
(1) Includes 1,623,186 and 500,000 weighted average nonvested shares of restricted stock for the year 2014 and 2013, respectively, which are participating securities that feature voting and dividend rights. | |
| | | | | | | | |
(2) Excluded from the computation of loss per share as their impact is antidilutive. | | | | | |
Note 4. Investment in Affiliate
During the yearyears ended December 28, 2013, the Company entered into an asset purchase30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and sale agreement with NeutriSci International Inc. (“NeutriSci”) and consummated the sale of BluScience consumer product line to NeutriSci. The Company used the cost recovery method to account the sale transaction, which was estimated at approximately $3,157,804. The consideration received consisted of following: (a) a $1,000,000 cash payment; (b) a $2,500,000 senior convertible secured note (convertible into 625,000 shares Series I Preferred Stock); and (c) 669,708 shares of Series I Preferred Shares that are convertible into 2,678,832 Class “A” common shares of NeutriSci, representing an aggregate of 19% of the NeutriSci shares at the date of the transaction.
The Company had previously applied the equity method of accounting due to a significant influence that it had obtained from the financial instruments noted above, and the carrying value, which includes the Senior Note, was reflected as long-term investment in affiliate in the Company’s consolidated balance sheet at the date of transaction. The initial carrying value of this investment recognized at the date of transaction was $2,157,804, which is the Company’s unrecovered cost or the difference between the net assets transferred to NeutriSci and the initial monetary consideration received. The 669,708 shares of Series I Preferred Shares and the senior convertible secured note were accounted for as one long-term investment in NeutriSci. Under the cost recovery method, no gain on the sale is recognized until the Company’s cost basis in the net assets transferred has been recovered.
During the year ended December 28, 2013, the Company received a partial payment of $225,000 for the first installment repayment that was due under the Senior Note.January 2, 2016.
| |
| | | |
| | | |
Net loss | $(11,377,618) | $(2,928,185) | $(2,771,067) |
| | | |
Basic and diluted loss per common share | $(0.26) | $(0.08) | $(0.08) |
| | | |
Basic and diluted weighted average common shares outstanding (1): | 44,598,879 | 37,294,321 | 35,877,341 |
| | | |
Potentially dilutive securities (2): | | | |
Stock options | 6,534,167 | 5,210,334 | 5,244,918 |
Warrants | 470,444 | 470,444 | 423,007 |
Convertible debt | - | - | 257,798 |
| | | |
(1) Includes approximately 0.5 million, 0.4 million and 0.4 million nonvested restricted stock | |
for the years 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, which are participating securities that feature | |
voting and dividend rights. | | | |
| | | |
(2) Excluded from the computation of loss per share as their impact is antidilutive. | | |
Sale of Senior Secured Convertible Note
On December 30, 2013, the Company assigned the Senior Note to an unrelated third party for $1,250,000. $2,275,000 remained outstanding on the Senior Note at the date of the assignment. The Company also paid legal fees of $7,500 out of the proceeds of the purchase price. The Company also agreed to transfer to the third party a number of shares of preferred stock of NeutriSci having a value of $500,000 upon the consummation by NeutriSci of any action resulting in the shares of its common stock being listed on an exchange. There was no recourse provision to the Company associated with the assignment of the note. In connection with the assignment of the note, the Company paid Palladium Capital Advisors, LLC (“Palladium”), a placement agent, a cash fee of $150,000 and agreed to transfer to Palladium a number of shares of preferred stock of NeutriSci having a value of $50,000 upon the consummation by NeutriSci of any action resulting in the shares of its common stock being listed on an exchange. The net proceeds received from the assignment of the Senior Note have been charged against the carrying value of the long-term investment in affiliate.
Sale and Transfer of Preferred Shares
On December 1, 2014, NeutriSci consummated its reverse merger with Disani Capital Corporation and became listed on Toronto Stock Exchange, TSX Venture Exchange. Immediately prior to NeutriSci’s listing, the Company transferred 108,676 and 10,868 Series I Preferred Shares of NeutriSci to the unrelated third party and Palladium, respectively, pursuant to the terms of the assignment of the Senior Note. In addition, the Company sold the remaining 551,114 Series I Preferred Shares to another unrelated third party for $749,515. The Company recorded a loss of $24,286 as the carrying value prior to these transactions was $773,801. As of January 3, 2015, the Company does not have any investments in NeutriSci.
Loss of Significant Influence
As a result of the assignment of the Senior Note described above, the Company no longer had a significant influence on NeutriSci as of December 30, 2013. As a result, the Company discontinued applying equity method of accounting and applied cost method of accounting from December 30, 2013. The adjusted carrying amount as of December 30, 2013 became the new cost figure for the investment and no retrospective adjustments to the financial statements have been made. The Company had elected to record equity method adjustments in losses on the investment in NeutriSci, with a three-month lag, as the financial information of NeutriSci was not available in a timely manner. The equity method adjustment for the previously unaccounted NeutriSci’s operations from October 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013 was recorded during the year ended January 3, 2015, and was incorporated into the adjusted carrying amount of the investment.
Sales, gross profit, net loss of NeutriSci for the six months ended September 30, 2013 and the three months ended December 31, 2013 are as follows:
| | Six Months Ended | | | Three Months Ended | |
| | September 30, 2013 | | | December 31, 2013 | |
Sales | | $ | 36,451 | | | $ | 60,575 | |
Gross profit | | | 13,310 | | | | 33,619 | |
Net loss | | $ | (813,212 | ) | | $ | (435,208 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Changes in carrying value and the Company ownership percentage since the inception are summarized as follows:
| | Carrying Value | | | Ownership Percentage | |
At March 28, 2013 | | $ | 2,157,804 | | | | 5.7 | % |
| | | | | | | | |
Company's share of NeutriSci's loss | | | | | | | | |
through September 30, 2013 | | | (44,961 | ) | | | | |
Proceeds from investment in affiliate | | | (225,000 | ) | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
At December 28, 2013 | | | 1,887,844 | | | | 4.9 | % |
| | | | | | | | |
Company's share of NeutriSci's loss | | | | | | | | |
for the three-month period ended December 31, 2013; | | | | | | | | |
previously not recognized due to a three-month lag | | | (21,543 | ) | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Proceeds from assignment of the Senior Note | | | (1,092,500 | ) | | | | |
Proceeds from sale and transfer of the Preferred Shares | | | (749,515 | ) | | | | |
Loss from investment in affiliate | | | (24,286 | ) | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
At January 3, 2015 | | $ | - | | | | 0.0 | % |
Note 5. Intangible Assets Note 4.
| Intangible Assets |
Intangible assets consisted of the following:
| | 2014 | | | 2013 | | | | Weighted Average Total Amortization Period |
| | Gross Carrying | | | Accumulated | | | Gross Carrying | | | Accumulated | | | |
Healthspan Research LLC Acquisition (See Note 9) | | $1,346,000 | $- | 10 years
|
License agreements and other | | 1,494,000 | 1,469,000 | 9 years
|
Less accumulated depreciation | | (1,189,000) | (983,000) | |
| | Amount | | | Amortization | | | Amount | | | Amortization | | $1,651,000 | $486,000 | |
Amortized intangible assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
License agreements and other | | $ | 1,205,275 | | | $ | 909,224 | | | $ | 1,075,285 | | | $ | 873,635 | | |
Amortization expenseexpenses on amortizable intangible assets included in the consolidated statement of operations for the yearyears ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 20152, 2016 were approximately $206,000, $88,000 and December 28, 2013 was approximately $36,000 and $24,000,$45,000, respectively. The unamortized expense is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 7.3 years as of January 3, 2015.
Estimated aggregate amortization expense for each of the next five years is as follows:
Years ending December: | | | | |
2015 | | $ | 40,000 | | |
2016 | | | 40,000 | | |
2017 | | | 40,000 | | |
2018 | | | 36,000 | | $233,000 |
2019 | | | 33,000 | | 233,000 |
2020 | | 228,000 |
2021 | | 209,000 |
2022 | | 171,000 |
Thereafter | | | 107,000 | | 577,000 |
| | $ | 296,000 | | $1,651,000 |
| | |
Note 6. Note 5. | Leasehold Improvements and Equipment, Net |
Leasehold improvements and equipment, net of assets held for sale, consisted of the following:
| | 2014 | | | 2013 | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Laboratory equipment | | $ | 3,151,748 | | | $ | 2,782,364 | | $1,869,000 | $1,142,000 | 10 years |
Leasehold improvements | | | 495,240 | | | | 491,125 | | 1,699,000 | 1,332,000 | Lesser of lease term or estimated useful life |
Computer equipment | | | 329,737 | | | | 372,851 | | 511,000 | 400,000 | 3 to 5 years |
Furniture and fixtures | | | 13,039 | | | | 18,313 | | 90,000 | 41,000 | 7 years |
Office equipment | | | 7,877 | | | | 7,877 | | 18,000 | 10,000 | 10 years |
Construction in progress | | | 68,141 | | | | 40,126 | | 131,000 | 170,000 | |
| | | 4,065,782 | | | | 3,712,656 | | 4,318,000 | 3,095,000 | |
Less accumulated depreciation | | | 2,801,122 | | | | 2,649,417 | | 1,446,000 | 1,317,000 | |
| | $ | 1,264,660 | | | $ | 1,063,239 | | $2,872,000 | $1,778,000 | |
| | |
Depreciation expenseexpenses on leasehold improvements and equipment included in the consolidated statement of operations for the yearyears ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 20152, 2016 were approximately $510,000, $332,000 and December 28, 2013 was approximately $223,000 and $246,000,$286,000, respectively.
The Company leases equipment under capitalized lease obligations with a total cost of $1,073,601approximately $871,000 and $695,461$1,214,000 and accumulated amortization of $242,887$126,000 and $136,358$277,000 as of January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 2013,31, 2016, respectively.
During the year ended January 3, 2015, the Company disposed of approximately $56,000 of fully depreciated equipment.
Note 7. Note 6. | Capitalized Lease Obligations |
Minimum future lease payments under capital leases as of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, are as follows:
Year ending December: | | | | |
2015 | | $ | 191,454 | | |
2016 | | | 178,563 | | |
2017 | | | 157,713 | | |
2018 | | | 108,860 | | $236,000 |
2019 | | | 33,884 | | 196,000 |
2020 | | 126,000 |
2021 | | 18,000 |
Total minimum lease payments | | | 670,474 | | 576,000 |
Less amount representing interest at a rate of approximately 8.8% per year | | | 99,181 | | |
Less amount representing interest at a rate of approximately 9.8% per year | | 70,000 |
Present value of net minimum lease payments | | | 571,293 | | 506,000 |
Less current portion | | | 148,278 | | 196,000 |
Long-term obligations under capital leases | | $ | 423,015 | | $310,000 |
| | | | | |
Interest expenseexpenses related to capital leases waswere approximately $47,000$57,000, $48,000 and $34,000$62,000 for the years ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013,2, 2016, respectively.
Subsequent to January 3, 2015,On November 4, 2016, the Company entered into a business financing transactionagreement (“Financing Agreement”) with Western Alliance Bank (“Western Alliance”), in order to purchase laboratory equipment. Under the lease terms,establish a formula based revolving credit line pursuant to which the Company will make monthly lease payments, including interest, of approximately $7,000 for 48 months, for a total payment of approximately $356,000. The Company will record a capital lease of approximately $304,000. The equipment will be utilized in our core standards and contract services segment.
Note 8. Loan Payable
On September 29, 2014, the Company entered into a loan and security agreement (the “Loan Agreement”) with Hercules Technology II, L.P., as lender (“Lender”) and Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc., as agent. Lender will provide us with access to a term loanmay borrow an aggregate principal amount of up to $5 million. The first $2.5 million$5,000,000, subject to the terms and conditions of the term loan was funded at closing,Financing Agreement. As of December 30, 2017 and is repayable in equal monthly installments of principal and interest (mortgage style) over 30 months, following an initial interest-only period of twelve months after closing. The remaining $2.5 million of the term loan can be drawn down at our option at any time but no later than JulyDecember 31, 2015. In connection with the loan,2016, the Company paid a $50,000 facility charge to Lender and recorded as debt issuance cost.did not have any outstanding loan payable from this line of credit arrangement.
The term loan bears interest rate will be calculated at thea floating rate per yearmonth equal to (a) the greater of either (i) 9.35% plus3.50% per year or (ii) the prime rate as reportedPrime Rate published in the Money Rates section of the Western Edition of The Wall Street Journal, minus 3.25%, or (ii) 9.35%.such other rate of interest publicly announced by Lender as its Prime Rate, plus (b) 2.50 percentage points, plus an additional 5.00 percentage points during any period that an event of default has occurred and is continuing. The Company may prepay all, but no less than all, of the outstanding loan balance, subject to prepayment charges of 3% during the first twelve months following closing, 2% during the next twelve months and 1% thereafter. On the earliest to occur of the (a) the loan maturity date, (b) the date the Company prepays the outstanding loan balance or (c) the date the outstanding loan balance becomes due and payable, the Company will pay Lender an end of term charge equal to 3.75% of all amounts drawnCompany’s obligations under the loan.
The LoanFinancing Agreement further provides that, subject to certain conditions, any regularly scheduled installment of principal due to Lender may be paid, in whole or in part at the option of the Company or Lender,are secured by converting a portion of the principal of the term loan into shares of the Company’s common stock (the “Conversion Shares”) at a conversion price of $1.293, in lieu of payment in cash. The aggregate principal amount to be paid in Conversion Shares shall not exceed $1,000,000. Of this amount 50% shall convert at the Lender’s option and 50% shall convert at the Company’s option.
Pursuant to the Loan Agreement, the Company issued Lender a warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase 419,020 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $1.062 per share, subject to customary anti-dilution provisions. The Warrant is exercisable and expires five years from the date of issuance.
In connection with the Loan Agreement, the Company granted first priority liens and security interest in substantially all of ourthe Company’s current and future personal property assets, exclusive ofincluding intellectual property and 35% of the capital stock of any foreign subsidiary, as collateral for theproperty. Any borrowings, interest or other fees or obligations under the Loan Agreement. The Loan Agreement also contains representations and warranties bythat the Company and Lender, indemnification provisions in favor of Lender and customary covenants, and events of default. Uponowes Western Alliance pursuant to the occurrence of an event of default, a default interest rate of an additional 4%Financing Agreement will be applied to the outstanding loan balances, and Lender may terminate its lending commitment, declare all outstanding obligations immediatelybecome due and payable and take such other actions as set forth in the Loan Agreement. We are currently in compliance with all loan covenants.on November 4, 2018.
Debt Issuance Costs and End of Term Charge
The Company incurred debt issuance costs of $102,866approximately $252,000 in connection with this term loan. Theline of credit arrangement and had an unamortized balance of approximately $115,000 as of December 30, 2017. For the line of credit arrangement, the Company has elected a policy to keep the debt issuance costs are beingas an asset, regardless of whether an amount is drawn. The remaining unamortized deferred asset will be amortized as interest expense using the effective interest method over the termremaining life of the loan. Amortizationline of debt issuance costs was $11,505 for the year ended January 3, 2015 and the remaining unamortized debt issuance costs of $91,361 are included in other noncurrent assets. In addition, the Company will pay an end of term charge of $93,750, which is 3.75% of the $2.5 million drawn under the loan. The end of term charge is being accrued as additional interest expense using the effective interest rate method over the term of the loan. The Company accrued $10,486 of this fee during the year ended January 3, 2015.credit arrangement.
Warrant Issued to Lender
The Company determined the Warrant issued to Lender to be equity classified. The Company estimated the fair value of this Warrant as of the issuance date using a Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions:
| | September 29, 2014 | |
Fair value of common stock | | $ | 1.08 | |
Volatility | | | 72.40 | % |
Expected dividends | | | 0.00 | % |
Contractual term | | 5.0 years | |
Risk-free rate | | | 1.76 | % |
The Company utilized this fair value in its allocation of the loan proceeds between loan payable and the Warrant which was performed on a relative fair value basis. The fair value of the Warrant to purchase 419,020 shares of our common stock was approximately $273,081. Ultimately, the Company allocated $246,189 to the Warrant and recognized this amount in additional paid in capital. Accordingly, this amount is recognized as a debt discount and is being amortized as interest expense using the effective interest method over the term of the loan. Amortization of this debt discount was $27,535provision for the year ended January 3, 2015.
Loan payable as of January 3, 2015income tax consists of the following:
Principal amount payable for following years ending December | | | |
2015 | | $ | 223,358 | |
2016 | | | 867,247 | |
2017 | | | 1,035,995 | |
2018 | | | 373,400 | |
Total principal payments | | | 2,500,000 | |
Accrued end of term charge | | | 10,486 | |
Total loan payable | | | 2,510,486 | |
Less unamortized debt discount | | | 218,654 | |
Less current portion | | | 223,358 | |
Loan payable – long term | | $ | 2,068,474 | |
The total interest expenses related the term loan, including cash interest payments, the amortizations of debt issuance costs and debt discount, and the accrual of end of term charge were approximately $112,000 for the year ended January 3, 2015.
Note 9. Income Taxes
| | | |
Current | | | |
Federal | $- | $- | $- |
State | - | - | 4,527 |
Deferred (net of valuation allowance) | | | |
Federal | - | - | - |
State | - | - | - |
Income tax provision | $- | $- | $4,527 |
| | | |
At January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 2013,31, 2016, the companyCompany maintained a full valuation allowance against the entire deferred income tax balance which resulted in an effective tax raterates of zero0%, 0% and 0.2% for 2014years 2017, 2016 and 2013.2015, respectively. At December 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, we recorded a valuation allowance of $12.9 million and $15.5 million, respectively. The valuation allowance increaseddecreased by $2,308,000 as of January 3, 2015.$2.6 million during 2017.
A reconciliation of income taxes computed at the statutory Federal income tax rate to income taxes as reflected in the financial statements is summarized as follows:
| | 2014 | | | 2013 | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Federal income tax expense at statutory rate | | | (34.0 | )% | | | (34.0 | )% | (34.0)% |
State income tax, net of federal benefit | | | (5.3 | )% | | | (4.3 | )% | (5.3)% | (5.1)% |
Permanent differences | | | 2.7 | % | | | 2.6 | % | 7.6% | 8.4% | 5.7% |
Change in tax rates | | | (6.1 | )% | | | (3.7 | )% | 0% | (0.3)% | 0.7% |
Changes of state net operating losses | | 1.3% | 1.8% | 17.4% |
Change in stock options and restricted stock | | (1.3)% | 11.8% | 0.0% |
Change in valuation allowance | | | 42.8 | % | | | 39.2 | % | (23.1)% | 16.4% | 13.7% |
Remeasurement of deferred taxes asset / liability | | 53.4% | - |
Other | | | (0.1 | )% | | | 0.2 | % | 1.4% | 1.2% | 1.8% |
Effective tax rate | | | 0.0 | % | | | 0.0 | % | 0.0% | 0.2% |
| | | | | | | | | |
On December 22, 2017, new legislation was signed into law, informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which included, among other things, a provision to reduce the federal corporate income tax rate to 21%. Under ASC 740, Accounting for Income Taxes, the enactment of the Tax Act also requires companies, to recognize the effects of changes in tax laws and rates on deferred tax assets and liabilities and the retroactive effects of changes in tax laws in the period in which the new legislation is enacted. There is no further change to its assertion on maintaining a full valuation allowance against its U.S. deferred tax assets. The Company’s gross deferred tax assets have been revalued from 34% to 21% with a corresponding offset to the valuation allowance and any potential other taxes arising due to the Tax Act will result in reductions to its net operating loss carryforward and valuation allowance. Deferred tax assets of approximately $19.1 million have been revalued to approximately $13.0 million with a corresponding decrease to the Company’s valuation allowance. Upon completion of our 2017 U.S. income tax return in 2018 we may identify additional remeasurement adjustments to our recorded deferred tax liabilities and the one-time transition tax. We will continue to assess our provision for income taxes as future guidance is issued, but do not currently anticipate significant revisions will be necessary. Any such revisions will be treated in accordance with the measurement period guidance outlined in Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118.
The deferred income tax assets and liabilities consisted of the following components as of January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 2013:31, 2016:
| | 2014 | | | 2013 | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Deferred tax assets: | | | | | | | |
Net operating loss carryforward | | $ | 11,401,000 | | | $ | 8,953,000 | | $9,963,000 | $11,023,000 |
Capital loss carryforward | | - | 811,000 |
Stock options and restricted stock | | | 2,934,000 | | | | 1,945,000 | | 1,873,000 | 2,694,000 |
Investment in affiliate related to BluScience transaction | | | - | | | | 1,187,000 | | |
Inventory reserve | | | 226,000 | | | | 100,000 | | 143,000 | 195,000 |
Allowance for doubtful accounts | | | 15,000 | | | | 3,000 | | 183,000 | 425,000 |
Accrued expenses | | | 125,000 | | | | 100,000 | | 674,000 | 487,000 |
Deferred revenue | | | 4,000 | | | | 64,000 | | 19,000 | 13,000 |
Intangibles | | | 26,000 | | | | 36,000 | | 27,000 | 29,000 |
Deferred rent | | | 81,000 | | | | 99,000 | | 166,000 | 252,000 |
| | | 14,812,000 | | | | 12,487,000 | | 13,048,000 | 15,929,000 |
Less valuation allowance | | | 14,669,000 | | | | 12,361,000 | | (12,904,000) | (15,530,000) |
| | | 143,000 | | | | 126,000 | | 144,000 | 399,000 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Deferred tax liabilities: | | | | | | | | | |
Leasehold improvements and equipment | | | (108,000 | ) | | | (100,000 | ) | (9,000) | (282,000) |
Prepaid expenses | | | (35,000 | ) | | | (26,000 | ) | (135,000) | (117,000) |
| | | (143,000 | ) | | | (126,000 | ) | (144,000) | (399,000) |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | $ | - | | | $ | - | | $- |
The Company has tax net operating loss carryforwards for federal and otherstate income tax attributes available to offset future federal taxable income and future state taxable incomepurposes of approximately $28,956,000$40.0 million and $29,092,000,$29.6 million, respectively which begin to expire in the year ending December 31, 2023 and 2015,2022, respectively. The net operating loss can be carried forward up to 20 years for federal tax returns and from 5 to 20 years for various state tax returns.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, certain ownership changes may subject the Company to annual limitations on the utilization of its net operating loss carryforward. The Company has determined that the stock issued in the year of 2017 did not create a change in control under the Internal Revenue Code Section 382. The Company will continue to analyze the potential impact of any additional transactions undertaken upon the utilization of the net operating losses on a go forward basis.
The companyCompany is currently not under examination by the Internal Revenue Service or any other jurisdictions for any tax years. The Company has not identified any uncertain tax positions requiring a reserve as of January 3, 2015December 30, 2017 and December 28, 2013.31, 2016.
Note 9. | Related Party Transactions |
Asset acquisition
On March 12, 2017, the Company acquired all of the outstanding equity interests of Healthspan from Robert Fried, Jeffrey Allen and Dr. Charles Brenner (the "Sellers"). Robert Fried is a member of the Board of Directors ("Board") of the Company, a position he has held since July 2015.
Upon the closing of, and as consideration for, the acquisition, the Company issued an aggregate of 367,648 shares of the Company’s common stock to the Sellers. The fair value of these shares was approximately $1.0 million based on the closing price of $2.72 per share on March 12, 2017. Also on March 12, 2017, the Company appointed Robert Fried as President and Chief Strategy Officer, effective immediately. Mr. Fried continues to serve as a member of the Board, but resigned as a member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board.
Healthspan was formed in August 2015 to offer and sell finished bottle product TRU NIAGEN® directly to consumers through internet-based selling platforms. TRU NIAGEN® is currently the Company's leading product. Prior to the acquisition, the Company has supplied certain amount of NIAGEN® to Healthspan as a raw material inventory in exchange for a 4% equity interest in Healthspan. An additional 5% equity interest was received for granting certain exclusive rights to resell NIAGEN® prior to the total acquisition on March 12, 2017.
This transaction was accounted for as an acquisition of assets. An intangible asset of approximately $1.35 million was recorded as a result of this acquisition, which is the difference of consideration transferred and the net amount of assets acquired and liabilities assumed.
(A) Consideration transferred | | | (B) Net amount of assets and liabilities | |
| | | Assets acquired | |
Common Stock | $1,000,000 | | Cash and cash equivalents | $19,000 |
Transaction costs | 178,000 | | Trade receivables | 11,000 |
Previously held equity interest | 20,000 | | Inventory | 61,000 |
| | | | |
| $1,198,000 | | Liabilities assumed | |
| | | Due to officer | (132,000) |
| | | Accounts payable | (74,000) |
| | | Credit card payable | (30,000) |
| | | Other accrued expenses | (3,000) |
Consumer product business model, | | | | |
intangible asset (A) -(B) | $1,346,000 | | Net assets | $(148,000) |
| | | | |
Note 10. Share-Based CompensationThe acquired intangible asset is considered to have a useful life of 10 years. The expense is amortized using the straight-line method over the useful life and the Company recognized an amortization expense of approximately $109,000 for the year ended December 30, 2017.
10A.In cancellation of a loan owed by Healthspan to Mr. Fried prior to the acquisition, the Company repaid $32,500 to Mr. Fried on March 13, 2017 and also repaid $100,000 on March 9, 2018. No interest was paid for the $100,000 repaid on March 9, 2018.
Sale of consumer products, related party
During July 2017, the Company entered into an exclusivity agreement (the "Customer G Agreement") with Customer G, whereby the Company agreed to exclusively sell its TRU NIAGEN® dietary supplement product to Customer G in certain territories in Asia. During the year ended December 30, 2017, the Company sold approximately $4.1 million of TRU NIAGEN® dietary supplement product pursuant to the Customer G Agreement. As of December 30, 2017, the trade receivable from Customer G was approximately $1.0 million.
Li Ka Shing, who beneficially owns more than 10% of the Company's common stock, beneficially owns approximately 30% of Entity A and Entity A beneficially owns approximately 75% of Customer G. In accordance with the Company's Related-Person Transactions Policy, the Audit Committee of the Company's Board of Directors ratified the terms of sales agreement with Customer G.
Note 10.
| Discontinued Operations |
On September 5, 2017, the Company completed the sale of its operating assets that were used with the Company's quality verification program testing and analytical chemistry business for food and food related products (the "Lab Business") to Covance Laboratories Inc. ("Covance"). In consideration of the Lab Business sale, the Company received $6.75 million from Covance and additional cash consideration of $0.8 million is currently held in escrow to satisfy any potential indemnification claims by Covance. The Company was also eligible to receive an additional earnout payment from Covance in an amount equal to up to $1.0 million, tied to 2017 revenue of the Lab Business. However, 2017 revenue of the Lab Business came up short of the required threshold and this contingent consideration was not earned.
The Company recorded a gain of approximately $5.5 million from the disposal.
(A) Consideration received | | | | (C) Carrying value of the Lab Business | |
| | | | | |
| | | | Assets disposed | |
Cash payment | $6,750,000 | | | Leasehold improvements and equipment, net | $1,427,000 |
Cash payment held in escrow (1) | 750,000 | | | Prepaid expenses | 11,000 |
Additional earnout payment | - | | | Deposits | 20,000 |
| $7,500,000 | | | | |
| | | | Liabilities disposed | |
(B) Selling costs | | | | Deferred revenue | (7,000) |
| | | | Deferred rent
| (215,000) |
Legal | $428,000 | | | | |
Financial consulting | 250,000 | | | | |
Other | 118,000 | | | | |
| $796,000 | | | Net assets | $1,236,000 |
Gain from disposal (A) - (B) - (C) | $5,468,000 | | | | |
| | | | | |
(1) $750,000 is expected to be held in escrow until March 2019 to satisfy any indemnification claims. |
The sale of the Lab Business qualifies as a discontinued operation as the sale represents a strategic shift that has (or will have) a major effect on operations and financial results.
The results of operations from the discontinued operations for the years ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016 are as follows:
Statements of Operations - Discontinued operations | | | |
Years Ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016 | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
Sales | $2,820,631 | $5,146,438 | $4,129,254 |
Cost of sales | 2,478,827 | 3,615,840 | 3,182,851 |
| | | |
Gross profit | 341,804 | 1,530,598 | 946,403 |
| | | |
Operating expenses: | | | |
Sales and marketing | 482,134 | 692,376 | 818,920 |
General and administrative | 150,171 | 178,446 | 215,220 |
Operating expenses | 632,305 | 870,822 | 1,034,140 |
| | | |
Operating income (loss) | (290,501) | 659,776 | (87,737) |
| | | |
Nonoperating income (expense): | | | |
Interest expense, net | (24,639) | (36,366) | (45,791) |
Nonoperating expenses | (24,639) | (36,366) | (45,791) |
| | | |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations | $(315,140) | $623,410 | $(133,528) |
The assets and liabilities that are classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2016 are as follows:
| |
Current assets held for sale | |
Prepaid expenses | $18,315 |
| |
Leasehold Improvements and Equipment, net | 1,333,203 |
Deposits | 19,675 |
| |
Total assets held for sale | 1,371,193 |
| |
Deferred rent | 184,766 |
| |
Total liabilities held for sale | $184,766 |
Depreciation, capital expenditures and significant noncash investing activities of the discontinued operations for the years ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016 are as follows:
| | | |
| | | |
Depreciation | $169,250 | $254,755 | $234,010 |
Purchase of leasehod improvements and equipment | $111,232 | $313,842 | $190,632 |
| | | |
Noncash investing activity | | | |
Capital lease obligation incurred for the purchase of equipment | $- | $156,655 | $303,933 |
Retirement of fully depreciated equipment - cost | $55,947 | $76,050 | $119,888 |
Retirement of fully depreciated equipment - accumulated depreciation | $(55,947) | $(76,050) | $(119,888) |
11A. Employee Share-Based Compensation
Stock Option Plans
At the discretion of the Company’s compensation committee (the “Compensation Committee”), and with the approval of the Company’s board of directors (the “Board of Directors”), the Company may grant options to purchase the Company’s common stock to certain individuals from time to time. Management and the Compensation Committee determine the terms of awards which include the exercise price, vesting conditions and expiration dates at the time of grant. Expiration dates for stock options are not to exceed 10 years from their date of issuance.
On June 20, 2017, the stockholders of the Company approved the ChromaDex Corporation 2017 Equity Incentive Plan (the "2017 Plan"). The Company, under its2017 Plan is intended to be the successor to the ChromaDex Corporation Second Amended and Restated 2007 Equity Incentive Plan (the "2007 Plan"). Under the 2017 Plan, the Company is authorized to issue stock options that total no more than 20%the sum of (i) 3,000,000 new shares, (ii) approximately 384,000 unallocated shares remaining available for the sharesgrant of common stock issued and outstanding, as determined on a fully diluted basis. Beginning in 2007, stock options were no longer issuablenew awards under the Company’s 2000 Non-Qualified Incentive Stock Plan.2007 Plan, and (iii) any returned shares from the 2007 Plan or the 2017 Plan, such as forfeited, cancelled, or expired shares.
Under both 2007 Plan and 2017 Plan, the total number of shares the Company may grant, excluding returned shares, was approximately 10.8 million shares. The remaining amount available for issuance under the Second Amended and Restated 2007 Equity Incentive2017 Plan totaled 4,738,496approximately 1.4 million shares at January 3, 2015. December 30, 2017.
General Vesting Conditions
The stock option awards generally vest ratably over a three to four-year period following grant date after a passage of time. However, some stock option awards are market or performance based and vest based on the achievement of certain criteriatriggering events established by the Compensation Committee, subject to approval by the Board of Directors.
The fair value of the Company’s stock options that are not market based was estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes based option valuation model. The table below outlines the weighted average assumptions for options granted to employees during the years ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013.
Year Ended December | | 2014 | | | 2013 | |
Expected Volatility | | | 74.63 | % | | | 32.75 | % |
Expected dividends | | | 0.00 | % | | | 0.00 | % |
Expected term | | 5.76 years | | | 6.0 years | |
Risk-free rate | | | 1.86 | % | | | 1.51 | % |
Prior to the year 2014, the Company calculated expected volatility from the volatility of publicly held companies in similar industries, as the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock did not cover the period equal to the expected life of the options. For the stock options granted during the year ended January 3, 2015, the Company calculated expected volatility rate based principally on the combined volatility of similarly situated publicly held companies. Based on the expected term of stock options, a 20~75% weight was assigned to the volatility of the Company common stock as the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock from June 2008 through April 2010 was exceptionally high due to a thinly traded market. Below table illustrates the Company’s historical volatility and the average daily trading volume of the Company’s common stock from June 2008 through April 2010 and from April 2010 through December 2014.
Period | | Volatility | | | Average Daily Trading Volume | |
6/20/2008 ~ 4/19/2010 | | | 402 | % | | | 11,455 | |
4/20/2010 ~ 1/2/2015 | | | 77 | % | | | 155,111 | |
2, 2016.
Year Ended December | | | |
Expected term | | | |
Volatility | 72% | 73% | 76% |
Dividend Yield | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Risk-free rate | 2% | 1% | 2% |
The dividend yield assumption is based on the Company’s history and expectation of future dividend payouts on the common stock. The risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield available on U.S. treasury zero-coupon issues with an equivalent remaining term. For the expected term, the Company used SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107 simplified method since most of the options granted were “plain vanilla” options with following characteristics: (i) the share options are granted at the market price on the grant date; (ii) exercisability is conditional on performing service through the vesting date on most options; (iii) If an employee terminates service prior to vesting, the employee would forfeit the share options; (iv) if an employee terminates service after vesting, the employee would have 30 days to exercise the share options; and (v) the share options are nontransferable and nonhedgeable.
1) Service Period Based Stock Options
The majority of options granted by the Company are comprised of service based options granted to employees. These options vest ratably over a defined period following grant date after a passage of a service period.
The following table summarizes service period based stock options activity at January 3, 2015 and changes during the year then ended:activity:
| | | | | Weighted Average | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Remaining | | | Aggregate | | | | | |
| | Number of | | | Exercise | | | Contractual | | | Intrinsic | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | Price | | | Term | | | Value | | | | | |
Outstanding at December 28, 2013 | | | 12,113,655 | | | $ | 1.06 | | | | 7.43 | | | | | |
Outstanding at January 3, 2015 | | 4,241,386 | $3.39 | 7.00 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Options Granted | | | 2,233,987 | | | | 1.39 | | | | 10.00 | | | | | 730,562 | 3.66 | 10.00 | $2.28 | |
Options Classification from Employee to Non-Employee | | | (113,151 | ) | | | 0.76 | | | | | | | | | (514,024) | 2.79 | 7.78 | | |
Options Exercised | | | (534,715 | ) | | | 0.87 | | | | | | | | | (40,236) | 2.37 | | $58,000 |
Options Forfeited | | (103,425) | 3.93 | |
Outstanding at January 2, 2016 | | 4,314,263 | $3.50 | 6.44 | |
| | |
Options Granted | | 742,485 | 3.91 | 10.00 | $2.49 | |
Options Exercised | | (238,423) | 2.67 | | $502,000 |
Options Expired | | | (253,900 | ) | | | 1.00 | | | | | | | | | (183,334) | 4.50 | |
Options Forfeited | | | (722,275 | ) | | | 1.13 | | | | | | | | | (353,840) | 4.15 | |
Outstanding at January 3, 2015 | | | 12,723,601 | | | $ | 1.13 | | | | 7.00 | | | $ | 581,050 | | |
Outstanding at December 31, 2016 | | 4,281,151 | $3.52 | 6.36 | | $1,352,000 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Exercisable at January 3, 2015 | | | 9,362,374 | | | $ | 1.13 | | | | 6.40 | | | $ | 455,570 | | |
Options Granted | | 1,110,404 | 3.25 | 10.00 | $2.07 | |
Options Exercised | | (863,712) | 2.42 | | $2,455,000 |
Options Expired | | (3,334) | 4.50 | |
Options Forfeited | | (73,483) | 3.88 | |
Outstanding at December 30, 2017 | | 4,451,026 | $4.45 | 5.76 | | $10,740,000* |
| | |
Exercisable at December 30, 2017 | | 2,937,613 | $3.54 | 5.18 | | $7,230,000* |
*The aggregate intrinsic values in the table above are based on the Company’s closing stock price of $0.90$5.88 on the last day of business for the year ended January 3, 2015. The weighted average fair valueDecember 30, 2017.
2) Performance Based Stock Options
The Company also grants stock option awards that are performance based and vest based on the achievement of certain criteria established from time to time by the Compensation Committee. If these performance criteria are not met, the compensation expenses are not recognized and the expenses that have been recognized will be reversed.
The following table summarizes performance based stock options activity at January 3, 2015 and changes during the year then ended:activity:
| | | | | Weighted Average | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Remaining | | | Aggregate | | | | | |
| | Number of | | | Exercise | | | Contractual | | | Intrinsic | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | Price | | | Term | | | Value | | | | | |
Outstanding at December 28, 2013 | | | 200,000 | | | $ | 0.63 | | | | 9.08 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Outstanding at January 3, 2015 | | 66,668 | $1.89 | 8.08 | | |
Options Granted | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | | - | | |
Options Exercised | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | | - | | |
Options Expired | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | | |
Options Forfeited | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | | - | | |
Outstanding at January 3, 2015 | | | 200,000 | | | $ | 0.63 | | | | 8.08 | | | $ | 54,000 | | |
Outstanding at January 2, 2016 | | 66,668 | $1.89 | 7.08 | | |
Options Granted | | - | | |
Options Exercised | | - | | |
Options Forfeited | | - | | |
Outstanding at December 31, 2016 | | 66,668 | $1.89 | 6.08 | | |
Options Granted | | - | | |
Options Exercised | | - | | |
Options Forfeited | | - | | |
Outstanding at December 30, 2017 | | 66,668 | $1.89 | 5.08 | | $266,000 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Exercisable at January 3, 2015 | | | 95,833 | | | $ | 0.63 | | | | 8.08 | | | $ | 25,875 | | |
Exercisable at December 30, 2017 | | 66,668 | $1.89 | 5.08 | | $266,000 |
The aggregate intrinsic value in the table above are, based on the Company’s closing stock price of $0.90$5.88 on the last day of business for the period ended January 3, 2015.December 30, 2017.
3) Market Based Stock Options
The Company also grants stock option awards that are market based which have vesting conditions associated with a service condition as well as performance of the Company's stock price. The following table summarizes market based stock options activity:
| | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Outstanding at December 31, 2016 | - | $- | - | | |
Options Granted | 1,000,000 | 4.24 | 10.00 | $3.04 | |
Options Exercised | - | - | | | |
Options Forfeited | - | - | | | |
Outstanding at December 30, 2017 | 1,000,000 | $4.24 | 9.24 | | $1,640,000 |
| | | | | |
Exercisable at December 30, 2017 | 55,556 | $4.24 | 9.24 | | $91,000 |
| | | | | |
The aggregate intrinsic value in the table above are, based on the Company’s closing stock price of $5.88 on the last day of business for the period ended December 30, 2017.
The fair value of 1,000,000 options granted during the period ended December 30, 2017 was measured using Monte Carlo simulations based on a lattice approach with following assumptions:
| Volatility: | 67% | |
| Contractual Term: | 10 years | |
| Risk Free Rate: | 2.4% | |
| Cost of Equity: | 15.7% | |
For the contractual term, we are using 10 years as this is not a "plain vanilla" option. SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107 simplified method for estimating the expected term can be only used if the option is a "plain vanilla" option.
As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, there was approximately $1,768,000$5.7 million of total unrecognized compensation expense related to non-vested share-based compensation arrangements granted under the plans for employee stock options. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 2.202.5 years. The realized tax benefit from stock options for the years ended January 3, 2015, and December 28, 2013 was $0, based on the Company’s election of the “with and without” approach.
Restricted Stock Awards
Restricted stock awards granted by the Company to employees have vesting conditions that are unique to each award.
The following table summarizes activity of restricted stock awards granted to employees at January 3, 2015 and changes duringemployees:
| | |
| | |
| | |
Unvested shares at January 3, 2015 | 530,007 | $3.54 |
Granted | - | - |
Vested | (173,336) | 4.23 |
Forfeited | - | - |
Unvested shares at January 2, 2016 | 356,671 | $3.21 |
Granted | - | - |
Vested | (6,668) | 4.23 |
Forfeited | - | - |
Unvested shares at December 31, 2016 | 350,003 | $3.20 |
Granted | 500,000 | 5.08 |
Vested | (666,668) | 4.60 |
Forfeited | - | - |
Unvested shares at December 30, 2017 | 183,335 | $3.25 |
| | |
Expected to Vest as of December 30, 2017 | 183,335 | $3.25 |
During the year then ended:
| | | | | Weighted Average | |
| | | | | Award-Date | |
| | Shares | | | Fair Value | |
Unvested shares at December 28, 2013 | | | 500,000 | | | $ | 0.69 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Granted | | | 1,090,000 | | | | 1.41 | |
Vested | | | - | | | | - | |
Forfeited | | | - | | | | - | |
Unvested shares at January 3, 2015 | | | 1,590,000 | | | $ | 1.18 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Expected to Vest as of January 3, 2015 | | | 1,590,000 | | | $ | 1.18 | |
On January 2, 2014,ended December 30, 2017, the Company awarded an aggregate of 1,090,000granted 500,000 shares of restricted stock award to the Company’s officersCompany's President and Chief Operating Officer Robert Fried, which vested during the year ended December 30, 2017. The expense for vested restricted stock was approximately $2.5 million and was recognized during the year ended December 30, 2017.
During the year ended December 30, 2017, the Company's former Chief Financial Officer, Thomas Varvaro resigned and received immediate vesting of his unvested restricted stock of 166,668 shares. The expense for the vested restricted stock was approximately $525,000 and was recognized prior to the fiscal year 2015.
During the years ended December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016, several members of the boardBoard resigned from the Board and received immediate vesting of directors. These shares shall vest upon the earlier to occur of the following: (i) the market price of the Company’s stock exceeds a certain price, or (ii) one of other certain triggering events, including the termination of the officers and members of the board of directors without cause for any reason. The fair values of thesetheir unvested restricted stock awards were $1,536,900 in aggregate,of 6,668 shares and they were based on the trading price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant.173,336 shares, respectively. The expense related tofor the vested restricted stock award has been amortized overwas approximately $761,000 and was recognized all during the period of six months through July 1, 2014, as the Company determined the requisite service period to be 6 months as that is when they are eligible to vest.fiscal year ended January 3, 2015.
Employee Option and Restricted Stock Compensation
The Company recognized share-based compensation expense of approximately $2,747,000$4.4 million, $1.1 million and $958,000$1.5 million in general and administrative expenses in the statement of operations for the yearyears ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013.2, 2016, respectively.
11B.
| Non-Employee Share-Based Compensation |
Stock Option Plan
At the discretion of management, working with the Compensation Committee, and with approval of the Board of Directors, the Company may grant options to purchase the Company’s common stock to certain individuals from time to time who are not employees of the Company. These options are granted under the Second Amended and Restated 2007 Equity Incentive Plan of the Company and are granted on the same terms as those being issued to employees. Stock options granted to non-employees are accounted for using the fair value approach. The fair value of non-employee option grants are estimated using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model and are re-measured over the vesting term until earned. The estimated fair value is expensed over the applicable service period.
The following table summarizes activity of stock options granted to non-employees at January 3, 2015 and changes during the year then ended:non-employees:
| | | | | Weighted Average | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Remaining | | | Aggregate | | | | |
| | Number of | | | Exercise | | | Contractual | | | Intrinsic | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | Price | | | Term | | | Value | | | | | |
Outstanding at December 28, 2013 | | | 847,300 | | | $ | 1.44 | | | | 5.74 | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Outstanding at January 3, 2015 | | 350,158 | $4.05 | 5.46 | |
Options Granted | | | 90,000 | | | | 1.24 | | | | 10.00 | | | | | - | | |
Options Classification from Employe to Non-Employee | | | 113,151 | | | | 0.76 | | | | | | | | | |
Options Classification from Employee to Non-Employee | | 514,024 | 2.79 | 7.78 | |
Options Exercised | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | | - | | |
Options Forfeited | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | | - | | |
Outstanding at January 3, 2015 | | | 1,050,451 | | | $ | 1.35 | | | | 5.46 | | | $ | 37,550 | | |
Outstanding at January 2, 2016 | | 864,182 | $3.31 | 6.04 | |
Options Granted | | 40,000 | 2.85 | 10.00 | |
Options Exercised | | (41,667) | 1.92 | | $98,000 |
Options Forfeited | | - | |
Outstanding at December 31, 2016 | | 862,515 | $3.35 | 5.23 | |
Options Granted | | 175,000 | 4.89 | 10.00 | |
Options Exercised | | (21,042) | 3.88 | | $24,000 |
Options Forfeited | | - | |
Outstanding at December 30, 2017 | | 1,016,473 | $3.61 | 5.16 | $2,361,000* |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Exercisable at January 3, 2015 | | | 971,701 | | | $ | 1.36 | | | | 5.12 | | | $ | 37,550 | | |
Exercisable at December 30, 2017 | | 824,806 | $3.35 | 4.15 | $2,088,000* |
The aggregate intrinsic values in the table above are, based on the Company’s closing stock price of $0.90$5.88 on the last day of business for the year ended January 3, 2015. December 30, 2017.
The aggregate intrinsicfair value of the Company’s stock options was estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes based option valuation model. The table below outlines the weighted average assumptions for options exercisedgranted to non-employees during the yearyears ended December 28, 2013 was $35,000.30, 2017 and December 31, 2016.
Year Ended December | | | |
Contractual term | 6 years | 5 years | N/A |
Volatility | 69% | 73% | N/A |
Dividend yield | 0% | 0% | N/A |
Risk-free rate | 2% | 2% | N/A |
As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, there was approximately $44,000$651,000 of total unrecognized compensation expense related to non-vested share-based compensation arrangements granted under the planplans for non-employee stock options. The unrecognized compensation expenseThat cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.72.4 years.
Stock and Restricted Stock Awards
On July 1, 2014, the Company awarded 65,000 shares of the Company’s common stock that were fully vested and non-forfeitable to a non-employee. The fair value of the award, which amounted to $83,850 was based on the trading price of the Company’s stock on the date of grant. The expense related to this stock award is being amortized over the period of approximately 7 months, as the services relating to this award are being provided over this period of time. In addition, there were stock awards made in 2013, which the Company has recognized a portion of the expense in 2014 as the required service periods extended into 2014. The total expense the Company recognized for stock awards to non-employees was approximately $129,000 for the twelve months ended January 3, 2015. During the twelve months ended December 28, 2013, the Company awarded an aggregate of 600,000 shares and recognized a total expense of approximately $325,000.
As of January 3, 2015, there was approximately $11,000 of total unrecognized compensation expense related to the stock award to a non-employee. That cost is expected to be recognized over a period of approximately one month.
Warrant Awards
On October 27, 2014, the Company awarded a warrant to purchase 50,000 shares of the Company’s common stock to a certain non-employee. The exercise price of the warrant was $1.10 per share and the term of the warrant was 2 years. The fair value of the warrant was estimated at the date of award using the Black-Scholes based valuation model. The table below outlines the assumptions for the warrant granted.
| | October 27, 2014 | |
Volatility | | | 66.9 | % |
Expected dividends | | | 0.00 | % |
Contractual term | | 2.0 years | |
Risk-free rate | | | 0.41 | % |
The Company calculated expected volatility from the historical volatility of Company’s common stock. The dividend yield assumption is based on the Company’s history and expectation of future dividend payouts on the common stock. The risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield available on U.S. treasury zero-coupon issues with an equivalent remaining term. The expected term of the warrants represents the contractual terms. For the year ended January 3, 2015, the expense the Company recognized for this warrant award was approximately $6,000. As of January 3, 2015, there was approximately $10,000 of total unrecognized compensation expense related to this warrant, expected to be recognized over a period of approximately 4 months.
During the year ended December 28, 2013, the Company recognized an expense of approximately $4,000 for the warrant that was previously awarded to a certain non-employee on August 7, 2012. On December 9, 2013, the warrant was exercised and the Company issued 74,186 shares of common stock. The non-employee who held the warrant elected a cashless exercise pursuant to the provisions of the warrant and received 74,186 shares of common stock in lieu of 250,000 shares for a cash payment of $0.75 per share. The intrinsic value of the warrant exercised was $90,507.
Restricted Stock Award
Restricted stock awards granted by the Company to non-employees generally feature time vesting service conditions, specified in the respective service agreements. Restricted stock awards issued to non-employees are accounted for at current fair value through the vesting period. The fair value of vested non-employee restricted shares awarded during the twelve months ended January 3, 2015 was approximately $24,000, which represents the market value of the Company’s common stock on respective vesting dates charged to expense.
The following table summarizes activity of restricted stock awards issued to non-employees at January 3, 2015 and changes during the year then ended:non-employees:
| | | | | Weighted Average | | | |
| | Shares | | | Fair Value | | | |
Unvested shares at December 28, 2013 | | | - | | | $ | - | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Unvested shares at January 3, 2015 | | 25,333 | $2.70 |
Granted | | | 96,000 | | | | 1.30 | | 46,668 | 2.58 |
Vested | | | (20,000 | ) | | | 1.17 | | (54,668) | 3.63 |
Forfeited | | | - | | | | - | | - |
Unvested shares expected to vest at January 3, 2015 | | | 76,000 | | | $ | 0.90 | | |
Unvested shares at January 2, 2016 | | 17,333 | $3.66 |
Granted | | - |
Vested | | (7,333) | 3.79 |
Forfeited | | - |
Unvested shares at December 31, 2016 | | 10,000 | $3.31 |
Granted | | - |
Vested | | (8,000) | 3.63 |
Forfeited | | - |
Unvested shares expected to vest at December 30, 2017 | | 2,000 | $5.88 |
As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, there was approximately $68,000$12,000 of total unrecognized compensation expense related to the restricted stock award to a non-employee. That cost is expected to be recognized over a period of 3.2 years2 months as of December 30, 2017.
The Company did not award any stock grants to non-employees in 2017 and 2016. For the year ended January 3, 2015.2, 2016, the Company awarded 116,668 shares of the Company’s common stock to non-employees and recognized expenses of $361,000.
Non-Employee Option, Stock Warrant and Restricted Stock Awards
For non-employee share-based compensation, the Company recognized share-based compensation expense of approximately $170,000$171,000, $61,000 and $330,000$435,000 in general and administrative expenses in the statement of operations for the yearyears ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013.2, 2016, respectively.
Fiscal year 2017
On April 26, 2017, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with certain purchasers named therein, pursuant to which the Company agreed to sell and issue up to $25.0 million of its common stock at a purchase price of $2.60 per share in three tranches of approximately $3.5 million, $16.4 million and $5.1 million, respectively. All three tranches closed during the year ended December 30, 2017, whereby approximately 9.6 million shares were issued for proceeds of $23.7 million, net of offering costs.
On November 3, 2017 the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement for the sale of approximately $23.0 million of its common stock in a private placement, in return for which the purchasers received approximately 5.6 million shares at a per share price of $4.10. The private placement closed during the year ended December 30, 2017 and the Company received proceeds of $22.9 million, net of offering costs.
Fiscal year 2016
On March 11, 2016, the Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the "March 2016 SPA") to raise $500,000 in a registered direct offering. Pursuant to the March 2016 SPA, the Company sold a total of 128,205 Units at a purchase price of $3.90 per Unit, with each Unit consisting of one share of the Company’s common stock and a warrant to purchase one half of a share of common stock (64,103 total) with an exercise price of $4.80 and a term of 3 years. The estimated fair value of the warrant was approximately $108,000 and the warrant was determined to be classified as equity. The fair value was estimated at the date of issuance using the Black-Scholes based valuation model. The table below outlines the assumptions for the warrant issued.
| |
Fair value of common stock | $4.41 |
Contractual term | 3.0 years
|
Volatility | 60% |
Risk-free rate | 1.16% |
Expected dividends | 0% |
On June 11, 2014,3, 2016, the Company issued 44,605entered into securities purchase agreements to raise $5,250,000 in a registered direct offering, pursuant to which, the Company sold a total of 1,117,022 shares of the Company’s common stock toat a vendor to settle an outstanding payable balancepurchase price of $52,188.$4.70 per share.
On June 18, 2014, the Company issued 82,000 shares of common stock to a vendor to settle an outstanding payable balance of $76,306 and payment of 6 months of $3,000 per month monthly retainer fees from July 2014 through December 2014.Fiscal year 2015
In Fiscal Year 2013,2015, the Company entered into securities purchase agreements with certain existing stockholders to raise $2,000,000 in a registered direct offering. Pursuant to those securities purchase agreements, the Company sold a total of 200,000 Units at a purchase price of $10.00 per Unit, with each Unit consisting of 2.667 shares of the Company’s common stock and a warrant to purchase 1.333 shares of common stock (266,667 total) with an exercise price of $4.50 and a term of 3 years. The aggregate estimated fair value of the warrants was approximately 3.5 million shares with gross proceeds$489,000 and these warrants were determined to be classified as equity. The fair value was estimated at the date of approximately $3.0 million to two strategic accredited investors pursuant to a subscription agreement. A total placement agent fee of $20,000 was incurred in connection withissuance using the investments.Black-Scholes based valuation model. The table below outlines the assumptions for the warrants issued.
| |
Fair value of common stock | $4.41 |
Contractual term | 3.0 years
|
Volatility | 62% |
Risk-free rate | 1.27% |
Expected dividends | 0% |
The following table summarizes activity of warrants at December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 20132, 2016 and changes during the years then ended:
| | | | | Weighted Average | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Remaining | | | Aggregate | | | |
| | Number of | | | Exercise | | | Contractual | | | Intrinsic | | | | |
| | Shares | | | Price | | | Term | | | Value | | | | |
Outstanding at December 29, 2012 | | | 10,056,914 | | | $ | 0.72 | | | | 0.44 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Outstanding and exercisable at January 3, 2015 | | 156,341 | 3.21 | 4.43 | |
Warrants Issued | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 266,667 | 4.50 | |
Warrants Exercised | | | (8,338,564 | ) | | | 0.25 | | | | | | | | - | |
Warrants Expired | | | (1,718,350 | ) | | | 3.00 | | | | | | | | - | |
Outstanding at December 28, 2013 | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Outstanding and exercisable at January 2, 2016 | | 423,008 | 4.02 | 3.07 | |
Warrants Issued | | | 469,020 | | | | 1.07 | | | | 4.68 | | | | 64,103 | 4.80 | |
Warrants Exercised | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | - | |
Warrants Expired | | | - | | | | - | | | | | | | | (16,667) | 3.30 | |
Outstanding and exercisable at January 3, 2015 | | | 469,020 | | | $ | 1.07 | | | | 4.43 | | $ | - | |
Outstanding and exercisable at December 31, 2016 | | 470,444 | 4.15 | 2.17 | |
Warrants Issued | | - | |
Warrants Exercised | | - | |
Warrants Expired | | - | |
Outstanding and exercisable at December 30, 2017 | | 470,444 | $4.15 | 1.17 | $814,000 |
| | |
The aggregate intrinsic values in the table above are based on the Company’s closing stock price of $0.90$5.88 on the last day of business for the year ended January 3, 2015.December 30, 2017.
On September 29, 2014,The fair values of warrants issued were estimated at the Companydate of issuance using the Black-Scholes based valuation model. The table below outlines the weighted average assumptions for the warrants issued Hercules Technology II, L.P. a warrant to purchase 419,020 shares ofduring the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $1.062 per share pursuant to the Loan Agreement. This warrant has not been exercised as ofyears ended December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015.2, 2016.
On October 27, 2014, the Company awarded a certain non-employee a warrant to purchase 50,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $1.10 per share. This warrant has not been exercised as of January 3, 2015. | | |
Fair value of common stock | $4.41 | $4.41 |
Contractual term | 3.0 years | 3.0 years |
Volatility | 60% | 62% |
Risk-free rate | 1.16% | 1.27% |
Expected dividends | 0% | 0% |
Note 13. Note 14.
| Commitments and Contingencies |
Lease
The Company leases its office and research facilities in California, Colorado and Maryland under operating lease agreements that expire at various dates from August 2015September 2018 through September 2019.February 2024. Monthly lease payments range from $1,320$1,500 per month to $22,788$24,000 per month, and minimum lease payments escalate during the terms of the leases. Generally accepted accounting principles require total minimum lease payments to be recognized as rent expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. The excess of such expense over amounts required to be paid under the lease agreement is carried as a liability on the Company’s consolidated balance sheet.
Minimum future rental payments under all of the leases as of December 30, 2017 are as follows:
Fiscal years ending: | | | | |
2015 | | $ | 544,000 | | |
2016 | | | 319,000 | | |
2017 | | | 225,000 | | |
2018 | | | 233,000 | | $601,000 |
2019 | | | 181,000 | | 590,000 |
2020 | | 424,000 |
2021 | | 340,000 |
2022 | | 138,000 |
Thereafter | | 167,000 |
| | $ | 1,502,000 | | $2,260,000 |
Rent expense was approximately $537,000,$729,000, $606,000 and $519,000$536,000 for the years ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 20152, 2016, respectively.
As of December 30, 2017, deferred rent from these operating lease agreements increased to $492,000 compared to $380,000 as of December 31, 2016. On July 6, 2017, the Company entered into a lease for an office space located in Los Angeles, California. Pursuant to the term of the lease, the landlord provided tenant improvements for approximately $122,000. The landlord provided lease incentive (a) has been recorded as leasehold improvement asset and is amortized over the lease term which is through September 2021; and (b) has been recorded as deferred rent and is amortized as reductions to lease expense over the lease term.
Subsequent to the year ended December 28, 2013, respectively.30, 2017, the Company entered into a lease amendment to lease additional office space located in Los Angeles, California through October 2021. Pursuant to the lease, the Company will make additional monthly lease payments ranging from approximately $9,000 to $11,000, as the payments escalate during the term of the lease.
Purchase obligations
The Company enters into purchase obligations with various vendors for goods and services that we need for our operations. The purchase obligations for goods and services include inventory, research and development, and laboratory supplies. Minimum future payments under purchase obligations as of December 30, 2017 are as follows:
Fiscal years ending: | |
2018 | $3,489,000 |
2019 | 82,000 |
| $3,571,000 |
Royalty
The Company has 1011 licensing agreements with leading research universities and other patent holders, pursuant to which the Company acquired patents related to certain products the Company offers to its customers. These agreements afford for future royalty payments based on contractual minimums and expire at various dates from December 31, 2019 through April 12, 2032.an estimated year of 2037. Yearly minimum royalty payments including license maintenance fees range from $5,000$10,000 per year to $50,000$83,000 per year, however, these minimum payments escalate each year with a maximum of $150,000$200,000 per year. In addition, the Company is required to pay a range of 2% to 5%8% of sales related to the licensed products under these agreements. Total royalty expenseexpenses including license maintenance fees from continuing operations for the yearyears ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 20152, 2016 were approximately $992,000, $773,000 and December 28, 2013 was approximately $323,000 and $111,000,$583,000, respectively under these agreements. Minimum royalties including license maintenance fees for the next five years are as follows:
Fiscal years ending: | | | | |
2015 | | $ | 272,000 | | |
2016 | | | 283,000 | | |
2017 | | | 320,000 | | |
2018 | | | 338,000 | | $446,000 |
2019 | | | 339,000 | | 612,000 |
2020 | | 467,000 |
2021 | | 485,000 |
2022 | | 450,000 |
| | $ | 1,552,000 | | $2,460,000 |
| | |
Legal proceedings
On December 29, 2016, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, naming Elysium Health, Inc. (together with Elysium Health, LLC, “Elysium”) as defendant. Among other allegations, ChromaDex, Inc. alleged in the Complaint that (i) Elysium breached the Supply Agreement, dated June 26, 2014, by and between ChromaDex, Inc. and Elysium (the “pTeroPure® Supply Agreement”), by failing to make payments to ChromaDex, Inc. for purchases of pTeroPure® pursuant to the pTeroPure® Supply Agreement, (ii) Elysium breached the Supply Agreement, dated February 3, 2014, by and between ChromaDex, Inc. and Elysium, as amended (the “NIAGEN® Supply Agreement”), by failing to make payments to ChromaDex, Inc. for purchases of NIAGEN® pursuant to the NIAGEN® Supply Agreement, (iii) Elysium breached the Trademark License and Royalty Agreement, dated February 3, 2014, by and between ChromaDex, Inc. and Elysium (the “License Agreement”), by failing to make payments to ChromaDex, Inc. for royalties due pursuant to the License Agreement and (iv) certain officers of Elysium made false promises and representations to induce ChromaDex, Inc. into providing large supplies of pTeroPure® and NIAGEN® to Elysium pursuant to the pTeroPure® Supply Agreement and NIAGEN® Supply Agreement. ChromaDex, Inc. is seeking punitive damages, money damages and interest.
On January 25, 2017, Elysium filed an answer and counterclaims (the “Counterclaim”) in response to the Complaint. Among other allegations, Elysium alleges in the Counterclaim that (i) ChromaDex, Inc. breached the NIAGEN® Supply Agreement by not issuing certain refunds or credits to Elysium and for violating certain confidential information provisions, (ii) ChromaDex, Inc. breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing pursuant to the NIAGEN® Supply Agreement, (iii) ChromaDex, Inc. breached certain confidential provisions of the pTeroPure® Supply Agreement, (iv) ChromaDex, Inc. fraudulently induced Elysium into entering into the License Agreement (the “Fraud Claim”), (v) ChromaDex, Inc.’s conduct constitutes misuse of its patent rights (the “Patent Claim”) and (vi) ChromaDex, Inc. has engaged in unlawful or unfair competition under California state law (the “Unfair Competition Claim”). Elysium is seeking damages for ChromaDex, Inc.’s alleged breaches of the NIAGEN® Supply Agreement and pTeroPure® Supply Agreement, and compensatory damages, punitive damages and/or rescission of the License Agreement and restitution of any royalty payments conveyed by Elysium pursuant to the License Agreement, and a declaratory judgment that ChromaDex, Inc. has engaged in patent misuse.
On February 15, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed an amended complaint. In the amended complaint, ChromaDex, Inc. re-alleges the claims in the Complaint, and also alleges that Elysium willfully and maliciously misappropriated ChromaDex, Inc.’s trade secrets. On February 15, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. also filed a motion to dismiss the Fraud Claim, the Patent Claim and the Unfair Competition Claim. On March 1, 2017, Elysium filed a motion to dismiss ChromaDex, Inc.'s fraud and trade secret misappropriation causes of action. On March 6, 2017, Elysium filed a first amended counterclaim. On March 20, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. moved to dismiss Elysium's amended fraud, declaratory judgment of patent misuse and the Unfair Competition Claim. On May 10, 2017, the court ruled on the motions to dismiss, denying ChromaDex, Inc.’s motion as to Elysium’s fraud and declaratory judgment claims and granting ChromaDex, Inc.’s motion with prejudice as to Elysium’s Unfair Competition Claim. With respect to Elysium’s motion, the court granted the motion with prejudice as to ChromaDex, Inc.’s fraud claim and granted with leave to amend the motion as to ChromaDex, Inc.’s trade secret misappropriation claims. On May 24, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. answered the first amended counterclaim and asserted several affirmative defenses. Also on May 24, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a second amended complaint, amending the trade secret misappropriation claims and addressing Elysium’s declaratory judgment of patent misuse counterclaim. On June 7, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a third amended complaint dismissing the trade secret misappropriation claims and asserting two breach of contract claims for Elysium’s failure to pay for the product delivered. On June 16, 2017, Elysium answered the third amended complaint. On August 14, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. moved for judgment on the pleadings as to Elysium’s declaratory judgment of patent misuse counterclaim. On September 26, 2017, the court denied ChromaDex’s motion without prejudice and directed Elysium to file an amended counterclaim if it intended to maintain its declaratory judgment counterclaim. On October 11, 2017, Elysium filed a second amended counterclaim, re-alleging the claims in the first amended counterclaim and adding a claim for unjust enrichment and restitution of the royalties Elysium paid to ChromaDex, Inc. pursuant to the License Agreement. On October 25, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss the declaratory judgment of patent misuse and unjust enrichment claims and/or strike allegations in the unjust enrichment claim contained in the second amended counterclaim. On November 28, 2017, the court denied the motion. ChromaDex, Inc. answered the second amended counterclaim on December 12, 2017. The parties are currently in discovery.
On July 17, 2017, Elysium filed petitions with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 8,197,807 (the “’807 Patent”) and 8,383,086 (the “’086 Patent”), patents to which ChromaDex, Inc. is the exclusive licensee. The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) denied institution of an inter partes review for the ’807 Patent on January 18, 2018. For the ’086 patent, on January 29, 2018 the PTAB granted institution of an inter partes review as to claims 1, 3, 4, and 5 and denied institution as to claim 2.
On September 27, 2017, Elysium Health Inc. ("Elysium Health") filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, against ChromaDex, Inc. (the “SDNY Complaint”). Elysium Health alleges in the SDNY Complaint that ChromaDex, Inc. made false and misleading statements in a citizen petition to the Food and Drug Administration it filed on or about August 18, 2017. Among other allegations, Elysium Health avers that the citizen petition made Elysium Health’s product appear dangerous, while casting ChromaDex, Inc.’s own product as safe. The SDNY Complaint asserts four claims for relief: (i) false advertising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (ii) trade libel; (iii) deceptive business practices under New York General Business Law § 349; and (iv) tortious interference with prospective economic relations. ChromaDex, Inc. denies the claims in the SDNY Complaint and intends to defend against them vigorously. On October 26, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. moved to dismiss the SDNY Complaint on the grounds that, inter alia, its statements in the citizen petition are immune from liability under the Noerr-Pennington Doctrine, the litigation privilege, and New York’s Anti-SLAPP statute, and that the SDNY Complaint failed to state a claim. Elysium Health opposed the motion on November 2, 2017. ChromaDex, Inc. filed its reply on November 9, 2017. The motion is currently pending.
On October 26, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Elysium Health (the “ChromaDex SDNY Complaint”). ChromaDex alleges that Elysium Health made material false and misleading statements to consumers in the promotion, marketing, and sale of its health supplement product, Basis, and asserts five claims for relief: (i) false advertising under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1125(a); (ii) unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a); (iii) deceptive practices under New York General Business Law § 349; (iv) deceptive practices under New York General Business Law § 350; and (v) tortious interference with prospective economic advantage. On November 16, 2017, Elysium Health moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim. ChromaDex, Inc. opposed the motion on November 30, 2017 and Elysium Health filed a reply on December 7, 2017. On November 3, 2017, the Court consolidated the SDNY Complaint and the ChromaDex SDNY Complaint actions under the caption In re Elysium Health-ChromaDex Litigation, 17-cv-7394, and stayed discovery in the consolidated action pending a Court-ordered mediation. The mediation was unsuccessful and the motion is currently pending.
The Company fromis unable to predict the outcome of these matters and, at this time, cannot reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of loss with respect to the legal proceedings discussed herein. As of December 31, 2017, ChromaDex, Inc. did not accrue a potential loss for the Counterclaim or the SDNY Complaint because ChromaDex, Inc. believes that the allegations are without merit and thus it is not probable that a liability has been incurred.
From time to time iswe are involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business, which can include employment claims, product claims and patent infringements.business. We do not believe that any of these claims and proceedings against us as they arise arethere is no other litigation pending that is likely to have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
Severance payments to named executive officers
As of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, the Company has threefour named executive officers, Frank Jaksch, Jr., Chief Executive Officer, Thomas Varvaro,Robert Fried, President and Chief Operating Officer, Kevin Farr, Chief Financial Officer and Troy A. Rhonemus, Chief Executive Officer.Vice President. Upon termination, Mr. Jaksch, Mr. VarvaroFried, Mr. Farr and Mr. Rhonemus will receive severance payments per the terms of the respective employment agreements entered with the Company. The key terms of the employment agreements, including the severance terms are as follows:
Employment Agreement with Frank L. Jaksch Jr.
On April 19, 2010, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the “Amended Jaksch“Jaksch Agreement”) with Frank L. Jaksch Jr. The Amended Jaksch Agreement has a three year term, beginning on the date of the Agreement that automatically renews unless the Amended Jaksch Agreement is terminated in accordance with its terms. On January 2, 2014, the Board approved the recommendations of the Company’s Compensation Committee raising the annual base salary of Mr. Jaksch to $275,000 per year and raising the annual cash bonus target for Mr. Jaksch up to 50% of his base salary. On March 14, 2016, the Board increased the base salary of Mr. Jaksch to $320,000. On April 25, 2016, Mr. Jaksch’s base salary increased to $370,000 as the Company’s common stock was listed on Nasdaq Stock Market.
The severance terms of the Amended Jaksch Agreement provide that in the event Mr. Jaksch’s employment with the Company is terminated voluntarily, by Mr. Jaksch, he will be entitled to any accrued but unpaid base salary, any stock vested through the date of his termination and a pro-rated portion of 50% of his salary (50% of his salary being the “Maximum Annual Bonus”) for the year of termination.bonus. In addition, if Mr. Jaksch leaves the Company for “Good Reason”, (as defined in the Amended Jaksch Agreement), he will also be entitled to severance equal to the Maximum Annual Bonus,50% of his salary, and he will be deemed to have been employed for the entirety of such year. Severance will then consist of 16 weeks of paid salary, unless Mr. Jaksch signs a release, in which case he will receive compensation equal to the lesser of the remainder of the term of the agreement, or up to 12 months paid salary.
In the event the Company terminates Mr. Jaksch’s employment “without Cause” (as defined in the Amended Jaksch Agreement), Mr. Jaksch will be entitled to severance in the form of any stock vested through the date of his termination and continuation of his base salary for a period of eight weeks, or, if Mr. Jaksch enters into a standard separation agreement, Mr. Jaksch will receive continuation of base salary and health benefits, together with applicable fringe benefits as provided to other executive employees until the last to occur of the expiration of the term or renewal term then in effect or 24 months from the date of termination (the “Severance Period”), and he will receive a bonus of 50% of his Maximum Annual Bonus if the Severance Period is equal to 24 months or a pro rata portion thereof if less,base salary as well as the full vesting of any otherwise unvested stock.stock awards.
Employment Agreement with Thomas C. VarvaroRobert Fried
On April 19, 2010,March 12, 2017, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the “Amended Varvaro Agreement”"Fried Agreement") with Thomas C. Varvaro. The Amended Varvaro Agreement has a three year term beginning onRobert Fried. Mr. Fried is entitled to receive certain severance payments per the dateterms of the agreement that automatically renews unless the Amended Varvaro Agreement is terminated in accordance with its terms. On January 2, 2014, the Board approved the recommendationsFried Agreement. The key terms of the Company’s Compensation Committee raisingFried Agreement, including the severance terms are as follows:
Mr. Fried is entitled to: (i) an annual base salary of Mr. Varvaro to $225,000 per year and raising the$300,000; (ii) an annual cash bonus targetequal to (a) 1% of net direct-to-consumer sales of products with nicotinamide riboside as a lead ingredient by the Company plus (b) 2% of direct to consumer net sales of products with nicotinamide riboside as a lead ingredient for Mr. Varvarothe portion of such sales that exceeded prior year sales plus (c) 1% of the gross profit derived from nicotinamide riboside ingredient sales to dietary supplement producers; (iii) an option to purchase up to 40%500,000 shares of his base salary.Common Stock under the 2007 Plan, subject to monthly vesting over a three-year period, which option grant Mr. Fried received on March 12, 2017; and (iv) 166,667 shares of restricted Common Stock, which vested on December 20, 2017 in connection with an amendment to the Fried Agreement (the "Fried Amendment") by and between the Company and Mr. Fried, dated December 20, 2017. In addition, Mr. Fried received 333,333 shares of restricted stock on December 20, 2017, which were immediately vested in connection with the Fried Amendment.
Subject to Mr. Fried’s continuous service through such date, Mr. Fried is also eligible to receive up to 500,000 shares of fully-vested restricted Common Stock that will be granted upon the achievement of certain performance goals. The Fried Amendment also provides that Mr. Fried will be granted these shares of performance-based restricted Common Stock immediately prior to the consummation of a change in control of the Company, subject to Mr. Fried's continuous service through such change in control.
Any unvested options or shares of restricted stock will vest in full upon (a) a change in control of the Company, (b) Mr. Fried’s death, (c) Mr. Fried’s disability, (d) termination by the Company of Mr. Fried’s employment without cause or (e) Mr. Fried’s resignation for good reason, subject in each case to Mr. Fried’s continuous service as an employee or consultant of the Company or any of its subsidiaries though such event.
The severance terms of the Amended VarvaroFried Agreement provide that in the eventif (i) Mr. Varvaro’sFried’s employment with us is terminated voluntarily by the Company without cause, for death or disability, or Mr. Varvaro he will be entitledFried resigns for good reason, or (ii) (a) a change in control of the Company occurs and (b) within one month prior to any accrued but unpaid base salary, any stock vested through the date of his termination and a pro-rated portion of 40% of his salary (40% of this salary being the “Maximum Annual Bonus”) for the year of termination. In addition, if Mr. Varvaro leaves the Company for “Good Reason” (as definedsuch change in the Amended Varvaro Agreement), he will also be entitled to severance equal to the Maximum Annual Bonus, and he shall be deemed to have been employed for the entirety of such year. Severance will then consist of 16 weeks of paid salary, unless Mr. Varvaro signs a release, in which case he will receive compensation equal to the lesser of the remainder of his agreementcontrol or 12twelve months paid salary.
In the event the Company terminates Mr. Varvaro’s employment “without Cause,” Mr. Varvaro will be entitled to severance in the form of any stock vested throughafter the date of his termination andsuch change in control Mr. Fried’s employment is terminated by the Company other than for cause, then, subject to executing a release, Mr. Fried will receive (w) continuation of his base salary for 12 months, (x) health care continuation coverage payments premiums for 12 months, (y) a prorated annual cash bonus earned for the fiscal year in which such termination or resignation occurs, and (z) an extended exercise period for his options.
Employment Agreement with Kevin Farr
On October 5, 2017, the Company entered into an Employee Agreement (the "Farr Agreement") with Kevin M. Farr who was appointed by the Board to serve as Chief Financial Officer, principal accounting officer and principal financial officer. Mr. Farr is entitled to receive certain severance payments per the terms of eight weeks,the Farr Agreement. The key terms of the Farr Agreement, including the severance terms are as follows:
Mr. Farr is entitled to: (i) an annual base salary of $300,000 and (ii) a discretionary annual bonus based on the achievement of certain performance goals to be determined by the Board. Pursuant to the Farr Agreement, Mr. Farr also received an option to purchase up to 1,000,000 shares of ChromaDex common stock under the ChromaDex 2017 Equity Incentive Plan, subject to monthly vesting over a three-year period, with an exercise price equal to $4.24 per share. Any unvested options will vest in full (a) upon a change of control of the Company, subject to Mr. Farr’s continuous service through such change of control, (b) on the date (the “Price Threshold Date”) that the unweighted average closing price of the Company’s common stock as quoted on the Nasdaq Capital Market (or such similar established stock exchange) over the previous 20 trading days (including the date such calculation is measured) first equals or exceeds $10.00 per share, subject to Mr. Farr’s continuous service through such Price Threshold Date, or (c) if Mr. Farr is terminated by the Company without cause or if Mr. Varvaro enters intoFarr resigns for good reason within 90 days prior to such change of control or Price Threshold Date.
If Mr. Farr’s employment is terminated by the Company without cause or Mr. Farr resigns for good reason, then, subject to executing a standard separation agreement,release, Mr. VarvaroFarr will receive (i) continuation of his base salary and health benefits, together with applicable fringe benefits as provided to other executive employees untilfor 12 months, (ii) COBRA premiums for 12 months, (iii) a prorated annual cash bonus, based on the last to occurgood faith determination of the expirationBoard of the term or renewal term then in effect or 24 months fromactual results and period of employment during the dateyear of such termination, (the “Severance Period”), will receive his Maximum Annual Bonus if the Severance Period is equal to 24 months or a pro rata portion thereof if less, as well as the full(iv) accelerated vesting of anytime-based equity that would have otherwise unvested stock.become vested by the one year anniversary of such termination date and (v) an extended exercise period for his options.
Employment Agreement with Troy A. Rhonemus
On March 6, 2014, the Company entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Rhonemus Agreement”) with Mr. Troy Rhonemus pursuant to which Mr. Rhonemus was appointed to serve as the Chief Operating Officer of the Company. On March 17, 2015, the Board increased the base salary to $190,000. The Rhonemus Agreement provides for a base salary of $180,000, and provides for an annual cash bonus (based on performance targets) of up to 30% of his base salary. On March 14, 2016, the Board increased the base salary (30% of thisMr. Rhonemus to $210,000. On April 25, 2016, Mr. Rhonemus’ base salary beingincreased to $235,000 as the “Maximum Annual Bonus”), and provides for option grantsCompany’s common stock was listed on Nasdaq Stock Market. On February 1, 2018, the Compensation Committee increased the base salary of 250,000 sharesMr. Rhonemus to $250,000.
In the event of Common Stock. The option grants were awarded on February 21, 2014 at an exercise price of $1.75 per share, which vest 33% one year from the date of grant with the remainder vesting in 24 equal monthly installments thereafter.
Upona termination, Mr. Rhonemus will be entitled to any accrued but unpaid base salary and any accrued but unpaid welfare and retirement benefits up to the termination date. In addition, if Mr. Rhonemus leaves the Company for “Good Reason” (as defined in the Rhonemus Agreement), he will also be entitled to severance equal to two weeks of base salary for each full year of service to a maximum of eight weeks of the base salary.
In the event the Company terminates Mr. Rhonemus’ employment “without Cause,without "Cause,” (as defined in the Rhonemus Agreement) Mr. Rhonemus will be entitled to severance equal to two weeks of base salary for each full year of service to a maximum of eight weeks of the base salary, or, if Mr. Rhonemus enters into a standard separation agreement, Mr. Rhonemus will receive continuation of base salary and health benefits, together with applicable fringe benefits as provided until the expiration of the term or renewal term then in effect, however, that in the case of medical and dental insurance, until the expiration of 12 months from the date of termination.
Note 14. Note 15. | Business Segmentation and Geographical Distribution |
Since the year ended December 28, 2013,31, 2016, the Company has generated significant revenue from its ingredients operations and has made operational changes includingto merge its scientific and regulatory consulting segment into core standards and contract services segment. Additionally, with the acquisition of Healthspan in March 2017, the Company began selling consumer products that contain the Company's branded NIAGEN® ingredient. The Company made operational changes in the organizational structure to support the ingredients operations. As a result, on December 29, 2013, the Companyand began segregating its financial results for ingredients operations, andconsumer products operations.
As a result, the Company has the following three reportable segments.
| · | Core standards, and contract services segment includes supply of phytochemical reference standards, which are small quantities of plant-based compounds typically used to research an array of potential attributes, reference materials, and related contract services. |
segments:
| · | Ingredients segment develops and commercializes proprietary-based ingredient technologies and supplies these ingredients to the manufacturers of consumer products in various industries including the nutritional supplement, food and beverage and animal health industries. |
●
Ingredients segment develops and commercializes proprietary-based ingredient technologies and supplies these ingredients to consumers in finished products or as raw materials to the manufacturers of consumer products in various industries including the nutritional supplement, food and beverage and animal health industries.
●
Consumer products segment provides directly to consumers as well as to distributors finished dietary supplement products that contain the Company's proprietary ingredients.
●
Core standards and contract services segment includes (i) supply of phytochemical reference standards, (ii) scientific and regulatory consulting and (iii) other research and development services.
| · | Scientific and regulatory consulting segment which consist of providing scientific and regulatory consulting to the clients in the food, supplement and pharmaceutical industries to manage potential health and regulatory risks. |
On September 5, 2017, the Company completed the sale of the Lab Business which was a part of the core standards and contract services segment. The discontinued operations related to the Lab Business are not included in following statement of operations for business segments.
The “Other”“Corporate and other” classification includes corporate items not allocated by the Company to each reportable segment. Further, there are no intersegment sales that require elimination. The Company evaluates performance and allocates resources based on reviewing gross margin by reportable segment.
Year ended | | | | | |
December 30, 2017 | | | Core Standards and Contract Services | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Net sales | $11,153,371 | $5,464,843 | $4,583,268 | $- | $21,201,482 |
Cost of sales | 5,491,920 | 2,189,597 | 3,042,660 | - | 10,724,177 |
| | | | | |
Gross profit | 5,661,451 | 3,275,246 | 1,540,608 | - | 10,477,305 |
| | | | | |
Operating expenses: | | | | | |
Sales and marketing | 1,280,004 | 2,672,810 | 506,410 | - | 4,459,224 |
Research and development | 2,903,249 | 1,104,132 | | | 4,007,381 |
General and administrative | - | - | - | 17,641,889 | 17,641,889 |
Other | 745,773 | - | - | - | 745,773 |
Operating expenses | 4,929,026 | 3,776,942 | 506,410 | 17,641,889 | 26,854,267 |
| | | | | |
Operating income (loss) | $732,425 | $(501,696) | $1,034,198 | $(17,641,889) | $(16,376,962) |
Year ended January 3, 2015 | | Core Standards and Contract Services segment | | | | | | Regulatory Consulting segment | | | Other | | | Total | | |
Year ended | | | | |
December 31, 2016 | | | | Core Standards and Contract Services | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net sales | | $ | 7,487,189 | | | $ | 6,857,177 | | | $ | 968,813 | | | $ | - | | | $ | 15,313,179 | | $16,774,641 | $- | $4,890,007 | $- | $21,664,648 |
Cost of sales | | | 5,141,667 | | | | 4,257,347 | | | | 588,500 | | | | - | | | | 9,987,514 | | 7,920,516 | - | 3,353,598 | - | 11,274,114 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gross profit | | | 2,345,522 | | | | 2,599,830 | | | | 380,313 | | | | - | | | | 5,325,665 | | 8,854,125 | - | 1,536,409 | - | 10,390,534 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Operating expenses: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Sales and marketing | | | 975,800 | | | | 1,081,209 | | | | 79,575 | | | | - | | | | 2,136,584 | | 1,196,711 | - | 361,502 | - | 1,558,213 |
Research and development | | 2,487,978 | - | 34,790 | - | 2,522,768 |
General and administrative | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 8,374,601 | | | | 8,374,601 | | - | 9,214,763 |
Loss from investment in affiliate | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 45,829 | | | | 45,829 | | |
Operating expenses | | | 975,800 | | | | 1,081,209 | | | | 79,575 | | | | 8,420,430 | | | | 10,557,014 | | 3,684,689 | - | 396,292 | 9,214,763 | 13,295,744 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Operating income (loss) | | $ | 1,369,722 | | | $ | 1,518,621 | | | $ | 300,738 | | | $ | (8,420,430 | ) | | $ | (5,231,349 | ) | $5,169,436 | $- | $1,140,117 | $(9,214,763) | $(2,905,210) |
Year ended | | Core Standards and Contract Services segment | | | | | | | | | Other | | | Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net sales | | $ | 6,643,832 | | | $ | 2,430,699 | | | $ | 1,146,718 | | | $ | (60,285 | ) | | $ | 10,160,964 | |
Cost of sales | | | 4,893,649 | | | | 1,501,187 | | | | 632,037 | | | | 955 | | | | 7,027,828 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gross profit (loss) | | | 1,750,183 | | | | 929,512 | | | | 514,681 | | | | (61,240 | ) | | | 3,133,136 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Operating expenses: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Sales and marketing | | | 1,459,620 | | | | 752,121 | | | | 14,705 | | | | 131,159 | | | | 2,357,605 | |
General and administrative | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 5,117,016 | | | | 5,117,016 | |
Loss from investment in affiliate | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 44,961 | | | | 44,961 | |
Operating expenses | | | 1,459,620 | | | | 752,121 | | | | 14,705 | | | | 5,293,136 | | | | 7,519,582 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Operating income (loss) | | $ | 290,563 | | | $ | 177,391 | | | $ | 499,976 | | | $ | (5,354,376 | ) | | $ | (4,386,446 | ) |
At January 3, 2015 | | Core Standards and Contract Services segment | | | | | | | | | Other | | | Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total assets | | $ | 3,220,518 | | | $ | 3,757,073 | | | $ | 105,711 | | | $ | 4,524,906 | | | $ | 11,608,208 | |
At December 28, 2013 | | Core Standards and Contract Services segment | | | | | | | | | Other | | | Total | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total assets | | $ | 2,952,270 | | | $ | 1,083,856 | | | $ | 139,765 | | | $ | 4,811,001 | | | $ | 8,986,892 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RevenueYear ended | | | | | |
January 2, 2016 | | | Core Standards and Contract Services | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Net sales | $12,542,314 | $- | $5,342,572 | $- | $17,884,886 |
Cost of sales | 6,664,164 | - | 3,686,117 | - | 10,350,281 |
| | | | | |
Gross profit | 5,878,150 | - | 1,656,455 | - | 7,534,605 |
| | | | | |
Operating expenses: | | | | | |
Sales and marketing | 1,111,993 | - | 395,875 | - | 1,507,868 |
Research and development | 891,601 | - | - | - | 891,601 |
General and administrative | - | - | - | 7,201,231 | 7,201,231 |
Operating expenses | 2,003,594 | - | 395,875 | 7,201,231 | 9,600,700 |
| | | | | |
Operating income (loss) | $3,874,556 | $- | $1,260,580 | $(7,201,231) | $(2,066,095) |
| | | | | |
At December 30, 2017 | | | Core Standards and Contract Services | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Total assets | $9,742,400 | $3,398,800 | $2,558,801 | $47,023,599 | $62,723,600 |
| | | | | |
At December 31, 2016 | | | Core Standards and Contract Services | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Total assets | $13,257,289 | $- | $2,547,427 | $3,947,352 | $19,752,068 |
Revenues from international sources for the ingredients segment approximated $0.4 million, $0.5 million and $0.3 million for the years ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 2, 2016, respectively. Revenues from international sources for the consumer products segment approximated $4.2 million for the year ended December 30, 2017. Revenues from international sources for the core standards and contract services segment from continuing operations approximated $1,756,000$1.0 million, $1.6 million and $1,488,000$1.8 million for the years ended December 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013, respectively. Revenues from international sources for the ingredients segment approximated $35,000 and $22,000 for the years ended January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013, respectively. Revenues from international sources for the scientific and regulatory consulting segment approximated $104,000 and $450,000 for the years ended January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013,2, 2016, respectively. International sources which the Company generates revenue from include Europe, North America, South America, Asia, and Oceania.
The Company’s long-lived assets are located within the United States.
Disclosure of major customers
Major customers who accounted for more than 10% of the Company’s total sales from continuing operations were as follows:
| Years Ended |
Major Customers | | | |
| | | |
Customer G - Related Party | 19.4% | * | * |
Customer D | 10.2% | 11.0% | * |
Customer C (1) | * | 23.9% | * |
Customer B | * | * | 13.6% |
| | | |
* Represents less than 10%. | | | |
(1) There is ongoing litigation with Customer C | | | |
Major customers who accounted for more than 10% of the Company’s total trade receivables were as follows:
| Percentage of the Company's Total Trade Receivables
|
Major Customers | | |
| | |
Customer G - Related Party | 18.1% | * |
Customer D | 13.4% | 10.2% |
Customer C (1) | 41.8% | 45.8% |
| | |
* Represents less than 10%. | | |
(1) There is ongoing litigation with Customer C | | |
Disclosure of major vendors
Major vendors who accounted for more than 10% of the Company's total accounts payable were as follows:
| Percentage of the Company's Total Accounts Payable
|
Major Vendors | | |
| | |
Vendor A | * | 39.5% |
Vendor B | * | 20.8% |
Vendor C | 14.5% | * |
Vendor D | 10.4% | * |
Vendor E | 10.3% | * |
| | |
* Represents less than 10%. | | |
Loss from an ongoing litigation, Elysium
During the year ended December 30, 2017, the Company incurred a write-off of approximately $746,000 in gross trade receivable from Elysium related to royalties, due to inherent uncertainty about collecting all damages sought by the Company, as well as the Company’s decision to not seek damages for any unpaid royalty payments under the License Agreement in connection with the defense of Elysium’s claims for patent misuse and unjust enrichment. As a result of this write-off and after further analysis, the Company made an adjustment to the total allowance amount from ($800,000) to ($500,000).
Note 17. | Quarterly Financial Information (unaudited) |
| |
| | | | |
| | | | |
Sales, net | $3,367,647 | $4,218,310 | $6,084,690 | $7,530,836 |
Cost of sales | 1,749,911 | 2,109,109 | 3,169,321 | 3,695,837 |
| | | | |
Gross profit | 1,617,736 | 2,109,201 | 2,915,369 | 3,834,999 |
| | | | |
Operating expenses | 3,390,625 | 4,758,708 | 6,092,153 | 12,612,782 |
| | | | |
Operating loss | (1,772,889) | (2,649,507) | (3,176,784) | (8,777,783) |
| | | | |
Nonoperating expenses | (28,349) | (35,894) | (44,508) | (44,033) |
| | | | |
Loss from continuing operations | (1,801,238) | (2,685,401) | (3,221,292) | (8,821,816) |
| | | | |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations | (127,517) | (78,723) | 5,358,369 | - |
| | | | |
Net income (loss) | $(1,928,755) | $(2,764,124) | $2,137,077 | $(8,821,816) |
| | | | |
Basic earnings (loss) per common share | $(0.05) | $(0.07) | $0.05 | $(0.17) |
| | | | |
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share | $(0.05) | $(0.07) | $0.04 | $(0.17) |
| | | | |
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding | 38,030,688 | 42,121,150 | 47,065,009 | 51,178,664 |
| | | | |
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding | 38,030,688 | 42,121,150 | 47,556,697 | 51,178,664 |
| Three Months Ended
|
| April 2, 2016 | July 2, 2016 | October 1, 2016 | |
Sales, net | $5,852,109 | $7,422,470 | $3,937,286 | $4,452,783 |
Cost of sales | 3,008,391 | 3,748,684 | 2,074,325 | 2,442,714 |
| | | | |
Gross profit | 2,843,718 | 3,673,786 | 1,862,961 | 2,010,069 |
| | | | |
Operating expenses | 2,811,652 | 3,514,974 | 2,787,123 | 4,181,995 |
| | | | |
Operating income (loss) | 32,066 | 158,812 | (924,162) | (2,171,926) |
| | | | |
Nonoperating expenses | (177,350) | (448,416) | (2,260) | (18,360) |
Provision for income taxes | (10,740) | 4,087 | 3,153 | 3,500 |
| | | | |
Loss from continuing operations | (156,024) | (285,517) | (923,269) | (2,186,786) |
| | | | |
Income (loss) from discontinued operations | 411,649 | 202,850 | (31,121) | 40,033 |
| | | | |
Net income (loss) | $255,625 | $(82,667) | $(954,390) | $(2,146,753) |
| | | | |
Basic earnings (loss) per common share | $0.01 | $(0.00) | $(0.03) | $(0.06) |
| | | | |
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share | $0.01 | $(0.00) | $(0.03) | $(0.06) |
| | | | |
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding | 36,414,041 | 36,990,032 | 37,868,672 | 37,904,534 |
| | | | |
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding | 37,472,579 | 36,990,032 | 37,868,672 | 37,904,534 |
Note 18. | Subsequent Events |
Note 15.
Subsequent Events
On January 28, 2015,to the Company awarded 350,000 shares of common stock to consultants for certain investor relations services to be provided.
On February 25, 2015,year ended December 30, 2017, the Board granted a total of Directors (the “Board”) appointed Stephen Allen, a current Board member, to serve as Chairman of the Board. Mr. Allen remained on the Board’s Compensation Committee and chairperson of the Board’s Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
Also on February 25, 2015, Michael Brauser and Barry Honig, who were Co-Chairmen of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of the Company, resigned from the Board. Mr. Brauser’s and Mr. Honig’s resignations were not a result of any disagreements with the Company’s operations, policies or practices. At the time of resignation, Mr. Brauser and Mr. Honig held following unvested securities of the Company:
| · | Michael Brauser – 26,667 stock options at an exercise price of $1.25 per share; 250,000 shares of restricted stock. |
| · | Barry Honig – 26,667 stock options at an exercise price of $1.25 per share; 250,000 shares of restricted stock. |
The Board made a resolution that above unvested securities are immediately vested on the date of resignation. In addition, the Board made a resolution that all470,000 stock options held by Mr. Brauserat an exercise price of $5.85 per share and Mr. Honig will expire in accordance with their terms as if Mr. Brauser and Mr. Honig remained directors of500,000 stock options at an exercise price $5.65 per share to the Company.Company's executive officers.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure Item 9. | Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
We have had no disagreements with our independent registered public accounting firm on accounting and financial disclosure.None.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management, with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of January 3, 2015.December 30, 2017. Pursuant to Rule13a−15(e) promulgated by the Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) “disclosure controls and procedures” means controls and other procedures that are designed to insure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file with the Commission is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Commission’s rules and forms. “Disclosure controls and procedures” include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to insure that information that we are required to disclose in the reports we file with the Commission is accumulated and communicated to our principal executive officer and principal financial officer as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Based on their evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of January 3, 2015.
December 30, 2017.
Inherent Limitations on Disclosure Controls and Procedures
The effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures is subject to various inherent limitations, including cost limitations, judgments used in decision making, assumptions about the likelihood of future events, the soundness of our systems, the possibility of human error, and the risk of fraud. Moreover, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions and the risk that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate over time. Because of these limitations, there can be no assurance that any system of disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived, will be successful in preventing all errors or fraud or in making all material information known in a timely manner to the appropriate levels of management.
Changes in Internal ControlsControl over Financial Reporting
There waswere no change in internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a−15(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act) that occurred during our fourth fiscal quarter that hashave materially affected or isare reasonably likely to materially affect our internal control over financial reporting.
Management Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-(f) under the Exchange Act. Our internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Our internal control over financial reporting include those policies and procedures that:
(i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets;
(ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit the preparation of our consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and
(iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the consolidated financial statements.
Our management, including the undersigned principal executive officer and principal financial officer, assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of January 3, 2015.December 30, 2017. In conducting its assessment, our management used the criteria issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control—Integrated Framework in 2013. Based on this assessment, our management concluded that, as of January 3, 2015,December 30, 2017, our internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria.
Inherent Limitations on Internal Control
Internal control over financial reporting cannot provide absolute assurance of achieving financial reporting objectives because of its inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error and circumvention by collusion or overriding of control. Accordingly, even an effective internal control system may not prevent or detect material misstatements on a timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Accordingly, our internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives.
Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm
This annual report includesThe effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting has been audited by Marcum LLP, an attestation report of the Company’sindependent registered public accounting firm, regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’sas stated in their attestation report was subject to attestation byin Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which expresses an unqualified opinion on the Company’s registered public accounting firm since the Company is presently reporting as an “accelerated filer.”
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM ON
INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
To the Audit Committee of the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of
ChromaDex Corporation
We have audited ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries' (the “Company”)our internal control over financial reporting as of January 3, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in 2013. The Company's management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying “Management Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting”. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company's internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, ChromaDex Corporation and Subsidiaries maintained, in all material aspects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of January 3, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in 2013.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets as of January 3, 2015 and December 28, 2013 and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for the years then ended of the Company and our report dated March 19, 2015 expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements.
/s/ Marcum LLP
Marcum LLP
New York, NY
March 19, 2015
Item 9B. Other Information
None.
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
The following table sets forth the names, ages, and positions of our current directors and executive officers. Our directors hold office for one-year terms until the following annual meeting of stockholders and until his or her successor has been elected and qualified or until the director’s earlier resignation or removal. Officers are elected annually by the Board of Directors (the “Board”) and serve at the discretion of the Board.30, 2017.
Name | Age | Position |
Frank Jaksch, Jr. | 46 | Chief Executive Officer and Director |
Thomas Varvaro | 45 | Chief Financial Officer |
Troy Rhonemus | 42 | Chief Operating Officer |
Stephen Allen (2)(3) | 65 | Chairman of the Board |
Stephen A. Block (1)(2) | 70 | Director |
Reid Dabney (1) | 63 | Director |
Hugh Dunkerley (2) | 41 | Director |
Mark S. Germain (3) | 64 | Director |
Glenn L. Halpryn (1)(3) | 54 | Director |
| (1) Member of our Audit Committee. |
| (2) Member of our Compensation Committee. |
| (3) Member of our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. |
Board of Directors
The Board currently consists of seven members, six of whom are independent within the meaning of Marketplace Rule 5605(a)(2) of the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. On February 25, 2015, the Board appointed Stephen Allen, an existing Board member, to serve as Chairman of the Board. Mr. Allen remained on the Board’s Compensation Committee and chairperson of the Board’s Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Also on February 25, 2015, Michael Brauser and Barry Honig, who were Co-Chairmen of the Board, resigned from the Board. Mr. Brauser’s and Mr. Honig’s resignations were not as a result of any disagreements with the Company’s operations, policies or practices.
Listed below are the biographical summaries and ages as of March 12, 2015 of individuals serving as directors as well as information about each individual’s qualification and experience that contributes to the overall needs of the Board as determined by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee:
Frank L. Jaksch Jr., 46, is a co-founder of the Company and has served as a member of Board since February 2000. Mr. Jaksch served as Chairman of the Board from May 2010 to October 2011 and was its Co-Chairman from February 2000 to May 2010. Mr. Jaksch currently serves as our Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Jaksch oversees research, strategy and operations for the Company with a focus on scientific and novel products for pharmaceutical and nutraceutical markets. From 1993 to 1999, Mr. Jaksch served as International Subsidiaries Manager of Phenomenex, a life science supply company where he managed the international subsidiary and international business development divisions. Mr. Jaksch earned a B.S. in Chemistry and Biology from Valparaiso University. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believes that Mr. Jaksch’s years of experience working in chemistry-related industries, his extensive sales and marketing background, and his knowledge of international business bring an understanding of the industries in which the Company operates as well as scientific expertise to the Board.
Stephen Allen, 65, has served as Chairman of the Board since February 2015, and as a director of the Board, Chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and member of the Compensation Committee since January 2014. Until 2009, Mr. Allen worked for Nestlé, at which point he retired from a 30 year career where he served in various sales, marketing and management roles, including 7 years serving in Nestlé’s Mergers and Acquisitions department. Until 2012, Mr. Allen served on the Advisory Board of Vitamin Angels, an organization focused on eliminating childhood malnutrition in Africa and the Middle East. Currently, Mr. Allen serves as the non-executive Vice Chairman of 6 Pacific group, a Los Angeles based boutique advisory and investment firm. Mr. Allen also serves as the Managing Partner of California Agricultural Orchards LLC and California Nut Orchards LLC which, along with growing almonds and grapes, manages the assets of high net-worth individuals. Mr. Allen also serves as the President of the Board of the North American Foundation for the University of Leeds where Mr. Allen plays a key role in fundraising efforts. Mr. Allen received his B.Sc. with honors from the University of Leeds and his M.Sc. at the University of London, School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believes that Mr. Allen’s past experience in the nutritional industry bring financial expertise, industry knowledge, and merger and acquisition experience to the Board.
Stephen A. Block, 70, has been a director of the Company since October 2007 and Chair of the Compensation Committee and a member of the Audit Committee since October 2007. From May 2010 to October 2011, Mr. Block served as Lead Independent Director to the Board. Mr. Block is also a director and chair of the nominating and corporate governance committee and a member of the audit committee of Senomyx, Inc. (NASDAQ:SNMX). He has served on the board of directors of Senomyx, Inc. since 2005. Since September 2013, he has served as a director of GetThis, Corp., a privately held digital media company bringing real-time shopping through a second screen to consumers watching television programming. Until December 2011, he also served as the chairman of the board of directors of Blue Pacific Flavors and Fragrances, Inc., and, until March 2012, as a director of Allylix, Inc. He served on the boards of directors of these privately held companies since 2008, and 2007, respectively. Mr. Block retired as senior vice president, general counsel and secretary of International Flavors and Fragrances Inc., a leading creator, manufacturer and seller of flavors and fragrances (IFF) in December 2003, having been IFF’s chief legal officer since 1993. During his eleven years at IFF he also led the company’s Regulatory Affairs Department. Prior to 1993, Mr. Block served as senior vice president, general counsel, secretary and director of GAF Corporation, a company specializing in specialty chemicals and building materials, and its publicly traded subsidiary International Specialty Products Inc., held various management positions with Celanese Corporation, a company specializing in synthetic fibers, chemicals and plastics, and practiced law with the New York firm of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan. Mr. Block currently serves as an industry consultant and as a Managing Director of Venture Farm LLC, an early stage venture capital firm, and as a Venture Partner of K5 Venture Partners, LLC, an Orange County early stage venture firm. He is also a Managing Director of K5 Venture Partner, LLC’s affiliated accelerator K5 Launch and a member of the executive committee of the Orange County network of Tech Coast Angels, a leading investing group. Mr. Block received his B.A. cum laude in Russian Studies from Yale University and his law degree from Harvard Law School. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believes that Mr. Block’s experience as the chief legal officer of one of the world’s leading flavor and fragrance companies contributes to the Board’s understanding of the flavor industry, including the Board’s perspective on the strategic interests of potential collaborators, the regulation of the industry, and the viability of various commercial strategies. In addition, Mr. Block’s experience in the area of corporate governance and public company financial reporting is especially valuable to the Board in his capacity as a member of both the Audit Committee and the Compensation Committee.
Reid Dabney, 63, has served as a director of the Company and has chaired the Audit Committee since October 2007. Mr. Dabney is the Company’s audit committee financial expert. Since December 2014, he has served as a managing director and chief compliance officer of CVCapital Securities, LLC. From October 2012 to November 2013, he has also served as a managing director of Merriman Capital, Inc. From May 2008 to July 2012, he has also served as a managing director of Monarch Bay Associates, LLC. From March 2005 to November 2008, Mr. Dabney served as Cecors, Inc.'s (OTC Markets: CEOS) (a Software As A Service (SaaS) technology provider) senior vice president and chief financial officer. From July 2003 to the present, Mr. Dabney has been engaged by CFO911 as a managing director and business and financial consultant. From January 2003 to August 2004, Mr. Dabney served as vice president of National Securities, a broker-dealer firm specializing in raising equity for private operating businesses that have agreed to become public companies through reverse merger transactions with publicly traded shell companies. From June 2002 to January 2003, Mr. Dabney was the chief financial officer of House Ear Institute in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Dabney received a B.A. from Claremont McKenna College and an M.B.A. in Finance from the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. Mr. Dabney also holds Series 7, 24, 63, 79 and 99 licenses from
the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believes that Mr. Dabney's experience as chief financial officer of a public company and his extensive experience dealing with financial markets qualify him to chair the Audit Committee and that Mr. Dabney brings financial, merger and acquisition experience, and a background working with public marketplaces to the Board.
Hugh Dunkerley, 41, has served as a director of the Company since December 2005 and has served on the Compensation Committee since May 2010 and has served on the Nominating and Governance Committee from October 2007 to December 2013. From October 2002 to December 2005, Mr. Dunkerley served as Director of Corporate Development at ChromaDex. Since September 2013, Mr. Dunkerley has been a Managing Director of Burnham Securities Inc., a New York based investment bank, and has been setting up their new operations in Irvine, CA. Prior to Burnham, Mr. Dunkerley was an EVP, Capital Markets of COR Capital LLC, an investment fund based in Santa Monica, CA. He is a director and sits on the compensation committee for COR Securities Holdings, Inc., the parent company of COR Clearing LLC, a national clearing and settlements firm. Mr. Dunkerley is also the President and Director of Wealth Assurance Holdings a Bermudian based and listed company that oversees a portfolio of insurance assets in the EU. Mr. Dunkerley was a Manager of Capital Markets for the FDIC, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, from February 2009 to March 2011 where he was active in implementing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act, along with the oversight of securities and derivatives portfolios for large money center banks. He was president and chief executive officer of Cecors, Inc. (OTCBB:CEOS.OB), a Software As A Service (SaaS) technology provider, from October, 2007 to February, 2009. He had served as Cecor's chief operating officer and as vice president of corporate finance starting in June 2006. During 2006 Mr. Dunkerley also served as VP of Small-Mid Cap Equities at Hunter Wise Financial Group, LLC, specializing in investment banking advisory services to US and EU companies. Mr. Dunkerley received his undergraduate degree from the University of Westminster, London and earned a MBA from South Bank University, London. Mr. Dunkerley also holds Series 7, 24, 66 and 79 licenses from FINRA. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believe that Mr. Dunkerley's experience as the chief executive officer of a public company and his extensive financial market experience qualify him to sit on the Compensation Committee and that Mr. Dunkerley brings financial and mergers and acquisitions experience, and experience with public marketplaces and regulatory oversight to the Board. His previous experience as an employee of the Company also allows him to provide a unique perspective of and extensive knowledge on the industries in which the Company operates.
Mark S. Germain, 64, is a co-founder of the Company and has served on the Nominating and Corporate Governance since May 2010. He served on the Audit Committee from October 2007 to May 2010, and as Co-Chairman of the Board from February 2000 to May 2010. Mr. Germain has extensive experience as a merchant banker in the biotech and life sciences industries. He has been involved as a founder, director, chairman of the board of directors of, and/or investor in over twenty companies in the biotech field, and assisted many of them in arranging corporate partnerships, acquiring technology, entering into mergers and acquisitions, and executing financings and going public transactions. He was a partner in a New York law firm practicing corporate and securities law until 1986. Between 1986 and 1991, he served businesses in senior executive capacities, including as president of a public company sold in 1991. Mr. Germain was or is a director of the following companies that are or were publicly traded: Omnimmune Holdings, Inc. (OTC Markets: OMMH), a biotechnology company, Stem Cell Innovations, Inc. (OTC Markets: SCLL), a cell biology company, Collexis Holdings, Inc. (OTC Markets: CLXS), a developer of semantic search and knowledge discovery software, and Pluristem Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: PSTI), a bio-therapeutics company. During the past five years, Mr. Germain also served as a board member of two publicly traded companies, Reis, Inc. (NASDAQ: REIS), a commercial real estate market information provider, and Intellect Neurosciences, Inc. (OTC Markets: ILNS), a biopharmaceutical company. He is also a co-founder and director of a number of private companies in the biotechnology field. He graduated from New York University School of Law, Order of the Coif, in 1975. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believes that Mr. Germain’s past experience as the president of a public company and as the board member of other public companies bring financial expertise, industry knowledge, and merger and acquisition experience to the Board.
Glenn L. Halpryn, 54, has served on the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee since 2010 and has served as Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee from May 2010 to December 2013. Mr. Halpryn has also served on the Audit Committee since May 2010. Mr. Halpryn has been the chief executive officer and a director of Transworld Investment Corporation, a private investment company, since June 2001. Mr. Halpryn currently serves as a director of Castle Brands Inc. (AMEX: ROX), a developer and international marketer of premium branded spirits and served as a director of Sorrento Therapeutics (OTC Markets:SRNE), a biopharmaceutical company until September 2012. Mr. Halpryn served as a director of Tiger Media Inc. f/k/a SearchMedia Holdings Limited (NYSE:IDI), a China-based billboard and in-elevator advertising company until June 2011. From April 2010 until October 2011, Mr. Halpryn served as a director of CDSI Holdings, Inc., a public shell company seeking new business opportunities. From September 2008 until May 2010, Mr. Halpryn also served as a director of Winston Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (OTC Markets: WPHM), a pharmaceutical company specializing in skin creams and pain medications. From October 2002 to September 2008, Mr. Halpryn served as a director of Ivax Diagnostics, Inc. (AMEX: IVD). From June 1987 until April 2012, Mr. Halpryn served as the president of and a beneficial owner of United Security Corporation, a broker-dealer registered with FINRA. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believes that Mr. Halpryn’s past experience as the board member of other public companies bring financial expertise and industry knowledge to the Board.
Executive Officers
Thomas C. Varvaro, 45, has served as the Company’s Chief Financial Officer since January 2004 and Secretary since March 2006. He also served as a director from March 2006 until May 2010. Mr. Varvaro is responsible for overseeing all of Company’s operations including all aspects of accounting, information technology, inventory, distribution, and human resources management. Mr. Varvaro has extensive process mapping and business process improvement skills, along with a solid information technology background that includes management and implementation experiences ranging from custom application design to enterprise wide system deployment. Mr. Varvaro also has hands-on experience in integrating acquisitions and in new facility startups. In working with manufacturing organizations Mr. Varvaro has overseen plant automation, reporting and bar code tracking implementations. Mr. Varvaro also has broad legal experience in intellectual property (IP), contract and employment law. From 1998 to 2004, Mr. Varvaro was employed by Fast Heat Inc., a Chicago, Illinois based Global supplier to the plastics, HVAC, packaging, and food processing industries, where he began as controller and was promoted to chief information officer and then chief financial officer during his tenure. During his time there Mr. Varvaro was responsible for all financial matters including accounting, risk management and human resources. From 1993 to 1998, Mr. Varvaro was employed by Leaf Bakery, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, during its rise to becoming a national leader in specialty products. During his tenure Mr. Varvaro served in information technology and accounting roles, helping to shepherd the company from a single facility to national leader in specialty food products. Mr. Varvaro has a B.S. in Accounting from University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign and has been certified as a Certified Public Accountant.
Troy Rhonemus, 42, has served as the Company’s Chief Operating Officer since March 2014 and a Director of New Technology and Supply Chain from January 2013 to February 2014. Mr. Rhonemus is responsible for overseeing all of Company’s operations including all aspects of sales, marketing, supply chain management, distribution, and new technology development. Mr. Rhonemus also consults with customers to improve the supply chain management of raw materials to meet government regulations, which includes developing supply chain strategies, auditing manufacturers and developing an understanding of how to manage supplies from countries outside the Unites States. Mr. Rhonemus has extensive experience in managing operations and supply chain, business strategies, and the roll-out of new processes, technologies and products. From 2006 to 2012, Mr. Rhonemus held several positions at Cargill, Inc. As Truvia® Business Process Manager, he served as the product line lead for managing the operations and supply chain of the Truvia® enterprise from leaf to consumer products. As Technology Manger, Mr. Rhonemus served as technical lead for process and product development for Truvia® consumer products and ingredient business. From 2004 to 2006, Mr. Rhonemus served as Principal Research Scientist at E&J Gallo Winery, where he developed experimental designs to ensure that all project work was statistically valid in the lab, pilot and production wineries. From 1998 to 2004, Mr. Rhonemus served as Senior Research Scientist and as Process Technology Manager at Cargill, Inc. In these positions, Mr. Rhonemus solved technical problems and implemented new technologies into production. He identified potential tolling facilities, coordinated tolling efforts, directly supervised and developed new processes and solved technical issues in existing business units in Cargill. Mr. Rhonemus has earned a M.A. in Chemistry and a B.S. in Chemistry from Ball State University.
Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Section 16 of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) requires our executive officers, directors and persons who own more than 10% of our common stock to file initial reports of ownership and reports of changes in ownership with the SEC and to furnish us with copies of such reports. Based solely on our review of the copies of such forms furnished to us and written representations by our officers and directors regarding their compliance with applicable reporting requirements under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, we believe that all Section 16(a) filing requirements for our executive officers, directors and 10% stockholders were met during the year ended January 3, 2015 except as follows: Frank L. Jaksch Jr. was late in filing one report for one transaction; Michael Brauser was late in filing one report for one transaction; Barry Honig was late in filing one report for one transaction; Stephen Allen was late in filing one report for one transaction; Stephen A. Block was late in filing one report for one transaction; Reid Dabney was late in filing one report for one transaction; Hugh Dunkerley was late in filing one report for one transaction; Mark S. Germain was late in filing one report for one transaction; Glenn L. Halpryn was late in filing one report for one transaction; Thomas C. Varvaro was late in filing one report for one transaction; and Troy A. Rhonemus was late in filing one report for one transaction.
Family Relationships
There are no family relationships between any of our directors, executive officers or directors.
Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings
During the past ten years, none of our officers, directors, promoters or control persons have been involved in any legal proceedings as described in Item 401(f) of Regulation S-K.
Code of Conduct
The Board has established a corporate Code of Conduct which qualifies as a “code of ethics” as defined by Item 406 of Regulation S-K of the Exchange Act. Among other matters, the Code of Conduct is designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote:
honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships;
full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure in our SEC reports and other public communications;
compliance with applicable governmental laws, rules and regulations;
prompt internal reporting of violations of the Code of Conduct to appropriate persons identified in the code; and
accountability for adherence to the Code of Conduct.
Waivers to the Code of Conduct may be granted only by the Board. In the event that the Board grants any waivers of the elements listed above to any of our officers, we expect to announce the waiver within four business days on a Current Report on Form 8-K.
The Code of Conduct applies to all of the Company’s employees, including our principal executive officer, the principal financial and accounting officer, and all employees who perform these functions. A full text of our Code of Conduct is published on our website at www.chromadex.com under the tab “Investor Relations-Corporate Governance-Highlights.” If we amend our Code of Conduct as it applies to the principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller (or persons performing similar functions) or grant a waiver from any provision of the code of conduct to any such person, we shall disclose such amendment or waiver on our website at www.chromadex.com under the tab “Investor Relations-Corporate Governance-Highlights.”
Public Availability of Corporate Governance Documents
Our key corporate governance documents, including our Code of Conduct and the charters of our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee are:
available on our corporate website at www.chromadex.com; and
available in print to any stockholder who requests them from our corporate secretary.
Director Attendance
The Board held 4 meetings during 2014. Each director attended at least 75% of Board meetings and meetings of the committees on which he served.
Board Qualification and Selection Process
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee does not have a specific written policy or process regarding the nominations of directors, nor does it maintain minimum standards for director nominees. However, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee does consider the knowledge, experience, integrity and judgment of potential candidates for nominations to the Board. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will consider persons recommended by stockholders for nomination for election as directors. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will consider and evaluate a director candidate recommended by a stockholder in the same manner as a committee-recommended nominee. Stockholders wishing to recommend director candidates must follow the prior notice requirements as described under “Stockholder Proposals,” below.
Board Leadership Structure and Risk Oversight
The leadership of the Board is structured so that it is led by non-executive Chairman, Stephen Allen. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee believes it is in the best interest of the Company to have an independent director as Chairman of the Board considering past experience of Mr. Allen, who has an extensive business and management expertise in food and nutrition industry.
The entire Board of Directors is responsible for oversight of our Company’s risk management process. Management furnishes information regarding risk to the Board as requested. The Audit Committee discusses risk management with the Company’s management and independent public accountants as set forth in the Audit Committee’s charter. The Compensation Committee reviews the compensation programs of the Company to make sure economic incentives are tied to the long-term interests of the stockholders. The Company believes that innovation and the building of long-term stockholder value are impossible without taking risks. We recognize that imprudent acceptance of risk and the failure to identify risks could be a detriment to stockholder value. The executive officers of the Company are responsible for assessing these risks on a day-to-day basis and for how to best identify, manage and mitigate significant risks that the Company may face.
Board Committees
The Board has established an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee and a Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Other committees may be established by the Board from time to time. The following is a description of each of the committees and their composition
Audit Committee
Our Audit Committee currently consists of three directors: Messrs. Reid Dabney (chairman), Stephen Block and Glenn L. Halpryn. The Board has determined that:
Mr. Dabney qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined by the SEC in Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K; and
all members of the Audit Committee (i) are “independent” under the independence requirements of Marketplace Rule 5605(a)(2) of the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc., (ii) meet the criteria for independence as set forth in the Exchange Act, (iii) have not participated in the preparation of our financial statements at any time during the past three years and (iv) are financially literate and have accounting and finance experience.
The designation of Mr. Dabney as an “audit committee financial expert” will not impose on him any duties, obligations or liability that are greater than those that are generally imposed on him as a member of our Audit Committee and our Board, and his designation as an “audit committee financial expert” will not affect the duties, obligations or liability of any other member of our Audit Committee or Board.
Audit Committee Report
The Audit Committee reviews our financial reporting process on behalf of the Board. Management has the primary responsibility for the financial statements and the reporting process. Our independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for expressing an opinion on the conformity of the audited financial statements with generally accepted accounting principles.
In this context, the Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed with management our audited consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2015 (our 2014 fiscal year) and the notes thereto. It has discussed with Marcum, LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm for the 2014 fiscal year, the matters required to be discussed by Statement of Auditing Standards No. 61, as amended, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board in Rule 3200T. The Audit Committee also received the written disclosures and the letter from Marcum, LLP required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding Marcum’s communications by the Audit Committee concerning independence and discussed with Marcum, LLP its independence from us. Based on such review and discussions, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board that our audited consolidated financial statements be included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2015 and be filed with the SEC.
| Submitted by:
The Audit Committee Of
The Board of Directors
Reid Dabney (Chairman)
Stephen Block
Glenn L. Halpryn
|
Compensation Committee
Our Compensation Committee currently consists of three directors: Messrs. Stephen Block (chairman), Hugh Dunkerley and Stephen Allen. The Board has determined that:
all members of the Compensation Committee qualify as “independent” under the independence requirements of Marketplace Rule 5605(a)(2) of the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc.;
all members of the Compensation Committee qualify as “non-employee directors” under Exchange Act Rule 16b-3; and
all members of the Compensation Committee qualify as “outside directors” under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee currently consists of three directors: Stephen Allen (chairman), Glenn L. Halpryn and Mark Germain. The Board has determined that all members of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee qualify as “independent” under the independence requirements of Marketplace Rule 5605(a)(2) of the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
Compensation Committee ReportUnder the rules of the SEC, this Compensation Committee Report is not deemed to be incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating this Annual Report by reference into any filings with the SEC.
The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management. Based on this review and these discussions, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Submitted by the Compensation Committee
Stephen A. Block, Chairman
Hugh Dunkerley
Stephen Allen
Compensation Discussion and AnalysisThe following discussion and analysis of compensation arrangements of our named executive officers for 2014 should be read together with the compensation tables and related disclosures set forth below.
We believe our success depends on the continued contributions of our named executive officers. Personal relationships and experience are very important in our industry. Our named executive officers are primarily responsible for many of our critical business development relationships. The maintenance of these relationships is critical to ensuring our future success as is experience in managing these relationships. Therefore, it is important to our success that we retain the services of these individuals.
General Philosophy
Our overall compensation philosophy is to provide an executive compensation package that enables us to attract, retain and motivate executive officers to achieve our short-term and long-term business goals. The goals of our compensation program are to align remuneration with business objectives and performance, and to enable us to retain and competitively reward executive officers who contribute to the long-term success of the Company. We attempt to pay our executive officers competitively in order that we will be able to retain the most capable people in the industry. In making executive compensation and other employment compensation decisions, the Compensation Committee considers achievement of certain criteria, some of which relate to our performance and others of which relate to the performance of the individual employee. Awards to executive officers are based on achievement of Company and individual performance criteria.
The Compensation Committee will evaluate our compensation policies on an ongoing basis to determine whether they enable us to attract, retain and motivate key personnel. To meet these objectives, the Compensation Committee may from time to time increase salaries, award additional stock grants or provide other short and long-term incentive compensation to executive officers and other employees.
Compensation Program and Forms of CompensationWe provide our executive officers with a compensation package consisting of base salary, bonus, equity incentives and participation in benefit plans generally available to other employees. In setting total compensation, the Compensation Committee considers individual and company performance, as well as market information regarding compensation paid by other companies in our industry. All executive officers have employment agreements that establish their initial base salaries and set pre-approved goals -- and minimum and maximum opportunities -- for the bonuses and equity incentive awards. Both the Compensation Committee and the Board have approved these agreements.
Base Salary. Salaries for our executive officers are initially set based on negotiation with individual executive officers at the time of recruitment and with reference to salaries for comparable positions in the industry for individuals of similar education and background to the executive officers being recruited. We also consider the individual’s experience, reputation in his or her industry and expected contributions to the Company. Base salary is regularly evaluated by competitive pay and individual job performance. In each case, we take into account the results achieved by the executive, his or her future potential, scope of responsibilities and experience, and competitive salary practices. In some circumstances our executive officers have elected to take less than market salaries. These salaries may be increased in the future to market conditions with a competitive base salary that is in line with his or her role and responsibilities when compared to peer companies of comparable size in similar locations.
Bonuses. We design our bonus programs to be both affordable and competitive in relation to the market. Our bonus program is designed to motivate employees to achieve overall corporate goals. Our programs are designed to avoid entitlements, to align actual payouts with the actual results achieved and to be easy to understand and administer. The Compensation Committee and the executive officer, with input from the other executive officers, work together to identify targets and goals for the executive officer; however, the targets and goals themselves are established after deliberation by the Compensation Committee alone. Upon completion of the fiscal year, the Compensation Committee assesses the executive officer’s performance and, with input from management and the Board, determines the achievement of the bonus targets and the amount to be awarded within the parameters of the executive officer’s agreement with us subject to the impact paying such bonuses will have on the Company’s financial position.
Equity-Based Rewards
We design our equity programs to be both affordable and competitive in relation to the market. We monitor the market and applicable accounting, corporate, securities and tax laws and regulations and adjust our equity programs as needed. Stock options and other forms of equity compensation are designed to reflect and reward a high level of sustained individual performance over time. We design our equity programs to align employees’ interests with those of our stockholders. The Compensation Committee and the executive officer, with input from the other executive officers, work together to identify targets and goals for the executive officer; however, the targets and goals themselves are established after deliberation by the Compensation Committee alone. Upon completion of the fiscal year, the Compensation Committee assesses the executive officer’s performance and, with input from management and the Board, determines the achievement of the vesting targets and the amount to be awarded within the parameters of the executive officer’s agreement with us.
Timing of Equity Awards
Only the Board may approve stock option grants to our executive officers, which grants are recommended to it by the Compensation Committee. Stock options are generally granted at predetermined meetings of the Board. On limited occasions, grants may occur upon unanimous written consent of the Board, which occurs primarily for the purpose of approving a compensation package for a newly hired or promoted executive under an employment agreement with the executive. The exercise price of a newly granted option is the average price of our common stock on the date of grant.
Benefits Programs
We design our benefits programs to be both affordable and competitive in relation to the market while conforming to local laws and practices. We monitor the market, local laws and practices and adjust our benefits programs as needed. We design our benefits programs to provide an element of core benefits, and to the extent possible, offer options for additional benefits, be tax-effective for employees in each country and balance costs and cost sharing between us and our employees.
Performance-Based Compensation and Financial Restatement
We have implemented a policy regarding retroactive adjustments to any cash or equity-based incentive compensation paid to our executives where such payments were predicated upon the achievement of certain financial results that were subsequently the subject of a financial restatement and have included this policy in the employment contracts with our executives.
Tax and Accounting Considerations
In the review and establishment of our compensation programs, we consider the anticipated accounting and tax implications to us and our executives. Section 162(m) of the Code imposes a limit on the amount of compensation that we may deduct in any one year with respect to our chief executive officer and each of our next four most highly compensated executive officers, unless certain specific and detailed criteria are satisfied. Performance-based compensation, as defined in the Code, is fully deductible if the programs are approved by stockholders and meet other requirements. We believe that grants of equity awards under our Second Amended and Restated 2007 Equity Incentive Plan, or the 2007 Plan, may qualify as performance-based for purposes of satisfying the conditions of Section 162(m), thereby permitting us to receive a federal income tax deduction, if applicable, in connection with such awards. In general, we have determined that we will not seek to limit executive compensation so that it is deductible under Section 162(m). From time to time, however, we monitor whether it might be in our interests to structure our compensation programs to satisfy the requirements of Section 162(m). We seek to maintain flexibility in compensating our executives in a manner designed to promote our corporate goals and therefore our compensation committee has not adopted a policy requiring all compensation to be deductible. Our compensation committee will continue to assess the impact of Section 162(m) on our compensation practices and determine what further action, if any, is appropriate.
Severance and Change in Control Arrangements
Several of our executives have employment and other agreements that provide for severance payment arrangements and/or acceleration of stock option vesting in the event of an acquisition or other change in control of our company. See “Employment and Consulting Agreements” below for a description of the severance and change in control arrangements for our named executive officers.
Role of Executives in Executive Compensation Decisions
The Board and our Compensation Committee generally seek input from our executive officers when discussing the performance of, and compensation levels for, executives. The Compensation Committee also works with our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer to evaluate the financial, accounting, tax and retention implications of our various compensation programs. None of our other executives participates in deliberations relating to his or her compensation.
Summary Compensation Table
The following table sets forth information concerning the annual and long-term compensation earned by our Chief Executive Officer (the principal executive officer), our Chief Financial Officer (the principal financial officer) and our Chief Operating Officer, each of whom served during the year ended January 3, 2015 as our executive officers.
Name | Year | | Salary | | | Bonus | | | Stock Awards (1) | | | Option Awards (2) | | | All Other Compensation | | | Total ($) | |
Frank L. Jaksch Jr. | 2014 | | $ | 275,000 | | | $ | 30,000 | | | $ | 352,500 | (3) | | $ | 138,518 | (4) | | | - | | | $ | 796,018 | |
| 2013 | | $ | 225,000 | | | $ | 51,242 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | $ | 276,242 | |
Thomas C. Varvaro | 2014 | | $ | 225,000 | | | $ | 24,200 | | | $ | 352,500 | (5) | | $ | 115,807 | (6) | | | - | | | $ | 717,507 | |
| 2013 | | $ | 175,000 | | | $ | 29,891 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | $ | 204,891 | |
Troy A. Rhonemus(7) | 2014 | | $ | 179,039 | | | | - | | | | - | | | $ | 358,723 | (8) | | | - | | | $ | 537,762 | |
| 2013 | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | |
(1) | The amounts in the column titled “Stock Awards” above reflect the aggregate award date fair value of restricted stock awards. These restricted stock awards shall vest upon the earlier to occur of the following: (A) the average closing market price of the Company’s common stock exceeds $2.50 per share over any six month period, (B) the Company experiences a change in control, (C) the Company’s common stock or assets are acquired by, or the Company merges with, another entity or engages in another form of reorganization as a result of which it is not the surviving corporation, (D) service is terminated without cause for any reason, or (E) the Company’s stock is listed on a national securities exchange, but in no event would any shares vest prior to July 1, 2014. The fair values of these restricted stock awards were based on the trading price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. |
(2) | The amounts in the column titled “Option Awards” above reflect the aggregate grant date fair value of stock option awards for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2015. See Note 10 of the ChromaDex Corporation Consolidated Financial Report included in this Form 10-K for the year ended January 3, 2015 for a description of certain assumptions in the calculation of the fair value of the Company’s stock options. |
(3) | On January 2, 2014, Frank L. Jaksch Jr. was awarded 250,000 shares of restricted stock. As of January 3, 2015, these shares have not vested. |
(4) | On June 18, 2014, Frank L. Jaksch Jr. was granted options to purchase 150,000 shares of ChromaDex common stock at an exercise price of $1.25. These options expire on June 18, 2024 and 25% of the options vest on June 18, 2015 and the remaining 75% vest 2.083% monthly thereafter. |
(5) | On January 2, 2014, Thomas C. Varvaro was awarded 250,000 shares of restricted stock. As of January 3, 2015, these shares have not vested. |
(6) | On June 18, 2014, Thomas C. Varvaro was granted options to purchase 125,000 shares of ChromaDex common stock at an exercise price of $1.25. These options expire on June 18, 2024 and 25% of the options vest on June 18, 2015 and the remaining 75% vest 2.083% monthly thereafter. |
(7) | Troy A. Rhonemus became the Company’s Chief Operating Officer on March 6, 2014. |
(8) | On February 21, 2014, Troy A. Rhonemus was granted options to purchase 250,000 shares of ChromaDex common stock at an exercise price of $1.75. These options expire on February 21, 2024 and 33% of the options vested on February 21, 2015 and the remaining 67% vest 2.778% monthly thereafter. In addition, on June 18, 2014, Troy A. Rhonemus was granted options to purchase 75,000 shares of ChromaDex common stock at an exercise price of $1.25. These options expire on June 18, 2024 and 25% of the options vest on June 18, 2015 and the remaining 75% vest 2.083% monthly thereafter. |
Employment and Consulting AgreementsThe material terms of employment agreements with the named executive officers previously entered into by the Company are described below.
Employment Agreement with Frank L. Jaksch Jr.
On April 19, 2010, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the “Amended Jaksch Agreement”) with Frank L. Jaksch Jr. The Amended Jaksch Agreement has a three year term, beginning on the date of the Agreement, that automatically renews unless the Amended Jaksch Agreement is terminated in accordance with its terms. The Amended Jaksch Agreement provides for a base salary of $225,000 (subject to an increase of $50,000 in the event the Company’s common stock is listed on a stock exchange), and provides for an annual cash bonus (based on performance targets) of up to 40% of his base salary, and two option grants of 800,000 shares of Common Stock in aggregate. The option grants were awarded on May 20, 2010.
On January 2, 2014, the Board approved the recommendations of the Company’s Compensation Committee raising the annual base salary of Mr. Jaksch to $275,000 per year and raising the annual cash bonus target for Mr. Jaksch up to 50% of his base salary. In addition, the Board approved granting 250,000 shares of the Company’s restricted stock, subject to certain vesting provisions to Mr. Jaksch. In February 2015, the Board approved the recommendations of the Company’s Compensation Committee paying Mr. Jaksch a bonus of $85,890 for services provided to the Company during the fiscal year ending January 3, 2015.
The severance terms of the Amended Jaksch Agreement provide that in the event Mr. Jaksch’s employment with the Company is terminated voluntarily by Mr. Jaksch, he will be entitled to any accrued but unpaid base salary, any stock vested through the date of his termination and a pro-rated portion of 50% of his salary (50% of his salary being the “Maximum Annual Bonus”) for the year of termination. In addition, if Mr. Jaksch leaves the Company for “Good Reason” he will also be entitled to severance equal to the Maximum Annual Bonus, and he will be deemed to have been employed for the entirety of such year. “Good Reason” means any of the following: (A) the assignment of duties materially inconsistent with those of other employees in similar employment positions, and Mr. Jaksch provides written notice to the Company within 60 days of such assignment that such duties are materially inconsistent with those duties of such similarly-situated employees and the Company fails to release Mr. Jaksch from his obligation to perform such inconsistent duties and to re-assign Mr. Jaksch to his customary duties within 20 business days after the Company’s receipt of such notice; or (B) if, without the consent of Mr. Jaksch, Mr. Jaksch’s normal place of work is or becomes situated more than 50 linear miles from Mr. Jaksch’s personal residence as of the effective date of the Amended Jaksch Agreement, or (C) a failure by the Company to comply with any other material provision of the Amended Jaksch Agreement which has not been cured within 60 days after notice of such noncompliance has been given by Mr. Jaksch to the Company, or if such failure is not capable of being cured in such time, a cure shall not have been diligently pursued by the Company within such 60 day period. Severance will then consist of 16 weeks of paid salary, unless Mr. Jaksch signs a release, in which case he will receive compensation equal to the lesser of the remainder of the term of the agreement, or up to 12 months paid salary.
In the event Mr. Jaksch’s employment terminates as a result of his death or disability, he, or his estate, as the case may be, will be entitled to his accrued but unpaid base salary, stock vested through the date of his termination and, notwithstanding any policy of the Company to the contrary, any annual bonus that would be due to him for the fiscal year in which termination pursuant to death or disability took place in an amount no less than the prorated portion of his Maximum Annual Bonus. At the option of the Board, Mr. Jaksch’s bonus will be either prorated or paid in full to him, or his estate, as the case may be, at the time he would have received such bonus had he remained an employee of the Company.
In the event that Mr. Jaksch is terminated by the Company for “Cause” (as defined in the Amended Jaksch Agreement), he will only be entitled to his accrued but unpaid base salary, and any stock vested through the date of his termination.
In the event that Mr. Jaksch is terminated due to “Cessation of Business” (as defined in the Amended Jaksch Agreement), Mr. Jaksch will be entitled to a lump sum payment of base salary and an amount equal to the Maximum Annual Bonus, and continuation of health benefits until the earlier of the last to occur of the term or renewal term of the agreement or 12 months from the date of termination.
In the event the Company terminates Mr. Jaksch’s employment “without Cause”, Mr. Jaksch will be entitled to severance in the form of any stock vested through the date of his termination and continuation of his base salary for a period of eight weeks, or, if Mr. Jaksch enters into a standard separation agreement, Mr. Jaksch will receive continuation of base salary and health benefits, together with applicable fringe benefits as provided to other executive employees until the last to occur of the expiration of the term or renewal term then in effect or 24 months from the date of termination (the “Severance Period”), and he will receive his Maximum Annual Bonus if the Severance Period is equal to 24 months or a pro rata portion thereof if less, as well as the full vesting of any otherwise unvested stock.
Employment Agreement with Thomas C. Varvaro
On April 19, 2010, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the “Amended Varvaro Agreement”) with Thomas C. Varvaro. The Amended Varvaro Agreement has a three year term beginning on the date of the agreement that automatically renews unless the Amended Varvaro Agreement is terminated in accordance with its terms. The Amended Varvaro Agreement provides for a base salary of $175,000 (subject to an increase of $50,000 in the event the Company’s common stock is listed on a stock exchange), and provides for an annual cash bonus (based on performance targets) of up to 30% of his base salary, and provides for two option grants of 400,000 shares of Common Stock in aggregate. The option grants were awarded on May 20, 2010.
On January 2, 2014, the Board approved the recommendations of the Company’s Compensation Committee raising the annual base salary of Mr. Varvaro to $225,000 per year and raising the annual cash bonus target for Mr. Varvaro up to 40% of his base salary. In addition, the Board approved granting 250,000 shares of the Company’s restricted stock, subject to certain vesting provisions to Mr. Varvaro. In February 2015, the Board approved the recommendations of the Company’s Compensation Committee paying Mr. Varvaro a bonus of $56,219 for services provided to the Company during the fiscal year ending January 3, 2015.
The severance terms of the Amended Varvaro Agreement provide that in the event Mr. Varvaro’s employment with us is terminated voluntarily by Mr. Varvaro he will be entitled to any accrued but unpaid base salary, any stock vested through the date of his termination and a pro-rated portion of 40% of his salary (40% of this salary being the “Maximum Annual Bonus”) for the year of termination. In addition, if Mr. Varvaro leaves the Company for Good Reason he will also be entitled to severance equal to the Maximum Annual Bonus, and he shall be deemed to have been employed for the entirety of such year. “Good Reason” means any of the following: (A) the assignment of duties materially inconsistent with those of other employees in similar employment positions, and Mr. Varvaro provides written notice to the Company within 60 days of such assignment that such duties are materially inconsistent with those duties of such similarly-situated employees and the Company fails to release Mr. Varvaro from his obligation to perform such inconsistent duties and to re-assign Mr. Varvaro to his customary duties within 20 business days after the Company’s receipt of such notice; or (B) the termination of Frank Jaksch as the Company’s Chief Executive Officer either by the Company without “Cause” or by the Mr. Jaksch for “Good Reason,” and Mr. Varvaro provides written notice within 60 days of such termination, or (C) a failure by the Company to comply with any other material provision of the Amended Varvaro Agreement which has not been cured within 60 days after notice of such noncompliance has been given by Mr. Varvaro to the Company, or if such failure is not capable of being cured in such time, a cure will not have been diligently pursued by the Company within such 60 day period. Severance will then consist of 16 weeks of paid salary, unless Mr. Varvaro signs a release, in which case he will receive compensation equal to the lesser of the remainder of his agreement or 12 months paid salary.
In the event Mr. Varvaro is terminated as a result of his death or disability he will be entitled to his accrued but unpaid base salary, stock vested through the date of his termination and, notwithstanding any policy of the Company to the contrary, any annual bonus that would be due to him for the fiscal year in which termination pursuant to death or disability took place in an amount no less than the prorated portion of his Maximum Annual Bonus. Mr. Varvaro’s bonus will be either prorated or paid in full to him, or his estate, as the case may be, at the time he would have received such bonus had he remained an employee of the Company.
In the event that Mr. Varvaro is terminated by the Company for “Cause” (as defined in the Amended Varvaro Agreement), he will only be entitled to his accrued but unpaid base salary, and any stock vested through the date of his termination.
In the event that Mr. Varvaro is terminated due to a “Cessation of Business” (as defined in the Amended Varvaro Agreement), Mr. Varvaro will be entitled to a lump sum payment of base salary and an amount equal to the Maximum Annual Bonus, and continuation of health benefits until the last to occur of the term or renewal term of the agreement or 12 months from the date of termination.
In the event the Company terminates Mr. Varvaro’s employment “without Cause,” Mr. Varvaro will be entitled to severance in the form of any stock vested through the date of his termination and continuation of his base salary for a period of eight weeks, or, if Mr. Varvaro enters into a standard separation agreement, Mr. Varvaro will receive continuation of base salary and health benefits, together with applicable fringe benefits as provided to other executive employees until the last to occur of the expiration of the term or renewal term then in effect or 24 months from the date of termination (the “Severance Period”), will receive his Maximum Annual Bonus if the Severance Period is equal to 24 months or a pro rata portion thereof if less, as well as the full vesting of any otherwise unvested stock.Employment Agreement with Troy Rhonemus
On March 6, 2014, the Company entered into an Employment Agreement (the “Rhonemus Agreement”) with Troy Rhonemus. The Rhonemus Agreement has a one year term beginning on the date of the agreement that automatically renews unless the Rhonemus Agreement is terminated in accordance with its terms. The Rhonemus Agreement provides for a base salary of $180,000, and provides for an annual cash bonus (based on performance targets) of up to 30% of his base salary (30% of this salary being the “Maximum Annual Bonus”), and provides for option grants of 250,000 shares of Common Stock. The option grants were awarded on February 21, 2014.
In February 2015, the Board approved the recommendations of the Company’s Compensation Committee paying Mr. Rhonemus a bonus of $33,731 for services provided to the Company during the fiscal year ending January 3, 2015.
The severance terms of the Rhonemus Agreement provide that in the event Mr. Rhonemus’ employment with us is terminated voluntarily by Mr. Rhonemus, he will be entitled to any accrued but unpaid base salary and any accrued but unpaid welfare and retirement benefits. In addition, if Mr. Rhonemus leaves the Company for Good Reason he will also be entitled to severance equal to two weeks of base salary for each full year of service to a maximum of eight weeks of the base salary. “Good Reason” means a failure by the Company to comply with any other material provision of the Rhonemus Agreement which has not been cured within 60 days after notice of such failure has been given by Mr. Rhonemus to the Company, or if such failure is not capable of being cured in such time, a cure will not have been diligently pursued by the Company within such 60 day period.
In the event Mr. Rhonemus is terminated as a result of his death or disability he will be entitled to his accrued but unpaid base salary, and, notwithstanding any policy of the Company to the contrary, any annual bonus that would be due to him for the fiscal year in which termination pursuant to death or disability occurs will be prorated to Mr. Rhonemus (or his estate, as the case may be) at the time Mr. Rhonemus would have received such bonus had he remained an employee of the Company.
In the event that Mr. Rhonemus is terminated by the Company for “Cause” (as defined in the Rhonemus Agreement), he will only be entitled to his accrued but unpaid base salary, and any accrued but unpaid welfare and retirement benefits.
In the event that Mr. Rhonemus is terminated due to a “Cessation of Business” (as defined in the Rhonemus Agreement), Mr. Rhonemus will be entitled to a lump sum payment of (i) base salary until the last to occur of (A) the expiration of the remaining portion of the initial term or the then applicable renewal term, as the case may be, or (B) the expiration of the 12-month period commencing on the date Employee is terminated, and (ii) the Maximum Annual Bonus.
In the event the Company terminates Mr. Rhonemus’ employment “without Cause,” Mr. Rhonemus will be entitled to severance equal to two weeks of base salary for each full year of service to a maximum of eight weeks of the base salary, or, if Mr. Rhonemus enters into a standard separation agreement, Mr. Rhonemus will receive continuation of base salary and health benefits, together with applicable fringe benefits as provided until the expiration of the term or renewal term then in effect, however, that in the case of medical and dental insurance, until the expiration of 12 months from the date of termination.
2014 Director Compensation
From time to time, non-employee directors receive a stock award or a grant of options to buy our common stock. These stock awards and options are granted under the Second Amended and Restated 2007 Equity Incentive Plan of the Company, or the 2007 Plan. The number of shares awarded or the number of options granted and the vesting conditions are determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. The vesting schedule on the options awarded for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2015 is as follows: 8.333% of the options vest monthly.
On January 2, 2014, the Company awarded shares of the Company’s restricted stock, subject to certain vesting provisions, to the Company’s independent members of the board of directors as follows: Michael H. Brauser 250,000 shares; Barry Honig 250,000 shares, Stephen Block 50,000 shares, Reid Dabney 10,000 shares; Hugh Dunkerley 10,000 shares; Mark S. Germain 10,000 shares; and Glenn L. Halpryn 10,000 shares. Effective February 25, 2015 upon their resignations from the Board, Mr. Brauser’s and Mr. Honig’s unvested options and restricted stock vested immediately. The options issued to Mr. Brauser and Mr. Honig shall expire according to their terms as if Mr. Brauser and Mr. Honig had not resigned from the Board.
The following table provides information concerning compensation of our non-employee directors who were directors for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2015. The compensation reported is for services as directors for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2015. The Company did not compensate its non-employee directors for services for the fiscal year ended December 28, 2013.
Summary Compensation Table
Name | | Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($) | | | | | | | | | Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($) | | | Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Earnings ($) | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Stephen Allen (3) | | | - | | | | - | | | | 262,241 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 262,241 | |
Stephen Block(4) | | | - | | | | 70,500 | | | | 60,221 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 130,721 | |
Reid Dabney(5) | | | - | | | | 14,100 | | | | 58,396 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 72,496 | |
Hugh Dunkerley(6) | | | - | | | | 14,100 | | | | 49,272 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 63,372 | |
Mark S. Germain(7) | | | - | | | | 14,100 | | | | 49,272 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 63,372 | |
Glenn L. Halpryn(8) | | | - | | | | 14,100 | | | | 54,746 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 68,846 | |
Michael H. Brauser(9) | | | - | | | | 352,500 | | | | 58,396 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 410,896 | |
Barry Honig(10) | | | - | | | | 352,500 | | | | 58,396 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 410,896 | |
| The amounts in the column titled “Stock Awards” above reflect the aggregate award date fair value of restricted stock awards. Except as stated below with respect to restricted stock held by Mr. Brauser and Mr. Honig, restricted stock awards shall vest upon the earlier to occur of the following: (A) the average closing market price of the Company’s common stock exceeds $2.50 per share over any six month period, (B) the Company experiences a change in control, (C) the Company’s common stock or assets are acquired by, or the Company merges with, another entity or engages in another form of reorganization as a result of which it is not the surviving corporation, (D) service is terminated without cause for any reason, or (E) the Company’s stock is listed on a national securities exchange, but in no event would any shares vest prior to July 1, 2014. The fair values of these restricted stock awards were based on the trading price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant.
|
| The amounts in the column titled “Option Awards” above reflect the aggregate grant date fair value of stock option awards for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2015. See Note 10 of the ChromaDex Corporation Consolidated Financial Report included in this Form 10-K for the year ended January 3, 2015 for a description of certain assumptions in the calculation of the fair value of the Company’s stock options. Except as stated below with respect to options awarded to Mr. Allen, the options have an exercise price of $1.25 and, except as stated below with respect to options held by Mr. Brauser and Mr. Honig, vest 1/12th every month for 12 months commencing in June 2014.
|
| On February 21, 2014, Stephen Allen was awarded the option to purchase 200,000 shares of the Company’s common stock with an exercise price of $1.75 per share. On June 18, 2014, Stephen Allen was awarded the option to purchase 82,500 shares of the Company’s common stock.
|
| On January 2, 2014, Stephen Block was awarded 50,000 shares of restricted stock. On June 18, 2014, Stephen Block was awarded the option to purchase 82,500 shares of the Company’s common stock.
|
| On January 2, 2014, Reid Dabney was awarded 10,000 shares of restricted stock. On June 18, 2014, Reid Dabney was awarded the option to purchase 80,000 shares of the Company’s common stock.
|
| On January 2, 2014, Hugh Dunkerley was awarded 10,000 shares of restricted stock. On June 18, 2014, Hugh Dunkerley was awarded the option to purchase 67,500 shares of the Company’s common stock.
|
| On January 2, 2014, Mark S. Germain was awarded 10,000 shares of restricted stock. On June 18, 2014, Mark S. Germain was awarded the option to purchase 67,500 shares of the Company’s common stock.
|
| On January 2, 2014, Glenn L. Halpryn was awarded 10,000 shares of restricted stock. On June 18, 2014, Glenn L. Halpryn was awarded the option to purchase 75,000 shares of the Company’s common stock.
|
| On January 2, 2014, Michael H. Brauser was awarded 250,000 shares of restricted stock. On June 18, 2014, Michael Brauser was awarded the option to purchase 80,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. This option award was to vest 1/12th every month for 12 months. Effective February 25, 2015, all of Mr. Brauser’s unvested restricted stock and options became fully vested upon his resignation from the Board of Directors.
|
| On January 2, 2014, Barry Honig was awarded 250,000 shares of restricted stock. On June 18, 2014, Barry Honig was awarded the option to purchase 80,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. This option award was to vest 1/12th every month for 12 months. Effective February 25, 2015, all of Mr. Honig’s unvested restricted stock and options became fully vested upon his resignation from the Board of Directors.
|
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year End
The following table sets forth certain information regarding stock options and restricted stock granted to our named executive officers outstanding as of January 3, 2015.
Outstanding Stock Options at 2014 Fiscal Year-End
| | Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable | | | Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable | | | Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned Options (#) | | | Option Exercise Price ($) | | | Option Expiration Date | |
Frank L. Jaksch Jr. | | | 300,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 1.50 | | | | 12/1/2016 | |
| | | 700,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 1.50 | | | | 4/21/2018 | |
| | | 150,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 1.50 | | | | 4/21/2018 | |
| | | 100,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 0.50 | | | | 5/13/2019 | |
| | | 100,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 1.70 | | | | 5/20/2020 | |
| | | 111,979 | | | | 13,021 | (1) | | | — | | | | 1.54 | | | | 5/10/2021 | |
| | | 145,833 | | | | 104,167 | (2) | | | — | | | | 0.64 | | | | 8/28/2022 | |
| | | 1,426,064 | | | | 475,354 | (3) | | | — | | | | 0.945 | | | | 9/15/2022 | |
| | | — | | | | 150,000 | (4) | | | — | | | | 1.25 | | | | 6/18/2024 | |
Thomas C. Varvaro | | | 250,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 1.50 | | | | 12/1/2016 | |
| | | 100,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 1.50 | | | | 4/21/2018 | |
| | | 75,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 0.50 | | | | 5/13/2019 | |
| | | 336,700 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 1.545 | | | | 5/20/2020 | |
| | | 75,000 | | | | — | | | | — | | | | 1.545 | | | | 5/20/2020 | |
| | | 3,841 | | | | 447 | (5) | | | — | | | | 1.54 | | | | 5/10/2021 | |
| | | 116,667 | | | | 83,333 | (6) | | | — | | | | 0.64 | | | | 8/28/2022 | |
| | | 647,633 | | | | 215,878 | (7) | | | — | | | | 0.945 | | | | 9/15/2022 | |
| | | — | | | | 125,000 | (8) | | | — | | | | 1.25 | | | | 6/18/2024 | |
Troy A. Rhonemus | | | 191,667 | | | | 208,333 | (9) | | | — | | | | 0.63 | | | | 1/25/2023 | |
| | | — | | | | 250,000 | (10) | | | — | | | | 1.75 | | | | 2/21/2024 | |
| | | — | | | | 75,000 | (11) | | | — | | | | 1.25 | | | | 6/18/2024 | |
(1) Item 9B. | 2,604 of Mr. Jaksch’s options vest on 10thOther of every month through May 10, 2015. |
(2) | 5,208 of Mr. Jaksch’s options vest on 28th of every month through August 28, 2016.
|
(3) | 52,817 of Mr. Jaksch’s options vest on 15th of every month through September 15, 2015.
|
(4) | 3,125 of Mr. Jaksch’s options vest on 18th of every month through June 18, 2018.
|
(5) | 89 of Mr. Varvaro’s options vest on 10th of every month through May 10, 2015.
|
(6) | 4,167 of Mr. Varvaro’s options vest on 28th of every month through August 28, 2016.
|
(7) | 23,986 of Mr. Varvaro’s options vest on 15th of every month through September 15, 2015.
|
(8) | 2,604 of Mr. Varvaro’s options vest on 18th of every month through June 18, 2018.
|
(9) | 8,333 of Mr. Rhonemus’ options vest on 25th of every month through January 25, 2017.
|
(10) | 6,944 of Mr. Rhonemus’ options vest on 21st of every month through February 21, 2017.
|
(11) | 6,250 of Mr. Rhonemus’ options vest on 18th of every month through June 18, 2018.Information
|
Outstanding Restricted Stock at 2014 Fiscal Year-End
Name | | Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#) | | | Market Value of Shares of Units of Stock That Have Not Vested ($) | | Equity incentive plan awards: Number of unearned shares, units or other rights that have not vested (#) | | | | Equity incentive plan awards: Market or payout value of unearned Shares, units or other rights that have not vested ($) (1) | |
Frank L. Jaksch Jr. | | | — | | | | — | | | 500,000 | (2 | ) | | $ | 450,000 | |
Thomas C. Varvaro | | | — | | | | — | | | 500,000 | (3 | ) | | $ | 450,000 | |
Troy A. Rhonemus | | | — | | | | — | | | — | | | | $ | — | |
(1) | The amounts in the column titled “Equity incentive plan awards: Market or payout value of unearned shares, units or other rights that have not vested” above reflect the aggregate market value based on the closing market price of the Company’s stock on January 3, 2015. |
(2) | On June 6, 2012, Frank L. Jaksch Jr. was awarded 250,000 shares of restricted stock. These shares shall vest upon the earlier to occur of the following: (A) the average closing market price of the Company’s common stock exceeds $2.00 per share over any six month period, (B) the Company experiences a change in control, (C) the Company engages in a merger or other reorganization in which it is not the surviving corporation, (D) the Company sells all or substantially all of its assets, (E) service is terminated for any reason, or (F) the Company’s stock is listed on a national securities exchange. In addition, on January 2, 2014, Mr. Jaksch was awarded 250,000 shares of restricted stock. These shares shall vest upon the earlier to occur of the following: (A) the average closing market price of the Company’s common stock exceeds $2.50 per share over any six month period, (B) the Company experiences a change in control, (C) the Company’s common stock or assets are acquired by, or the Company merges with another entity or engages in another form of reorganization as a result of which it is not the surviving corporation, (D) service is terminated without cause for any reason, or (E) the Company’s stock is listed on a national securities exchange, but in no event would any shares vest prior to July 1, 2014.
|
(3) | On June 6, 2012, Thomas C. Varvaro was awarded 250,000 shares of restricted stock. These shares shall vest upon the earlier to occur of the following: (A) the average closing market price of the Company’s common stock exceeds $2.00 per share over any six month period, or (B) the Company experiences a change in control, (C) the Company engages in a merger or other reorganization in which it is not the surviving corporation, (D) the Company sells all or substantially all of its assets, (E) service is terminated for any reason, or (F) the Company’s stock is listed on a national securities exchange. In addition, on January 2, 2014, Mr. Varvaro was awarded 250,000 shares of restricted stock. These shares shall vest upon the earlier to occur of the following: (A) the average closing market price of the Company’s common stock exceeds $2.50 per share over any six month period, (B) the Company experiences a change in control, (C) the Company’s common stock or assets are acquired by, or the Company merges with another entity or engages in another form of reorganization as a result of which it is not the surviving corporation, (D) service is terminated without cause for any reason, or (E) the Company’s stock is listed on a national securities exchange, but in no event would any shares vest prior to July 1, 2014. |
None.
Item 12. PART III
Item 10.
| Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance |
Information required by this item will be contained in the Proxy Statement under the headings “Management and Corporate Governance,” and “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance,” and is incorporated herein by reference.
The information required by this item regarding executive compensation is incorporated by reference to the information set forth in the sections titled “Executive Compensation” in the Proxy Statement.
Item 12. | Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
The information required by this item regarding security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management is incorporated by reference to the information set forth in the section titled “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
As of March 12, 2015, there were approximately 107,287,058 shares of our common stock outstanding. The following table sets forth certain information regarding our common stock, beneficially owned as of March 12, 2015, by each person known to us to beneficially own more than 5% of our common stock, each executive officer and director, and all directors and executive officers as a group. We calculated beneficial ownership according to Rule 13d-3 of the Exchange Act as of that date. Shares issuable upon exercise of options or warrants that are exercisable or convertible within 60 days after March 12, 2015 are included as beneficially owned by the holder. Beneficial ownership generally includes voting and dispositive power with respect to securities. Unless otherwise indicated below, the persons and entities namedManagement” in the table have sole voting and sole dispositive power with respectProxy Statement.
The information required by Item 201(d) of Regulation S-K is incorporated by reference to all shares beneficially owned.
Name of Beneficial Owner (1) | | Shares of Common Stock Beneficially Owned (2) | | | Aggregate Percentage Ownership | |
| | | | | | |
Dr. Phillip Frost (3) | | | 15,252,937 | | | | 14.22 | % |
Michael Brauser (4) | | | 8,738,088 | | | | 8.13 | % |
Barry Honig (5) | | | 8,420,216 | | | | 7.83 | % |
Black Sheep, FLP (6) | | | 6,225,155 | | | | 5.80 | % |
Directors | | | | | | | | |
Stephen Allen (7) | | | 268,750 | | | | * | |
Stephen Block (8) | | | 563,731 | | | | * | |
Reid Dabney (9) | | | 626,867 | | | | * | |
Hugh Dunkerley (10) | | | 484,525 | | | | * | |
Mark S. Germain (11) | | | 749,774 | | | | * | |
Glenn L. Halpryn (12) | | | 1,553,237 | | | | 1.43 | % |
Frank L. Jaksch Jr. (13) | | | 11,527,319 | | | | 10.43 | % |
Named Executive Officers | | | | | | | | |
Frank L. Jaksch Jr., Chief Executive Officer | | (See above) | | | | | |
Thomas C. Varvaro, Chief Financial Officer (14) | | | 2,224,900 | | | | 2.04 | % |
Troy Rhonemus, Chief Operating Officer (15) | | | 337,222 | | | | * | |
All directors and executive officers as a group | | | | | | | | |
(7 Directors plus Chief Financial Officer | | | | | | | | |
and Chief Operating Officer) (16) | | | 18,316,325 | | | | 15.86 | % |
the information set forth in the section titled “Executive Compensation” in the Proxy Statement.
* | Represents less than 1%. |
(1) | Addresses for the beneficial owners listed are: Dr. Phillip Frost, 4400 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 1500, Miami, FL 33137; Michael Brauser, 4400 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 850, Miami, FL 33137; Barry Honig, 555 South Federal Highway, #450, Boca Raton, FL 33432; and Black Sheep, FLP 6 Palm Hill Drive, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675. |
(2) | Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC and includes voting or dispositive power with respect to shares beneficially owned. Unless otherwise specified, reported ownership refers to both voting and dispositive power. Shares of common stock issuable upon the conversion of stock options or the exercise of warrants within the next 60 days are deemed to be converted and beneficially owned by the individual or group identified in the Aggregate Percentage Ownership column. |
Item 13.(3) | Includes 5,852,937 shares of common stock held by Frost Gamma Investments Trust and 9,400,000 shares of common stock held by Phillip and Patricia Frost Philanthropic Foundation, Inc. Dr. Phillip Frost is the trustee of Frost Gamma Investments Trust. Frost Gamma Limited Partnership is the sole and exclusive beneficiary of Frost Gamma Investments Trust. Dr. Frost is one of two limited partners of Frost Gamma Limited Partnership. The general partner of Frost Gamma Limited Partnership is Frost Gamma, Inc. and the sole shareholder of Frost Gamma, Inc. is Frost-Nevada Corporation. Dr. Frost is also the sole shareholder of Frost-Nevada Corporation. Dr. Phillip Frost is President of Phillip and Patricia Frost Philanthropic Foundation, Inc. Dr. Frost is a stockholder and chairman of the board of Ladenburg Thalmann Financial Services, Inc. (NYSE:LTS), parent company of Ladenburg Thalmann & Co., Triad Advisors, Inc. and Investacorp Inc., each registered broker-dealers. |
(4) | Direct ownership of (i) 1,143,498 shares of common stock; and (ii) through Michael & Betsy Brauser TBE, 3,626,428 shares of common stock. Indirect ownership through (i) 628,570 Shares held by Grander Holdings, Inc. 401K Profit Sharing Plan of which Mr. Brauser is a trustee; (ii) 342,857 Shares held by the Brauser 2010 GRAT of which Mr. Brauser is a trustee; (iii) 342,857 Shares held by Birchtree Capital, LLC of which Mr. Brauser is the manager; (iv) 1,692,856 Shares held by BMB Holdings, LLLP of which Mr. Brauser is the manager of its general partner; and (v) 714,284 Shares held by Betsy Brauser Third Amended Trust Agreement beneficially owned by Mr. Brauser's spouse which are disclaimed by him. Includes 246,738 stock options exercisable within 60 days. |
(5) | Direct ownership of 4,824,959 shares of common stock. Indirect ownership includes (i) 230,000 Shares owned by GRQ Consultants, Inc. Defined Benefits Plan for the benefit of Mr. Honig; (ii) 966,786 Shares owned by GRQ Consultants, Inc. 401K of which Mr. Honig is the beneficiary; (iii) 2,103,571 Shares owned by GRQ Consultants Inc. Roth 401K FBO Renee Honig, Mr. Honig's spouse, of which Mr. Honig has voting and investment power and disclaims beneficial ownership; and (iv) 89,900 shares owned by GRQ Consultants, Inc., of which Mr. Honig is the President. Includes 205,000 stock options exercisable within 60 days. |
(6) | Black Sheep, FLP is a family limited partnership the co-general partners of which are Frank L. Jaksch, Jr. and Tricia Jaksch and the sole limited partners of which are Frank L. Jaksch, Jr., Tricia Jaksch and the Jaksch Family Trust. |
(7) | Includes 268,750 stock options exercisable within 60 days. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence |
The information required by this item regarding certain relationships and related transactions and director independence is incorporated by reference to the information set forth in the sections titled “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and “Management and Corporate Governance – Director Independence,” respectively, in the Proxy Statement.
(8) Item 14. | Includes 513,731 stock options exercisable within 60 days. Principal Accounting Fees and Services |
The information required by this item regarding principal accountant fees and services is incorporated by reference to the information set forth in the section titled “Audit Fees” in the Proxy Statement.
PART IV
(9) Item 15.
| Includes 616,867 stock options exercisable within 60 days. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules |
(10) | Includes 474,525 stock options exercisable within 60 days.
|