|9 Months Ended|
Sep. 30, 2012
As of September 30, 2012, warrants to purchase 8,676,142 shares were outstanding, having exercise prices ranging from $1.00 to $1.90 and expiration dates ranging from August 8, 2013 to September 30, 2016.
At September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the average remaining contractual life of the outstanding warrants was 2.9 and 3.2 years, respectively
The warrants, which were issued to investors in the December 2007, March 2008, May 2009, October 2009, June 2010, and March 2011 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, “Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity,” (“ASC 480”) and are recorded at fair value. In addition, the warrants issued in the May 2009, October 2009, June 2010 and March, 2011 offerings contain a cashless exercise provision that is exercisable only in the event that a registration statement is not effective, which provision may not be operative if an effective registration statement is not available because of 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.
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 provided multiple date intervals over which multiple volatilities and risk free interest rates were used. These intervals allow the Lattice model to project outcomes along specific paths which 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.
13. Warrants (cont’d)
Due to the fundamental transaction provision, which could provide for early redemption of the warrants, the model also considered the probability the Company would enter into a fundamental transaction during the remaining term of the warrant. Since the Company is still in its development stage and is not yet achieving positive cash flow, management believes the probability of a fundamental transaction occurring over the term of the warrant is unlikely and therefore estimates the probability of entering into a fundamental transaction to be 5%. For valuation purposes, the Company also assumed that if such a transaction did occur, it was more likely to occur towards the end of the term of the warrants.
The warrants issued in December 2007 and March 2008 are not only subject to traditional anti-dilution protection, such as stock splits and dividends, but they are also subject to down-round anti-dilution protection. Accordingly, if the Company sells common stock or common stock indexed financial instruments below the stated exercise price, the exercise price related to these warrants will adjust to that lower amount. The Lattice model used to value the warrants with down-round anti-dilution protection provides for multiple, probability-weighted scenarios at the stated exercise price and at five additional decrements/scenarios on each valuation date in order to encompass the value of the anti-dilution provisions in the estimate of fair value of the warrants. Calculations were performed at the stated exercise price and at five additional decrements/scenarios on each valuation date. The calculations provide for multiple, probability-weighted scenarios reflecting decrements that result from declines in the market prices. Decrements are predicated on the trading market prices in decreasing ranges below the contractual exercise price. For each valuation date, multiple Binomial Lattice calculations were performed which were probability weighted by considering both the Company’s (i) historical market pricing trends, and (ii) an outlook for whether or not the Company may need to issue equity or equity-indexed instruments in the future with a price less than the current exercise price.
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.
The following table summarizes the fair value of the warrants as of the respective balance sheet or transaction dates:
13. Warrants (cont’d)
The following table summarizes the number of shares indexed to the warrants as of the respective balance sheet or transaction dates:
The assumptions used in calculating the fair values of the warrants are as follows:
13. Warrants (cont’d)
13. Warrants (cont’d)
Changes in the fair value of the warrant liabilities, carried at fair value, as reported as “unrealized (loss) gain on fair value of warrants” in the statement of operations:
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.