Unassociated Document
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 SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
o 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 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
the 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
November 16, 2009, there were 16,052,075 Shares of the registrant’s Common
Stock, par value $.01 per share, outstanding.
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Form
10-Q
Quarter
Ended September 30, 2009
Table
of Contents
|
Page
|
|
|
PART
I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
Item
1 - Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets – September 30, 2009 (Unaudited) and December 31,
2008
|
1
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations (Unaudited) for the three months ended September
30, 2009 and 2008
|
3
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations (Unaudited) for the nine months ended September
30, 2009 and 2008
|
4
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statement of Stockholders’ Equity (Unaudited) for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009
|
5
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited) for the nine months ended September
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
|
19
|
|
|
Item
3 - Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk
|
37
|
|
|
Item
4T - Controls and Procedures
|
37
|
|
|
PART
II - OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
Item
1 - Legal Proceedings
|
37
|
|
|
Item
1A - Risk Factors
|
38
|
|
|
Item
2 - Unregistered Sales of Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
48
|
|
|
Item
6 - Exhibits
|
48
|
|
|
Signatures
|
49
|
PART
I
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
Item
1. Financial
Statements
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
(in
thousands, except share information)
|
|
September 30,
2009
|
|
|
December 31,
2008
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
3,543 |
|
|
$ |
8,314 |
|
Short-term
investments
|
|
|
1,079 |
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
Accounts
receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $801 and $760 in 2009
and 2008, respectively
|
|
|
2,435 |
|
|
|
1,852 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
5,699 |
|
|
|
7,743 |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
2,185 |
|
|
|
1,994 |
|
Assets
held for sale
|
|
|
12,088 |
|
|
|
4,680 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
27,029 |
|
|
|
25,588 |
|
Property
and equipment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
|
|
|
2,374 |
|
|
|
6,874 |
|
Buildings
and leasehold improvements
|
|
|
6,407 |
|
|
|
12,642 |
|
Machinery
and equipment
|
|
|
5,048 |
|
|
|
5,332 |
|
Furniture
and fixtures
|
|
|
536 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
Total
property and equipment
|
|
|
14,365 |
|
|
|
25,359 |
|
Accumulated
depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(5,608 |
) |
|
|
(7,164 |
) |
Total
property and equipment, net
|
|
|
8,757 |
|
|
|
18,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
7,869 |
|
|
|
6,887 |
|
Other
intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization of $1,608 and $1,472 in
2009 and 2008, respectively
|
|
|
3,935 |
|
|
|
3,449 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
1,625 |
|
|
|
917 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
49,215 |
|
|
$ |
55,036 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral
part
of these consolidated financial statements.
|
|
September 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
|
|
|
2,747 |
|
|
|
2,287 |
|
Income
taxes payable
|
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities
|
|
|
4,245 |
|
|
|
2,649 |
|
Liabilities
related to assets held for sale
|
|
|
3,136 |
|
|
|
1,644 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
11,230 |
|
|
|
9,563 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
1,624 |
|
|
|
2,306 |
|
Capital
lease obligations, net of current position
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
481 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
and contingencies – See Note 7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 16,052,075 at September 30, 2009 and 16,285,377 at
December 31, 2008, respectively
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
94,050 |
|
|
|
94,161 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
(58,435 |
) |
|
|
(51,147 |
) |
|
|
|
35,775 |
|
|
|
43,172 |
|
Less
treasury stock at cost, 27,232 shares at September 30, 2009 and 5,532
shares at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
35,748 |
|
|
|
43,167 |
|
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
|
$ |
49,215 |
|
|
$ |
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
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security
|
|
$ |
4,821 |
|
|
$ |
5,309 |
|
Digital
media marketing
|
|
|
2,231 |
|
|
|
3,355 |
|
Car
wash
|
|
|
1,175 |
|
|
|
1,677 |
|
|
|
|
8,227 |
|
|
|
10,341 |
|
Cost
of revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security
|
|
|
3,348 |
|
|
|
4,004 |
|
Digital
media marketing
|
|
|
1,772 |
|
|
|
2,139 |
|
Car
wash
|
|
|
1,143 |
|
|
|
1,463 |
|
|
|
|
6,263 |
|
|
|
7,606 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
3,771 |
|
|
|
4,481 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(2,212 |
) |
|
|
(1,993 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
(expense) income, net
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Other
income
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(2,240 |
) |
|
|
(1,844 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(2,255 |
) |
|
|
(1,869 |
) |
Loss
from discontinued operations, net of tax of $0 in 2009 and
2008
|
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
(192 |
) |
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(2,358 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,061 |
) |
Per
share of common stock (basic and diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.14 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.11 |
) |
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.01 |
) |
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(0.15 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
16,191,590 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
16,191,590 |
|
|
|
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)
|
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security
|
|
$ |
13,457 |
|
|
$ |
16,151 |
|
Digital
media marketing
|
|
|
8,035 |
|
|
|
14,272 |
|
Car
wash
|
|
|
3,841 |
|
|
|
5,077 |
|
|
|
|
25,333 |
|
|
|
35,500 |
|
Cost
of revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Security
|
|
|
9,477 |
|
|
|
12,019 |
|
Digital
media marketing
|
|
|
5,797 |
|
|
|
9,884 |
|
Car
wash
|
|
|
3,580 |
|
|
|
4,430 |
|
|
|
|
18,854 |
|
|
|
26,333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
11,627 |
|
|
|
14,182 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
739 |
|
|
|
818 |
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
1,432 |
|
|
|
2,608 |
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(7,319 |
) |
|
|
(8,441 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
(expense) income, net
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
40 |
|
Other
income
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
378 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(7,314 |
) |
|
|
(8,023 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(7,409 |
) |
|
|
(8,098 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations, net of tax of $0 in 2009 and
2008
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
6,082 |
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(7,288 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,016 |
) |
Per
share of common stock (basic and diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
(0.46 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.49 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.37 |
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(0.45 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
16,253,765 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
16,253,765 |
|
|
|
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)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93 |
|
Purchase
and retirement of treasury stock, net
|
|
|
(233,302 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(228 |
) |
Unrealized
gain on short-term investments
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
Net
loss
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(7,288 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(7,288 |
) |
Total
comprehensive loss
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(7,284 |
) |
Balance
at September 30, 2009
|
|
|
16,052,075 |
|
|
$ |
161 |
|
|
$ |
94,050 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(58,435 |
) |
|
$ |
(27 |
) |
|
$ |
35,748 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral
part
of this consolidated financial statements.
Mace
Security International, Inc.
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited) (in
thousands)
|
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Operating
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(loss) income
|
|
$ |
(7,288 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,016 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
6,082 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(7,409 |
) |
|
|
(8,098 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile loss from continuing operations to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
739 |
|
|
|
818 |
|
Stock-based
compensation (see Note 6)
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
546 |
|
Provision
for losses on receivables
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
(Gain)
loss on sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
Asset
impairment charge
|
|
|
1,432 |
|
|
|
2,608 |
|
Loss
(gain) on short-term investments
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(259 |
) |
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities, net of acquisition:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
(609 |
) |
|
|
877 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
1,906 |
|
|
|
(348 |
) |
Prepaid
expenses and other assets
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
619 |
|
|
|
(1,568 |
) |
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
Accrued
expenses
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
812 |
|
Income
taxes payable
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(364 |
) |
Net
cash used in operating activities-continuing operations
|
|
|
(2,594 |
) |
|
|
(4,563 |
) |
Net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities-discontinued
operations
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
(727 |
) |
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(2,311 |
) |
|
|
(5,290 |
) |
Investing
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
of business, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
(1,845 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
|
|
(375 |
) |
|
|
(374 |
) |
Proceeds
from sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Purchase
of short-term investments
|
|
|
(74 |
) |
|
|
(1,070 |
) |
Payments
for intangibles
|
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Net
cash used in investing activities-continuing operations
|
|
|
(1,521 |
) |
|
|
(1,458 |
) |
Net
cash (used in) provided by investing activities-discontinued
operations
|
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
7,849 |
|
Net
cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
|
|
(1,544 |
) |
|
|
6,391 |
|
Financing
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments
on long-term debt
|
|
|
(388 |
) |
|
|
(867 |
) |
Purchase
and retirement of treasury stock, net
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(38 |
) |
Net
cash used in financing activities-continuing operations
|
|
|
(410 |
) |
|
|
(905 |
) |
Net
cash used in financing activities-discontinued operations
|
|
|
(506 |
) |
|
|
(544 |
) |
Net
cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(916 |
) |
|
|
(1,449 |
) |
Net decrease
in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(4,771 |
) |
|
|
(348 |
) |
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
8,314 |
|
|
|
8,104 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$ |
3,543 |
|
|
$ |
7,756 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral
part
of these consolidated financial statements.
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 products and security monitoring services; 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. As of September 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 accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States (“GAAP”). See Note 5. Discontinued Operations and
Assets Held for Sale.
2. New Accounting
Standards
In June
2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued the FASB
Accounting Standards Codification (the “ASC”). The ASC has become the single
source of non-governmental accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States (“GAAP”) recognized by the FASB in the preparation of financial
statements. The ASC does not supersede the rules or regulations of the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), therefore, the rules and
interpretive releases of the SEC continue to be additional sources of GAAP for
the Company. The Company adopted the ASC as of July 1, 2009. The ASC does not
change GAAP and did not have an effect on the Company’s financial position,
results of operations or cash flows.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued new guidance on business combinations. This
guidance establishes principles and requirements for how the Company: (1)
recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets
acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interest in the
acquiree; (2) recognizes and measures the goodwill acquired in the business
combination or a gain from a bargain purchase; and (3) determines what
information to disclose to enable users of the financial statements to evaluate
the nature and financial effects of the business combination. The business
combinations guidance also requires acquisition-related transaction and
restructuring costs to be expensed rather than treated as part of the cost of
the acquisition. This guidance applies prospectively to 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. The Company adopted
the business combination guidance on January 1, 2009. See Note 4. Business Acquisitions and
Divestitures.
In April
2009, the FASB issued guidance relating to accounting for assets acquired and
liabilities assumed in a business combination that arise from contingencies.
This pronouncement amends the guidance on business combinations to clarify the
initial and subsequent recognition, subsequent accounting, and disclosure of
assets and liabilities arising from contingencies in a business combination.
This pronouncement requires that assets acquired and liabilities assumed in a
business combination that arise from contingencies be recognized at fair value,
as determined in accordance with the fair value measurements guidance, if the
acquisition-date fair value can be reasonably estimated. If the acquisition-date
fair value of an asset or liability cannot be reasonably estimated, the asset or
liability would be measured at the amount that would be recognized in accordance
with the accounting guidance for contingencies. This pronouncement became
effective for the Company as of January 1, 2009, and the provisions of the
pronouncement are applied prospectively to business combinations with an
acquisition date on or after the date the guidance became effective. The
adoption of the pronouncement did not have a material impact on the Company’s
financial position or results of operations.
In April
2009, the FASB issued additional guidance on fair value measurements and
disclosures. Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell
an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants under current market conditions. The new guidance requires
an evaluation of whether there has been a significant decrease in the volume and
level of activity for the asset or liability in relation to normal market
activity for the asset or liability. If there has been a significant decrease in
activity, transactions or quoted prices may not be indicative of fair value and
a significant adjustment may need to be made to those prices to estimate fair
value. Additionally, an entity must consider whether the observed transaction
was orderly (that is, not distressed or forced). If the transaction was orderly,
the obtained price can be considered a relevant, observable input for
determining fair value. If the transaction is not orderly, other valuation
techniques must be used when estimating fair value. This guidance, which was
applied by the Company prospectively as of June 30, 2009, did not impact the
Company’s results of operations, cash flows or financial position for the three
and nine months periods ended September 30, 2009.
In May
2009, the FASB issued guidance on subsequent events which establishes general
standards of accounting for and disclosure of events that occur after the
balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued or are available
to be issued. This guidance is based on the same principles as currently exist
in auditing standards and was issued by the FASB to include accounting guidance
that originated as auditing standards into the body of authoritative literature
issued by the FASB. The standard addresses the period after the balance sheet
date during which management of a reporting entity should evaluate events or
transactions that may occur for potential recognition or disclosure in the
financial statements, the circumstances under which an entity should recognize
events or transactions occurring after the balance sheet date in its financial
statements and disclosure that an entity should make about events or
transactions that occurred after the balance sheet date. The Company adopted
this guidance during the quarter ended June 30, 2009. For the quarter ended
September 30, 2009, the Company evaluated subsequent events through November 16,
2009, which is the date the accompanying financial statements were available to
be issued. During this period we had recognizable subsequent events by entering
into an agreement to sell the Ft. Lauderdale, Florida warehouse building on
October 5, 2009 (See Note 5, Discontinued Operations and Assets
Held for Sale) and by entering into an amendment on October 9, 2009 to
the agreements of sale for the three car washes we own in Austin,
Texas (See Note 4, Business Acquisitions and
Divestitures).
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):
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount
|
|
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
|
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount
|
|
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
515 |
|
|
$ |
216 |
|
|
$ |
465 |
|
|
$ |
164 |
|
|
|
|
1,824 |
|
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
1,184 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
|
590 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
590 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
Software
|
|
|
883 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
883 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
231 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
Total
amortized intangible assets
|
|
|
4,042 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
|
|
3,369 |
|
|
|
1,472 |
|
Non-amortized
intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trademarks-Security
Segment
|
|
|
1,013 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,074 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Trademarks-Digital
Media Marketing Segment
|
|
|
488 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
non-amortized intangible assets
|
|
|
1,501 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
intangible assets
|
|
$ |
5,543 |
|
|
$ |
1,608 |
|
|
$ |
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
|
|
$ |
444 |
|
2010
|
|
$ |
485 |
|
2011
|
|
$ |
444 |
|
2012
|
|
$ |
379 |
|
2013
|
|
$ |
270 |
|
Amortization
expense of other intangible assets, net of discontinued operations, was
approximately $121,000 and $104,000 for the three months ended September 30,
2009 and 2008 and $345,000 and $399,000 for the nine months ended September 30,
2009 and 2008, respectively. The weighted average useful life of amortizing
intangible assets was 4.9 years at September 30, 2009.
4. Business
Acquisitions and Divestitures
Acquisitions
On April
30, 2009, the Company completed the purchase of all the outstanding common stock
of CSSS from CSSS’s shareholders. The Company paid approximately $3.7 million
consisting of $1.7 million in cash at closing, potential additional payments of
up to $1.4 million upon the settlement of certain contingencies as set forth in
the Stock Purchase Agreement, $124,000 which has been paid to date, $846,000
which is recorded in accrued expenses and other current liabilities and $481,000
of which is recorded as other non-current liabilities at September 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 the new business combination pronouncement as disclosed in Note
2.
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. 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
it owns in Austin, Texas. The net book value of this car wash is approximately
$2.6 million. On October 9, 2009 the agreements of sale were amended, and the
purchase price was modified to $8.0 million for the three car washes. Under the
amendment to the agreements of sale, $440,000 of deposits were released to the
Company and an additional $200,000 has been deposited in escrow. Closing under
the amendment is required to occur by November 30, 2009. Although no assurance
can be given that these transactions will close, the Company believes that the
sale will be consummated on or before November 30, 2009.
On May 5,
2009, the Company entered into an agreement of sale for an Arlington, Texas car
wash for a sales 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 sales price of $800,000. The net book value of this car wash is
approximately $750,000. The agreement to sell the Lubbock, Texas car wash was
terminated by the buyer on August 25, 2009. The Company received $20,000 in
cancellation payments from the buyer’s exercise of a contingency
clause.
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 was
approximately $925,000. The Company completed the sale of the Arlington, Texas
car wash on September 16, 2009. Simultaneously with the sale, $461,000 of cash
was used to pay down related mortgage debt. The sale resulted in a net gain of
$15,000.
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. The sale
resulted in a net gain of $9,600.
5. Discontinued Operations
and Assets Held for
Sale
The
Company reviews the carrying value of its long-lived assets held and used, and
its assets to be disposed of, for possible impairment when events and
circumstances warrant such a review. We also follow the criteria within GAAP 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 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 $1.5 million and $2.6 million for the three
months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 and $4.8 million and $7.9 million for
the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. Operating (loss) income from discontinued operations
was $(106,000) and $(188,000) for the three months ended September
30, 2009 and 2008 and $131,000 and $(781,000) for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
On
October 5, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement of sale to sell its Ft.
Lauderdale, Florida warehouse building for cash consideration of $1.6 million.
The sale is subject to customary closing conditions, including a general due
diligence period. While the transaction is expected to close prior to December
31, 2009 , no assurance can be given that the sale will be consummated. We
recorded an additional impairment charge of $150,000 at September 30, 2009 to
write-down the property to the sale price. The related assets have also been
reclassed to assets held for sale at September 30, 2009 (See Note 11. Assets Impairment
Charges).
Assets
and liabilities held for sale were comprised of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
As of September 30, 2009
|
|
Assets held for sale:
|
|
Lubbock,
Texas
|
|
|
Austin,
Texas
|
|
|
Ft.
Lauderdale,
Florida
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory
|
|
$ |
126 |
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
158 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
2,604 |
|
|
|
7,677 |
|
|
|
1,610 |
|
|
|
11,891 |
|
Intangible
Assets
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
2,730 |
|
|
$ |
7,748 |
|
|
$ |
1,610 |
|
|
$ |
12,088 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
related to assets held for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt
|
|
$ |
209 |
|
|
$ |
491 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
700 |
|
Long-term
debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
697 |
|
|
|
1,739 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,436 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
$ |
906 |
|
|
$ |
2,230 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
3,136 |
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2008
|
|
Assets held for sale:
|
|
Fort Worth,
Texas
|
|
|
Lubbock,
Texas
|
|
|
San Antonio,
Texas
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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: 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 recognizes
compensation cost relating to share-based payment transactions as compensation
expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of the instruments,
based upon the grant date fair value of the equity or liability instruments
issued. Total stock compensation expense is approximately $40,300 and
$93,000 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 ($40,300 in
selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”) expenses in the three month
period and $93,000 in the nine month period) and $255,000 and $548,000 for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2008, ($255,000 in SG&A expenses
in the three month period and $545,400 in SG&A expenses and $2,600 in the
discontinued operations in the nine 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
September 30,
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Expected
term years
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
|
|
2.75 |
% |
|
|
3.88 |
% |
|
2.75% to 3.21
|
% |
|
3.51% to 3.91
|
% |
Volatility
|
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
47 |
% |
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
47 |
% |
Dividend
yield
|
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Forfeiture
Rate
|
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
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 nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, the Company granted 353,000
and 887,500 stock options, respectively. The weighted-average of the fair value
of stock option grants are $0.57 and $0.95 per share for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. As of September 30, 2009, total
unrecognized stock-based compensation expense is $261,300, which has a weighted
average period to be recognized of approximately 1.2 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
September 30, 2009 for continuing operations are as follows: 2010 -
$1.0 million; 2011 - $826,000; 2012 - $775,000; 2013 - $480,000; 2014- $291,000
and thereafter - $436,000. Rental expense under these leases was
$298,000 and $253,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 and
$832,000 and $787,000 for the nine months ended September 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 September 30, 2009 and 2008,
revenues under these leases were approximately $5,300 and $28,300, respectively
and $57,600 and $68,200 for the nine months ended September 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 defaming 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. Testimony in the arbitration has been
completed, the parties are preparing briefs of their positions and a ruling is
expected on or about March 15, 2010, based on the current scheduling order. 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. A
hearing on the Company’s motion has been scheduled for the end of November
2009.
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. 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 (the “EPA”) conducted a site
investigation at the Company’s Bennington, Vermont location and the building
within which the facility is located. The Company leases 33,476
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. On September 29, 2009 the EPA accepted the final report. A
total estimated cost of approximately $711,000 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. Approximately $596,000 has been
paid to date, leaving an accrual balance of $115,000 at September 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 U.S. Attorney is actively pursuing an investigation of
possible criminal violations. 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 September 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
from external customers
|
|
$ |
4,821 |
|
|
$ |
2,231 |
|
|
$ |
1,175 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
8,227 |
|
Segment
operating (loss) income
|
|
$ |
(482 |
) |
|
$ |
(174 |
) |
|
$ |
(179 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,227 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,062 |
) |
Segment
assets (2)
|
|
$ |
16,604 |
|
|
$ |
8,400 |
|
|
$ |
12,123 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
37,127 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
$ |
1,982 |
|
|
$ |
5,887 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
7,869 |
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
$ |
115 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
70 |
|
|
$ |
187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine
months ended September 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
from external customers
|
|
$ |
13,457 |
|
|
$ |
8,035 |
|
|
$ |
3,841 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
25,333 |
|
Segment
operating (loss) income
|
|
$ |
(1,711 |
) |
|
$ |
141 |
|
|
$ |
(441 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,876 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,887 |
) |
Capital
expenditures
|
|
$ |
274 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
77 |
|
|
$ |
375 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three
months ended September 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
from external customers
|
|
$ |
5,309 |
|
|
$ |
3,355 |
|
|
$ |
1,677 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
10,341 |
|
Segment
operating (loss) income
|
|
$ |
(504 |
) |
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
$ |
(120 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,405 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,993 |
) |
Segment
assets (2)
|
|
$ |
17,787 |
|
|
$ |
10,264 |
|
|
$ |
30,745 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
58,796 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
$ |
1,344 |
|
|
$ |
6,887 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
8,231 |
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
124 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine
months ended September 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
from external customers
|
|
$ |
16,151 |
|
|
$ |
14,272 |
|
|
$ |
5,077 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
35,500 |
|
Segment
operating (loss) income
|
|
$ |
(1,807 |
) |
|
$ |
387 |
|
|
$ |
(273 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,140 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,833 |
) |
Capital
expenditures
|
|
$ |
247 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
94 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
374 |
|
A
reconciliation of operating income for reportable segments to total reported
operating loss is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
operating loss for reportable segments
|
|
$ |
(2,062 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,993 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,887 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,833 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,432 |
) |
|
|
(2,608 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
reported operating loss
|
|
$ |
(2,212 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,993 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,319 |
) |
|
$ |
(8,441 |
) |
(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.
10. Income
Taxes
The
Company recorded income tax expense of $15,000 and $25,000 from continuing
operations in the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 and
$95,000 and $75,000 for continuing operations in the nine months ended
September 2009 and 2008, respectively. Income tax expense reflects
the recording of income taxes on income from continuing operations at an
effective rate of approximately (1.3)% in 2009 and (0.9)% 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
nine month periods ended September 30, 2009 and 2008.
The
Company follows the appropriate accounting pronouncements which prescribe 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 September 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
nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 is insignificant and
when incurred is reported as interest expense.
11. Asset
Impairment Charges
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 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, 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 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 based on updated market valuations of the property. On
October 5, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement of sale to sell the Ft.
Lauderdale, Florida building for cash consideration of $1.6 million. The sale is
subject to customary closing conditions, including a general due diligence
period. While the transaction is expected to close prior to December 31, 2009,
no assurance can be given that the sale will be consummated. We recorded an
additional impairment charge of $150,000 at September 30, 2009 to write-down the
property to the sale price. The related assets have also been reclassed to
assets held for sale. See Note
5. Discontinued Operations and Assets Held for Sale.
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 was less than 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.
Additionally,
as noted in Note 4. Business
Acquisitions and Divestitures, on October 9, 2009 the agreements of sale
related to the three car washes the Company owns in Austin, Texas were amended
to modify the sales price to $8.0 million. This amended sale price less costs to
sell will result in an estimated loss upon disposal of approximately $175,000.
An impairment loss of $175,000 was recorded as of September 30, 2009 and
included in the results from discounted operations in the accompanying
consolidated statements of operations.
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. The Company 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. In September 2009, the Company and Vermont Mill extended
the term of the lease to November 14, 2010 at a monthly rental rate of $10,776
per month and modified the square footage rented to 33,476 square feet. The
Company believes that the lease rate is lower than lease rates charged for
similar properties in the Bennington, Vermont area. Rent expense under this
lease was $32,300 and $32,100 for the three months ending September 30, 2009 and
2008 and $102,956 and $95,556 for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and
2008, respectively.
13. Long-Term
Debt, Notes Payable and Capital Lease Obligations
At
September 30, 2009, we had borrowings, including capital lease obligations and
borrowings related to discontinued operations, of approximately $5.3 million,
substantially all of which is secured by mortgages against certain of our real
property. Of such borrowings, approximately $3.5 million, including
$3.1 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 September 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 as long-term debt at September 30, 2009, with certain loans
classified as liabilities related to assets held for sale.
We have
two letters of credit outstanding at September 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 September 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 September 30, 2009.
Our most
significant borrowings, including borrowings related to discontinued operations
are secured notes payable to Chase, in the amount of $4.2 million, $1.6 million
of which was classified as non-current debt at September 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 expressed prohibition on incurring additional debt for borrowed money
without the approval of the lender. As of September 30, 2009, our
warehouse and office facility in Farmers Branch, Texas and seven 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 September 30, 2009.
If we
default on any of the Chase covenants and are not able to obtain amendments or
waivers, Chase debt totaling $4.2 million at September 30, 2009, including debt
recorded as long-term debt at September 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 seven of our
car wash facilities as of September 30, 2009) are foreclosed upon, revenues from
our Car Wash Segment, which comprised 14.6% of our total revenues for fiscal
year 2008 and 15.2% of our total revenues for the nine months ended September
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):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
488 |
|
|
$ |
534 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
acquisition consideration
|
|
|
846 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,911 |
|
|
|
2,115 |
|
|
|
$ |
4,245 |
|
|
$ |
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
September 30,
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(2,358 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,061 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,288 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,016 |
) |
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator
for basic earnings per share-weighted-average shares
|
|
|
16,191,590 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
|
|
16,253,765 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
Dilutive
effect of options and warrants
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Denominator
for diluted earnings per share-weighted-average shares
|
|
|
16,191,590 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
|
|
16,253,765 |
|
|
|
16,465,253 |
|
Basic
and diluted (loss) income per share
|
|
$ |
(0.15 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.13 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.45 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.12 |
) |
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 15,435 and 110,781 for the three months ended September 30,
2009 and 2008 and 2,261 and 153,746 for the nine months ended September 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 September 30,
2009, the Company purchased 440,410 shares on the open market, at a total cost
of approximately $477,000 with 27,232 shares included in treasury stock at
September 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 (“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 (the
“Exchange Act”). 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 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 $132,000 and
$177,000 for the three months ending September 30, 2009 and 2008 and $413,000
and $516,000 for the nine months ended September 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 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 $141,000 and $318,000 are included in cost of revenues for the three
months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 and $498,000 and $1.14 million for the
nine months ended September 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
September 30, 2009, the Company had approximately $1.1 million 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 September 30, 2009.
On June
18, 2008, we requested redemption of a short-term investment in a hedge fund,
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’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 September 30, 2009. Although
the adoption of the new accounting pronouncement 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
September 30,
2009
|
|
|
Quoted Market
Prices(1)
|
|
|
Observable
Inputs(2)
|
|
|
Unobservable
Inputs(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term
investments
|
|
$ |
1,079 |
|
|
$ |
1,079 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
(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 detailed 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
$134,000 and $143,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2009,
and 2008 and $394,000 and $419,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2009
and 2008, respectively. Maintenance and repairs are charged to
expense as incurred and amounted to approximately $51,000 and $56,000 in the
three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 and $147,000 and $187,000 in the
nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Asset
Impairment Charges
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. Based on the resulting implied goodwill, 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 was less than 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 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 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. Accounting standards require that the Company 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 September
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. 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 $121,000 and $104,000 for the three months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008 and $345,000 and $399,000 for the nine months ended
September 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 sets 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 September 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 also follows
the appropriate accounting pronouncements which prescribes a model for the
recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken, and
provides guidance on recognition, classification, interest and penalties,
disclosure and transition. At September 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 nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008 is insignificant and when incurred is reported as
interest expense.
Supplementary
Cash Flow Information
Interest
paid on all indebtedness, including discontinued operations, was approximately
$68,000 and $118,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 and
$197,000 and $425,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Income
taxes paid (refunded), including discontinued operations, was approximately
$(41,000) and $336,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008
and $135,000 and $447,000 for the nine months ended September 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 were $45,000 and $30,000 at
September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively. Advertising
expense was approximately $197,000 and $147,000 for the three months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008 and $590,000 and $730,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
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 nine months ended September 30, 2009 for the Security Segment were comprised
of approximately 26% from our professional electronic surveillance operation in
Florida, 15% from our consumer direct electronic surveillance operations, 21%
from our machine vision camera and video conferencing equipment operation in
Texas, 27% from our personal defense and law enforcement operation in Vermont,
and 11% from our wholesale security monitoring operation in
California.
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. During the third quarter of 2009, management made a decision
to reactivate on a limited basis certain operations of the Promopath online
marketing services to both third party customers as well as to generate customer
acquisitions for Linkstar, the Company’s e-commerce division.
Revenues
within our Digital Media Marketing Segment for the nine months ended September
30, 2009, were approximately $8.0 million, consisting of $8.0 million from our
e-commerce division and $15,000 from our online marketing division.
Car Wash
At
September 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 nine months ending September
30, 2009 for the Car and Truck Wash Segment were comprised of approximately 53%
from car washing and detailing, 44% 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 $1.5
million and $2.6 million for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008
and $4.8 million and $7.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009
and 2008, respectively. Operating (loss) income from discontinued operations was
$(106,000) and $(188,000) for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008
and $131,000 and $(781,000) for the nine months ended September 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 $876,856 at September 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
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 $4.6 million at September 30,
2009. The ratio of our total debt to total capitalization, which
consists of total debt plus stockholders’ equity, was 12.8% at September 30,
2009 and 13.0% at December 31, 2008.
One of
our short-term investments in 2008 was in a hedge fund, 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 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
September 30, 2009, we had working capital of $15.8 million. Working capital was
$16.0 million at December 31, 2008. The working capital of $15.8 million at
September 30, 2009 is inclusive of assets held for sale, net of liabilities
related to assets held for sale, of $8.95 million. See Note 5. Discontinued Operations and Assets
Held for Sale.
During
the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, we made capital expenditures
of $46,000 and $196,000 (including $23,000 and $102,000 related to
discontinued operations), respectively, within our Car Wash
Segment.
Capital
expenditures for our Security Segment were $274,000 and $247,000 for the nine
months ending September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. We estimate capital
expenditures for the remainder of 2009 for the Security Segment at approximately
$5,000 to $15,000, 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 September 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 the remainder of 2009 and in years
subsequent to 2009 on all of our businesses is largely dependent on the
profitability of our businesses. Until our businesses start generating positive
cash flow, we are dependent on car wash sales for liquidity. We believe our cash
and short-term investments balance of $4.6 million at September 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 administrative 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 excess of $3.0
million in annualized savings. This program continued through the third quarter
of 2009. Through September 30, 2009, we incurred approximately $140,000 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.
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 $1.9 million through September 30, 2009 ($185,000 included in the nine
months ended September 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 33,476 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 $711,000, 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 $596,000
has been paid to date, leaving an accrual balance of $115,000 at September 30,
2009. This amount represents management’s best estimate of probable
loss.
In
December 2004, the Company announced that it was exploring the sale of its car
washes. From December 2005 through September 30, 2009, we sold 38 car washes and
five truck washes with total cash proceeds generated of approximately $35.3
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
September 30, 2009, we had borrowings, including capital lease obligations, of
approximately $5.3 million. We had two letters of credit outstanding at
September 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 September 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 September 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 September 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 $4.2 million at September 30, 2009,
including debt recorded as long-term debt at September 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
seven of our car wash facilities as of September 30, 2009) are foreclosed upon,
revenues from our Car Wash Segment, which comprised 14.6% of our total revenues
for fiscal year 2008 and 15.2% of our total revenue for the nine months ended
September 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 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,
continued deterioration in economic conditions, and the requirements to fund the
growth of our security business. In the event that non-compliance with the debt
covenants should 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 $4.2
million, including debt recorded as long-term debt at September 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 September 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
FiveYears
|
|
Long-term
debt (2)
|
|
$ |
5,116 |
|
|
$ |
1,022 |
|
|
$ |
2,927 |
|
|
$ |
1,167 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Capital
Lease Obligations
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Minimum
operating lease payments
|
|
|
3,809 |
|
|
|
1,001 |
|
|
|
1,601 |
|
|
|
771 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
$ |
9,103 |
|
|
$ |
2,069 |
|
|
$ |
4,633 |
|
|
$ |
1,965 |
|
|
$ |
436 |
|
|
|
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 $196,000.
(3) The
Company maintains a $500,000 line of credit with Chase. There were no borrowings
outstanding under this line of credit at September 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 September 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 $2.3 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009. Cash used in operating activities in 2009 was primarily due
to a net loss from continuing operations of $7.4 million offset partially by a
reduction in inventories of $1.9 million, depreciation and amortization expense
of $739,000, asset impairment charges of $1.4 million, and an increase in
accounts payable of $619,000.
Net cash
used in operating activities totaled $5.3 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008. Cash used in operating activities in 2008 was primarily due
to a net loss from continuing operations of $8.1 million, which included
$545,500 in non-cash stock-based compensation charges from continuing operations
and $817,600 of depreciation and amortization. Cash was also impacted by a
decrease in accounts payable of $1.6 million, an increase in accrued expenses of
$812,000, a decrease in accounts receivable of $877,000 and an increase in
inventory of $348,000.
Investing
Activities. Cash used in investing activities totaled
approximately $1.5 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, which
includes use of $1.8 million in consideration for the acquisition of CSSS, Inc.
and capital expenditures of $375,000 related to ongoing operations, partially
offset by $809,000 of cash generated from the sales of car wash
sites.
Cash
provided by investing activities totaled approximately $6.4 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2008, which includes cash provided by investing
activities from discontinued operations of $7.8 million related to the sale of
six car wash sites in the nine months ended September 30, 2008.
Financing
Activities. Cash used in financing activities was
approximately $916,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, which
includes $388,000 of routine principal payments on debt from continuing
operations and $506,000 of principal payments on debt related to discontinued
operations.
Cash used
in financing activities was approximately $1.4 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008, which includes $867,000 of routine principal payments on
debt from continuing operations and $544,000 of principal payments on debt
related to discontinued operations.
Results
of Operations for the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009
Compared
to the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2008
The
following table presents the percentage each item in the consolidated statements
of operations bears to revenues:
|
|
Nine months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
Cost
of revenues
|
|
|
74.4 |
|
|
|
74.2 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
45.9 |
|
|
|
39.9 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(28.9 |
) |
|
|
23.7 |
|
Interest
(expense) income, net
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
0.1 |
|
Other
income
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(28.9 |
) |
|
|
(22.6 |
) |
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(29.3 |
) |
|
|
(22.8 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
17.1 |
|
Net
(loss) income
|
|
|
(28.8 |
)% |
|
|
(5.7 |
)% |
Revenues
Security
Revenues
within the Security Segment were approximately $13.5 million and $16.2 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Of the
$13.5 million of revenues for the nine months ended September 30,
2009, $3.4 million, or 26%, was generated from our professional electronic
surveillance operation in Florida, $2.0 million, or 15%, from our consumer
direct electronic surveillance equipment operations in Texas, $2.9 million or
21%, from our machine vision camera and video conferencing equipment operation
in Texas, $3.7 million, or 27%, from our personal defense operation, and $1.5
million, or 11% from our wholesale security monitoring operation. Of the $16.2
million of revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2008, $5.7 million,
or 35%, was generated from our professional electronic surveillance operation in
Florida, $2.8 million, or 18%, from our consumer direct electronic surveillance
equipment operation in Texas, $4.3 million, or 26%, from our machine vision
camera and video conference equipment operation in Texas, and $3.4 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 reduction in
sales to certain customers with ties to the “big three” domestic automotive
manufacturers. The increase of approximately $323,000 or 10% 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 became increasingly concerned with their personal
safety.
Digital Media Marketing
Revenues
for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 within our Digital Media Marketing
Segment were approximately $8.0 million as compared to $14.3 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2008, a decrease of $6.3 million, or 44%. Of the
$8.0 million of revenues for the nine months ended September 30,
2009, $8.0 million related to our e-commerce division and $15,000 related to our
online marketing division. Of the $14.3 million of revenues for the nine months
ended September 30, 2008, $12.1 million related to our e-commerce division and
$2.2 million related to our online marketing division. The reduction in revenues
within our e-commerce division of $4.1 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. Revenues within our e-commerce division were also negatively impacted
by an increase in credit card decline rates as the recession continues and as
credit card companies continue to tighten their credit to customers. 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 nine months ended September 30, 2009 were $3.8 million as compared to
$5.1 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2008, a decrease of $1.2
million, or 24%. Of the $3.8 million of revenues for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009, $2.0 million, or 53%, was generated from car wash and
detailing, $1.7 million, or 44%, from lube and other automotive services, and
$120,000, or 3%, from fuel and merchandise sales. Of the $5.1 million of
revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2008, $2.8 million, or 55%, was
generated from car wash and detailing, $2.0 million, or 40%, from lube and other
automotive services, and $236,000, or 5%, from fuel and merchandise sales. The
decrease in car wash and detail revenues in 2009 was principally due to a
decline in car wash volumes of 42,000 cars, or 25%, in the first nine months of
2009 as compared to the first nine months of 2008, including a car wash volume
reduction of 21,600 cars from the closure and divestiture of two Texas car wash
locations since October 2008 included in continuing operations. Additionally,
the Company experienced a decline in average car wash and detailing revenue per
car from $16.64 in the first nine months of 2008 to $15.98 in the same period in
2009.
Cost
of Revenues
Security
During
the nine months ended September 30, 2009, cost of revenues was $9.5 million, or
70% of revenues, as compared to $12.0 million, or 74% of revenues, for the nine
months ended September 30, 2008. The reduction in cost of revenues as a percent
of revenues in 2009 is the result of the implementation of corporate wide cost
savings measures in the last six months of 2008 and the first nine months of
2009 and a reduction in discounts and product returns within our professional
and our consumer direct electronic surveillance operations.
Digital Media Marketing
Cost of
revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 within our
Digital Media Marketing Segment was approximately $5.8 million, or 72% of
revenues, and $9.9 million, or 69% of revenues, respectively.
Car
Wash Services
Cost of
revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 were $3.6 million, or 93%
of revenues, with car washing and detailing costs at 105% of respective
revenues, lube and other automotive services costs at 79% of respective
revenues, and fuel and merchandise costs at 88% of respective
revenues. Cost of revenues for the nine months ended September 30,
2008 were $4.4 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 85% 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 55.8% in 2008 to 58.5% in
2009.
Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses
SG&A
expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 were $11.6 million
compared to $14.2 million for the same period in 2008, a net decrease of
approximately $2.6 million, or 18% inclusive of approximately $487,000 of
SG&A expenses in 2009 related to CSSS which we acquired in April 2009.
SG&A expenses as a percent of revenues increased to 46% for the nine months
ended September 30, 2009 as compared to 40% for the same period in 2008 as a
result of the above mentioned reductions in revenues. 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 the first nine months of 2009,
including a significant reduction in employees throughout the entire Company.
The cost savings were partially 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
$419,000, or 11%, partially as a result of our consolidation efforts to reduce
SG&A costs as noted above and partially as a result of our reduced sales
levels. 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 our
Digital Media Marketing Segment decreased from $3.7 million in the nine months
ended September 30, 2008 to $1.9 million in the nine months ended September 30,
2009. In addition to these cost savings measures, we also noted a
reduction in non-cash compensation expense from continuing operations from
approximately $546,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to $93,000 in
the nine months ended September 30, 2009. SG&A expenses also includes costs
related to the Arbitration Proceedings with Mr. Paolino of approximately
$300,000 and $69,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Depreciation
and amortization totaled $739,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2009,
compared to $818,000 for the same period in 2008. The decrease in depreciation
and amortization expense was related to amortization expense on Linkstar
intangible assets that were determined to be impaired and as a result written
down at June 30, 2008.
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 continued
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 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, 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. On October 5, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement of sale to sell
the Ft. Lauderdale, Florida building for cash consideration of $1.6 million. The
sale is subject to customary closing conditions, including a general due
diligence period. While the transaction is expected to close prior to December
31, 2009, no assurance can be given that the sale will be consummated. We
recorded an additional impairment charge of $150,000 at September 30, 2009 to
write-down the property to the sale price. The related assets have also been
reclassed to assets held for sale. See Note 5. Discontinued Operations and
Assets Held for Sale.
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 was less than 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 nine months ended September 30, 2009
was $50,000, compared to interest income, net of interest expense of $40,000 for
the nine months ended September 30, 2008. The Company experienced a decrease in
interest expense of approximately $128,000 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 $218,000 with the Company’s decrease in cash and cash
equivalents.
Other
Income
Other
income for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 was $55,000, compared to
$378,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2008. The 2008 other income
includes $250,000 of earnings on short-term investments.
Income
Taxes
The
Company recorded tax expense of $95,000 and $75,000 in the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Tax expense reflects the recording of
income taxes at an effective rate of approximately (1.3)% in 2009 and (0.9)% in
2008.
Results
of Operations for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2009
Compared
to the Three Months Ended September 30, 2008
The
following table presents the percentage each item in the consolidated statements
of operations bears to revenues:
|
|
Three months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
Cost
of revenues
|
|
|
76.1 |
|
|
|
73.6 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
45.8 |
|
|
|
43.3 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
Asset
impairment charges
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(26.8 |
) |
|
|
(19.3 |
) |
Interest
(expense) income, net
|
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Other
income
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(27.2 |
) |
|
|
(17.9 |
) |
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(27.4 |
) |
|
|
(18.1 |
) |
Loss from
discontinued operations
|
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
(1.8 |
) |
Net
loss
|
|
|
(28.7 |
)% |
|
|
(19.9 |
)% |
Revenues
Security
Revenues
within the Security Segment were approximately $4.8 million and $5.3 million for
the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Of the $4.8
million of revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2009, $1.1 million,
or 23%, was generated from our professional electronic surveillance operation in
Florida, $525,000 or 11%, from our consumer direct electronic surveillance
equipment operations in Texas, $1.1 million, or 23%, from our machine vision
camera and video conferencing equipment operation in Texas, $1.2 million, or
25%, from our personal defense operation, and $875,000, or 18% from our
wholesale security monitoring operation. Of the $5.3 million of revenues for the
three months ended September 30, 2008, $1.8 million, or 34%, was generated from
our professional electronic surveillance operation in Florida, $903,000, or 17%,
from our consumer direct electronic surveillance equipment operation in Texas,
$1.5 million, or 29%, from our machine vision camera and video conference
equipment operation in Texas, and $1.1 million, or 20%, 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 and our professional electronic surveillance operation in
Florida. These decreases in revenues were partially offset by increases in
revenues in our personal defense operation in Vermont and 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 increase in sales of
our personal defense operation in Vermont of $181,000 or 17% 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 became increasingly
concerned with their personal safety.
Digital
Media Marketing
Revenues
for the three months ended September 30, 2009 within our Digital Media Marketing
Segment were approximately $2.2 million as compared to $3.4 million for the
three months ended September 30, 2008, a decrease of $1.1 million, or 34%. Of
the $2.2 million of revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2009, $2.2
million related to our e-commerce division and $3,100 related to our online
marketing division. Of the $3.4 million of revenues for the three months ended
September 30, 2008, $3.3 million related to our e-commerce division and $97,000
related to our online marketing division. The reduction in revenues within our
e-commerce division of $1.0 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.
Sales within our e-commerce division were also negatively impacted by an
increase in credit card decline rates as the recession continues and as credit
card companies continue to tighten their credit to customers. 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 September 30, 2009 were $1.2 million as compared to
$1.7 million for the three months ended September 30, 2008, a decrease of
approximately $502,000, 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 $1.2 million of revenues for the three
months ended September 30, 2009, $607,000, or 52%, was generated from car wash
and detailing, $537,000, or 46%, from lube and other automotive services, and
$31,000, or 2%, from fuel and merchandise sales. Of the $1.7 million of revenues
for the three months ended September 30, 2008, $933,000, or 56%, was generated
from car wash and detailing, $688,000 or 41%, from lube and other automotive
services, and $56,000, or 3%, 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 two Dallas, Texas car wash sites
since October 2008 combined with a decline in average wash and detailing revenue
per car from $16.71 in the three months ending September 30, 2008 to $15.53 in
the three months ended September 30, 2009.
Cost
of Revenues
Security
During
the three months ended September 30, 2009, cost of revenues was $3.3 million, or
69% of revenues, as compared to $4.0 million, or 75% of revenues, for the three
months ended September 30, 2008. The reduction in cost of
revenues as a percent of revenues in 2009 is the result of the implementation of
corporate wide cost savings measures in the last six months of 2008 and the
first nine months of 2009 and a reduction in discounts and product returns
within our professional and our consumer direct electronic surveillance
operations.
Digital
Media Marketing
Cost of
revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008 within our
Digital Media Marketing Segment were approximately $1.8 million, or 79% of
revenues, and $2.1 million, or 64% of revenues, respectively.
Car
Wash Services
Cost of
revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2009 was $1.1 million, or 97%
of revenues, with car washing and detailing costs at 114% of revenues, lube and
other automotive services costs at 79% of revenues, and fuel and merchandise
costs at 81% of revenues. Cost of revenues for the three months ended
September 30, 2008 was $1.5 million, or 87% of revenues, with car washing and
detailing costs at 96% of revenues, lube and other automotive services costs at
76% of revenues, and fuel and merchandise costs at 82% 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 September 30, 2009 were $3.8 million
compared to $4.5 million for the same period in 2008, a decrease of
approximately $710,000, or 16% inclusive of approximately $279,000 of SG&A
expenses in 2009 related to CSSS which we acquired in April 2009. SG&A
expenses as a percent of revenues increased to 46% for the three months ended
September 30, 2009 as compared to 43% for the same period in 2008 as a result of
the above mentioned reductions in revenues. 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 the first nine months of 2009, including a
significant 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 $216,000
or 17%, partially as a result of our consolidation efforts to reduce SG&A
costs as noted above and partially as a result of our reduced sales levels.
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 $1.1 million in the three months ended September 30, 2008 to
$578,000 in the three months ended September 30, 2009. In addition to
these cost savings measures, we also noted a reduction in non-cash compensation
expense from continuing operations from approximately $255,000 in the three
months ended September 30, 2008 to $40,000 in the three months ended September
30, 2009. SG&A expenses also includes costs related to the Arbitration
Proceedings with Mr. Paolino of approximately $154,000 and $59,000 in the three
months ended September 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Depreciation
and amortization totaled $255,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2009,
compared to $247,000 for the same period in 2008. The increase in depreciation
and amortization expense was attributable to the CSSS acquired intangible assets
on April 30, 2009.
Interest
Expense, Net
Interest
expense, net of interest income, for the three months ended September 30, 2009
was $29,000, compared to $8,000 for the three months ended September 30,
2008.
Other
Income
Other
income for the three months ended September 30, 2009 was $1,000, compared to
$157,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2008. The 2008
other income includes $70,000 of earnings on short-term
investments.
Income
Taxes
The
Company recorded tax expense of $15,000 and $25,000 in the three months ended
September30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Income tax expense reflects the
recording of income taxes at an effective rate of approximately (0.7)% in 2009
and (1.4)% 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
all of the Company’s debt at September 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 September 30,
2009. The impact of increasing interest rates by one percent would be an
increase in interest expense of approximately $65,000 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 September 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 September 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 September
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 nine months of 2009, our
revenues from continuing operations declined $10.2 million, or 29%, from our
revenues from continuing operations in the first nine 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 $15.8 million as of September 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. 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 September 30, 2009 were
$5.3 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 seven of our car wash
facilities at September 30, 2009). Our most significant borrowings are secured
notes payable to Chase in the amount of $4.2 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 seven of our car wash
facilities at September 30, 2009) are foreclosed upon, revenues from our Car
Wash Segment, which comprised 14.6% of our total revenues for the fiscal 2008
and 15.2% of out total revenues for the nine months ended September 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 $4.2 million, $1.6 million of which was classified as non-current
debt at September 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 September 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 nine months of 2009. Although a portion of the reported losses in past
years related to non-cash impairment charges of intangible assets and non-cash
stock-based compensation expense, we may continue to report net losses and
negative cash flow in the future. Additionally, accounting
pronouncements 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 certain of
our workers’ compensation coverage, we have been insured as a participant in a
captive insurance program with other unrelated businesses. Workers’ compensation
coverage for non-car wash employees was transferred to an occurrence-based
policy in March 2009. 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 September 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 of 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; and
|
|
·
|
the purchase of our dealers by
third parties who choose to monitor
elsewhere.
|
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 September
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 its 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 six
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
of 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 the closing bid price of our stock does
not return to above $1.00 for ten consecutive days during the 180 day period
ending April 7, 2010. 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 bid price of $0.83
at the close of the market on November 11, 2009. On October 9, 2009, the Company
received a letter from the NASDAQ Listing Qualifications Department that the
Company was not in compliance with NASDAQ Listing Rule 5450(a)(1) because, for
the period August 27, 2009 through October 8, 2009, the Company closing bid
price of our common stock was less than $1.00 per share. The non-compliance with
NASDAQ Listing Rule 5450a)(1) makes the Company’s common stock subject to being
delisted from the NASDAQ Stock Market. In accordance with NASDAQ Listing Rule
5810(c)(3)(A), the Company has a grace period of 180 calendar days expiring on
April 7, 2010 to regain compliance by having a closing bid price for a minimum
of ten consecutive business days at $1.00 per share or higher. Under NASDAQ
Listing Rule 5810(c)(3)(F), the NASDAQ Listing Qualification Department may, in
its discretion, require the Company to maintain a closing bid price of at least
$1.00 per share for a period in excess of ten consecutive business days, but
generally not more than 20 consecutive business days. 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 stockholder becoming an “interested stockholder,” 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 September 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)
|
|
July
1 to July 31, 2009
|
|
|
14,400 |
|
|
$ |
1.02 |
|
|
|
14,400 |
|
|
$ |
1,579,000 |
|
August
1 to August 31, 2009
|
|
|
51,200 |
|
|
|
1.01 |
|
|
|
51,200 |
|
|
$ |
1,527,000 |
|
September
1 to September 30, 2009
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
1.01 |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,523,000 |
|
Total
|
|
|
69,600 |
|
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
|
|
69,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
(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
shares of common stock in the future if the market conditions so dictate. As of
September 30, 2009, 440,410 shares had been repurchased under this program at an
aggregate cost of approximately $477,000.
Item
6. Exhibits
(a) 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 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.
|