|9 Months Ended|
Sep. 30, 2015
The warrants issued to investors in the March 2011, December 2012 and previous offerings contain a provision for net cash settlement in the event that there is a fundamental transaction (contractually defined as a merger, sale of substantially all assets, tender offer or share exchange). If a fundamental transaction occurs in which the consideration issued consists principally of cash or stock in a non-public company, then the warrant holder has the option to receive cash, equal to the fair value of the remaining unexercised portion of the warrant. Due to this contingent redemption provision, the warrants require liability classification in accordance with ASC 480 and are recorded at fair value. The warrants issued to investors in the July 2013, October 2013 and January 2014 offerings contain a fundamental transaction provision, but the warrant holders only have an option as to the type of consideration received if the holders of common stock receive an option as to their consideration. In addition, the warrants issued in the July 2013, October 2013, January 2014 and previous offerings contain a cashless exercise provision that is exercisable only in the event that a registration statement is not effective. That provision may not be operative if an effective registration statement is not available because an exemption under the U.S. securities laws may not be available to issue unregistered shares. As a result, net cash settlement may be required, and the warrants require liability classification.
ASC 820 provides requirements for disclosure of liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis in periods subsequent to the initial recognition. Fair values for warrants are determined using the Binomial Lattice (“Lattice”) valuation technique. The Lattice model provides for dynamic assumptions regarding volatility and risk-free interest rates within the total period to maturity. Accordingly, within the contractual term, the Company provides multiple date intervals over which multiple volatilities and risk free interest rates are used. These intervals allow the Lattice model to project outcomes along specific paths that consider volatilities and risk free rates that would be more likely in an early exercise scenario.
Significant assumptions are determined as follows:
Trading market values—Published trading market values;
Exercise price—Stated exercise price;
Term—Remaining contractual term of the warrant;
Volatility—Historical trading volatility for periods consistent with the remaining terms;
Risk-free rate—Yields on zero coupon government securities with remaining terms consistent with the remaining terms of the warrants.
The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of the warrants include management’s estimate of the probability that a fundamental transaction may occur in the future. Significant increases (decreases) in the probability of occurrence would result in a significantly higher (lower) fair value measurement.
Disclosure for warrants or rights issued. The Company's outstanding warrants and rights are non-derivative securities that give the holder the right to purchase securities (usually equity) from the issuer at a specific price within a certain time frame. Warrants are often included in a new debt issue to entice investors by a higher return potential. The main difference between warrants and call options is that warrants are issued and guaranteed by the company, whereas options are exchange instruments and are not issued by the company. Also, the lifetime of a warrant is often measured in years, while the lifetime of a typical option is measured in months. Disclose the title of issue of securities called for by warrants and rights outstanding, the aggregate amount of securities called for by warrants and rights outstanding, the date from which the warrants or rights are exercisable, and the price at which the warrant or right is exercisable.
No definition available.