UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
x
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2009
¨
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
FOR THE
TRANSITION PERIOD FROM __ TO __
COMMISSION
FILE NO: 0-22810
MACE
SECURITY INTERNATIONAL, INC.
(Exact
name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
DELAWARE
|
03-0311630
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
|
incorporation
or organization)
|
Identification
No.)
|
240
Gibraltar Road, Suite 220, Horsham, Pennsylvania 19044
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip code)
Registrant's
Telephone Number, including area code: (267) 317-4009
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 the (“
Exchange Act”) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that
the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to
such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No
¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (Section 232.405 of
this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that
the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ¨ No
¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See
definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller
reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
one)
Large
accelerated filer ¨
|
Accelerated
filer ¨
|
Non-accelerated
filer ¨
|
Smaller
reporting company x
|
|
|
(Do
not check if a smaller
|
|
|
|
reporting
company)
|
|
Indicate
by checkmark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act).
Yes ¨ No
x
As of
August 10, 2009, there were 16,285,377 Shares of the registrant’s Common Stock,
par value $.01 per share, outstanding.
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Form
10-Q
Quarter
Ended June 30, 2009
Table
of Contents
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
PART
I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1 - Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets – June 30, 2009 (Unaudited)
and
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations (Unaudited) for the three months
|
|
|
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations (Unaudited) for the six months
|
|
|
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statement of Stockholders’ Equity (Unaudited) for the
|
|
|
six
months ended June 30, 2009
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited) for the six
months
|
|
|
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
Item
2 - Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
Item
3 - Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
Item
4T - Controls and Procedures
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
PART
II - OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1 - Legal Proceedings
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
Item
1A - Risk Factors
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
Item
2 - Unregistered Sales of Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
Item
5 - Other Information
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
Item
6 - Exhibits
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
|
48
|
PART
I
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements
|
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
(in
thousands, except share information)
|
|
June 30,
2009
|
|
|
December 31,
2008
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
4,816 |
|
|
$ |
8,314 |
|
Short-term
investments
|
|
|
973 |
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
Accounts
receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $743 and $760 in 2009
and 2008, respectively
|
|
|
1,900 |
|
|
|
1,852 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
5,827 |
|
|
|
7,743 |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
1,592 |
|
|
|
1,994 |
|
Assets
held for sale
|
|
|
11,657 |
|
|
|
4,680 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
26,765 |
|
|
|
25,588 |
|
Property
and equipment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
3,154 |
|
|
|
6,874 |
|
Buildings
and leasehold improvements
|
|
|
7,897 |
|
|
|
12,642 |
|
Machinery
and equipment
|
|
|
4,924 |
|
|
|
5,332 |
|
Furniture
and fixtures
|
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
Total
property and equipment
|
|
|
16,504 |
|
|
|
25,359 |
|
Accumulated
depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(5,764 |
) |
|
|
(7,164 |
) |
Total
property and equipment, net
|
|
|
10,740 |
|
|
|
18,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
7,869 |
|
|
|
6,887 |
|
Other
intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization of $1,488 and $1,472 in
2009 and 2008, respectively
|
|
|
4,039 |
|
|
|
3,449 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
1,626 |
|
|
|
917 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
51,039 |
|
|
$ |
55,036 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral
part
of these consolidated financial statements.
|
|
June 30,
2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt and capital lease obligations
|
|
$ |
402 |
|
|
$ |
2,502 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
2,142 |
|
|
|
2,287 |
|
Income
taxes payable
|
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities
|
|
|
3,832 |
|
|
|
2,649 |
|
Liabilities
related to assets held for sale
|
|
|
3,799 |
|
|
|
1,644 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
10,567 |
|
|
|
9,563 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
1,713 |
|
|
|
2,306 |
|
Capital
Lease obligations, net of current position
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
481 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock, $.01 par value: authorized shares-10,000,000, issued and
outstanding shares-none
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Common
stock, $.01 par value: authorized shares-100,000,000, issued and
outstanding shares of 16,285,377 in 2009 and 2008,
respectively
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
94,214 |
|
|
|
94,161 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
(56,077 |
) |
|
|
(51,147 |
) |
|
|
|
38,299 |
|
|
|
43,172 |
|
Less
treasury stock at cost, 190,934 shares at June 30, 2009 and 5,532 shares
at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
(164 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
38,135 |
|
|
|
43,167 |
|
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
|
$ |
51,039 |
|
|
$ |
55,036 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral
part
of these consolidated financial statements.
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Consolidated
Statements of Operations
(Unaudited)
(in
thousands, except share and per share information)
|
|
Three Months Ended June
30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security
|
|
$ |
4,458 |
|
|
$ |
5,555 |
|
Digital
media marketing
|
|
|
2,758 |
|
|
|
5,472 |
|
Car
wash
|
|
|
1,298 |
|
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
|
8,514 |
|
|
|
12,870 |
|
Cost
of revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security
|
|
|
3,186 |
|
|
|
4,121 |
|
Digital
media marketing
|
|
|
1,883 |
|
|
|
3,700 |
|
Car
wash
|
|
|
1,216 |
|
|
|
1,563 |
|
|
|
|
6,285 |
|
|
|
9,384 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
4,179 |
|
|
|
4,739 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
284 |
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
1,282 |
|
|
|
2,608 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(3,484 |
) |
|
|
(4,145 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
(expense) income, net
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
26 |
|
Other
income
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(3,456 |
) |
|
|
(4,011 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(3,496 |
) |
|
|
(4,036 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations, net of tax of $0 in 2009 and
2008
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(3,332 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,929 |
) |
Per
share of common stock (basic and diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.21 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.25 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral
part
of these consolidated financial statements.
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Consolidated
Statements of Operations
(Unaudited)
(in
thousands, except share and per share information)
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security
|
|
$ |
8,636 |
|
|
$ |
10,841 |
|
Digital
media marketing
|
|
|
5,804 |
|
|
|
10,917 |
|
Car
wash
|
|
|
2,666 |
|
|
|
3,402 |
|
|
|
|
17,106 |
|
|
|
25,160 |
|
Cost
of revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security
|
|
|
6,128 |
|
|
|
8,015 |
|
Digital
media marketing
|
|
|
4,025 |
|
|
|
7,745 |
|
Car
wash
|
|
|
2,437 |
|
|
|
2,967 |
|
|
|
|
12,590 |
|
|
|
18,727 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
7,856 |
|
|
|
9,701 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
484 |
|
|
|
570 |
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
1,282 |
|
|
|
2,608 |
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(5,106 |
) |
|
|
(6,446 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
(expense) income, net
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
48 |
|
Other
income
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(5,074 |
) |
|
|
(6,178 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(5,154 |
) |
|
|
(6,228 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations, net of tax of $0 in 2009 and
2008
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
6,272 |
|
Net
(loss) income
|
|
$ |
(4,930 |
) |
|
$ |
44 |
|
Per
share of common stock (basic and diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.31 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.38 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.38 |
|
Net
(loss) income
|
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral
part
of these consolidated financial statements.
Mace Security International,
Inc.
Consolidated
Statement of Stockholders' Equity
(Unaudited)
(in
thousands, except share information)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Paid-in Capital
|
|
|
Comprehensive Income (loss)
|
|
|
Accumulated Deficit
|
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Balance
at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
$ |
94,161 |
|
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
(51,147 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
43,167 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense (see note 6)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53 |
|
Purchase
of treasury stock
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(159 |
) |
|
|
(159 |
) |
Unrealized
gain on short-term investments
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Net
loss
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4,930 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4,930 |
) |
Total
comprehensive loss
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4,926 |
) |
Balance
at June 30, 2009
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
$ |
94,214 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(56,077 |
) |
|
$ |
(164 |
) |
|
$ |
38,135 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral
part
of this consolidated financial statement.
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited) (in
thousands)
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Operating
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(loss) income
|
|
$ |
(4,930 |
) |
|
$ |
44 |
|
Income
from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
6,272 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(5,154 |
) |
|
|
(6,228 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile loss from continuing operations to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
484 |
|
|
|
571 |
|
Stock-based
compensation (see Note 6)
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Provision
for losses on receivables
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
Loss
on sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Asset
impairment charge
|
|
|
1,282 |
|
|
|
2,608 |
|
Gain
on short-term investments
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(186 |
) |
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
488 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
1,790 |
|
|
|
(358 |
) |
Prepaid
expenses and other assets
|
|
|
619 |
|
|
|
582 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
(1,233 |
) |
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(126 |
) |
Accrued
expenses
|
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
722 |
|
Income
taxes payable
|
|
|
(110 |
) |
|
|
(52 |
) |
Net
cash used in operating activities-continuing operations
|
|
|
(963 |
) |
|
|
(2,796 |
) |
Net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities-discontinued
operations
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
(853 |
) |
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(898 |
) |
|
|
(3,649 |
) |
Investing
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
of business, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
(1,721 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
|
|
(185 |
) |
|
|
(251 |
) |
Proceeds
from sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Proceeds
from sale of short-term investments
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Payments
for intangibles
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
Net
cash used in investing activities-continuing operations
|
|
|
(1,824 |
) |
|
|
(263 |
) |
Net
cash (used in) provided by investing activities-discontinued
operations
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
7,867 |
|
Net
cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
|
|
(1,850 |
) |
|
|
7,604 |
|
Financing
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments
on long-term debt
|
|
|
(256 |
) |
|
|
(742 |
) |
Payments
to repurchase stock
|
|
|
(159 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
cash used in financing activities-continuing operations
|
|
|
(415 |
) |
|
|
(742 |
) |
Net
cash used in financing activities-discontinued operations
|
|
|
(335 |
) |
|
|
(394 |
) |
Net
cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(750 |
) |
|
|
(1,136 |
) |
Net
(decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(3,498 |
) |
|
|
2,819 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
8,314 |
|
|
|
8,103 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$ |
4,816 |
|
|
$ |
10,922 |
|
The accompanying notes are an
integral
part
of these consolidated financial statement.
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
1.
|
Description
of Business and Basis of
Presentation
|
The
accompanying consolidated financial
statements include the accounts of Mace Security International, Inc. and its
wholly owned subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company” or “Mace”). All
significant intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The
Company currently operates in three business segments: the Security Segment,
selling consumer safety and personal defense products, as well as electronic
surveillance and monitoring products; the Digital Media Marketing Segment,
selling consumer products on the internet; and the Car Wash Segment, supplying
complete car care services (including wash, detailing, lube, and minor
repairs). The Company entered the digital media marketing business
with its acquisition of Linkstar Interactive, Inc. (“Linkstar”) on July 20, 2007
and the wholesale security monitoring business with its acquisition of Central
Station Security Systems, Inc. (“CSSS”) on April 30, 2009. See Note 4. Business Acquisitions and
Divestitures. The Company’s remaining car wash operations as of June 30,
2009 were located in Texas. As of June 30, 2009, the results for the Florida,
Austin, Texas, San Antonio, Texas and the Lubbock, Texas car wash regions have
been classified as discontinued operations in the statement of operations and
the statement of cash flows. The statements of operations and the statements of
cash flows for the prior years have been restated to reflect the discontinued
operations in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(“SFAS”) 144, Accounting for
the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. See Note 5. Discontinued Operations and
Assets Held for Sale.
2.
|
New Accounting
Standards
|
In April
2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued FSP
FAS 141R-1, Accounting for
Assets Acquired and Liabilities Assumed in a Business Combination That Arise from
Contingencies, (“FSP FAS 141R-1”), which amends and clarifies SFAS No.
141R. FSP FAS 141R-1 requires that assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a
business combination that arise from contingencies be recognized at fair value
if fair value can be reasonably estimated. If fair value cannot be reasonably
estimated, the asset or liability would generally be recognized in accordance
with FASB Statement No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies,
and FASB Interpretation No. 14, Reasonable Estimation of the Amount
of a Loss. Further, the FASB decided to remove the subsequent accounting
guidance for assets and liabilities arising from contingencies from SFAS 141R,
and carry forward without significant revision the guidance in SFAS No. 141,
Business Combinations.
FSP FAS 141R-1 is effective for assets or liabilities arising from contingencies
in business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the
beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December
15, 2008.
In April
2009, the FASB issued FSP FAS 107-1 and APB 28-1, Interim Disclosures about Fair Value
of Financial Instruments. This FSP amends SFAS No. 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of
Financial Instruments, to require disclosures about fair value of
financial instruments for interim reporting periods of publicly traded companies
as well as in annual financial statements. This FSP also amends APB Opinion No.
28, Interim Financial
Reporting, to require those disclosures in summarized financial
information at interim reporting periods. This FSP will be effective for interim
reporting periods ending after June 15, 2009. The adoption of FSP FAS
107-1 did not have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial
Statements.
In May
2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 165, Subsequent Events, (“SFAS
165”). SFAS 165 provides guidance to establish
general standards of accounting for and disclosures of events that occur after
the balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued or are
available to be issued. SFAS 165 also requires entities to disclose the date
through which subsequent events were evaluated as well as the rationale for why
that date was selected. SFAS 165 is effective for interim and annual periods
ending after June 15, 2009, and accordingly, we adopted this Standard
effective with this interim report for the period ending June 30, 2009. The
Company has performed an evaluation of subsequent events through August 12,
2009, which is the date the financial statements were issued. During this period
we did not have any material recognizable subsequent events. We did, however,
have non-recognizable subsequent events by selling a cell tower easement located
at one of the Company’s Arlington, Texas car wash properties on July 31, 2009
and by entering into an extension agreement with respect to the Company’s
Austin, Texas car washes. See Note 4, Business Acquisitions and
Divestitures, regarding the cell tower easement sale and the car wash
sale agreement extension.
In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 168, The FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, a
replacement of FASB Statement No. 162, (“SFAS 168”), which is
effective for the Company July 1, 2009. SFAS 168 does not change current
U.S. GAAP, but rather integrates existing accounting standards with other
authoritative guidance. Under SFAS 168, there will be a single source of
authoritative U.S. GAAP for nongovernmental entities and will supersede all
other previously issued non-SEC accounting and reporting guidance. The adoption
of SFAS 168 will not have any impact on our Consolidated Financial
Statements.
3.
|
Other
Intangible Assets
|
The
following table reflects the components of intangible assets, excluding goodwill
and other intangibles classified as assets held for sale (in
thousands):
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount
|
|
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
|
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount
|
|
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
515 |
|
|
$ |
201 |
|
|
$ |
465 |
|
|
$ |
164 |
|
|
|
|
1,824 |
|
|
|
574 |
|
|
|
1,184 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
|
590 |
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
590 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
Software
|
|
|
883 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
883 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
231 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
Total
amortized intangible assets
|
|
|
4,042 |
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
|
|
3,369 |
|
|
|
1,472 |
|
Non-amortized
intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trademarks-Security
Segment
|
|
|
1,007 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,074 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Trademarks-Digital
Media Marketing Segment
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
non-amortized intangible assets
|
|
|
1,485 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
intangible assets
|
|
$ |
5,527 |
|
|
$ |
1,488 |
|
|
$ |
4,921 |
|
|
$ |
1,472 |
|
The
following sets forth the estimated amortization expense on intangible assets for
the fiscal years ending December 31 (in thousands):
2009
|
|
$ |
451 |
|
2010
|
|
$ |
493 |
|
2011
|
|
$ |
452 |
|
2012
|
|
$ |
387 |
|
2013
|
|
$ |
277 |
|
Amortization
expense of other intangible assets, net of discontinued operations, was
approximately $120,000 and $147,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and
2008 and $224,000 and $295,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The weighted average useful life of amortizing intangible assets
was 5.0 years at June 30, 2009.
4.
|
Business
Acquisitions and Divestitures
|
Acquisitions
On April
30, 2009, the Company completed the purchase of all the outstanding common stock
of Central Station Security Systems, Inc. (“CSSS”) from CSSS’s shareholders. The
Company paid approximately $3.7 million consisting of $1.7 million in cash at
closing, potential additional payments up to $1.4 million upon the settlement of
certain contingencies as set forth in the Stock Purchase Agreement, $888,000 of
which is recorded in accrued expenses and other current liabilities and $481,000
which is recorded as other non-current liabilities at June 30, 2009, and the
assumption of approximately $590,000 of liabilities. CSSS, which is reported
within the Company’s Security Segment, is a national wholesale monitoring
company located in Anaheim, California, with approximately 300 security dealer
clients. CSSS owns and operates a UL-listed monitoring center that services over
30,000 end-user accounts. CSSS’s primary assets are accounts receivable,
equipment, customer contracts, and its business methods. The acquisition of CSSS
enables the Company to expand the marketing of its security products through
cross-marketing of the Company’s surveillance equipment products to CSSS’s
dealer base as well as offering the Company’s current customers monitoring
services. The purchase price was allocated as follows: approximately (i) $19,000
for cash; (ii) $112,000 for accounts receivable; (iii) $63,000 for prepaid
expenses and other assets; (iv) $443,000 for fixed assets and capital leased
assets; (v) the assumption of $590,000 of liabilities, and (vi) the remainder,
or $3.04 million, allocated to goodwill and other intangible assets. Within the
$3.04 million of acquired intangible assets, $1.98 million was assigned to
goodwill, which is not subject to amortization expense. The amount assigned to
goodwill was deemed appropriate based on several factors, including: (i)
multiples paid by market participants for businesses in the security monitoring
business; (ii) levels of CSSS’s current and future projected cash flows; (iii)
the Company’s strategic business plan, which included cross-marketing the
Company’s surveillance equipment products to CSSS’s dealer base as well as
offering the Company’s current customers monitoring services, thus potentially
increasing the value of its existing business segment; and (iv) the Company’s
plan to substitute the cash flows of the Car Wash Segment, which the Company is
exiting. The remaining intangible assets were assigned to customer
contracts and relationships for $940,000, tradename for $70,000, and a
non-compete agreement for $50,000. Customer relationships, tradename and the
non-compete agreement, were assigned a life of fifteen, three, and five years,
respectively. The acquisition was accounted for as a business combination in
accordance with SFAS 141(R), Business
Combinations.
Divestitures
In the
first quarter ending March 31, 2008, the Company sold its six full service car
washes in Florida in three separate transactions from January 4, 2008 to March
3, 2008 for total cash consideration of approximately $12.5 million at a gain of
approximately $6.9 million. Simultaneously with the sale, $4.2 million of cash
was used to pay down related mortgage debt.
On July
18, 2008, the Company entered into an agreement to sell one of its full service
car washes in Dallas, Texas for a total cash consideration of $1.8 million. The
Company completed the sale of the Dallas, Texas car wash on October 14, 2008.
Simultaneously with the sale, $1.24 million of cash was used to pay down related
mortgage debt.
On
January 14, 2009, the Company sold its two remaining San Antonio, Texas car
washes. The sale price of the car washes was $1.0 million, resulting in a loss
of approximately $7,000. The sale price was paid by the buyer issuing the
Company a secured promissory note in the amount of $750,000 bearing interest at
6% per annum plus cash of $250,000, less closing costs.
On
January 15, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement of sale for two of the
three car washes it owns in Austin, Texas for a sale price of $6.0 million. The
net book value of these two car washes is approximately $5.3 million.
Additionally, on April 6, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement of sale
for the third of the three car washes we own in Austin, Texas for a sale price
of $3.2 million. The net book value of this car wash is approximately $2.6
million. The closing date for these car washes has been extended to August 31,
2009 at the buyer’s request in exchange for the release of deposit monies to the
Company totaling $240,000. No assurance can be given that these transactions
will be consummated.
On May 5,
2009, the Company entered into an agreement of sale for an Arlington, Texas car
wash for a sale price of $2.95 million. The net book value of this car wash is
approximately $2.8 million. The agreement to sell the Arlington, Texas car wash
was terminated by the buyer through exercise of a contingency
clause.
On May
11, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement of sale for a Lubbock, Texas car
wash for a sale price of $800,000. The net book value of this car wash is
approximately $750,000. Additionally, on May 18, 2009, the Company
entered into an agreement of sale for an Arlington, Texas car wash for a sale
price of $979,000. The net book value of this car wash is approximately
$925,000. These transactions are subject to customary closing conditions,
including a general due diligence period. No assurance can be given that these
transactions will be consummated.
On July
31, 2009, the Company sold a cell tower easement located at one of the Company’s
Arlington, Texas car wash properties for a sales price of $292,000.
5.
Discontinued Operations and Assets Held for
Sale
The
Company follows the guidance within SFAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long Lived Assets, in reviewing the carrying value of our
long-lived assets held and used, and our assets to be disposed of, for possible
impairment when events and circumstances warrant such a review. We also follow
the criteria within the guidance of SFAS 144 in determining when to reclass
assets to be disposed of to assets and related liabilities held for sale as well
as when an operation disposed of or to be disposed of is classified as a
discontinued operation in the statements of operations and the statements of
cash flows.
The
Company entered into two separate agreements on November 8, 2007 and November
19, 2007 to sell five of its six full service car washes and a third agreement
in January 2008 to sell its final car wash in the Sarasota, Florida area. All
six Florida car washes were sold from January 4, 2008 to March 3,
2008.
Additionally,
on May 17, 2008 and June 30, 2008, the Company entered into two separate
agreements to sell two of its three full service car washes in Lubbock, Texas
for total cash consideration of $3.66 million. Additionally, on August 7, 2008,
the Company entered into an agreement to sell a full service car wash in
Arlington, Texas for total cash consideration of $3.6 million. The agreements to
sell the two Lubbock, Texas car washes and the Arlington, Texas car wash were
terminated by the buyers through the exercise of contingency clauses. The
Company received $10,700 in cancellation payments from the buyers’ exercise of
the contingency clauses. Also, as noted above, the Company entered into
agreements of sale for the three car washes it owns in Austin,
Texas.
Accordingly,
for financial statement purposes, the assets, liabilities, results of operations
and cash flows of the operations of our Florida, San Antonio, Texas, Lubbock,
Texas and our Austin, Texas car washes have been segregated from those of
continuing operations and are presented in the Company’s consolidated financial
statements as discontinued operations.
Revenues
from discontinued operations were $1.6 million and $3.0 million for the three
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $3.3 million and $5.3 million for the
six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Operating
income (loss) from discontinued operations was $166,000 and $132,000 for the
three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $236,000 and $(593,000) for the
six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Assets
and liabilities held for sale were comprised of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
As of June 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fort Worth,
Texas
|
|
|
Lubbock,
Texas
|
|
|
Austin,
Texas
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
held for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory
|
|
$ |
52 |
|
|
$ |
128 |
|
|
$ |
43 |
|
|
$ |
223 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
933 |
|
|
|
2,605 |
|
|
|
7,856 |
|
|
|
11,394 |
|
Intangible
Assets
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
985 |
|
|
$ |
2,733 |
|
|
$ |
7,939 |
|
|
$ |
11,657 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
related to assets held for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt
|
|
$ |
191 |
|
|
$ |
206 |
|
|
$ |
486 |
|
|
$ |
883 |
|
Long-term
debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
751 |
|
|
|
1,863 |
|
|
|
2,916 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
$ |
493 |
|
|
$ |
957 |
|
|
$ |
2,349 |
|
|
$ |
3,799 |
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fort Worth,
Texas
|
|
|
Lubbock,
Texas
|
|
|
San Antonio,
Texas
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
held for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
|
$ |
126 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
177 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
2,599 |
|
|
|
977 |
|
|
|
4,503 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
978 |
|
|
$ |
2,725 |
|
|
$ |
977 |
|
|
$ |
4,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
related to assets held for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt
|
|
$ |
589 |
|
|
$ |
201 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
790 |
|
Long-term
debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
854 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
854 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
$ |
589 |
|
|
$ |
1,055 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
1,644 |
|
6.
|
Stock-Based
Compensation
|
The
Company has two stock-based employee compensation plans. The Company follows
SFAS 123(R), Share-Based
Payment, which requires that the compensation cost relating to
share-based payment transactions be recognized in the financial statements. The
cost is recognized as compensation expense on a straight-line basis over the
life of the instruments, based upon the grant date fair value of the equity or
liability instruments issued. Total stock compensation expense is approximately
$2,700 and $52,800 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009, ($2,700 in
SG&A expense in the three month period and $52,800 in the six month period)
and $37,100 and $293,500 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008,
($36,900 in SG&A expense and $200 in discontinued operations in the three
month period and $290,900 in SG&A expense and $2,600 in the discontinued
operations in the six month period).
The fair
values of the Company’s options were estimated at the dates of grant using a
Black-Scholes option pricing model with the
following
weighted average assumptions:
|
|
Three Months Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
Six Months ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Expected
term years
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
|
|
2.75%
|
|
|
3.51%
to 3.91%
|
|
|
2.75%
to 3.21%
|
|
|
3.51%
to 3.91%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
48.6%
|
|
|
|
46%
|
|
|
|
48.6%
|
|
|
|
46%
|
|
Dividend
yield
|
|
|
0%
|
|
|
|
0%
|
|
|
|
0%
|
|
|
|
0%
|
|
Forfeiture
Rate
|
|
|
30%
|
|
|
11%
to 31%
|
|
|
|
30%
|
|
|
11%
to 31%
|
|
Expected
term: The Company’s expected life is based on the period the options are
expected to remain outstanding. The Company estimated this amount based on
historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the contractual
terms of the awards, vesting requirements and expectations of future
behavior.
Risk-free
interest rate: The Company uses the risk-free interest rate of a U.S. Treasury
Note with a similar term on the date of the grant.
Volatility:
The Company calculates the volatility of the stock price based on historical
value and corresponding volatility of the Company’s stock price over the prior
five years, to correspond with the Company’s focus on the Security
Segment.
Dividend
yield: The Company uses a 0% expected dividend yield as the Company has not paid
and does not anticipate declaring dividends in the near future.
Forfeitures:
The Company estimates forfeitures based on historical experience and factors of
known historical or future projected work force reduction actions to anticipate
the projected forfeiture rates.
During
the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, the Company granted 103,000 and
497,500 stock options, respectively. The weighted-average of the fair value of
stock option grants are $0.47 and $0.95 per share for the six months ended June
30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. As of June 30, 2009, total unrecognized
stock-based compensation expense is $155,300, which has a weighted average
period to be recognized of approximately 1.1 years.
The
Black-Scholes option valuation model was developed for use in estimating the
fair value of traded options which have no vesting restrictions and are fully
transferable. In addition, option valuation models require the input of highly
subjective assumptions including the expected stock price volatility. Because
the Company’s employee stock options have characteristics significantly
different from those of traded options, and because changes in the subjective
input assumptions can materially affect the fair value estimate, in management’s
opinion, the existing models do not necessarily provide a reliable single
measure of the fair value of its employee stock options.
7. Commitments
and Contingencies
The
Company is obligated under various operating leases, primarily for certain
equipment, vehicles, and real estate. Certain of these leases contain
purchase options, renewal provisions, and contingent rentals for the
proportionate share of taxes, utilities, insurance, and annual cost of living
increases. Future minimum lease payments under operating leases with
initial or remaining non-cancellable lease terms in excess of one year as of
June 30, 2009, for continuing operations are as follows: 2010 - $1.0 million;
2011 - $873,000; 2012 - $843,000; 2013 - $619,000; 2014- $308,000 and thereafter
- $509,000. Rental expense under these leases was $305,000 and
$291,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $537,000 and
$534,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
The
Company subleases a portion of the building space at several of its car wash
facilities and its California leased office space related to its Digital Media
Marketing Segment either on a month-to-month basis or under cancelable
leases. During the three months ending June 30, 2009 and 2008,
revenues under these leases were approximately $20,000 and $27,000, respectively
and $52,000 and $40,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. These amounts are recorded in SG&A expense as a
reduction of rental expense in the accompanying consolidated statements of
operations.
As a
result of its continued cost saving efforts, the Company decided to terminate a
leased office in Fort Lauderdale, Florida during the second quarter
2008. Effective December 31, 2008, the lease’s termination date, the
executives in the terminated office were moved to other offices of the Company.
The lease termination resulted in a one time fee of $38,580, which was paid and
included in SG&A expense in the second quarter of 2008.
The
Company is subject to federal and state environmental regulations, including
rules relating to air and water pollution and the storage and disposal of oil,
other chemicals, and waste. The Company believes that it complies, in
all material respects, with all applicable laws relating to its business. See
also the discussion below concerning the environmental remediation which
occurred at the Bennington, Vermont location in 2008.
Certain
of the Company’s executive officers have entered into employee stock option
agreements pursuant to which options issued to them shall immediately vest upon
a change in control of the Company.
The Board
of Directors of the Company terminated Mr. Paolino as the Chief Executive
Officer of the Company on May 20, 2008. On June 9, 2008, the Company
received a Demand for Arbitration from Mr. Paolino (“Arbitration
Demand”). The Arbitration Demand has been filed with the American
Arbitration Association in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (“Arbitration
Proceeding”). The primary allegations of the Arbitration Demand are:
(i) Mr. Paolino alleges that he was terminated by the Company wrongfully and is
owed a severance payment of $3,918,120 due to the termination; (ii) Mr. Paolino
is claiming that the Company owes him $322,606 because the Company did not issue
him a sufficient number of stock options in August 2007, under provisions of the
Employment Contract between Mr. Paolino and the Company dated August 21, 2006;
(iii) Mr. Paolino is claiming damages against the Company in excess of
$6,000,000, allegedly caused by the Company having defamed Mr. Paolino’s
professional reputation and character in the Current Report on Form 8-K dated
May 20, 2008 filed by the Company and in the press release the Company issued on
May 21, 2008, relating to Mr. Paolino’s termination; and (iv) Mr.
Paolino is also seeking punitive damages, attorney’s fees and costs in an
unspecified amount. The Company has disputed the allegations made by Mr. Paolino
and is defending itself in the Arbitration Proceeding. The Company has also
filed a counterclaim in the Arbitration Proceeding demanding damages from Mr.
Paolino of $1,000,000. The arbitrators, who will decide claims of the
parties, have scheduled hearing dates in the fall of 2009. Discovery in the
Arbitration Proceeding has not been concluded. It is not possible to predict the
outcome of the Arbitration Proceeding. No accruals have been made with respect
to Mr. Paolino’s claims.
Mr.
Paolino has demanded that the Company pay Mr. Paolino’s costs of defending the
Company’s $1,000,000 counterclaim that was filed in the Arbitration Proceeding.
The Company has refused Mr. Paolino’s letter demand for indemnification. Mr.
Paolino on March 30, 2009, filed a Complaint (“Indemnity Complaint”) in the
Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware seeking to compel the Company to
indemnify Mr. Paolino’s defense costs. The Indemnity Complaint alleges that the
Company is obligated to pay for Mr. Paolino’s defense of the Company’s
counterclaim under Article 6, Section 6.01 of the Company’s Bylaws. The Company
has filed a motion with the Chancery Court for dismissal of Mr. Paolino’s
Indemnity Complaint.
On June
25, 2008, Mr. Paolino filed a claim with the United States Department of Labor
claiming that his termination as Chief Executive Officer of the Company was an
“unlawful discharge” in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1514A, a provision of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “DOL Complaint”). Mr. Paolino has alleged that
he was terminated in retaliation for demanding that certain risk factors be set
forth in the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, filed by
the Company on May 15, 2008. Even though the risk factors demanded by Mr.
Paolino were set forth in the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March
31, 2008, Mr. Paolino in the DOL Complaint asserts that the demand was a
“protected activity” under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1514A , which protects Mr. Paolino
against a “retaliatory termination”. In the DOL Complaint, Mr.
Paolino demands the same damages he requested in the Arbitration Demand and
additionally requests reinstatement as Chief Executive Officer with back pay
from the date of termination. On September 23, 2008 the Secretary of
Labor, acting through the Regional Administrator for the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, Region III dismissed the DOL Complaint and issued
findings (the “Findings”) that there was no reasonable cause to believe that the
Company violated 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1514A of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. The Findings further stated that: (i) the investigation
revealed that Mr. Paolino was discharged for non-retaliatory reasons that were
unrelated to his alleged protected activity; (ii) Mr. Paolino was discharged
because of his failure to comply with a Board directive to reduce costs; (iii)
the Board terminated Mr. Paolino’s employment because of his failure to follow
its directions and for his failure to reduce corporate overhead and expenses;
and (iv) a preponderance of the evidence indicates that the alleged protected
activity was not a contributing factor in the adverse action taken against Mr.
Paolino. Mr. Paolino has filed objections to the
Findings. As a result of the objections, an Administrative Law Judge
set a date for a “de novo” hearing on Mr. Paolino’s claims. A “de
novo hearing” is a proceeding where evidence is presented to the Administrative
Law Judge and the Administrative Law Judge rules on the claims based on the
evidence presented at the hearing. Upon the motion of Mr. Paolino,
the de novo hearing and the claims made in the DOL Complaint have been stayed
pending the conclusion of the Arbitration Proceeding. The
Company will defend itself against the allegations made in the DOL Complaint,
which the Company believes are without merit. Although the Company is confident
that it will prevail, it is not possible to predict the outcome of the DOL
Complaint or when the matter will reach a conclusion.
As
previously disclosed, on May 8, 2008, Car Care, Inc. (“Car Care”), a
defunct subsidiary of the Company that owned four of the Company’s Northeast
region car washes, the Company’s former Northeast region car wash
manager and four former general managers of four Northeast region car washes,
were each indicted with and pled guilty to one felony count of conspiracy to
defraud the government, harboring illegal aliens and identity
theft. To resolve the indictment, Car Care entered into a written
Guilty Plea Agreement on June 23, 2008 with the government, to plead guilty to
the one count of conspiracy charged in the indictment. Under this
agreement, on June 27, 2008, Car Care paid a criminal fine of $100,000 and
forfeited $500,000 in proceeds from the sale of the four car washes. A charge of
$600,000 was recorded as a component of income from discontinued operations as
of March 31, 2008, as prescribed by SFAS No.5, Accounting for Contingencies.
The Company was not named in the indictment and, according to the plea
agreement, will not be charged. The Company fully cooperated with the
government in its investigation of this matter.
During
January 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) conducted a site
investigation at the Company’s Bennington, Vermont location and the building
within which the facility is located. The Company leases 44,000
square feet of the building from Vermont Mill Properties, Inc. (“Vermont
Mill”). The site investigation was focused on whether hazardous
substances were being improperly stored. After the site
investigation, the EPA notified the Company and the building owner that
remediation of certain hazardous wastes were required. The EPA, the
Company and the building owner entered into an Administrative Consent Order
under which the hazardous materials and waste were remediated. All remediation
required by the Administrative Consent Order was completed within the time
allowed by the EPA and a final report regarding the remediation was submitted to
the EPA in October 2008, as required by the Administrative Consent
Order. The Company has not received any comments from the EPA
regarding the final report. A total estimated cost of approximately $710,000
relating to the remediation, which includes disposal of the waste materials, as
well as expenses incurred to engage environmental engineers and legal counsel
and reimbursement of the EPA’s costs, has been recorded through December 31,
2008. This amount represents management’s best estimate of probable loss, as
defined by SFAS No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies.
Approximately $594,000 has been paid to date, leaving an accrual balance of
$116,000 at June 30, 2009 for estimated EPA costs.
In
addition to the EPA site investigation, the United States Attorney for the
District of Vermont (“U.S. Attorney”) conducted a search of the Company’s
Bennington, Vermont location and the building in which the facility is located,
during February 2008, under a search warrant issued by the U.S. District Court
for the District of Vermont. On May 2, 2008, the U.S. Attorney issued
a grand jury subpoena to the Company. The subpoena required the
Company to provide the U.S. Attorney documents related to the storage, disposal
and transportation of materials at the Bennington, Vermont
location. The Company has supplied the documents and fully cooperated
with the U.S. Attorney’s investigation and will continue to do
so. The Company does not expect that any further action will be taken
by the U.S. Attorney. The Company has made no provision for any
future costs associated with the investigation.
On
September 19, 2008, the Company received a proposed assessment from a sales tax
audit in the State of Florida for the audit period of August 2004 through July
2007. In the proposed assessment, audit deficiency, including interest, totaled
$600,307. Based on documentation provided to the State, the Company settled this
matter with a payment of $45,000 in March 2009.
The
Company is a party to various other legal proceedings related to its normal
business activities. In the opinion of the Company’s management, none
of these proceedings are material in relation to the Company’s results of
operations, liquidity, cash flows, or financial condition.
8.
Business Segments Information
The
Company currently operates in three segments: the Security Segment, the Digital
Media Marketing Segment, and the Car Wash Segment.
The
Company evaluates performance and allocates resources based on operating income
of each reportable segment rather than at the operating unit
level. The Company defines operating income as revenues less cost of
revenues, selling, general and administrative expense, and depreciation and
amortization expense. The accounting policies of the reportable
segments are the same as those described in the Summary of Critical Accounting
Policies (see below in
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations). There is no intercompany profit or loss
recognized on intersegment sales.
The
Company’s reportable segments are business units that offer different services
and products. The reportable segments are each managed separately
because they provide distinct services or produce and distribute distinct
products through different processes.
Selected
financial information for each reportable segment from continuing operations is
as follows:
|
|
Security
|
|
|
Digital
Media
Marketing
|
|
|
Car
Wash
|
|
|
Corporate
Functions(1)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Three
months ended June 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
from external customers
|
|
|
4,458 |
|
|
|
2,758 |
|
|
|
1,298 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,514 |
|
Segment
operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(842 |
) |
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
(1,386 |
) |
|
|
(2,202 |
) |
Segment
assets (2)
|
|
|
16,486 |
|
|
|
8,578 |
|
|
|
14,318 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
39,382 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
1,982 |
|
|
|
5,887 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7,869 |
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six
months ended June 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
from external customers
|
|
|
8,636 |
|
|
|
5,804 |
|
|
|
2,666 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
17,106 |
|
Segment
operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(1,229 |
) |
|
|
316 |
|
|
|
(263 |
) |
|
|
(2,648 |
) |
|
|
(3,824 |
) |
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three
months ended June 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
from external customers
|
|
|
5,555 |
|
|
|
5,472 |
|
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12,870 |
|
Segment
operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(578 |
) |
|
|
317 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(1,263 |
) |
|
|
(1,537 |
) |
Segment
assets (2)
|
|
|
17,630 |
|
|
|
11,134 |
|
|
|
35,989 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
64,753 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
1,344 |
|
|
|
6,887 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8,231 |
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six
months ended June 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
from external customers
|
|
|
10,841 |
|
|
|
10,917 |
|
|
|
3,402 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
25,160 |
|
Segment
operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(1,303 |
) |
|
|
351 |
|
|
|
(151 |
) |
|
|
(2,735 |
) |
|
|
(3,838 |
) |
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
251 |
|
A
reconciliation of operating income for reportable segments to total reported
operating loss is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
operating loss for reportable segments
|
|
$ |
(2,202 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,537 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,824 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,838 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
(1,282 |
) |
|
|
(2,608 |
) |
|
|
(1,282 |
) |
|
|
(2,608 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
reported operating loss
|
|
$ |
(3,484 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,145 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,106 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,446 |
) |
(1) Corporate
functions include the corporate treasury, legal, financial reporting,
information technology, corporate tax, corporate
insurance, human resources, investor relations, and other typical centralized
administrative functions.
(2) Segment
assets exclude assets held for sale.
9. Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets,
liabilities, revenues and expenses, as well as the disclosure of contingent
assets and liabilities at the date of its consolidated financial statements. The
Company bases its estimates on historical experience, actuarial valuations and
various other factors that are believed to be 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. Some of those judgments can be subjective and complex, and
consequently, actual results may differ from these estimates under different
assumptions or conditions. The Company must make these estimates and assumptions
because certain information is dependent on future events and cannot be
calculated with a high degree of precision from the data currently available.
Such estimates include the Company's estimates of reserves such as the allowance
for doubtful accounts, sales returns, warranty allowances, inventory valuation
allowances, insurance losses and loss reserves, valuation of long-lived assets,
estimates of realization of income tax net operating loss carryforwards,
computation of stock-based compensation, as well as valuation calculations such
as the Company’s goodwill impairment calculations under the provisions of SFAS
142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets.
10. Income
Taxes
The
Company recorded income tax expense of $40,000 and $25,000 from continuing
operations in the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $80,000 and
$50,000 for continuing operations in the six months ended June 2009 and 2008,
respectively. Income tax expense reflects the recording of income taxes on
income from continuing operations at an effective rate of approximately (1.6)%
in 2009 and (0.8)% in 2008. The effective rate differs from the federal
statutory rate for each year primarily due to state and local income taxes,
non-deductible costs related to intangibles, fixed asset adjustments and changes
to the valuation allowance. It is management’s belief that it is unlikely that
the net deferred tax asset will be realized and as a result it has been fully
reserved. Additionally, the Company recorded no income tax expense related to
discontinued operations for either of the three or six month periods ended June
30, 2009 and 2008.
The
Company follows the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes (“FIN 48”), an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (“SFAS
109”). FIN 48 prescribes a model for the recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return, and provides guidance on
recognition, classification, interest and penalties, disclosure and transition.
At June 30, 2009, the Company did not have any significant unrecognized tax
benefits. The total amount of interest and penalties recognized in the
statements of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 is
insignificant and when incurred is reported as interest expense.
11. Asset
Impairment Charges
In
accordance with SFAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, we periodically review the carrying value
of our long-lived assets held and used, and assets to be disposed of, for
possible impairment when events and circumstances warrant such a review. Assets
classified as held for sale are measured at the lower of carrying value or fair
value, net of costs to sell.
Continuing
Operations
In June
2008, management made a decision to discontinue marketing efforts by its
subsidiary, Promopath, the online marketing division of Linkstar, to third-party
customers on a non-exclusive CPA basis, both brokered and through promotional
sites. Management’s decision was the result of business environment changes in
which the ability to maintain non-exclusive third-party relationships at an
adequate profit margin became increasingly difficult. Promopath will continue to
market and acquire customers for the Company’s e-commerce operation, Linkstar.
As a result of this decision, the value assigned to customer relationships at
the time of the acquisition of Promopath in accordance with SFAS 141, Business Combinations, was
determined to be impaired as of June 30, 2008 in that future undiscounted cash
flows relating to this asset were insufficient to recover its carrying value.
Accordingly, in the second quarter of 2008, in accordance with SFAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, we recorded an impairment charge of
approximately $1.4 million representing the net book value of the Promopath
customer relationship intangible asset at June 30, 2008.
During
the quarter ended June 30, 2008, we wrote down assets related to two
full-service car washes in Arlington, Texas by approximately $1.2
million. Additionally, during the quarter ended December 31, 2008, we
wrote down the assets of two of our Arlington, Texas area car wash sites by
approximately $1.0 million. We determined that based on current data utilized to
estimate the fair value of these car wash facilities, the future expected cash
flows would not be sufficient to recover their carrying values.
In the
fourth quarter of 2008, we consolidated the inventory in our Ft. Lauderdale,
Florida warehouse into our Farmers Branch, Texas facility. Certain of our
administrative and sales staff of our Security Segment’s electronic surveillance
products division remain in the Ft. Lauderdale, Florida building which we listed
for sale with a real estate broker. We performed an updated market valuation of
this property, with a current listing of this facility for sale at a price of
$1,750,000. We recorded an impairment charge of $275,000 related to this
property at December 31, 2008 and an additional impairment charge of $60,000 at
June 30, 2009 to write-down the property to our estimate of net realizable
value.
In the
second quarter of 2009, we conducted our annual assessment of goodwill for
impairment for our Digital Media Marketing Segment as of June 30, 2009. We
updated our forecasted cash flows of this reporting unit during the second
quarter. This update considered current economic conditions and trends,
estimated future operating results for the launch of new products as well as
non-product revenue growth, and anticipated future economic and regulatory
conditions. Based on the results of our assessment of goodwill impairment, the
net book value of our Digital Media Marketing Segment reporting unit exceeded
its fair value. With the noted potential impairment, we performed the second
step of the impairment test to determine the implied fair value of goodwill. The
resulting implied goodwill was $5.9 million which exceeded the recorded value of
goodwill of $6.9 million; accordingly, we recorded an impairment to write down
goodwill of this reporting unit by $1.0 million. Additionally, due to continuing
deterioration in our Mace Security Products, Inc. reporting unit, we performed
certain impairment testing of our remaining intangible assets, specifically, the
value assigned to customer lists, product lists, and trademarks as of June 30,
2009. We recorded an additional impairment charge to trademarks of approximately
$80,000 and an impairment charge of $142,000 to customer lists, both principally
related to our consumer direct electronic surveillance operations at June 30,
2009.
Discontinued
Operations
We closed
the two remaining car wash locations in San Antonio, Texas in the quarter ended
September 30, 2008. In connection with the closing of these two facilities, we
wrote down the assets of these sites by approximately $310,000 to our estimate
of net realizable value based on our plan to sell the two facilities for real
estate value. Additionally, during the quarter ending December 31, 2008, we
closed a full-service car wash location in Lubbock, Texas and wrote down the
assets of this site by approximately $670,000 to an updated appraisal value
based on our plan to sell this facility for real estate value. We also wrote
down an additional Lubbock, Texas location by approximately $250,000 during the
quarter ending December 31, 2008. We have determined that due to further
reductions in car wash volumes at these sites resulting from increased
competition and a deterioration in demographics in the immediate geographic
areas of these sites, current economic pressures, along with current data
utilized to estimate the fair value of these car wash facilities, future
expected cash flows would not be sufficient to recover their carrying
values.
12.
Related Party Transactions
The
Company’s Security Segment leases manufacturing and office space under a
five-year lease with Vermont Mill. Vermont Mill is controlled by Jon E.
Goodrich, a former director and current employee of the Company. In November
2004, the Company exercised an option to continue the lease through November
2009 at a rate of $10,576 per month. The Company amended the lease in 2008 to
occupy additional space for an additional $200 per month. We also began leasing
in November 2008, on a month-to-month basis through May 2009, approximately
3,000 square feet of temporary inventory storage space at a monthly cost of
$1,200. Rent expense under this lease was $34,728 and $31,728 for the three
months ending June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $70,656 and $63,456 for the six months
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Mace has the option to cancel the
lease with proper notice and a payment equal to six months of the then current
rent.
13. Long-Term
Debt, Notes Payable and Capital Lease Obligations
At June
30, 2009, we had borrowings, including capital lease obligations and borrowings
related to discontinued operations, of approximately $6.1 million, substantially
all of which is secured by mortgages against certain of our real
property. Of such borrowings, approximately $4.2 million, including
$3.8 million of long-term debt included in liabilities related to assets held
for sale, is reported as current as it is due or expected to be repaid in less
than twelve months from June 30, 2009. On May 8, 2009, the Company entered into
Amendments to its Business Loan Agreements with JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.
(“Chase”) to renew four car wash mortgages which were up for periodic renewal
from June 2009 through October 2009, and a mortgage on the Company’s Farmers
Branch, Texas warehouse facility up for periodic renewal in September 2009.
These loans, classified as current at December 31, 2008, were renewed by Chase
for a two- year period for the four car washes and a three- year period for the
Farmers Branch, Texas warehouse facility. Accordingly, certain of these loans
were classified to long-term debt at June 30, 2009, with certain loans
classified as Liabilities related to assets held for sale.
We have
two letters of credit outstanding at June 30, 2009 totaling $570,364 as
collateral relating to workers’ compensation insurance policies. We maintain a
$500,000 revolving credit facility to provide financing for additional
electronic surveillance product inventory purchases. There were no
borrowings outstanding under the revolving credit facility at June 30,
2009. The Company
also maintains a $300,000 line of credit for commercial letters of credit for
the importation of inventory. There were no outstanding commercial letters of
credit under this commitment at June 30, 2009.
Our most
significant borrowings, including borrowings related to discontinued operations
are secured notes payable to Chase, in the amount of $4.9 million, $1.7 million
of which was classified as non-current debt at June 30, 2009. The
Chase agreements contain affirmative and negative covenants, including covenants
relating to the maintenance of certain levels of tangible net worth, the
maintenance of certain levels of unencumbered cash and marketable securities,
limitations on capital spending and certain financial reporting requirements.
The Chase agreements are our only debt agreements that contain an express
prohibition on incurring additional debt for borrowed money without the approval
of the lender. As of June 30, 2009, our warehouse and office facility
in Farmers Branch, Texas and eight car washes were encumbered by
mortgages.
The Chase
term loan agreement also limits capital expenditures annually to $1.0 million,
requires the Company to provide Chase with an Annual Report on Form 10-K and
audited financial statements within 120 days of the Company’s fiscal year end
and a Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q within 60 days after the end of each fiscal
quarter, and requires the maintenance of a minimum total unencumbered cash and
marketable securities balance of $3 million. The maintenance of a minimum total
unencumbered cash and marketable securities balance requirement was reduced to
$3 million from $5 million on May 8, 2009 as part of the Amendments to the Chase
loan agreements noted above. If we are unable to satisfy these
covenants and we cannot obtain waivers, the Chase notes may be reflected as
current in future balance sheets and as a result our stock price may decline. We
were in compliance with these covenants as of June 30, 2009.
If we
default on any of the Chase covenants and are not able to obtain amendments or
waivers, Chase debt totaling $4.9 million at June 30, 2009, including debt
recorded as long-term debt at June 30, 2009, could become due and payable on
demand, and Chase could foreclose on the assets pledged in support of the
relevant indebtedness. If our assets (including up to eight of our
car wash facilities as of June 30, 2009) are foreclosed upon, revenues from our
Car Wash Segment, which comprised 14.6% of our total revenues for fiscal year
2008 and 15.6% of our total revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2009,
would be severely impacted and we may be unable to continue to operate our
business.
14. Accrued
Expenses and Other Current Liabilities
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities consist of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
613 |
|
|
$ |
534 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
acquisition consideration
|
|
|
888 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,331 |
|
|
|
2,115 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,832 |
|
|
$ |
2,649 |
|
15.
Earnings Per Share
The
following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings (loss)
per share (in thousands, except share and per share data):
|
|
Three Months Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(Loss) income
|
|
$ |
(3,332 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,929 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,930 |
) |
|
$ |
44 |
|
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator
for basic earnings per share-weighted-average shares
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
Dilutive
effect of options and warrants
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Denominator
for diluted earnings per share-weighted-average shares
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
|
|
16,285,377 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
Basic
and diluted (loss) income per share
|
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
$ |
- |
|
The
effect of options and warrants for the periods in which we incurred a net loss
has been excluded as it would be anti-dilutive. The options and warrants
excluded totaled 3,230 and 90,884, for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and
2008 and 2,261 and 175,228 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
16. Equity
On August
13, 2007, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase program
to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock up to a maximum value of $2.0
million. Purchases will be made in the open market, if and when management
determines to effect purchases. Management may elect not to make purchases or to
make purchases totaling less than $2.0 million in amount. Through June 30, 2009,
the Company purchased 370,810 shares on the open market, at a total cost of
approximately $406,000 with 190,934 shares included in treasury stock at June
30, 2009.
17. Florida
Security Division
As
previously disclosed, in April 2007, we determined that the former divisional
controller of the Florida Security division embezzled funds from the Company. In
January 2009, we recovered $41,510 of funds from an investment account of the
former divisional controller where certain of the embezzled funds were
deposited. The recovered funds were reported as a component of operating income
in the first quarter of 2009.
Item
2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations
The
following discussion of the financial condition and results of operations should
be read in conjunction with the financial statements and the notes thereto
included in this report on Form 10-Q.
Forward-Looking
Statements
This
report includes forward looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Forward-Looking Statements”). All
statements other than statements of historical fact included in this report are
Forward-Looking Statements. Forward-Looking Statements are statements
related to future, not past, events. In this context, Forward-Looking Statements
often address our expected future business and financial performance and
financial condition, and often contain words such as "expect," "anticipate,"
"intend," "plan," believe," "seek," or ''will." Forward-Looking Statements by
their nature address matters that are, to different degrees, uncertain. For us,
particular uncertainties that could cause our actual results to be materially
different than those expressed in our Forward-Looking Statements include: the
severity and duration of current economic and financial conditions; our success
in selling our remaining car washes; the level of demand of the customers we
serve for our goods and services, and numerous other matters of national,
regional and global scale, including those of a political, economic, business
and competitive nature. These uncertainties are described in more detail in
Part II, Item 1A. Risk
Factors of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. The Forward- Looking Statements
made herein are only made as of the date of this filing, and we undertake no
obligation to publicly update such Forward-Looking Statements to reflect
subsequent events or circumstances.
Summary
of Critical Accounting Policies
The
discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is
based upon the Company's consolidated financial statements, which have been
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires the
Company to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of
contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the Company's financial
statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions.
Critical
accounting policies are defined as those that are reflective of significant
judgments and uncertainties, and potentially result in materially different
results under different assumptions and conditions. The Company’s critical
accounting policies are described below.
Revenue Recognition and Deferred
Revenue
The
Company recognizes revenue in accordance with Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”)
No. 104, Revenue Recognition
in Financial Statements. Under SAB No. 104, the Company recognizes
revenue when the following criteria have been met: persuasive evidence of an
arrangement exists, the fees are fixed and determinable, no significant
obligations remain and collection of the related receivable is reasonably
assured. Allowances for sales returns, discounts and allowances, are estimated
and recorded concurrent with the recognition of the sale and are primarily based
on historical return rates.
Revenue
from the Company’s Security Segment is recognized when shipments are made or
security monitoring services are provided, or for export sales when title has
passed. Shipping and handling charges and costs of $134,000 and
$191,000 for the three months ending June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $281,000 and
$339,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively are
included in cost of revenues. Prior year amounts, which were originally recorded
as SG&A expenses, were reclassed to conform to current year
presentation.
The
e-commerce division recognizes revenue and the related product costs for trial
product shipments after the expiration of the trial period. Marketing costs
incurred by the e-commerce division are recognized as incurred. The online
marketing division recognizes revenue and cost of sales consistent with the
provisions of the Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 99-19, Reporting Revenue Gross as a
Principal versus Net as an Agent, the Company records revenue based on
the gross amount received from advertisers and the amount paid to the publishers
placing the advertisements as cost of sales. Shipping and handling charges
related to the e-commerce division of the Company’s Digital Media
Marketing Segment of $161,000 and $366,000 are included in cost of revenues for
the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $357,000 and $821,000 for the
six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Prior year amounts, which
were originally recorded as SG&A expenses, were reclassed to conform to
current year presentation.
Revenue
from the Company’s Car Wash Segment is recognized, net of customer coupon
discounts, when services are rendered or fuel or merchandise is sold. Sales tax
collected from customers and remitted to the applicable taxing authorities is
accounted for on a net basis, with no impact to revenues. The Company records a
liability for gift certificates, ticket books, and seasonal and annual passes
sold at its car wash locations but not yet redeemed. The Company estimates these
unredeemed amounts based on gift certificates and ticket book sales and
redemptions throughout the year as well as utilizing historical sales and
redemption rates per the car washes’ point-of-sale systems. Seasonal and annual
passes are amortized on a straight-line basis over the time during which the
passes are valid.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and
cash equivalents consist of cash and highly liquid short-term investments with
original maturities of three months or less, and credit card deposits which are
converted into cash within two to three business days.
At June
30, 2009, the Company had approximately $973,000 of short-term investments
classified as available for sale in one broker account consisting of
certificates of deposit. A cumulative unrealized loss, net of tax, of
approximately $1,000 is included as a separate component of equity in
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income at June 30, 2009.
On June
18, 2008, we requested redemption of a short-term investment in a hedge fund,
namely the Victory Fund, Ltd. Under the Limited Partnership Agreement with the
hedge fund, the redemption request was timely for a return of the investment
account balance as of September 30, 2008, payable ten business days after the
end of the September 30, 2008 quarter. The hedge fund acknowledged that the
redemption amount owed was $3,206,748. On October 15, 2008 the hedge fund
asserted the right to withhold the redemption amount due to extraordinary market
circumstances. After negotiations, the hedge fund agreed to pay the redemption
amount in two installments, $1,000,000 on November 3, 2008 and $2,206,748 on
January 15, 2009. The Company received the first installment of $1,000,000 on
November 5, 2008. The Company has not received the second
installment. On January 21, 2009, the principal of the Victory Fund,
Ltd, Arthur Nadel, was criminally charged with operating a “Ponzi”
scheme. Additionally, the SEC has initiated a civil case against Mr.
Nadel and others alleging that Arthur Nadel defrauded investors in the Victory
Fund, LLC and five other hedge funds by massively overstating the value of
investments in these funds and issuing false and misleading account statements
to investors. The SEC also alleges that Mr. Nadel transferred large sums of
investor funds to secret accounts which only he controlled. A
receiver has been appointed in the civil case and has been directed to
administer and manage the business affairs, funds, assets, and any other
property of Mr. Nadel, the Victory Fund, LLC and the five other hedge funds and
conduct and institute such legal proceedings that benefit the hedge fund
investors. Accordingly, we recorded a charge of $2,206,748 as an
investment loss at December 31, 2008. If we recover any of the investment loss,
such amounts will be recorded as recoveries in future periods when received. The
original amount invested in the hedge fund was $2,000,000.
Fair
Value Measurements
The
Company adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements,
(“SFAS 157”) as of January 1, 2008 for financial assets and liabilities
and January 1, 2009 for all nonrecurring fair value measurements of nonfinancial
assets. In general, the Company’s nonfinancial assets and liabilities that are
measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis include goodwill, intangible
assets and long-lived tangible assets including property, plant and equipment.
The Company did not adjust any nonfinancial assets or liabilities measured at
fair value on a nonrecurring basis to fair value during the three months ended
June 30, 2009. Although the adoption of SFAS No. 157 did not
materially impact our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows,
additional disclosures about fair value measurements are required.
The
following table shows the assets included in the accompanying balance sheet
which are measured at fair value on a recurring basis and the source of the fair
value measurement:
(In thousands)
|
|
Fair Value Measurement Using
|
|
Description
|
|
Fair Value at
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
Quoted Market
Prices(1)
|
|
|
Observable
Inputs(2)
|
|
|
Unobservable
Inputs(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
$ |
973 |
|
|
$ |
973 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
(1) This
is the highest level of fair value input and represents inputs to fair value
from quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities to
those being valued.
(2) Directly
or indirectly observable inputs, other than quoted prices in active markets, for
the assets or liabilities being valued including but not limited to, interest
rates, yield curves, principal-to principal markets, etc.
(3) Lowest
level of fair value input because it is unobservable and reflects the Company’s
own assumptions about what market participants would use in pricing assets and
liabilities at fair
value.
The
Company’s accounts receivable are due from trade customers. Credit is
extended based on evaluation of customers’ financial condition and, generally,
collateral is not required. Accounts receivable payment terms vary
and amounts due from customers are stated in the financial statements net of an
allowance for doubtful accounts. Accounts outstanding longer than the
payment terms are considered past due. The Company determines its
allowance by considering a number of factors, including the length of time trade
accounts receivable are past due, the Company’s previous loss history, the
customer’s current ability to pay its obligation to the Company, and the
condition of the general economy and the industry as a whole. The
Company writes off accounts receivable when they are deemed uncollectible, and
payments subsequently received on such receivables are credited to the allowance
for doubtful accounts. Risk of losses from international sales within the
Security Segment are reduced by requiring substantially all international
customers to provide either irrevocable confirmed letters of credit or cash
advances.
Inventories
are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is determined using
the first-in first-out (“FIFO”) method for security, e-commerce and car care
products. Inventories within the Company’s Security Segment consist of defense
sprays, child safety products, electronic security monitors, cameras and digital
recorders, and various other consumer security and safety products. Inventories
within the e-commerce division of the Digital Media Marketing segment consist of
several health and beauty products. Inventories at the Company’s car wash
locations consist of various chemicals and cleaning supplies used in operations
and merchandise and fuel for resale to consumers. The Company
continually and at least on a quarterly basis reviews the book value of slow
moving inventory items, as well as discontinued product lines to determine if
inventory is properly valued. The Company identifies slow moving or discontinued
product lines by a detail review of recent sales volumes of inventory items as
well as a review of recent selling prices versus cost and assesses the ability
to dispose of inventory items at a price greater than cost. If it is determined
that cost is less than market value, then cost is used for inventory valuation.
If market value is less than cost, then an adjustment is made to the Company’s
obsolescence reserve to adjust the inventory to market value. When slow moving
items are sold at a price less than cost, the difference between cost and
selling price is charged against the established obsolescence
reserve.
Property
and Equipment
Property
and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation is recorded using the
straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which are
generally as follows: buildings and leasehold improvements - 15 to 40 years;
machinery and equipment - 5 to 20 years; and furniture and fixtures - 5 to 10
years. Significant additions or improvements extending assets' useful
lives are capitalized; normal maintenance and repair costs are expensed as
incurred. Depreciation expense from continuing operations was approximately
$132,000 and $137,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009, and
2008 and $260,000 and $275,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as
incurred and amounted to approximately $36,000 and $50,000 in the three months
ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $65,000 and $97,000 in the six months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Asset
Impairment Charges
In
accordance with SFAS 144, we periodically review the carrying value of our
long-lived assets held and used, and assets to be disposed of, for possible
impairment when events and circumstances warrant such a review. Assets
classified as held for sale are measured at the lower of carrying value or fair
value, net of costs to sell.
In
assessing goodwill for impairment, we first compare the fair value of our
reporting units with their net book value. We estimate the fair value of the
reporting units using discounted expected future cash flows, supported by the
results of various market approach valuation models. If the fair value of the
reporting units exceeds their net book value, goodwill is not impaired, and no
further testing is necessary. If the net book value of our reporting units
exceeds their fair value, we perform a second test to measure the amount of
impairment loss, if any. To measure the amount of any impairment loss, we
determine the implied fair value of goodwill in the same manner as if our
reporting units were being acquired in a business combination. Specifically, we
allocate the fair value of the reporting units to all of the assets and
liabilities of that unit, including any unrecognized intangible assets, in a
hypothetical calculation that would yield the implied fair value of goodwill. If
the implied fair value of goodwill is less than the goodwill recorded on our
balance sheet, we record an impairment charge for the difference.
We
performed extensive valuation analyses, utilizing both income and market
approaches, in our goodwill assessment process. The following describes the
valuation methodologies used to derive the fair value of the reporting
units.
|
·
|
Income Approach: To
determine fair value, we discounted the expected cash flows of the
reporting units. The discount rate used represents the estimated weighted
average cost of capital, which reflects the overall level of inherent risk
involved in our reporting units and the rate of return an outside investor
would expect to earn. To estimate cash flows beyond the final year of our
model, we used a terminal value approach. Under this approach, we used
estimated operating income before interest, taxes, depreciation and
amortization in the final year of our model, adjusted to estimate a
normalized cash flow, applied a perpetuity growth assumption and
discounted by a perpetuity discount factor to determine the terminal
value. We incorporated the present value of the resulting terminal value
into our estimate of fair
value.
|
|
·
|
Market-Based Approach:
To corroborate the results of the income approach described above,
we estimated the fair value of our reporting units using several
market-based approaches, including the value that we derive based on our
consolidated stock price as described above. We also used the guideline
company method which focuses on comparing our risk profile and growth
prospects to select reasonably similar/guideline publicly traded
companies.
|
The
determination of the fair value of the reporting units requires us to make
significant estimates and assumptions that affect the reporting unit’s expected
future cash flows. These estimates and assumptions primarily include, but are
not limited to, the discount rate, terminal growth rates, operating income
before depreciation and amortization and capital expenditures forecasts. Due to
the inherent uncertainty involved in making these estimates, actual results
could differ from those estimates. In addition, changes in underlying
assumptions would have a significant impact on either the fair value of the
reporting units or the goodwill impairment charge.
The
allocation of the fair value of the reporting units to individual assets and
liabilities within reporting units also requires us to make significant
estimates and assumptions. The allocation requires several analyses to determine
fair value of assets and liabilities including, among others, customer
relationships, non-competition agreements and current replacement costs for
certain property, plant and equipment.
As of
November 30, 2008, we conducted our annual assessment of goodwill for impairment
for our Security Segment and as of June 30, 2008, for our Digital Media
Marketing Segment. We conduct assessments more frequently if indicators of
impairment exist. As of November 30, 2008, we experienced a sustained,
significant decline in our stock price. The Company believes the reduced market
capitalization reflects the financial market’s reduced expectations of the
Company’s performance, due in large part to overall deteriorating economic
conditions that may have a materially negative impact on the Company’s future
performance. We also updated our forecasted cash flows of the reporting units
during the fourth quarter. This update considered current economic conditions
and trends; estimated future operating results, our views of growth rates,
anticipated future economic and regulatory conditions. Additionally, based upon
our procedures, we determined impairment indicators existed at December 31, 2008
relative to our Digital Media Marketing Segment and accordingly, we performed an
updated assessment of goodwill for impairment. Based on the results of our
assessment of goodwill for impairment, the net book value of our Mace Security
Products, Inc. (Florida and Texas security surveillance equipment operations)
reporting unit exceeded its fair value. Our Digital Media Marketing Segment
reporting unit fair value as determined exceeded its net book
value.
With the
noted potential impairment in Mace Security Products, Inc., we performed the
second step of the impairment test to determine the implied fair value of
goodwill. Specifically, we hypothetically allocated the fair value of the
impaired reporting units as determined in the first step to our recognized and
unrecognized net assets, including allocations to intangible assets such as
trademarks, customer relationships and non-competition
agreements. The resulting implied goodwill was $(5.9) million;
accordingly, we recorded an impairment charge to write off the goodwill of this
reporting unit totaling $1.34 million. We also performed impairment testing of
certain other intangible assets relating to Mace Security Products, Inc.,
specifically, the value assigned to trademarks. We recorded an additional
impairment charge to trademarks of approximately $223,000 related to our
consumer direct electronic surveillance operations and our high end digital and
machine vision cameras and professional imaging component operations.
Additionally, due to continuing deterioration in our Mace Security Products,
Inc. reporting unit, we performed certain impairment testing of our remaining
intangible assets, specifically, the value assigned to customer lists, product
lists, and trademarks as of June 30, 2009. We recorded an additional impairment
charge to trademarks of approximately $80,000 and an impairment charge of
$142,000 to customer lists, both principally related to our consumer direct
electronic surveillance operations at June 30, 2009.
As noted
above, we conducted our annual assessment of goodwill for impairment for our
Digital Media Marketing Segment as of June 30, 2009. We updated our forecasted
cash flows of this reporting unit during the second quarter. This update
considered current economic conditions and trends, estimated future operating
results for the launch of new products as well as non-product revenue growth,
and anticipated future economic and regulatory conditions. Based on the results
of our assessment of goodwill impairment, the net book value of our Digital
Media Marketing Segment reporting unit exceeded its fair value. With the noted
potential impairment, we performed the second step of the impairment test to
determine the implied fair value of goodwill. The resulting implied goodwill was
$5.9 million which exceeded the recorded value of goodwill of $6.9 million;
accordingly, we recorded an impairment to write down goodwill of this reporting
unit by $1.0 million.
In June
2008, management made a decision to discontinue marketing efforts by its
subsidiary, Promopath, the online marketing division of Linkstar, to third-party
customers on a non-exclusive CPA basis, both brokered and through promotional
sites. Management’s decision was the result of business environment changes in
which the ability to maintain non-exclusive third-party relationships at an
adequate profit margin became increasingly difficult. Promopath will continue to
market and acquire customers for the Company’s e-commerce operation, Linkstar.
As a result of this decision, the value assigned to customer relationships at
the time of the acquisition of Promopath in accordance with SFAS 141, Business Combinations, was
determined to be impaired as of June 30, 2008 in that future undiscounted cash
flows relating to this asset were insufficient to recover its carrying value.
Accordingly, in the second quarter of 2008, in accordance with SFAS 144, we
recorded an impairment charge of approximately $1.4 million representing the net
book value of the Promopath customer relationship intangible asset at June 30,
2008.
Goodwill
represents the premium paid over the fair value of the net tangible and
intangible assets we have acquired in business combinations. SFAS No.
142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets (“SFAS 142”), requires the Company to perform a
goodwill impairment test on at least an annual basis. Application of the
goodwill impairment test requires significant judgments including estimation of
future cash flows, which is dependent on internal forecasts, estimation of the
long-term rate of growth for the businesses, the useful life over which cash
flows will occur and determination of our weighted average cost of
capital. Changes in these estimates and assumptions could materially
affect the determination of fair value and/or conclusions on goodwill impairment
for each reporting unit. The Company conducts its annual goodwill
impairment test as of November 30 for its Security Segment and as of June 30 for
its Digital Media Marketing Segment, or more frequently if indicators of
impairment exist. We periodically analyze whether any such indicators
of impairment exist. A significant amount of judgment is involved in
determining if an indicator of impairment has occurred. Such indicators may
include a sustained, significant decline in our share price and market
capitalization, a decline in our expected future cash flows, a significant
adverse change in legal factors or in the business climate, unanticipated
competition and/or slower expected growth rates, among others. The
Company compares the fair value of each of its reporting units to their
respective carrying values, including related goodwill. Future
changes in the industry could impact the results of future annual impairment
tests. Goodwill
was $7.9 million and $6.9
million at June 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. There can be no assurance
that future tests of goodwill impairment will not result in impairment charges.
Also see Note 3. Other Intangible Assets
and Note 11, Asset Impairment Charges.
Other
Intangible Assets
Other
intangible assets consist of deferred financing costs, trademarks, customer
lists, non-compete agreements, product lists, and patent costs. In accordance
with SFAS 142, our trademarks are considered to have indefinite lives and as
such, are not subject to amortization. These assets will be tested for
impairment annually and whenever there is an impairment indicator. Estimating
future cash requires significant judgment and projections may vary from cash
flows eventually realized. Several impairment indicators are beyond our control,
and determining whether or not they will occur cannot be predicted with any
certainty. Customer lists, product lists, software costs, patents and
non-compete agreements are amortized on a straight-line or accelerated basis
over their respective estimated useful lives. Amortization of other intangible
assets from continuing operations was approximately $120,000 and $147,000 for
the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $224,000 and $295,000 for the
six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Also see Note 11. Asset Impairment
Charges.
Insurance
The
Company insures for auto, general liability, and certain workers’ compensation
claims through participation in a captive insurance program with other unrelated
businesses. The Company maintains excess coverage through occurrence-based
policies. With respect to participating in the captive insurance
program, the Company set aside an actuarially determined amount of cash in a
restricted “loss fund” account for the payment of claims under the policies. The
Company funds these accounts annually as required by the captive insurance
company. Should funds deposited exceed claims ultimately incurred and paid,
unused deposited funds are returned to the Company with interest on or about the
fifth anniversary of the policy year-end. The Company’s participation
in the captive insurance program is secured by a letter of credit in the amount
of $566,684 at June 30, 2009. The Company records a monthly expense
for losses up to the reinsurance limit per claim based on the Company’s tracking
of claims and the insurance company’s reporting of amounts paid on claims plus
an estimate of reserves for possible future losses on reported claims as well as
claims incurred but not reported.
Income
Taxes
Deferred
income taxes are determined based on the difference between the financial
accounting and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Deferred income tax expense
(benefit) represents the change during the period in the deferred income tax
assets and deferred income tax liabilities. Deferred tax assets
include tax loss and credit carryforwards and are reduced by a valuation
allowance if, based on available evidence, it is more likely than not that some
portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. The Company follows the
provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes (“FIN 48”), an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (“SFAS
109”). FIN 48 prescribes a model for the recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return, and provides guidance on
recognition, classification, interest and penalties, disclosure and transition.
At June 30, 2009, the Company did not have any significant
unrecognized tax benefits.
Supplementary
Cash Flow Information
Interest
paid on all indebtedness, including discontinued operations, was approximately
$68,000 and $126,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and
$129,000 and $307,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Income
taxes paid, including discontinued operations, was approximately $120,000 and
$80,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $176,000 and
$111,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Noncash
investing and financing activity of the Company within discontinued operations
includes the recording of a $750,000 note receivable recorded as part of the
consideration received from the sale of the Company’s San Antonio, Texas car
washes during the three months ended March 31, 2009. Additionally, the Company
sold its Florida car washes in the three months ended March 31, 2008 and
simultaneously paid down related mortgages of approximately $4.2
million.
Advertising
The
Company expenses advertising costs, including advertising production costs, as
they are incurred or when the first time advertising takes place. The
Company’s costs of coupon advertising within its Car Wash Segment are recorded
as a prepaid asset and amortized to advertising expense during the period of
distribution and customer response, which is typically two to four
months. Prepaid advertising costs was $4,000 and $30,000 at June 30,
2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. Advertising expense was
approximately $235,000 and $313,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and
2008 and $393,000 and $583,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Introduction
Revenues
Security
Our
Security Segment designs, manufactures, markets and sells a wide range of
security products and provides wholesale security monitoring. The Company’s
primary focus in the Security Segment is the sourcing and selection of
electronic surveillance products and components that it sells, primarily to
installing dealers, system integrators, distributors, retailers and end
users. Other products in our Security Segment include, but are not
limited to, less-than-lethal Mace® defense sprays, personal alarms, high-end
digital and machine vision cameras and imaging components, as well as video
conferencing equipment and security monitors. The main marketing
channels for our products are industry shows and publications, catalogs,
internet and sales through telephone orders. Revenues generated for
the six months ended June 30, 2009 for the Security Segment were comprised of
approximately 27% from our professional electronic surveillance operation in
Florida, 17% from our consumer direct electronic surveillance operations, 20%
from our machine vision camera and video conferencing equipment operation in
Texas, 29% from our personal defense and law enforcement operation in Vermont,
and 7% from our wholesale security monitoring operation.
Digital Media Marketing
Prior to
June 2008, our Digital Media Marketing Segment consisted of two business
divisions: (1) e-commerce and (2) online marketing. After June 2008, we
discontinued the online marketing services to outside customers and our Digital
Media Marketing Segment is now essentially an online e-commerce
business.
Our
e-commerce division is a direct-response product business that develops, markets
and sells products directly to consumers through the Internet. We reach our
customers predominately through
online advertising on third party promotional websites. Before discontinuing Promopath, Linkstar also marketed products on
promotional websites operated by Promopath. Our products include: Vioderm, an
anti-wrinkle skin care product (www.vioderm.com); Purity by Mineral Science, a mineral
cosmetic (www.mineralscience.com); TrimDay™, a weight-loss supplement
(www.trimday.com); Eternal Minerals, a Dead Sea spa product
line (www.eternalminerals.com); ExtremeBriteWhite, a teeth whitening
product (www.extremebritewhite.com) and Knockout, an acne product
(www.knockoutmyacne.com). We continuously
develop and test product offerings to determine customer acquisition costs and
revenue potential, as well as to identify the most efficient marketing
programs.
Promopath,
our online affiliated marketing company, secured customer acquisitions or leads
for advertising clients principally using promotional internet sites offering
free gifts. Promopath was paid by its clients based on the cost-per-acquisition
(“CPA”) model. Promopath’s advertising clients were typically established
direct-response advertisers with well recognized brands and broad consumer
appeal such as NetFlix®, Discover® credit cards and Bertelsmann Group. Promopath
generated CPA revenue, both brokered and through co-partnered sites, as well as
list management and lead generation revenues. CPA revenue in the digital media
marketplace refers to paying a fee for the acquisition of a new customer,
prospect or lead. List management revenue is based on a relationship between a
data owner and a list management company. The data owner compiles, collects,
owns and maintains a proprietary computerized database composed of consumer
information. The data owner grants a list manager a non-exclusive,
non-transferable, revocable worldwide license to manage, use and have access to
the data pursuant to defined terms and conditions for which the data owner is
paid revenue. Lead generation is referred to as cost per lead (“CPL”) in the
digital media marketplace. Advertisers purchasing media on a CPL basis are
interested in collecting data from consumers expressing interest in a product or
service. CPL varies from CPA in that no credit card information needs to be
provided to the advertiser for the publishing source to be paid for the
lead.
In June
of 2008, the Company discontinued marketing Promopath’s online marketing
services to third party customers. Promopath’s primary mission is now focused on
increasing the distribution of the products of the Company’s e-commerce
division, Linkstar.
Revenues
within our Digital Media Marketing Segment for the six months ended June 30,
2009, were approximately $5.8 million, consisting of $5.79 million from our
e-commerce division and $12,000 from our online marketing division.
Car Wash
At June
30, 2009, we owned full service and self-service car wash locations in
Texas. We earn revenues from washing and detailing automobiles;
performing oil and lubrication services, minor auto repairs, and state
inspections; selling fuel; and selling merchandise within the car wash
facilities. Revenues generated for the six months ending June 30,
2009 for the Car and Truck Wash Segment were comprised of approximately 54% from
car washing and detailing, 43% from lube and other automotive services, and 3%
from fuel and merchandise. Additionally, our Florida, Lubbock,
Texas, Austin, Texas and our San Antonio, Texas region car washes are being
reported as discontinued operations (see Note 5 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements) and, accordingly, have been segregated from the following
revenue and expense discussion. Revenues from discontinued operations were $1.6
million and $3.0 million for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and
$3.3 million and $5.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. Operating income (loss) from discontinued operations was $166,000
and $132,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 and $236,000 and
$(593,000) for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
On
December 31, 2007, we completed the sale of the truck washes for $1.2 million
consideration, consisting of $280,000 cash and a $920,000 note payable to Mace
secured by mortgages on the truck washes. The $920,000 note, which has a balance
of $881,490 at June 30, 2009, has a five-year term, with principal and interest
paid on a 15-year amortization schedule.
The
majority of revenues from our Car Wash Segment are collected in the form of cash
or credit card receipts, thus minimizing customer accounts
receivable.
Cost
of Revenues
Security
Cost of
revenues within the Security Segment consists primarily of costs to purchase or
manufacture the security products including direct labor and related taxes and
fringe benefits, raw material costs, and telecommunication costs related to our
wholesale monitoring operation. Product warranty costs related to the Security
Segment are mitigated in that a portion of customer product warranty claims are
covered by the supplier through repair or replacement of the product associated
with the warranty claim.
Digital Media Marketing
Cost of
revenues within the Digital Media Marketing Segment consist primarily of amounts
we pay to website publishers that are directly related to revenue-generating
events, including the cost to enroll new members, fulfillment and warehousing
costs, including direct labor and related taxes and fringe benefits and
e-commerce product costs.
Car Wash
Cost of
revenues within the Car Wash Segment consists primarily of direct labor and
related taxes and fringe benefits, certain insurance costs, chemicals, wash and
detailing supplies, rent, real estate taxes, utilities, car damages, maintenance
and repairs of equipment and facilities, as well as the cost of the fuel and
merchandise sold.
Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses
Selling,
general and administrative (“SG&A”) expenses consist primarily of
management, clerical and administrative salaries, professional services,
insurance premiums, sales commissions, and other costs relating to marketing and
sales.
Direct
incremental costs associated with business acquisitions as well as indirect
acquisition costs, such as executive salaries, corporate overhead, public
relations, and other corporate services and overhead are expensed as
incurred.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Depreciation
and amortization consists primarily of depreciation of buildings and equipment,
and amortization of leasehold improvements and certain intangible
assets. Buildings and equipment are depreciated over the estimated
useful lives of the assets using the straight-line method. Leasehold
improvements are amortized over the shorter of their useful lives or the lease
term with renewal options. Intangible assets, other than goodwill or intangible
assets with indefinite useful lives, are amortized over their useful lives
ranging from three to fifteen years, using the straight-line or an accelerated
method.
Other
Income
Other
income consists primarily of rental income received on renting out excess space
at our car wash facilities and includes gains and losses on short-term
investments.
Income
Taxes
Income
tax expense is derived from tax provisions for interim periods that are based on
the Company’s estimated annual effective rate. Currently, the
effective rate differs from the federal statutory rate primarily due to state
and local income taxes, non-deductible costs related to acquired intangibles,
and changes to the valuation allowance.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Liquidity
Cash,
cash equivalents and short-term investments were $5.8 million at June 30,
2009. The ratio of our total debt to total capitalization, which
consists of total debt plus stockholders’ equity, was 13.7% at June 30, 2009 and
13.0% at December 31, 2008.
One of
our short-term investments in 2008 was in a hedge fund, namely the Victory Fund,
Ltd. We requested redemption of this hedge fund investment on June 18, 2008.
Under the Limited Partnership Agreement with the hedge fund, the redemption
request was timely for a return of the investment account balance as of
September 30, 2008, payable ten business days after the end of the September 30,
2008 quarter. The hedge fund acknowledged that the redemption amount owed was
$3,206,748; however, on October 15, 2008 the hedge fund asserted the right to
withhold the redemption amount due to extraordinary market circumstances. After
negotiations, the hedge fund agreed to pay the redemption amount in two
installments, $1,000,000 on November 3, 2008 and $2,206,748 on January 15, 2009.
The Company received the first installment of $1,000,000 on November 5,
2008. The Company has not received the second
installment. On January 21, 2009, the principal of the Victory Fund,
Ltd, Arthur Nadel, was criminally charged with operating a “Ponzi”
scheme. Additionally, the SEC has initiated a civil case against Mr.
Nadel and others alleging that Arthur Nadel defrauded investors in the Victory
Fund, LLC and five other hedge funds by massively overstating the value of
investments in these funds and issuing false and misleading account statements
to investors. The SEC also alleges that Mr. Nadel transferred large sums of
investor funds to secret accounts which only he controlled. A
receiver has been appointed in the civil case and has been directed to
administer and manage the business affairs, funds, assets, and any other
property of Mr. Nadel, the Victory Fund, LLC and the five other hedge funds and
conduct and institute such legal proceedings that benefit of the hedge fund
investors. Accordingly, we recorded a charge of $2,206,748 as an
investment loss at December 31, 2008. If we recover any of the investment loss,
such amounts will be recorded as recoveries in future periods when received. The
original amount invested in the hedge fund was $2,000,000. One of the actions
the Receiver may take on behalf of all investors is to attempt to “claw back”
redemptions and distributions made by the hedge funds to their investors and use
the returned funds to pay the expenses of the Receiver and for a pro-rata
distribution to all investors. No “claw back” action has been filed
to date. We have received a letter from the Receiver stating that the Receiver
does not intend to claw back the $1 million we were paid based on the fact that
our original investment was $2 million. If we are required by the Court to pay
back the $1,000,000 redemption we received, our liquidity would be adversely
affected.
Our
business requires a substantial amount of capital, most notably to pursue our
expansion strategies, including our current expansion in the Security and
Digital Media Marketing Segment. We plan to meet these capital needs from
various financing sources, including borrowings, cash generated from the sale of
car washes, and the issuance of common stock if the market price of the
Company’s stock is at a desirable level.
As of
June 30, 2009, we had working capital of approximately $16.2 million. Working
capital was approximately $16.0 million at December 31, 2008.
During
the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we made capital
expenditures of $45,000 and $148,000 (including $26,000 and $83,000
related to discontinued operations) respectively, within our Car Wash
Segment.
Capital
expenditures for our Security Segment were $159,000 and $160,000 for the six
months ending June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. We estimate capital
expenditures for the remainder of 2009 for the Security Segment at approximately
$25,000 to $50,000, principally related to technology and warehouse
facility improvements.
We expect
to invest resources in additional products within our e-commerce division. Our
online marketing division will also require the infusion of additional capital
as we grow our new members because our e-commerce customers are charged after a
14 to 21 day trial period while we typically pay our website publishers for new
member acquisitions in approximately 15 days. Additionally, as we introduce new
e-commerce products, upfront capital spending is required to purchase inventory
as well as pay for upfront media costs to enroll new e-commerce
members.
We intend
to continue to expend cash for the purchasing of inventory as we grow and
introduce new video surveillance products in 2009 and in years subsequent to
2009. We anticipate that inventory purchases will be funded from cash collected
from sales and working capital. At June 30, 2009, we maintained an
unused and fully available $500,000 revolving credit facility with Chase to
provide financing for additional video surveillance product inventory
purchases.
The
amount of capital that we will spend in 2009 and in years subsequent to 2009 on
all our businesses is largely dependent on the profitability of our businesses.
Until our businesses start generating positive cash flow, we have been dependent
on car wash sales for liquidity. We believe our cash and short-term investments
balance of $5.8 million at June 30, 2009, the revolving credit facility, and
cash generated from the sale of our car wash operations will be sufficient to
meet capital expenditure and fund operating needs through at least the next
twelve months while continuing to satisfy our debt covenant requirement with
Chase. Our debt covenant requires us to maintain a total unencumbered cash and
marketable securities balance of $3 million. Unless our operating cash flow
improves, our growth will be limited if we deplete our cash balance. If the cash
provided from operating activities does not improve in 2009 and future years and
if current cash balances are depleted, we will need to raise additional capital
to meet these ongoing capital requirements.
During
the six months ended December 31, 2008 and throughout 2009, we implemented
Company wide cost savings measures, including a reduction in employees
throughout the entire Company, and completed a consolidation of our Security
Segment’s electronic surveillance equipment operations in Ft. Lauderdale,
Florida and Farmers Branch, Texas at December 31, 2008. As part of this
reorganization, we consolidated our security division’s surveillance equipment
warehouse operations into our Farmers Branch, Texas facility. Our professional
security sales and administrative team remained in Florida with the security
catalog sales team being relocated from Texas to Florida during the third
quarter of 2009. Our goals of the reorganization were to better align
our electronic surveillance equipment sales teams to achieve sales growth; gain
efficiencies by sharing redundant functions within our security operations such
as warehousing, customer service, and accounting services; and to streamline our
organization structure and management team for improved long-term growth. We
estimate that our reorganization within our Security Segment, our Company wide
employee reductions, and other cost saving measures result in approximately $2.3
million in annualized savings. This program continued through the second quarter
of 2009. Through June 30, 2009, we incurred approximately $102,000 in severance
costs from employee reductions.
As
previously disclosed, on June 27, 2008 Car Care, Inc., a subsidiary of the
Company, paid a criminal fine of $100,000 and forfeited $500,000 in
proceeds from the sale of four car washes to settle a criminal
indictment. A charge of $600,000 was recorded as a component of
income from discontinued operations for the three months ended March 31, 2008,
as prescribed by SFAS 5, Accounting for
Contingencies.
Shortly
after the Company’s Audit Committee became aware of the now resolved criminal
investigation into the hiring of illegal aliens at four of the Company’s car
washes on March 6, 2006, the Company’s Audit Committee retained independent
outside counsel (“Special Counsel”) to conduct an independent investigation of
the Company’s hiring practices at the Company’s car washes and other related
matters. Special Counsel’s findings included, among other things, a finding that
the Company’s internal controls for financial reporting at the corporate level
were adequate and appropriate, and that there was no financial statement impact
implicated by the Company’s hiring practices, except for a potential contingent
liability. The Company incurred $704,000 in legal, consulting and accounting
expenses associated with the Audit Committee investigations in fiscal 2006 and a
total of $1.84 million through June 30, 2009 in legal fees associated with the
governmental investigation and Company’s defense and negotiations with the
government. As a result of this matter, the Company has incorporated additional
internal control procedures at the corporate, regional and site level to further
enhance the existing internal controls with respect to the Company’s hiring
procedures at the car wash locations to prevent the hiring of undocumented
workers.
As
previously discussed, during January 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency
(“EPA”) conducted a site investigation at the Company’s Bennington, Vermont
location and the building in which the facility is located. The
Company does not own the building or land and leases 44,000 square feet of the
building from Vermont Mill Properties, Inc (“Vermont
Mill”). The site investigation was focused on whether hazardous
substances were being improperly stored. After the site investigation
and search, the EPA notified the Company and the building owner that remediation
of certain hazardous wastes were required. The Company completed the
remediation of the waste during September 2008 within the time allowed by the
EPA. A total cost of approximately $710,000, which includes disposal
of the waste materials, as well as expenses incurred to engage environmental
engineers and legal counsel and the cost of reimbursing the EPA for its costs,
has been recorded through December 31, 2008. Approximately $594,000 has been
paid to date, leaving an accrual balance of $116,000 at June 30, 2009. The
initial accrual of $285,000 recorded at December 31, 2007 was increased by
$380,000 in the first quarter and $65,000 in the second quarter due to there
being more hazardous waste to dispose of than originally estimated, increased
cost estimates for additional EPA requirements in handling and oversight related
to disposing of the hazardous waste, and the cost of obtaining additional
engineering reports requested by the EPA. The accrual for waste disposal was
decreased by $27,000 in the third quarter when the final hazardous materials and
waste were disposed of and the actual cost of disposal of the waste was
determined and increased by $7,000 in the fourth quarter due to the actual cost
of preparing final engineering reports exceeding original estimated
costs.
In
December 2004, the Company announced that it was exploring the sale of its car
washes. From December 2005 through June 30, 2009, we sold 37 car washes and five
truck washes with total cash proceeds generated of approximately $34.5 million,
net of pay-off of related mortgage debt. We believe we will be successful in
selling additional car washes and generating cash for funding of current
operating needs and expansion of our Security Segment. If the cash
provided from operating activities does not improve in 2009 and in future years
and if current cash balances are depleted, we will need to raise additional
capital to meet these ongoing capital requirements.
In the
past, we have been successful in obtaining financing by selling common stock and
obtaining mortgage loans. Our ability to obtain new financing can be
adversely impacted by our stock price. Our failure to maintain the required debt
covenants on existing loans also adversely impacts our ability to obtain
additional financing. We are reluctant to sell common stock at market prices
below our per share book value. Our ability to obtain new financing
will be limited if our stock price is not above our per share book value and our
cash from operating activities does not improve. Currently, we cannot incur
additional long term debt without the approval of one of our commercial lenders.
The Company must demonstrate that the cash flow benefit from the use of new loan
proceeds exceeds the resulting future debt service
requirements.
Debt
Capitalization and Other Financing Arrangements
At June
30, 2009, we had borrowings, including capital lease obligations, of
approximately $6.1 million. We had two letters of credit outstanding at June 30,
2009, totaling $570,364 as collateral relating to workers’ compensation
insurance policies. We maintain a $500,000 revolving credit facility
to provide financing for additional video surveillance product inventory
purchases. There were no borrowings outstanding under the revolving
credit facility at June 30, 2009. The Company also maintains a $300,000 bank
commitment for commercial letters of credit for the importation of inventory.
There were no outstanding commercial letters of credit under this commitment at
June 30, 2009.
Several
of our debt agreements, as amended, contain certain affirmative and negative
covenants and require the maintenance of certain levels of tangible net worth,
maintenance of certain unencumbered cash and marketable securities balances,
limitations on capital spending and the maintenance of certain debt service
coverage ratios on a consolidated level.
The
Company entered into amendments to the Chase term loan agreements effective
September 30, 2006. The amended loan agreements with Chase eliminated
the Company’s requirement to maintain a ratio of consolidated earnings before
interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization to debt service. The Chase
term loan agreements also limit capital expenditures annually to $1.0 million,
requires the Company to provide Chase with an Annual Report on Form 10-K and
audited financial statements within 120 days of the Company’s fiscal year end
and a Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q within 60 days after the end of each fiscal
quarter, and requires the maintenance of a minimum total unencumbered cash and
marketable securities balance of $3 million. The maintenance of a minimum total
unencumbered cash and marketable securities balance requirements was reduced to
$3 million from $5 million on May 8, 2009 as part of the Amendments to the Chase
loan agreements noted above. If we are unable to satisfy these covenants and we
cannot obtain waivers, the Chase notes may be reflected as current in future
balance sheets and as a result our stock price may decline. We were in
compliance with these covenants as of June 30, 2009.
If we
default on any of the Chase covenants and are not able to obtain amendments or
waivers of acceleration, Chase debt totaling $4.9 million at June 30, 2009,
including debt recorded as long-term debt at June 30, 2009, could become due and
payable on demand, and Chase could foreclose on the assets pledged in support of
the relevant indebtedness. If our assets (including up to eight of
our car wash facilities as of June 30, 2009) are foreclosed upon, revenues from
our Car Wash Segment, which comprised 12.7% of our total revenues for fiscal
year 2008 and 14.6% of our total revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2009
would be severely impacted and we may be unable to continue to operate our
business. Even if the debt were accelerated without foreclosure, it
would be very difficult for us to continue to operate and we may go out of
business.
The
Company’s ongoing ability to comply with its debt covenants under its credit
arrangements and refinance its debt depends largely on the achievement of
adequate levels of cash flow. If our future cash flows are less than
expected or our debt service, including interest expense, increases more than
expected causing us to further default on any of the Chase covenants in the
future, the Company will need to obtain further amendments or waivers from
Chase. Our cash flow has been and could continue to be adversely affected by
weather patterns, economic conditions, and the requirements to fund the growth
of our security business. In the event that non-compliance with the debt
covenants should continue to occur, the Company would pursue various
alternatives to attempt to successfully resolve the non-compliance, which might
include, among other things, seeking additional debt covenant waivers or
amendments, or refinancing debt with other financial institutions. If
the Company is unable to obtain waivers or amendments in the future, Chase debt
currently totaling $4.9 million, including debt recorded as long-term debt at
June 30, 2009, would become payable on demand by the financial institution upon
expiration of its current waiver. There can be no assurance that further debt
covenant waivers or amendments would be obtained or that the debt would be
refinanced with other financial institutions at favorable terms. If we are
unable to obtain renewals on maturing loans or refinancing of loans on favorable
terms, our ability to operate would be materially and adversely
affected.
The
Company is obligated under various operating leases, primarily for certain
equipment and real estate within the Car Wash Segment. Certain of
these leases contain purchase options, renewal provisions, and contingent
rentals for our proportionate share of taxes, utilities, insurance, and annual
cost of living increases.
The
following are summaries of our contractual obligations and other commercial
commitments at June 30, 2009, includes capital lease obligations, debt related
to discontinued operations and liabilities related to assets held for sale and
reflects the renewal on May 8, 2009 of loans maturing in 2009 (in
thousands):
|
|
Payments Due By Period
|
|
Contractual Obligations (1)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Less than
One Year
|
|
|
One to Three
Years
|
|
|
Three to Five
Years
|
|
|
More Than
Five Years
|
|
Long-term
debt (2)
|
|
$ |
5,868 |
|
|
$ |
1,239 |
|
|
$ |
2,424 |
|
|
$ |
1,698 |
|
|
$ |
507 |
|
Capital
Lease Obligations
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Minimum
operating lease payments
|
|
|
4,189 |
|
|
|
1,037 |
|
|
|
1,716 |
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
509 |
|
|
|
$ |
10,246 |
|
|
$ |
2,322 |
|
|
$ |
4,240 |
|
|
$ |
2,668 |
|
|
$ |
1,016 |
|
|
|
Amounts Expiring Per Period
|
|
Other Commercial Commitments
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Less Than
One Year
|
|
|
One to Three
Years
|
|
|
Three to Five
Years
|
|
|
More Than
Five Years
|
|
Line
of credit (3)
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
Standby
letters of credit (4)
|
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
$ |
570 |
|
|
$ |
570 |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
(1) Potential
amounts for inventory ordered under purchase orders are not reflected in the
amounts above as they are typically cancelable prior to delivery and, if
purchased, would be sold within the normal business cycle.
(2) Related
interest obligations have been excluded from this maturity schedule. Our
interest payments for the next twelve month period, based on current market
rates, are expected to be approximately $243,000.
(3) The
Company maintains a $500,000 line of credit with Chase. There were no borrowings
outstanding under this line of credit at June 30, 2009.
(4) The
Company also maintains a $300,000 bank commitment for commercial letters of
credit with Chase for the importation of inventory. There were no outstanding
commercial letters of credit under this commitment at June 30, 2009.
Additionally, outstanding letters of credit of $570,364 represent collateral for
workers’ compensation insurance policies.
Cash
Flows
Operating Activities. Net
cash used in operating activities totaled $898,000 for the six months ended June
30, 2009. Cash used in operating activities in 2009 was primarily due to a net
loss from continuing operations of $5.2 million offset partially by a reduction
in inventories of $1.8 million, depreciation and amortization expense of
$484,000, asset impairment charges of $1.3 million, and a decrease in prepaid
expenses and other assets of $619,000.
Net cash
used in operating activities totaled $3.6 million for the six months ended June
30, 2008. Cash used in operating activities in 2008 was primarily due to a net
loss from continuing operations of $6.2 million, which included $291,000 in
non-cash stock-based compensation charges from continuing operations and
$571,000 of depreciation and amortization. Cash was also impacted by a decrease
in accounts payable of $1.2 million, an increase in accrued expenses of
$722,000, a decrease in accounts receivable of $488,000 and an increase in
inventory of $358,000.
Investing
Activities. Cash used in investing activities totaled
approximately $1.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2009, which
includes $1.7 million in consideration for the acquisition of CSSS, Inc. and
capital expenditures of $185,000 related to ongoing operations.
Cash
provided by investing activities totaled approximately $7.6 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2008, which includes cash provided by investing activities
from discontinued operations of $7.9 million related to the sale of six car wash
sites in the six months ended June 30, 2008.
Financing
Activities. Cash used in financing activities was
approximately $750,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009, which includes
$256,000 of routine principal payments on debt from continuing operations,
$335,000 of routine principal payments on debt related to discontinued
operations, and $159,000 for the purchase of treasury stock.
Cash used
in financing activities was approximately $1.1 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2008, which includes $742,000 of routine principal payments on debt
from continuing operations and $394,000 of routine principal payments on debt
related to discontinued operations.
Results
of Operations for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2009
Compared
to the Six Months Ended June 30, 2008
The
following table presents the percentage each item in the consolidated statements
of operations bears to revenues:
|
|
Six months Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
Cost
of revenues
|
|
|
73.6 |
|
|
|
74.4 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
45.9 |
|
|
|
38.5 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(29.8 |
) |
|
|
(25.6 |
) |
Interest
(expense) income, net
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
0.2 |
|
Other
income
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(29.6 |
) |
|
|
(24.5 |
) |
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(30.1 |
) |
|
|
(24.7 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
24.9 |
|
Net
(loss) income
|
|
|
(28.8 |
)
% |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
Revenues
Security
Revenues
within the Security Segment were approximately $8.6 million and $10.8 million
for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Of the $8.6
million of revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2009, $2.3 million, or
27%, was generated from our professional electronic surveillance operation in
Florida, $1.5 million, or 17%, from our consumer direct electronic surveillance
equipment operations in Texas, $1.8 million or 20%, from our machine vision
camera and video conferencing equipment operation in Texas, $2.4 million, or
29%, from our personal defense operation, and $594,000, or 7% from our wholesale
security monitoring operation. Of the $10.8 million of revenues for the six
months ended June 30, 2008, $3.9 million, or 36%, was generated from our
professional electronic surveillance operation in Florida, $1.9 million, or 18%,
from our consumer direct electronic surveillance equipment operation in Texas,
$2.7 million, or 25%, from our machine vision camera and video conference
equipment operation in Texas, and $2.3 million, or 21%, from our personal
defense operation in Vermont. The decrease in revenues within the Security
Segment was due to a decrease in sales of our professional electronic
surveillance operation in Florida, our consumer direct electronic surveillance
and our industrial machine vision camera and video conferencing equipment in
Texas partially offset by an increase in our personal defense operations in
Vermont and revenues of our wholesale security monitoring operation acquired in
April 2009. The decrease in sales of our professional electronic surveillance
operation in Florida, our consumer direct electronic surveillance and industrial
machine vision camera and video conference equipment operations in Texas was
largely a result of increased competition and a reduction in spending by certain
of our customers impacted by the deteriorating economy. The Company’s industrial
machine vision camera and video conferencing equipment operations continue to be
impacted by competition and a reductions in sales to certain customers with ties
to the “big three” domestic automotive manufacturers. The increase of
approximately $142,000 in revenues in our personal defense operation was largely
a result of an increase in Mace® aerosol defense spray sales with an increase in
sales of our PepperGel® product, sales from the introduction of new products
such as our Mace Pepper Gun®, and an overall increase in product sales in both
domestic and international markets as we believe customers become increasingly
concerned with their personal safety.
Digital Media Marketing
Revenues
for the six months ended June 30, 2009 within our Digital Media Marketing
Segment were approximately $5.8 million as compared to $10.9 million for the six
months ended June 30, 2008, a decrease of $5.1 million, or 47%. Of the $5.8
million of revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2009, $5.79 million
related to our e-commerce division and $12,000 related to our online marketing
division. Of the $10.9 million of revenues for the six months ended June 30,
2008, $8.8 million related to our e-commerce division and $2.1 million related
to our online marketing division. The reduction in revenues within our
e-commerce division of $3.0 million is related to a reduction in sales in our
Purity by Mineral Science cosmetic product line introduced in late 2007
partially offset by sales from the introduction of new products, including the
Eternal Minerals spa products and the ExtremeBriteWhite teeth whitening product.
The reduction in revenues within our online marketing divisions was a result of
management’s decision to discontinue marketing Promopath’s online marketing
services to external customers in June 2008.
Car Wash
Services
Revenues
for the six months ended June 30, 2009 were $2.7 million as compared to $3.4
million for the six months ended June 30, 2008, a decrease of $736,000, or 22%.
Of the $2.7 million of revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2009, $1.4
million, or 54%, was generated from car wash and detailing, $1.1 million, or
43%, from lube and other automotive services, and $88,000, or 3%, from fuel and
merchandise sales. Of the $3.4 million of revenues for the six months ended June
30, 2008, $1.9 million, or 55%, was generated from car wash and detailing, $1.3
million, or 39%, from lube and other automotive services, and $180,000, or 6%,
from fuel and merchandise sales. The decrease in wash and detail revenues in
2009 was principally due to a decline in car wash volumes of 25,000 cars, or
22%, in the first six months of 2009 as compared to the first six months of
2008, including a car wash volume reduction of 11,500 cars from the closure and
divestiture of a Texas car wash location in October 2008 included in
continuing operations. Additionally, the Company experienced a slight decline in
average wash and detailing revenue per car from $16.61 in the first six months
of 2008 to $16.18 in the same period in 2009.
Cost
of Revenues
Security
During
the six months ended June 30, 2009, cost of revenues was $6.1 million, or 71% of
revenues, as compared to $8.0 million, or 74% of revenues, for the six months
ended June 30, 2008.
Digital
Media Marketing
Cost of
revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 within our Digital
Media Marketing Segment were approximately $4.0 million, or 69% of revenues, and
$7.7 million, or 71% of revenues, respectively.
Car
Wash Services
Cost of
revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2009 were $2.4 million, or 91% of
revenues, with car washing and detailing costs at 100% of respective revenues,
lube and other automotive services costs at 79% of respective revenues, and fuel
and merchandise costs at 9% of respective revenues. Cost of revenues
for the six months ended June 30, 2008 were $3.0 million, or 87% of revenues,
with car washing and detailing costs at 95% of respective revenues, lube and
other automotive services costs at 76% of respective revenues, and fuel and
merchandise costs at 86% of respective revenues. This increase in car wash costs
as a percent of revenues in 2009 was the result of the reduction in car wash
volumes and an increase in the cost of labor as a percentage of car wash and
detailing revenues from 55% in 2008 to 57.6% in 2009.
Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses
SG&A
expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2009 were $7.9 million compared to
$9.7 million for the same period in 2008, a decrease of approximately $1.8
million, or 19%. SG&A expenses as a percent of revenues were 46% for the six
months ended June 30, 2009 as compared to 39% for the same period in 2008. The
decrease in SG&A costs is primarily the result of implementation of
corporate wide cost savings measures in the last six months of 2008 and early
2009, including a reduction in employees throughout the entire Company. The cost
savings in particular were realized from a reduction in costs with the
consolidation of our security division’s surveillance equipment warehouse
operations into our Farmers Branch, Texas facility as well as the consolidation
of customer service, accounting services, and other administrative functions
within these operations. SG&A costs decreased within our Florida
and Texas electronic surveillance equipment operations by approximately
$203,000, partially as a result of our reduced sales levels and partially as a
result of our consolidation efforts to reduce SG&A costs as noted above.
Additionally, cost savings were realized through overhead reductions within our
Digital Media Marketing Segment, Linkstar, including cost savings from our
decision in June 2008 to discontinue marketing Promopath’s online marketing
services to external customers. SG&A expenses of Linkstar
decreased from $2.6 million in the six months ended June 30, 2008 to $1.4
million in the six months ended June 30, 2009. In addition to these
cost savings measures, we also noted a reduction in non-cash compensation
expense from continuing operations from approximately $291,000 in the six months
ended June 30, 2008 to $53,000 in the six months ended June 30,
2009.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Depreciation
and amortization totaled $484,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2009,
compared to $570,000 for the same period in 2008. The increase in depreciation
and amortization expense was related to amortization expense on
Linkstar and CSSS acquired intangible assets.
Asset
Impairment Charges
In June
2008, management made a decision to discontinue marketing efforts by its
subsidiary, Promopath, the on-line marketing division of Linkstar, to
third-party customers on a non-exclusive CPA basis, both brokered and
through promotional sites. Management’s decision was the result of
business environment changes in which the ability to maintain non-exclusive
third-party relationships at an adequate profit margin became increasingly
difficult. Promopath will continue to market and acquire customers for the
Company’s e-commerce operation, Linkstar. As a result of this decision, the
value assigned to customer relationships at the time of the acquisition of
Promopath in accordance with SFAS 141, Business Combinations, was
determined to be impaired as of June 30, 2008 in that future undiscounted cash
flows relating to this asset were insufficient to recover its carrying value.
Accordingly, in the second quarter of 2008, in accordance with SFAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, we recorded an impairment charge of
approximately $1.4 million representing the net book value of the Promopath
customer relationship intangible asset at June 30, 2008. Additionally, during
the quarter ended June 30, 2008, we wrote down assets related to two full
service car washes in Arlington, Texas by approximately $1.2 million. We have
determined that due to further reductions in car wash volumes at these sites
resulting from increased competition and a deterioration in demographics in the
immediate geographic areas of these sites, along with current data utilized to
estimate the fair value of these car wash facilities, the further expected cash
flows would not be sufficient to recover their carrying values.
In the
fourth quarter of 2008, we consolidated the inventory in our Ft. Lauderdale,
Florida warehouse into our Farmers Branch, Texas facility. Certain of our
administrative and sales staff of our Security Segment’s electronic surveillance
products division remain in the Ft. Lauderdale, Florida building which we listed
for sale with a real estate broker. We performed an updated market valuation of
this property, with a current listing of this facility for sale at a price of
$1,750,000. We recorded an impairment charge of $275,000 related to this
property at December 31, 2008 and an additional impairment charge of $60,000 at
June 30, 2009 to write-down the property to our estimate of net realizable
value.
We
conducted our annual assessment of goodwill for impairment for our Digital Media
Marketing Segment as of June 30, 2009. We updated our forecasted cash flows of
this reporting unit during the second quarter. This update considered current
economic conditions and trends, estimated future operating results for the
launch of new products as well as non-product revenue growth, and anticipated
future economic and regulatory conditions. Based on the results of our
assessment of goodwill impairment, the net book value of our Digital Media
Marketing Segment reporting unit exceeded its fair value. With the noted
potential impairment, we performed the second step of the impairment test to
determine the implied fair value of goodwill. The resulting implied goodwill was
$5.9 million exceeded the recorded value of goodwill of $6.9 million;
accordingly, we recorded an impairment to write down goodwill of this reporting
unit by $1.0 million. Additionally, due to continuing deterioration in our Mace
Security Products, Inc. reporting unit, we performed certain impairment testing
of our remaining intangible assets, specifically, the value assigned to customer
lists, product lists, and trademarks as of June 30, 2009. We recorded an
additional impairment charge to trademarks of approximately $80,000 and an
impairment charge of $142,000 to customer lists, both principally related to our
consumer direct electronic surveillance operations as of June 30,
2009.
Interest
Expense, Net
Interest
expense, net of interest income, for the six months ended June 30, 2009 was
$21,000, compared to interest income, net of interest expense of $48,000 for the
six months ended June 30, 2008. The Company experienced a decrease in interest
expense of approximately $97,000 as a result of decreasing interest rates and a
reduction in outstanding debt due to routine principal payments and repayment of
debt related to car wash sales, as well as a decrease in interest income of
approximately $166,000 with the Company’s decrease in cash and cash
equivalents.
Other
Income
Other
income for the six months ended June 30, 2009 was $53,000, compared to $220,000
for the six months ended June 30, 2008. The 2008 other income includes $180,000
of earnings on short-term investments.
Income
Taxes
The
Company recorded tax expense of $80,000 and $50,000 in the six months ended June
30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Tax expense (benefit) reflects the recording of
income taxes at an effective rate of approximately (1.6)% in 2009 and (0.8)% in
2008.
Results
of Operations for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2009
Compared
to the Three Months Ended June 30, 2008
The
following table presents the percentage each item in the consolidated statements
of operations bears to revenues:
|
|
Three months Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
Cost
of revenues
|
|
|
73.8 |
|
|
|
72.9 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
49.1 |
|
|
|
36.8 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
15.1 |
|
|
|
20.3 |
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(41.0 |
) |
|
|
(32.2 |
) |
Interest
(expense) income, net
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
0.2 |
|
Other
income
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(40.7 |
) |
|
|
(31.2 |
) |
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(41.2 |
) |
|
|
(31.4 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
Net
loss
|
|
|
(39.3 |
)% |
|
|
(30.6 |
)% |
Revenues
Security
Revenues
within the Security Segment were approximately $4.5 million and $5.6 million for
the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Of the $4.5 million
of revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2009, $1.1 million, or 25%, was
generated from our professional electronic surveillance operation in Florida,
$704,000 or 16%, from our consumer direct electronic surveillance equipment
operations in Texas, $917,000, or 20%, from our machine vision camera and video
conferencing equipment operation in Texas, $1.1 million, or 25%, from our
personal defense operation, and $594,000, or 14% from our wholesale security
monitoring operation. Of the $5.6 million of revenues for the three months ended
June 30, 2008, $2.0 million, or 37%, was generated from our professional
electronic surveillance operation in Florida, $904,000, or 16%, from our
consumer direct electronic surveillance equipment operation in Texas, $1.4
million, or 25%, from our machine vision camera and video conference equipment
operation in Texas, and $1.2 million, or 22%, from our personal defense
operation in Vermont. The decrease in revenues within the Security Segment was
due to a decrease in sales of our consumer direct electronic surveillance
operations and our machine vision camera and video conferencing equipment in
Texas our professional electronic surveillance operation in Florida and our
personal defense operation in Vermont, partially offset by revenues of our
wholesale security monitoring operation acquired in April 2009. The decrease in
sales of our consumer direct electronic surveillance, machine vision camera and
video conference equipment operations, and our professional electronic
surveillance operation was due to several factors, including the impact on sales
of increased competition, delay in introducing new product lines and a reduction
in spending by certain of our customers impacted by the deteriorating economy.
Additionally, the Company’s machine vision camera and video conferencing
equipment operations continue to be impacted by certain large customers
purchasing directly from its main supplier combined with reductions in sales to
certain customers with ties to the “big three” domestic automotive
manufacturers. The decrease in sales of our personal defense operation in
Vermont was due largely to a $65,000, or 45%, decrease in the sale of OEM parts.
Mace® aerosol defense spray sales remain strong in both domestic and
international markets as we believe customers become increasingly concerned with
their personal safety.
Digital Media Marketing
Revenues
for the three months ended June 30, 2009 within our Digital Media Marketing
Segment were approximately $2.8 million as compared to $5.5 million for the
three months ended June 30, 2008, a decrease of $2.7 million, or 50%. Of the
$2.8 million of revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2009, $2.75 million
related to our e-commerce division and $5,000 related to our online marketing
division. Of the $5.5 million of revenues for the three months ended June 30,
2008, $4.4 million related to our e-commerce division and $1.1 million related
to our online marketing division. The reduction in revenues within our
e-commerce division of $1.65 million is related to a reduction in sales in our
Purity by Mineral Science cosmetic product line introduced in late 2007
partially offset by sales from the introduction of new products, including the
Eternal Minerals spa products and the ExtremeBriteWhite teeth whitening product.
Sales within our e-commerce division were also negatively impacted by an
increase in credit card decline rates as the recession continues. The reduction
in revenues within our online marketing divisions was a result of management’s
decision to discontinue marketing Promopath’s online marketing services to
external customers in June of 2008.
Car Wash
Services
Revenues
for the three months ended June 30, 2009 were $1.3 million as compared to $1.8
million for the three months ended June 30, 2008, a decrease of approximately
$545,000, or 30%. This decrease was primarily attributable to a reduction in
volume which negatively affected car wash, detailing and lube and other
automotive service revenues. Of the $1.3 million of revenues for the three
months ended June 30, 2009, $687,000, or 53%, was generated from car wash and
detailing, $557,000, or 43%, from lube and other automotive services, and
$54,000, or 4%, from fuel and merchandise sales. Of the $1.8 million of revenues
for the three months ended June 30, 2008, $1.0 million, or 55%, was generated
from car wash and detailing, $691,000, or 38%, from lube and other automotive
services, and $132,000, or 7%, from fuel and merchandise sales. The decrease in
wash and detail revenues in 2009 was principally due to a reduction in car wash
volumes including the impact of the sale of a Dallas, Texas car wash in October
2008 combined with a slight decline in average wash and detailing revenue per
car from $16.69 in the three months ending June 30, 2008 to $16.56 in the three
months ended June 30, 2009.
Cost
of Revenues
Security
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, cost of revenues was $3.2 million, or 71%
of revenues, as compared to $4.1 million, or 74% of revenues, for the three
months ended June 30, 2008.
Digital Media Marketing
Cost of
revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 within our Digital
Media Marketing Segment were approximately $1.9 million, or 68% of revenues, and
$3.7 million, or 68% of revenues, respectively.
Car
Wash Services
Cost of
revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2009 was $1.2 million, or 94% of
revenues, with car washing and detailing costs at 105% of revenues, lube and
other automotive services costs at 79% of revenues, and fuel and merchandise
costs at 105% of revenues. Cost of revenues for the three months
ended June 30, 2008 was $1.6 million, or 85% of revenues, with car washing and
detailing costs at 90% of revenues, lube and other automotive services costs at
77% of revenues, and fuel and merchandise costs at 84% of revenues. This
increase in car wash and detailing costs as a percent of revenues in 2008 was
the result of reduced volumes.
Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses
SG&A
expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2009 were $4.2 million compared to
$4.7 million for the same period in 2008, a decrease of approximately $560,000,
or 12%. SG&A expenses as a percent of revenues were 49% for the three months
ended June 30, 2009 as compared to 37% for the same period in 2008. The decrease
in SG&A costs is primarily the result of implementation of corporate wide
cost savings measures in the last six months of 2008 through June 30, 2009,
including a reduction in employees throughout the entire Company. The cost
savings in particular were realized from a reduction in costs with the
consolidation of our security division’s surveillance equipment warehouse
operations into our Farmers Branch, Texas facility as well as the consolidation
of customer service, accounting services, and other administrative functions
within these operations. SG&A costs decreased within our Florida
and Texas electronic surveillance equipment operations by approximately $63,000,
partially as a result of our reduced sales levels and partially as a result of
our consolidation efforts to reduce SG&A costs as noted above. Additionally,
cost savings were realized through overhead reductions within our Digital Media
Marketing Segment, Linkstar, including cost savings from our decision in June
2008 to discontinue marketing Promopath’s online marketing services to external
customers. SG&A expenses of Linkstar decreased from $1.4 million
in the three months ended June 30, 2008 to $644,000 in the three months ended
June 30, 2009. In addition to these cost savings measures, we also
noted a reduction in non-cash compensation expense from continuing operations
from approximately $37,000 in the three months ended June 30, 2008 to $2,600 in
the three months ended June 30, 2009.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Depreciation
and amortization totaled $252,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2009,
compared to $284,000 for the same period in 2008. The decrease in depreciation
and amortization expense was attributable to the impairment of the Linkstar
intangible asset relating to the Promopath customer relationships which were
impaired at June 30, 2008.
Interest
Expense, Net
Interest
expense, net of interest income, for the three months ended June 30, 2009 was
$(16,000), compared to interest income, net of interest expense of $26,000 for
the three months ended June 30, 2008.
Other
Income
Other
income for the three months ended June 30, 2009 was $44,000, compared to
$108,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2008. The 2008 other
income includes $96,000 of earnings on short-term investments.
Income
Taxes
The
Company recorded tax expense of $40,000 and $25,000 in the three months ended
June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Income tax expense reflects the
recording of income taxes at an effective rate of approximately (1.2)% in 2009
and (0.6)% in 2008.
Item
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk
There has
been no material change in our exposure to market risks arising from
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, commodity prices, equity prices
or market interest rates since December 31, 2008 as reported in our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Nearly
100% of the Company’s debt at June 30, 2009, including debt related to
discontinued operations, is at variable rates. Substantially all of our variable
rate debt obligations are tied to the prime rate, as is our incremental
borrowing rate. A one percent increase in the prime rates would not have a
material effect on the fair value of our variable rate debt at June 30, 2009.
The impact of increasing interest rates by one percent would be an increase in
interest expense of approximately $70,000 in 2009.
Item
4T. Controls and Procedures
The
Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports that it files
or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules, and include
controls and procedures designed to ensure that such information is accumulated
and communicated to the Company’s management, including its
principal executive and financial officers, to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure. Based on the evaluation of the effectiveness of
the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as of June 30, 2009 required by
Rule 13a-15(b) or Rule 15d-15(b) under the Exchange Act and conducted by the
Company’s chief executive officer and chief financial officer, such officers
concluded that the Company’s disclosures controls and procedures were effective
as of June 30, 2009. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set
forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(“COSO”) in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework. In addition, no change in the
Company’s internal control over financial reporting (as that term is defined in
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) occurred during the
quarter ended June 30, 2009 that materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Company’s internal controls over financial
reporting.
PART
II
OTHER
INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal Proceedings
Information
regarding our legal proceedings can be found in Note 7, Commitments and
Contingencies, of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included
in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Item
1A. Risks Factors
Many of our
customers’ activity levels and spending for our products and services may be
impacted by the current deterioration in the economy and credit markets.
As a result of the recession, the credit market crisis, declining
consumer and business confidence, increased unemployment, and other challenges
currently affecting the domestic economy, our customers have reduced their
spending on our products and services. Many of our customers in our
electronic surveillance equipment business finance their purchase activities
through cash flow from operations or the incurrence of debt. Additionally, many
of our customers in our personal defense products division, our e-commerce
division and our car wash operations depend on disposable personal income. The
combination of a reduction of disposal personal income, a reduction in cash flow
of businesses and a possible lack of availability of financing to businesses and
individuals has resulted in a significant reduction in our customers’ spending
for our products and services. During the first six months of 2009, our revenues
from continuing operations declined $8.1 million, or 32%, from our revenues from
continuing operations in the first six months of 2008. To the extent
our customers reduce their spending for the remainder 2009, this reduction in
spending could have a material adverse effect on our operations. If the economic
slowdown continues for a significant period or there is significant further
deterioration in the economy, our results of operations, financial position and
cash flows will be materially adversely affected.
If we are unable
to finance the growth of our business, our stock price could
decline. Our business plan
involves growing our Security and Digital Media Marketing Segments through
acquisitions and internal development, and divesting of our car washes through
third party sales. The growth of our Security and Digital Media Segments
requires significant capital that we hope to partially fund through the sale of
our car washes. Our capital requirements also include working capital
for daily operations and capital for equipment purchases. Although we
had positive working capital of $16.2 million as of June 30, 2009, we have a
history of net losses and in some years we have ended our fiscal year with a
negative working capital balance. Our positive working capital increased by
approximately $173,000 from December 31, 2008 to June 30, 2009. The
current economic climate has made it more difficult to sell our remaining car
washes as it is more difficult for buyers to finance the purchase price. To the
extent that we lack cash to meet our future capital needs, we will need to raise
additional funds through bank borrowings and additional equity and/or debt
financings, which may result in significant increases in leverage and interest
expense and/or substantial dilution of our outstanding equity. If we
are unable to raise additional capital, we may need to substantially reduce the
scale of our operations and curtail our business plan. Although we have
generated cash from the sale of our car washes, there is no guarantee that in
the current economic climate we will be able to sell our remaining car
washes.
Our liquidity
could be adversely affected if we do not prevail in the litigation initiated by
Louis D. Paolino, Jr. The Board of Directors of the
Company terminated Louis D. Paolino, Jr. as the Chief Executive Officer of the
Company on May 20, 2008. On June 9, 2008, the Company received a
Demand for Arbitration from Mr. Paolino (the “Arbitration Demand”) filed with
the American Arbitration Association in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (the
“Arbitration Proceeding”). The primary allegations of the Arbitration
Demand are: (i) Mr. Paolino alleges that he was terminated by the Company
wrongfully and is owed a severance payment of $3,918,120 due to the termination;
(ii) Mr. Paolino is claiming that the Company owes him $322,606 because the
Company did not issue him a sufficient number of stock options in August 2007,
under provisions of the Employment Contract between Mr. Paolino and the Company
dated August 21, 2006; (iii) Mr. Paolino is claiming damages against the Company
in excess of $6,000,000, allegedly caused by the Company having defamed Mr.
Paolino’s professional reputation and character in the Current Report on Form
8-K dated May 20, 2008 filed by the Company and in the press release the Company
issued on May 21, 2008, relating to Mr. Paolino’s termination; and
(iv) Mr. Paolino is also seeking punitive damages, attorney’s fees
and costs in an unspecified amount. The Company filed a
counterclaim in the Arbitration Proceeding demanding damages from Mr. Paolino of
$1,000,000. On June 25, 2008, Mr. Paolino also filed a claim with the
United States Department of Labor claiming that his termination as Chief
Executive Officer of the Company was an “unlawful discharge” in violation of 18
U.S.C. Sec. 1514A, a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “DOL
Complaint”). In the DOL Complaint, Mr. Paolino demands the same
damages he requested in the Arbitration Demand and additionally requests
reinstatement as Chief Executive Officer with back pay from the date of
termination. Upon the motion of Mr. Paolino, the proceedings relating
to the DOL Complaint have been stayed pending the conclusion of the Arbitration
Proceeding. The Company is disputing the allegations made by Mr.
Paolino and is defending itself in the Arbitration Proceeding and against the
DOL Complaint. Although the Company is confident that it will
prevail, it is not possible to predict the outcome of litigation with any
certainty. If the Company does not prevail and significant damages are awarded
to Mr. Paolino, such award may severely diminish the Company’s
liquidity.
If we fail to
manage the growth of our business, our stock price could decline. Our business plan is
predicated on growing the Security Segment. If we succeed in growing,
it will place significant burdens on our management and on our operational and
other resources. For example, it may be difficult to assimilate the
operations and personnel of an acquired business into our existing business; we
must integrate management information and accounting systems of an acquired
business into our current systems; our management must devote its attention to
assimilating the acquired business, which diverts attention from other business
concerns; we may enter markets in which we have limited prior experience; and we
may lose key employees of an acquired business. We will also need to attract,
train, motivate, retain, and supervise senior managers and other
employees. If we fail to manage these burdens successfully, one or
more of the acquisitions could be unprofitable, the shift of our management’s
focus could harm our other businesses, and we may be forced to abandon our
business plan, which relies on growth.
We have debt
secured by mortgages, which can be foreclosed upon if we default on the
debt. Our bank debt borrowings as of June 30, 2009 were $6.1
million, including capital lease obligations and borrowings related to assets
held for sale, substantially all of which are secured by mortgages against
certain of our real property (including up to eight of our car wash facilities
at June 30, 2009). Our most significant borrowings are secured notes payable to
Chase in the amount of $4.9 million. We have in the past violated
loan covenants in our Chase agreements. We have obtained waivers for our
violations of the Chase agreements. Our ongoing ability to comply with the debt
covenants under our credit arrangements and refinance our debt depends largely
on our achievement of adequate levels of cash flow. Our cash flow has been and
could continue to be adversely affected by economic conditions. If we default on
our loan covenants in the future and are not able to obtain amendments or
waivers of acceleration, our debt could become due and payable on demand, and
Chase could foreclose on the assets pledged in support of the relevant
indebtedness. If our assets (including up to eight of our car wash facilities at
June 30, 2009) are foreclosed upon, revenues from our Car Wash Segment, which
comprised 12.7% of our total revenues for the fiscal 2008 and 14.6% of out total
revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2009, would be severely impacted and
we may go out of business.
Our loans with
Chase have financial covenants that restrict our operations and which can cause
our loans to be accelerated. Our secured notes payable to
Chase total $4.9 million, $1.7 million of which was classified as non-current
debt at June 30, 2009. The Chase agreements contain affirmative and negative
covenants, including the maintenance of certain levels of tangible net worth,
maintenance of certain levels of unencumbered cash and marketable securities,
limitations on capital spending, and certain financial reporting requirements.
Our Chase agreements contain an express prohibition on incurring additional debt
without the approval of the lender. The Chase term loan agreements also limit
capital expenditures annually to $1.0 million, require the Company to provide
Chase with an Annual Report on Form 10-K and audited financial statements within
120 days of the Company’s fiscal year end and a Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
within 60 days after the end of each fiscal quarter, and require the maintenance
of a minimum total unencumbered cash and marketable securities balance of $3
million. If we are unable to satisfy the Chase covenants and we cannot obtain
further waivers or amendments to our loan agreements, the Chase notes may be
reflected as current in future balance sheets and as a result our stock price
may decline. We were in compliance with these covenants at June 30,
2009.
We have reported
net losses in the past. If we continue to report net losses, the price of our
common stock may decline, or we could go out of business. We
reported net losses and negative cash flow from operating activity from
continuing operations in each of the five years ended December 31, 2008 and in
the first six months of 2009. Although a portion of the reported losses in past
years related to non-cash impairment charges of intangible assets under SFAS 142
and non-cash stock-based compensation expense under SFAS 123(R), we may continue
to report net losses and negative cash flow in the
future. Additionally, SFAS 142 requires annual fair value based
impairment tests of goodwill and other intangible assets identified with
indefinite useful lives. As a result, we may be required to record
additional impairments in the future, which could materially reduce our earnings
and equity. If we continue to report net losses and negative cash flows, our
stock price could be adversely impacted.
We compete with
many companies, some of whom are more established and better capitalized than
us. We compete with a variety of companies on a worldwide
basis. Some of these companies are larger and better capitalized than
us. There are also few barriers to entry in our markets and thus above
average profit margins will likely attract additional competitors. Our
competitors may develop products and services that are superior to, or have
greater market acceptance than our products and services. For example, many of
our current and potential competitors have longer operating histories,
significantly greater financial, technical, marketing and other resources and
larger customer bases than ours. These factors may allow our competitors
to respond more quickly than we can to new or emerging technologies and changes
in customer requirements. Our competitors may engage in more extensive
research and development efforts, undertake more far-reaching marketing
campaigns and adopt more aggressive pricing policies which may allow them to
offer superior products and services.
Failure or
circumvention of our controls or procedures could seriously harm our business.
An internal control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can
provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s
objectives will be met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the
fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be
considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all
control systems, no system of controls can provide absolute assurance that all
control issues, mistakes and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have
been or will be detected. The design of any system of controls is based in part
upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and we cannot
assure you that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all
potential future conditions. Any failure of our controls and procedures to
detect error or fraud could seriously harm our business and results of
operations.
If we lose the
services of our executive officers, our business may
suffer. If we lose the services of one or more of our
executive officers and do not replace them with experienced personnel, that loss
of talent and experience will make our business plan, which is dependent on
active growth and management, more difficult to implement and could adversely
impact our operations.
If our insurance
is inadequate, we could face significant losses. We maintain
various insurance coverages for our assets and operations. These
coverages include property coverage including business interruption protection
for each location. We maintain commercial general liability coverage
in the amount of $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in the aggregate with
an umbrella policy which provides coverage up to $25 million. We also
maintain workers’ compensation policies in every state in which we
operate. Since July 2002, as a result of increasing costs of the
Company’s insurance program, including auto, general liability, and workers’
compensation coverage, we have been insured as a participant in a captive
insurance program with other unrelated businesses. The Company maintains excess
coverage through occurrence-based policies. With respect to our auto,
general liability, and certain workers’ compensation policies, we are required
to set aside an actuarially determined amount of cash in a restricted “loss
fund” account for the payment of claims under the policies. We expect
to fund these accounts annually as required by the insurance company. Should
funds deposited exceed claims incurred and paid, unused deposited funds are
returned to us with interest after the fifth anniversary of the policy
year-end. The captive insurance program is further secured by a
letter of credit from Mace in the amount of $566,684 at June 30,
2009. The Company records a monthly expense for losses up to the
reinsurance limit per claim based on the Company’s tracking of claims and the
insurance company’s reporting of amounts paid on claims plus an estimate of
reserves for possible future losses on reported claims and claims incurred but
not reported. There can be no assurance that our insurance will
provide sufficient coverage in the event a claim is made against us, or that we
will be able to maintain in place such insurance at reasonable
prices. An uninsured or under insured claim against us of sufficient
magnitude could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of
operations.
Risks
Related to our Security Segment
We could become
subject to litigation regarding intellectual property rights, which could
seriously harm our business. Although we have not been the
subject of any such actions, third parties may in the future assert against us
infringement claims or claims that we have violated a patent or infringed upon a
copyright, trademark or other proprietary right belonging to them. We
provide the specifications for most of our security products and contract with
independent suppliers to engineer and manufacture those products and deliver
them to us. Certain of these products contain proprietary
intellectual property of these independent suppliers. Third parties
may in the future assert claims against our suppliers that such suppliers have
violated a patent or infringed upon a copyright, trademark or other proprietary
right belonging to them. If such infringement by our suppliers or us were found
to exist, a party could seek an injunction preventing the use of their
intellectual property. In addition, if an infringement by us were
found to exist, we may attempt to acquire a license or right to use such
technology or intellectual property. Some of our suppliers have
agreed to indemnify us against any such infringement claim, but any infringement
claim, even if not meritorious and/or covered by an indemnification obligation,
could result in the expenditure of a significant amount of our financial and
managerial resources, which would adversely effect our operations and financial
results.
If our Mace brand
name falls into common usage, we could lose the exclusive right to the brand
name. The Mace registered name and trademark is important to
our security business and defense spray business. If we do not defend the Mace
name or allow it to fall into common usage, our security segment business could
be adversely affected.
If our original
equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) fail to adequately supply our products, our
security products sales may suffer. Reliance upon OEMs, as
well as industry supply conditions generally involves several additional risks,
including the possibility of defective products (which can adversely affect our
reputation for reliability), a shortage of components and reduced control over
delivery schedules (which can adversely affect our distribution schedules), and
increases in component costs (which can adversely affect our profitability). We
have some single-sourced manufacturer relationships, either because alternative
sources are not readily or economically available or because the relationship is
advantageous due to performance, quality, support, delivery, capacity, or price
considerations. If these sources are unable or unwilling to
manufacture our products in a timely and reliable manner, we could experience
temporary distribution interruptions, delays, or inefficiencies, adversely
affecting our results of operations. Even where alternative OEMs are
available, qualification of the alternative manufacturers and establishment of
reliable suppliers could result in delays and a possible loss of sales, which
could affect operating results adversely.
Many states have
and other states have stated an intention to enact laws (“electronic recycling
laws”) requiring manufacturers of certain electronic products to pay
annual registration fees and have recycling plans in place for electronic
products sold at retail such as televisions, computers, and
monitors. If the electronic recycling laws are applied to us, the
sale of monitors by us may become prohibitively expensive. Our
Security Segment sells monitors as part of the video security surveillance
packages we market. The video security surveillance
packages consist of cameras, digital video recorders and video
monitors. We have taken the position with many states that our
monitors are security monitors and are not subject to the laws they have enacted
which generally refer to computer monitors. If we have to pay registration fees
and have recycling plans for the monitors we sell, it may be prohibitively
expensive to offer monitors as part of our security surveillance
packages. The inability to offer monitors at a competitive price will
place us at a competitive disadvantage.
The businesses
that manufacture our electronic surveillance products are located in foreign
countries, making it difficult to recover damages if the manufacturers fail to
meet their obligations. Our electronic surveillance
products and many non-aerosol personal protection products are manufactured on
an OEM basis. Most of the OEM suppliers we deal with are located in Asian
countries and are paid a significant portion of an order in advance of the
shipment of the product. We also have limited information on the OEM suppliers
from which we purchase, including their financial strength, location and
ownership of the actual manufacturing facilities producing the goods. If any of
the OEM suppliers defaulted on their agreements with the Company, it would be
difficult for the Company to obtain legal recourse because of the suppliers’
assets being located in foreign countries.
If people are
injured by our consumer safety products, we could be held liable and face damage
awards. We face claims of injury allegedly resulting from our
defense sprays, which we market as less-than-lethal. For example, we
are aware of allegations that defense sprays used by law enforcement personnel
resulted in deaths of prisoners and of suspects in custody. In
addition to use or misuse by law enforcement agencies, the general public may
pursue legal action against us based on injuries alleged to have been caused by
our products. We may also face claims by purchasers of our electronic
surveillance systems if they fail to operate properly during the commission of a
crime. As the use of defense sprays and electronic surveillance systems by the
public increases, we could be subject to additional product liability
claims. We currently have a $25,000 deductible on our consumer safety
products insurance policy, meaning that all such lawsuits, even unsuccessful
ones and ones covered by insurance, cost the Company
money. Furthermore, if our insurance coverage is exceeded, we will
have to pay the excess liability directly. Our product liability
insurance provides coverage of $1 million per occurrence and $2 million in the
aggregate with an umbrella policy which provides coverage up to $25 million.
However, if we are required to directly pay a claim in excess of our coverage,
our income will be significantly reduced, and in the event of a large claim, we
could go out of business.
If governmental
regulations regarding defense sprays change or are applied differently, our
business could suffer. The distribution, sale, ownership and use of
consumer defense sprays are legal in some form in all 50 states and the District
of Columbia. Restrictions on the manufacture or use of consumer
defense sprays may be enacted, which would severely restrict the market for our
products or increase our costs of doing business.
Our defense
sprays use hazardous materials which if not properly handled would result in our
being liable for damages under environmental laws. Our
consumer defense spray manufacturing operation currently incorporates hazardous
materials, the use and emission of which are regulated by various state and
federal environmental protection agencies, including the United States
Environmental Protection Agency. If we fail to comply with any environmental
requirements, these changes or failures may expose us to significant liabilities
that would have a material adverse effect on our business and financial
condition. The Environmental Protection Agency conducted a site investigation at
our Bennington, Vermont facility in January, 2008 and found the facility in need
of remediation. See Note 7. Commitments and
Contingencies.
We rely on third
party providers for the software systems and communication
connections we use to monitor alarms and video signals; any failure or
interruption in products or services provided by these third parties could harm
our ability to operate our business. Our central station
utilizes third party software and third party phone and internet connections to
monitor alarm and video signals. Any financial or other difficulties our
providers face may have negative effects on our business.
Shifts in our
current and future customers' selection of telecommunications services could
increase customer attrition and could adversely impact our earnings and cash
flow. Certain elements of our operating model rely on our
customers' selection and continued use of traditional, land-line
telecommunications services, which we use to communicate with our monitoring
operations. In order to continue to service existing customers who cancel their
land-line telecommunications services and to service new customers who do not
subscribe to land-line telecommunications services, some customers must upgrade
to alternative and often more expensive wireless or internet based technologies.
Higher costs may reduce the market for new customers of alarm monitoring
services, and the trend away from traditional land lines to alternatives may
mean more existing customers will cancel service with us. Continued shifts in
customers' preferences regarding telecommunications services could continue to
have an adverse impact on our earnings, cash flow and customer
attrition.
We face
continuing competition and pricing pressure from other companies in our industry
and, if we are unable to compete effectively with these companies, our sales and
profitability could be adversely affected. We compete with a
number of major domestic security monitoring companies, as well as a
large number of smaller, regional competitors. We believe that this competition
is a factor in our attrition, limits our ability to raise prices, and, in some
cases, requires that we lower prices. Some of our monitoring competitors, either
alone or in conjunction with their respective parent corporate groups, are
larger than we are and have greater financial resources, sales, marketing or
operational capabilities than we do. In addition, opportunities to take market
share using innovative products, services and sales approaches may attract new
entrants to the field. We may not be able to compete successfully with the
offerings and sales tactics of other companies, which could result in the loss
of customers and, as a result, decreased revenue and operating
results.
Loss of customer
accounts could materially adversely affect our operations. Our contracts
can be terminated on 60 day notice by our customers. We could
experience the loss of accounts as a result of, among other
factors:
|
·
|
relocation of
customers;
|
|
·
|
customers' inability or
unwillingness to pay our
charges;
|
|
·
|
adverse financial and economic
conditions, the impact of which may be particularly acute among our small
business customers;
|
|
·
|
the customers' perceptions of
value;
|
|
·
|
competition from other alarm
service companies;
|
|
·
|
the purchase of
our dealers by third parties who choose to monitor elsewhere;
and
|
|
·
|
Loss
of a large dealer could result in a significant reduction in recurring
monthly revenue. Net losses of customer accounts could materially and
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
|
Increased
adoption of "false alarm" ordinances by local governments may adversely affect
our business. An increasing number of local governmental authorities have
adopted, or are considering the adoption of, laws, regulations or policies aimed
at reducing the perceived costs to municipalities of responding to false alarm
signals. Such measures could include:
|
·
|
requiring permits for the
installation and operation of individual alarm systems and the revocation
of such permits following a specified number of false
alarms;
|
|
·
|
imposing limitations on the
number of times the police will respond to alarms at a particular location
after a specified number of false
alarms;
|
|
·
|
requiring further verification of
an alarm signal before the police will respond;
and
|
|
·
|
subjecting alarm monitoring
companies to fines or penalties for transmitting false
alarms.
|
Enactment
of these measures could adversely affect our future business and operations. For
example, concern over false alarms in communities adopting these ordinances
could cause a decrease in the timeliness of police response to alarm activations
and thereby decrease the propensity of consumers to purchase or maintain alarm
monitoring services. Our costs to service affected accounts could
increase.
Due to a
concentration of accounts in California, we are susceptible to environmental
incidents that may negatively impact our results of operations.
Approximately 95% of our recurring monthly revenue (“RMR”) at June 30,
2009 was derived from customers located in California. Additionally, our
facilities are located in California. A major
earthquake, or other environmental disaster in
California could disrupt our ability to serve customers or
render customers uninterested in continuing to retain us to provide
alarm monitoring services.
We could face
liability for our failure to respond adequately to alarm activations. The
nature of the services we provide potentially exposes us to greater risks of
liability for employee acts or omissions or system failures than may be inherent
in other businesses. In an attempt to reduce this risk, our alarm monitoring
agreements and other agreements pursuant to which we sell our products and
services contain provisions limiting our liability to customers and third
parties. In the event of litigation with respect to such matters, however, these
limitations may not be enforced. In addition, the costs of such litigation could
have an adverse effect on us.
In the
event that adequate insurance is not available or our insurance is not deemed to
cover a claim, we could face liability. We carry insurance of various
types, including general liability and professional liability insurance in
amounts management considers adequate and customary for the industry. Some of
our insurance policies, and the laws of some states, may limit or prohibit
insurance coverage for punitive or certain other types of damages, or liability
arising from gross negligence. If we incur increased losses related to employee
acts or omissions, or system failure, or if we are unable to obtain adequate
insurance coverage at reasonable rates, or if we are unable to receive
reimbursements from insurance carriers, our financial condition and results of
operations could be materially and adversely affected.
Future government
regulations or other standards could have an adverse effect on our operations.
Our operations are subject to a variety of laws, regulations and
licensing requirements of federal, state and local authorities. In certain
jurisdictions, we are required to obtain licenses or permits to comply with
standards governing employee selection and training and to meet certain
standards in the conduct of our business. The loss of such licenses, or the
imposition of conditions to the granting or retention of such licenses, could
have an adverse effect on us. In the event that these laws, regulations and/or
licensing requirements change, we may be required to modify our operations or to
utilize resources to maintain compliance with such rules and regulations. In
addition, new regulations may be enacted that could have an adverse effect on
us.
The loss of
our Underwriter Laboratories listing could negatively impact our competitive
position. Our alarm monitoring center is Underwriters Laboratories ("UL")
listed. To obtain and maintain a UL listing, an alarm monitoring center must be
located in a building meeting UL's structural requirements, have back-up and
uninterruptible power supplies, have secure telephone lines and maintain
redundant computer systems. UL conducts periodic reviews of alarm monitoring
centers to ensure compliance with their regulations. Non-compliance could result
in a suspension of our UL listing. The loss of our UL listing could negatively
impact our competitive position.
Risks
Related to our Digital Media Marketing Segment
Our e-commerce
brands are not well known. Our e-commerce brands of Vioderm
(anti-wrinkle products), TrimDay (diet supplement), Purity by Mineral Science
(mineral based facial makeup), Eternal Minerals (Dead Sea spa products),
Extreme- BriteWhite (a teeth whitening product) and Knockout (an acne product)
are relatively new. We have not yet been able to develop widespread
awareness of our e-commerce brands. Lack of brand awareness could harm the
success of our marketing campaigns, which could have a material adverse effect
on our business, results of operations, financial condition and the trading
price of our common stock.
We have a
concentration of our e-commerce business in limited
products. E-Commerce revenues are currently generated from
five product lines. The concentration of our business in limited products
creates the risk of adverse financial impact if we are unable to continue to
sell these products or unable to develop additional products. We believe that we
can mitigate the financial impact of any decrease in sales by the development of
new products, however we cannot predict the timing of or success of new
products.
We compete with
many established e-commerce companies that have been in business longer than
us. Current and potential e-commerce competitors are making,
and are expected to continue to make, strategic acquisitions or establish
cooperative, and, in some cases, exclusive relationships with significant
companies or competitors to expand their businesses or to offer more
comprehensive products and services. To the extent these competitors or
potential competitors establish exclusive relationships with major portals,
search engines and ISPs, our ability to reach potential members through online
advertising may be restricted. Any of these competitors could cause us
difficulty in attracting and retaining online registrants and converting
registrants into customers and could jeopardize our existing affiliate program
and relationships with portals, search engines, ISPs and other Internet
properties. Failure to compete effectively including by developing and
enhancing our services offerings would have a material adverse effect on our
business, results of operations, financial condition and the trading price of
our common stock.
We need to
attract and retain a large number of e-commerce customers who purchase our
products on a recurring basis. Our e-commerce model is driven by
the need to attract a large number of customers to our continuity program and to
maintain customers for an extended period of time. We have fixed
costs in obtaining an initial customer which can be defrayed only by a customer
making further purchases. For our business to be profitable, we must
convert a certain percentage of our initial customers to customers that purchase
our products on a recurring monthly basis for a period of time. To do
so, we must continue to invest significant resources in order to enhance our
existing products and to introduce new high-quality products and services.
There is no assurance we will have the resources, financial or otherwise,
required to enhance or develop products and services. Further, if we are
unable to predict user preferences or industry changes, or if we are unable to
improve our products and services on a timely basis, we may lose existing
members and may fail to attract new customers. Failure to enhance or
develop products and services or to respond to the needs of our customers in an
effective or timely manner could have a material adverse effect on our business,
results of operations, financial condition and the trading price of our common
stock.
Our customer
acquisition costs may increase significantly. The customer
acquisition cost of our business depends in part upon our ability to obtain
placement on promotional Internet sites at a reasonable cost. We
currently pay for the placement of our products on third party promotional
Internet sites by paying the site operators a fixed fee for each customer we
obtain from the site, (“CPA fee”). The CPA fee varies over time, depending
upon a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control. One of the
factors that determine the amount of the CPA fee is the attractiveness of our
products and how many consumers our products draw to a promotional
website. Historically, we have used online advertising on promotional
websites as the sole means of marketing our products. In general, the
costs of online advertising have increased substantially and are expected to
continue to increase as long as the demand for online advertising remains
robust. We may not be able to pass these costs on in the form of higher
product prices. Continuing increases in advertising costs could have a
material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial
condition and the trading price of our common stock.
Our online
marketing business must keep pace with rapid technological change to remain
competitive. Our online marketing business operates in a market
characterized by rapidly changing technology, evolving industry standards,
frequent new product and service announcements, enhancements, and changing
customer demands. We must adapt to rapidly changing technologies and
industry standards and continually improve the speed, performance, features,
ease of use and reliability of our services and products. Introducing new
technology into our systems involves numerous technical challenges, requires
substantial amounts of capital and personnel resources, and often takes many
months to complete. We may not successfully integrate new technology into
our websites on a timely basis, which may degrade the responsiveness and speed
of our websites. Technology, once integrated, may not function as
expected. Failure to generally keep pace with the rapid technological
change could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations, financial condition and the trading price of our common
stock.
We depend on our
merchant and banking relationships, as well as strategic relationships with
third parties, who provide us with payment processing solutions.
Our e-commerce products are sold by us on the Internet and are paid for by
customers through credit cards. From time to time, VISA and
MasterCard increase the fees that they charge processors. We may attempt to pass
these increases along to our customers, but this might result in the loss of
those customers to our competitors who do not pass along the increases. Our
revenues from merchant account processing are dependent upon our continued
merchant relationships which are highly sensitive and can be canceled if
customer charge-backs escalate and generate concern that the company has not
held back sufficient funds in reserve accounts to cover these charge-backs as
well as result in significant charge-back fines. Cancellation by our merchant
providers would most likely result in the loss of new customers and lead to a
reduction in our revenues.
We depend on
credit card processing for a majority of our e-commerce business, including but
not limited to Visa, MasterCard, American Express, and Discover.
Significant changes to the merchant operating regulations, merchant rules and
guidelines, card acceptance methods and/or card authorization methods could
significantly impact our revenues. Additionally our e-commerce membership
programs are accepted under a negative option billing term (customers are
charged monthly until they cancel), and change in regulation of negative option
billing could significantly impact our revenue.
We are exposed to
risks associated with credit card fraud and credit payment. Our
customers use credit cards to pay for our e-commerce products and for the
products we market for third parties. We have suffered losses, and may
continue to suffer losses, as a result of orders placed with fraudulent credit
card data, even though the associated financial institution approved
payment. Under current credit card practices, a merchant is liable for
fraudulent credit card transactions when the merchant does not obtain a
cardholder’s signature. A failure to adequately control fraudulent credit
card transactions would result in significantly higher credit card-related costs
and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations,
financial condition and the trading price of our common stock.
Security breaches and
inappropriate Internet use could
damage our Digital Media Marketing business. Failure to successfully
prevent security breaches could significantly harm our business and expose us to
lawsuits. Anyone who is able to circumvent our security measures could
misappropriate proprietary information, including customer credit card and
personal data, cause interruptions in our operations, or damage our brand and
reputation. Breach of our security measures could result in the disclosure
of personally identifiable information and could expose us to legal
liability. We cannot assure you that our financial systems and other
technology resources are completely secure from security breaches or
sabotage. We have experienced security breaches and attempts at
“hacking.” We may be required to incur significant costs to protect
against security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by breaches. All of
these factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations, financial condition and the trading price of our common
stock.
Changes in
government regulation and industry standards could decrease demand for our
products and services and increase our costs of doing business. Laws and regulations
that apply to Internet communications, commerce and advertising are becoming
more prevalent. These regulations could affect the costs of communicating on the
web and could adversely affect the demand for our advertising solutions or
otherwise harm our business, results of operations and financial condition. The
United States Congress has enacted Internet legislation regarding children’s
privacy, copyrights, sending of commercial email (e.g., the Federal CAN-SPAM Act
of 2003), and taxation. Other laws and regulations have been adopted and
may be adopted in the future, and may address issues such as user
privacy, spyware, “do not email” lists, pricing, intellectual property ownership
and infringement, copyright, trademark, trade secret, export of encryption
technology, click-fraud, acceptable content, search terms, lead generation,
behavioral targeting, taxation, and quality of products and services. This
legislation could hinder growth in the use of the web generally and adversely
affect our business. Moreover, it could decrease the acceptance of the web as a
communications, commercial and advertising medium. The Company does not use any
form of spam or spyware.
Government
enforcement actions could result in decreased demand for our products and
services. The Federal Trade
Commission and other governmental or regulatory bodies have increasingly focused
on issues impacting online marketing practices and consumer protection. The
Federal Trade Commission has conducted investigations of competitors and filed
law suits against competitors. Some of the investigations and law
suits have been settled by consent orders which have imposed fines and required
changes with regard to how competitors conduct business. The New York
Attorney General’s office has sued a major Internet marketer for alleged
violations of legal restrictions against false advertising and deceptive
business practices related to spyware. In our judgment, the marketing
claims we make in advertisements we place to obtain new e-commerce customers are
legally permissible. Governmental or regulatory authorities may
challenge the legality of the advertising we place and the marketing claims we
make. We could be subject to regulatory proceedings for past marketing
campaigns, or could be required to make changes in our future marketing claims,
either of which could adversely affect our revenues.
Our business
could be subject to regulation by foreign countries, new unforeseen laws and
unexpected interpretations of existing laws, resulting in an increased cost of
doing business. Due to the global nature of the web, it is
possible that, although our transmissions originate in California and
Pennsylvania, the governments of other states or foreign countries might attempt
to regulate our transmissions or levy sales or other taxes relating to our
activities. In addition, the growth and development of the market for Internet
commerce may prompt calls for more stringent consumer protection laws, both
in the United States and abroad, that may impose additional burdens on
companies conducting business over the Internet. The laws governing the internet
remain largely unsettled, even in areas where there has been some legislative
action. It may take years to determine how existing laws, including those
governing intellectual property, privacy, libel and taxation, apply to the
Internet and Internet advertising. Our business, results of operations and
financial condition could be materially and adversely affected by the adoption
or modification of industry standards, laws or regulations relating to the
Internet, or the application of existing laws to the Internet or Internet-based
advertising.
We depend on
third parties to manufacture all of the products we sell within our e-commerce
division, and if we are unable to maintain these manufacturing and product
supply relationships or enter into additional or different arrangements, we may
fail to meet customer demand and our net sales and profitability may suffer as
a result. In addition, shortages of raw ingredients, especially
for our Purity mineral cosmetics line, could affect our supply chain and impede
current and future sales and net revenues. All of our products
are contract manufactured or supplied by third parties. The fact that we do not
have long-term contracts with our other third-party manufacturers means that
they could cease manufacturing these products for us at any time and for any
reason. In addition, our third-party manufacturers are not restricted from
manufacturing our competitors’ products, including mineral-based products. If we
are unable to obtain adequate supplies of suitable products because of the loss
of one or more key vendors or manufacturers, our business and results of
operations would suffer until we could make alternative supply arrangements. In
addition, identifying and selecting alternative vendors would be time-consuming
and expensive, and we might experience significant delays in production during
this selection process. Our inability to secure adequate and timely supplies of
merchandise would harm inventory levels, net sales and gross profit, and
ultimately our results of operations.
The quality of
our e-commerce products depend on quality control of third party
manufacturers. For our e-commerce products, third-party
manufacturers may not continue to produce products that are consistent with our
standards or current or future regulatory requirements, which would require us
to find alternative suppliers of our products. Our third-party
manufacturers may not maintain adequate controls with respect to product
specifications and quality and may not continue to produce products that are
consistent with our standards or applicable regulatory requirements. If we are
forced to rely on products of inferior quality, then our customer satisfaction
and brand reputation would likely suffer, which would lead to reduced net
sales.
Within our
e-commerce division, we manufacture and market health and beauty consumer
products that are ingestible or applied topically. These products may
cause unexpected and undesirable side effects that could limit their use,
require their removal from the market or prevent further development. In
addition, we are vulnerable to claims that our products are not as effective as
we claim them to be. We also may be vulnerable to product liability
claims from their use. Unexpected and undesirable side effects caused by
our products for which we have not provided sufficient label warnings could
result in our recall or discontinuance of sales of our products. Unexpected and
undesirable side effects could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market
acceptance of the affected products or could substantially increase the costs
and expenses of commercializing new products. In addition, consumers or industry
analysts may assert claims that our products are not as effective as we claim
them to be. Unexpected and undesirable side effects associated with our products
or assertions that our products are not as effective as we claim them to be also
could cause negative publicity regarding our company, brand or products, which
could in turn harm our reputation and net sales. Our business exposes
us to potential liability risks that arise from the testing, manufacture and
sale of our beauty products. Plaintiffs in the past have received substantial
damage awards from other cosmetics companies based upon claims for injuries
allegedly caused by the use of their products. We currently maintain general
liability insurance in the amount of $1 million per occurrence and
$2 million in the aggregate with an umbrella policy which provides coverage
up to $25 million. Any claims brought against us may exceed our existing or
future insurance policy coverage or limits. Any judgment against us that is in
excess of our policy limits would have to be paid from our cash reserves, which
would reduce our capital resources. Any product liability claim or
series of claims brought against us could harm our business significantly,
particularly if a claim were to result in adverse publicity or damage awards
outside or in excess of our insurance policy limits.
Risks
Related to our Car Wash Segment
Our car wash work
force may expose us to claims that might adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations; our insurance coverage may not
cover all of our potential liability. We employ a large
number of workers who perform manual labor at the car washes we operate. Many of
the workers are paid at or slightly above minimum wage. Also, a large percentage
of our car wash work force is composed of employees who have been employed by us
for relatively short periods of time. This work force is constantly turning
over. Our work force may subject us to financial claims in a variety of ways,
such as:
· claims
by customers that employees damaged automobiles in our custody;
· claims
related to theft by employees;
· claims
by customers that our employees harassed or physically harmed them;
· claims
related to the inadvertent hiring of undocumented workers;
· claims
for payment of workers’ compensation claims and other similar claims;
and
· claims
for violations of wage and hour requirements.
We may
incur fines and other losses or negative publicity with respect to these claims.
In addition, some or all of these claims may rise to litigation, which could be
costly and time consuming to our management team, and could have a negative
impact on our business. We cannot assure you that we will not experience these
problems in the future, that our insurance will cover all claims or that our
insurance coverage will continue to be available at economically feasible
rates
Our car wash
operations face governmental regulations, including environmental regulations,
and if we fail to or are unable to comply with those regulations, our business
may suffer. We are governed by federal, state and local laws
and regulations, including environmental regulations that regulate the operation
of our car wash centers and other car care services businesses. Other
car care services and products, such as gasoline and lubrication, use a number
of oil derivatives and other regulated hazardous substances. As a
result, we are governed by environmental laws and regulations dealing with,
among other things:
· transportation,
storage, presence, use, disposal, and handling of hazardous materials and
wastes;
· discharge
of storm water; and
· underground
storage tanks.
If
uncontrolled hazardous substances are found on any of our properties, including
leased property, or if we are otherwise found to be in violation of applicable
laws and regulations, we could be responsible for clean-up costs, property
damage, fines, or other penalties, any one of which could have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
Through
our Car Wash Segment, we face a variety of potential environmental liabilities,
including those arising out of improperly disposing waste oil or lubricants at
our lube centers, and leaks from our underground gasoline storage
tanks. If we improperly dispose of oil or other hazardous substances,
or if our underground gasoline tanks leak, we could be assessed fines by federal
or state regulatory authorities and/or be required to remediate the
property. Although each case is different, and there can be no
assurance as to the cost to remediate an environmental problem, if any, at one
of our properties, the costs for remediation of a leaking underground storage
tank typically range from $30,000 to $75,000.
If our car wash
equipment is not maintained, our car washes will not be
operable. Many of our car washes have older equipment that
requires frequent repair or replacement. Although we undertake to
keep our car washing equipment in adequate operating condition, the operating
environment in car washes results in frequent mechanical problems. If
we fail to properly maintain the equipment in a car wash, that car wash could
become inoperable or malfunction resulting in a loss of revenue, damage to
vehicles and poorly washed vehicles.
The current
difficult economic conditions make it more difficult to sell our car
washes. We can offer no assurances that we will be able to
locate additional buyers for our remaining car washes or that we will be able to
consummate any further sales to potential buyers we do locate. The current
economic climate has made it more difficult to sell our remaining car washes.
Potential buyers of the car washes are finding it difficult to finance the
purchase price.
If we sell our
Car Wash Segment, our revenues will decrease and our business may
suffer. If we are able to sell our remaining car
washes, our total revenues will decrease and our business will become reliant on
the success of our Security Segment and our Digital Marketing Media Segment.
Those businesses face significant risks as set forth herein and our reliance on
them may impact our ability to generate positive operating income or cash flows
from operations, may cause our financial results to become more volatile, or may
otherwise materially adversely affect us.
Risks
Related to our Common Stock
Our
stock price has been, and likely will continue to be, volatile and an investment
in our common stock may suffer a decline in value.
The
market price of our common stock has in the past been, and is likely to continue
in the future to be volatile. That volatility depends upon many factors,
some of which are beyond our control, including:
|
·
|
announcements
regarding the results of expansion or development efforts by us or our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
announcements
regarding the acquisition of businesses or companies by us or our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
announcements
regarding the disposition of all or a significant portion of the assets
that comprise our Car Wash Segment, which may or may not be on favorable
terms;
|
|
·
|
technological
innovations or new commercial products developed by us or our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
changes
in our, or our suppliers’ intellectual property
portfolio;
|
|
·
|
issuance
of new or changed securities analysts’ reports and/or recommendations
applicable to us or our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
additions
or departures of our key personnel;
|
|
·
|
operating
losses by us;
|
|
·
|
actual
or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly financial and operating
results and degree of trading liquidity in our common stock;
and
|
|
·
|
our
ability to maintain our common stock listing on the Nasdaq Global
Market.
|
One or
more of these factors could cause a decline in our revenues and income or in the
price of our common stock, thereby reducing the value of an investment in our
Company.
We could lose our
listing on the NASDAQ Global Market if our stock price remains below $1.00 for
30 consecutive days, after the $1.00 minimum bid rule is
reinstated. The loss of the listing would make our stock
significantly less liquid and would affect its value. Our
common stock is listed on NASDAQ Global Market with a closing price of $0.96 at
the close of the market on August 10, 2009. The NASDAQ Global Market rule
requires that listed stock is subject to delisting if its price falls below
$1.00 and for 30 consecutive days remains below $1.00. The delisting rule was
suspended through July 31, 2009. With the rule reinstated
on August 3, 2009, we may be subject to being delisted from the NASDAQ Global
Market, if our stock remains below $1.00 for 30 consecutive days after August 3,
2009. Upon delisting from the NASDAQ Global Market, our stock would
be traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market until we maintain a minimum bid price of
$1.00 for 30 consecutive days at which time we would be able to regain our
listing on the NASDAQ Global Market. If our stock fails to maintain a
minimum bid price of $1.00 for 30 consecutive days during a 180-day grace period
on the Nasdaq Capital Market or a 360-day grace period if compliance with
certain core listing standards are demonstrated, we could receive a delisting
notice from the Nasdaq Capital Market. Upon delisting from the Nasdaq
Capital Market, our stock would be traded over-the-counter, more commonly known
as OTC. OTC transactions involve risks in addition to those
associated with transactions in securities traded on the NASDAQ Global Market or
the Nasdaq Capital Market (together “Nasdaq-listed Stocks”). Many OTC stocks
trade less frequently and in smaller volumes than Nasdaq-listed
Stocks. Accordingly, our stock would be less liquid than it would be
otherwise. Also, the values of these stocks may be more volatile than
Nasdaq-listed Stocks. If our stock is traded in the OTC market and a
market maker sponsors us, we may have the price of our stock electronically
displayed on the OTC Bulletin Board, or OTCBB. However, if we lack
sufficient market maker support for display on the OTCBB, we must have our price
published by the National Quotations Bureau LLP in a paper publication known as
the Pink Sheets. The marketability of our stock would be even more limited if
our price must be published on the Pink Sheets.
Because we are a
Delaware corporation, it may be difficult for a third party to acquire us, which
could affect our stock price. We are governed by Section 203
of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which prohibits a publicly held
Delaware corporation from engaging in a “business combination” with an entity
who is an “interested stockholder” (as defined in Section 203 an owner of 15% or
more of the outstanding stock of the corporation) for a period of three years
following the shareholders becoming an “interested shareholder,” unless approved
in a prescribed manner. This provision of Delaware law may affect our
ability to merge with, or to engage in other similar activities with, some other
companies. This means that we may be a less attractive target to a
potential acquirer who otherwise may be willing to pay a premium for our common
stock above its market price.
If we issue our
authorized preferred stock, the rights of the holders of our common stock may be
affected and other entities may be discouraged from seeking to acquire control
of our Company. Our certificate of incorporation authorizes
the issuance of up to 10 million shares of “blank check” preferred stock that
could be designated and issued by our board of directors to increase the number
of outstanding shares and thwart a takeover attempt. No shares of
preferred stock are currently outstanding. It is not possible to
state the precise effect of preferred stock upon the rights of the holders of
our common stock until the board of directors determines the respective
preferences, limitations, and relative rights of the holders of one or more
series or classes of the preferred stock. However, such effect might
include: (i) reduction of the amount otherwise available for payment of
dividends on common stock, to the extent dividends are payable on any issued
shares of preferred stock, and restrictions on dividends on common stock if
dividends on the preferred stock are in arrears, (ii) dilution of the voting
power of the common stock to the extent that the preferred stock has voting
rights, and (iii) the holders of common stock not being entitled to share in our
assets upon liquidation until satisfaction of any liquidation preference granted
to the holders of our preferred stock. The “blank check” preferred
stock may be viewed as having the effect of discouraging an unsolicited attempt
by another entity to acquire control of us and may therefore have an
anti-takeover effect. Issuances of authorized preferred stock can be
implemented, and have been implemented by some companies in recent years, with
voting or conversion privileges intended to make an acquisition of a company
more difficult or costly. Such an issuance, or the perceived threat
of such an issuance, could discourage or limit the stockholders’ participation
in certain types of transactions that might be proposed (such as a tender
offer), whether or not such transactions were favored by the majority of the
stockholders, and could enhance the ability of officers and directors to retain
their positions.
Our policy of not
paying cash dividends on our common stock could negatively affect the price of
our common stock. We have not paid in the past, and do not
expect to pay in the foreseeable future, cash dividends on our common
stock. We expect to reinvest in our business any cash otherwise
available for dividends. Our decision not to pay cash dividends may
negatively affect the price of our common stock.
Item
2. Unregistered Sales of Securities and Use of Proceeds
None.
(c)
Issuer Purchases of Securities
The
following table summarizes our equity security repurchases during the three
months ended June 30, 2009:
Period
|
|
Total Number
of Shares
Purchased
|
|
|
Average Price
Paid per Share
|
|
|
Total Number of
Share Purchased
as part of
Publicly
Announced Plans
or Programs
|
|
|
Approximate Dollar
Value of Shares that
May Yet Be
Purchased Under
the Plans or
Programs (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April
1 to April 30,
2009
|
|
|
104,500 |
|
|
$ |
0.90 |
|
|
|
104,500 |
|
|
$ |
1,614,000 |
|
May
1 to May 31,
2009
|
|
|
21,001 |
|
|
|
0.93 |
|
|
|
21,001 |
|
|
$ |
1,594,000 |
|
June
1 to June 30, 2009
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
1,594,000 |
|
Total
|
|
|
125,501 |
|
|
$ |
0.91 |
|
|
|
125,501 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
On August 13, 2007, the Company’s Board of Directors approved a share repurchase
program to allow the Company to repurchase up to an aggregate $2,000,000 of its
common shares in the future if the market conditions so dictate. As of June 30,
2009, 370,810 shares had been repurchased under this program at an
aggregate cost of approximately $406,000.
Item
5. Other Information
On May 8,
2009, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania filed a one
count Information charging Robert Kramer, the Registrant’s General Counsel, and
the former Chief Operating Officer of the Registrant’s car wash operations, with
a Class B misdemeanor of engaging in a pattern or practice of continuing to
employ at least 50 undocumented aliens in the United States. This charge
resulted from the employment of certain workers at car washes owned by Car Care,
Inc., a subsidiary of the Registrant, with the constructive knowledge of Mr.
Kramer, according to the Information. Mr. Kramer and the U.S. Attorney have
entered into a plea agreement pursuant to which Mr. Kramer has pled guilty to
the Class B misdemeanor based on constructive knowledge.
Item
6. Exhibits
|
31.1
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31.2
|
Certification
of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32.1
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
|
32.2
|
Certification
of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.
|
Mace
Security International, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BY:
|
/s/ Dennis R.
Raefield
|
|
|
Dennis
Raefield, Chief Executive Officer
|
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
|
|
|
|
BY:
|
/s/ Gregory M.
Krzemien
|
|
|
Gregory
M. Krzemien, Chief Financial Officer
|
|
and
Chief Accounting Officer
|
|
(Principal
Financial Officer)
|
EXHIBIT
INDEX
Exhibit No.
|
|
Description
|
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 20
|
31.2
|
|
Certification
of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
32.1
|
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
32.2
|
|
Certification
of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|