Significant Accounting Policies

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2016

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Significant Accounting Policies

3. Significant Accounting Policies

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. These estimates include: the amount of stock-based compensation expense; the allowance for doubtful accounts; the estimated lives, valuation, and amortization of intangible assets (including capitalized software); depreciation of long-lived assets; valuation of warrants; post-employment benefits, and accruals for liabilities. While we believe that such estimates are fair, actual results could differ materially from those estimates.

Revenue Recognition

We market and license our products indirectly through channel distributors, independent software vendors (“ISVs”), value-added resellers (“VARs”) (collectively, “resellers”) and directly to corporate enterprises, governmental and educational institutions and others. Our product licenses are perpetual. We also separately sell intellectual property licenses, maintenance contracts, which are comprised of license updates and customer service access, as well as other products and services.

Software license revenues are recognized when:

● Persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (i.e., when we sign a non-cancellable license agreement wherein the customer acknowledges an unconditional obligation to pay, or upon receipt of the customer’s purchase order), and

● Delivery has occurred or services have been rendered and there are no uncertainties surrounding product acceptance (i.e., when title and risk of loss have been transferred to the customer, which occurs when the media containing the licensed program(s) is provided to a common carrier or, in the case of electronic delivery, when the customer is given access to the licensed program(s)), and

● The price to the customer is fixed or determinable, as typically evidenced in a signed non-cancellable contract, or a customer’s purchase order, and

● Collectability is probable. If collectability is not considered probable, revenue is recognized when the fee is collected.

Revenue recognized on software arrangements involving multiple deliverables is allocated to each deliverable based on vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) or third party evidence of the fair values of each deliverable; such deliverables include licenses for software products, maintenance, private labeling fees, and customer training. We limit our assessment of VSOE for each deliverable to either the price charged when the same deliverable is sold separately or the price established by management having the relevant authority to do so, for a deliverable not yet sold separately.

If sufficient VSOE of the fair value does not exist so as to permit the allocation of revenue to the various elements of the arrangement, all revenue from the arrangement is deferred until such evidence exists or until all elements are delivered. If VSOE of the fair value does not exist, and the only undelivered element is maintenance, then we recognize revenue on a ratable basis. If VSOE of the fair value of all undelivered elements exists but does not exist for one or more delivered elements, then revenue is recognized using the residual method. Under the residual method, the fair value of the undelivered elements is deferred and the remaining portion of the arrangement fee is recognized as revenue.

Certain resellers (“stocking resellers”) purchase product licenses that they hold in inventory until they are resold to the ultimate end user (an “inventory stocking order”). At the time that a stocking reseller places an inventory stocking order, no product licenses are shipped by us to the stocking reseller; rather, the stocking reseller’s inventory is credited with the number of licenses purchased and the stocking reseller can resell (issue) any number of licenses from their inventory at any time. Upon receipt of an order to issue a license(s) from a stocking reseller’s inventory (a “draw down order”), we will ship the license(s) in accordance with the draw down order’s instructions. We defer recognition of revenue from inventory stocking orders until the underlying licenses are sold and shipped to the end user, as evidenced by the receipt and fulfillment of the stocking reseller’s draw down order, assuming all other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

There are no rights of return granted to resellers or other purchasers of our software products.

Revenue from maintenance contracts is recognized ratably over the related contract period, which generally ranges from one to five years.

All of our software licenses are denominated in U.S. dollars.

Deferred Rent

The leases for both the Company’s current office in Campbell, California and the subleased former office in Campbell, California contain free rent and predetermined fixed escalations in our minimum rent payments (See Note 13). Rent expense related to these leases is recognized on a straight-line basis over the terms of the leases. Any difference between the straight-line rent amounts and amounts payable under the leases is recorded as part of deferred rent in current or long-term liabilities, as appropriate. The monthly rent payments due to the Company for the sublease of the office at 1919 S. Bascom Avenue fully offsets the rent payments due under the Company’s lease for that space.

Incentives that we received upon entering into the S. Bascom Avenue lease agreement are recognized on a straight-line basis as a reduction to rent over the term of the lease. We record the unamortized portion of these incentives as a part of deferred rent in current or long-term liabilities, as appropriate.

Postemployment Benefits (Severance Liability)

Nonretirement postemployment benefits, including salary continuation, supplemental unemployment benefits, severance benefits, disability-related benefits and continuation of benefits such as health care benefits, are recognized as a liability and a loss when it is probable that the employee(s) will be entitled to such benefits and the amount can be reasonably estimated. An aggregate of $0 and $5,900 is reported as a severance liability, at September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.

Software Development Costs

We capitalize software development costs incurred from the time technological feasibility of the software is established until the software is available for general release, in accordance with GAAP. Such capitalized costs are subsequently amortized as costs of revenue over the shorter of three years or the remaining estimated useful life of the product. See discussion at Note 11 for an impairment charge taken during the nine month period ended September 30, 2016.

Research and development costs and other computer software maintenance costs related to the software development are expensed as incurred.

Long-Lived Assets

Long-lived assets are assessed for possible impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts may not be recoverable, whenever we have committed to a plan to dispose of the assets or, at a minimum, annually. Typically, for long-lived assets to be held and used, measurement of an impairment loss is based on the fair value of such assets, with fair value being determined based on appraisals, current market value, comparable sales value, and discounted future cash flows, among other variables, as appropriate. Assets to be held and used (which assets are affected by an impairment loss) are depreciated or amortized at their new carrying amount over their remaining estimated life; assets to be sold or otherwise disposed of are not subject to further depreciation or amortization. During the three month and nine month period ended September 30, 2016 respectively, we determined that an impairment of $0 and $15,500 existed with certain capitalized software development costs associated with our hopTo Work product and recognized that cost as part of cost of revenue. No such impairment charge was recorded during either of the three or nine-month periods ended September 30, 2015.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

We maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts that reflects our best estimate of potentially uncollectible trade receivables. The allowance is based on assessments of the collectability of specific customer accounts and the general aging and size of the accounts receivable. We regularly review the adequacy of our allowance for doubtful accounts by considering such factors as historical experience, credit worthiness, and current economic conditions that may affect a customer’s ability to pay. We specifically reserve for those accounts deemed uncollectible. We also establish, and adjust, a general allowance for doubtful accounts based on our review of the aging and size of our accounts receivable.

The following table sets forth the details of the Allowance for Doubtful Accounts for the three-month periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015:

	Beginning Balance		Charge Offs		Recoveries		Provision			Ending Balance
2016	$	14,900	$	—	$	—	$	(9,600	)	$	5,300
2015		15,900		—		—		(200	)		15,700

The following table sets forth the details of the Allowance for Doubtful Accounts for the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015

	Beginning Balance		Charge Offs		Recoveries		Provision			Ending Balance
2016	$	17,300	$	—	$	—	$	(12,000	)	$	5,300
2015		32,600		—		—		16,900			15,700

Concentration of Credit Risk

For the three and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 respectively, we considered the customers listed in the following tables to be our most significant customers. The tables set forth the percentage of sales attributable to each customer during the periods presented, and the respective customer’s ending accounts receivable balance as a percentage of reported accounts receivable, net, as of September 30, 2016 and 2015.

	Three Months Ended September 30, 2016			As of September 30, 2016			Three Months Ended September 30, 2015			As of September 30, 2015
Customer	Sales			Accounts Receivable			Sales			Accounts Receivable
Alcatel-Lucent		3.2	%		13.9	%		8.4	%		21.1	%
Elosoft		10.8	%		10.4	%		8.1	%		5.0	%
GE		5.8	%		16.0	%		2.0	%		4.3	%
IDS		6.6	%		0.0	%		13.5	%		0.0	%
Imagination Technology		1.7	%		8.4	%		1.0	%		2.5	%
KitASP		5.3	%		2.7	%		2.8	%		17.5	%
Raytheon		5.7	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%
SAI SL		2.0	%		7.8	%		0.2	%		0.6	%
Thermo LabSystems		4.6	%		8.9	%		2.5	%		3.5	%
Uniface		6.0	%		16.5	%		1.3	%		2.9	%
Total		51.7	%		84.6	%		39.8	%		57.4	%

	Nine Months Ended September 30, 2016			As of September 30, 2016			Nine Months Ended September 30, 2015				As of September 30, 2015
Customer	Sales			Accounts Receivable			Sales			Accounts Receivable
Alcatel-Lucent		5.0	%		13.9	%		5.6	%		21.1	%
Centric		5.4	%		3.8	%		4.5	%		11.6	%
Elosoft		8.9	%		10.4	%		11.4	%		5.0	%
GE		4.6	%		16.0	%		1.9	%		4.3	%
Imagination Technology		0.5	%		8.4	%		0.3	%		2.5	%
SAI		1.0	%		7.8	%		0.6	%		0.6	%
Thermo LabSystems		5.4	%		8.9	%		2.6	%		3.5	%
Uniface		6.1	%		16.5	%		6.4	%		2.9	%
Total		36.9	%		85.7	%		33.3	%		51.5	%

Derivative Financial Instruments

We currently do not have a material exposure to either commodity prices or interest rates; accordingly, we do not currently use derivative instruments to manage such risks. We evaluate all of our financial instruments to determine if such instruments are derivatives or contain features that qualify as embedded derivatives. All derivative financial instruments are recognized in the balance sheet at fair value. Changes in fair value are recognized in earnings if they are not eligible for hedge accounting or in other comprehensive income if they qualify for cash flow hedge accounting.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The fair value of our accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate their carrying amounts due to the relative short maturities of these items.

The fair value of warrants at issuance and for those recorded as a liability at each reporting date are determined in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 820, “Fair Value Measurement,” which establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the assumptions (inputs) to valuation techniques used to price assets or liabilities that are measured at fair value. The hierarchy, as defined below, gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs. The guidance for fair value measurements requires that assets, liabilities and certain equity instruments measured at fair value be classified and disclosed in one of the following categories:

● Level 1: Defined as observable inputs, such as quoted (unadjusted) prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

● Level 2: Defined as observable inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1. This includes quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets and liabilities in markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

● Level 3: Defined as unobservable inputs to the valuation methodology that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the measurement of the fair value of the assets or liabilities. Level 3 assets and liabilities include those whose fair value measurements are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies or similar valuation techniques, as well as significant management judgment or estimation.

As of September 30, 2016, all of our Warrants Liability reported at fair value was categorized as Level 3 inputs (See Note 5).

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In August 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments (“ASU 2016-15”). ASU 2016-15 clarifies whether eight specifically identified cash flow issues should be categorized as operating, investing or financing activities in the statement of cash flows. The guidance will be effective for the fiscal year beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that year. The Company is currently assessing the impact of this ASU on its consolidated financial statements.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (“ASU 2016-13”). ASU 2016-13 is intended to provide financial statement users with more useful information about expected credit losses on financial assets held by a reporting entity at each reporting date. The new standard replaces the existing incurred loss impairment methodology with a methodology that requires consideration of a broader range of reasonable and supportable forward-looking information to estimate all expected credit losses. This ASU is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2019 and early adoption is permitted for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company is currently assessing the impact of this ASU on its consolidated financial statements.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12—Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients. The amendments in ASU 2016-12 affect only some of the narrow aspects of Topic 606 including the collectability criterion, presentation of sales taxes and other similar taxes collected from customers, noncash consideration, and treatment of certain contract modifications at transition. Similar to ASU 2014-09, as discussed below, the effective date will be the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 with early adoption permitted in the first quarter of fiscal year 2017. We are currently evaluating the impact that adoption of this new standard will have on our consolidated financial statements.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10—Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing to clarify certain aspects of ASU 2014-09. The amendments in ASU 2016-10 are expected to reduce the cost and complexity of applying the guidance on identifying promised goods or services in contracts with customers and to improve the operability and understandability of licensing implementation guidance related to the entity’s intellectual property. Similar to ASU 2014-09, the effective date will be the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 with early adoption permitted in the first quarter of fiscal year 2017. We are currently evaluating the impact that adoption of this new standard will have on our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09—Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. This update simplifies several aspects of the accounting for share-based payments, including immediate recognition of all excess tax benefits and deficiencies in the income statement, changing the threshold to qualify for equity classification up to the employees’ maximum statutory tax rates, allowing an entity-wide accounting policy election to either estimate the number of awards that are expected to vest or account for forfeitures as they occur, and clarifying the classification on the statement of cash flows for the excess tax benefit and employee taxes paid when an employer withholds shares for tax-withholding purposes. This guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016 including interim periods within that reporting period. We are currently evaluating the impact on our consolidated financial statements upon the adoption of this guidance.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08—Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net). This update seeks to further clarify the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations under the new revenue recognition standard, ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. Similar to ASU 2014-09, the effective date will be the first quarter of fiscal year 2018 with early adoption permitted in the first quarter of fiscal year 2017. We are currently evaluating the impact that adoption of this new standard will have on our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). Under this guidance, an entity is required to recognize right-of-use assets and lease liabilities on its balance sheet and disclose key information about leasing arrangements. This guidance offers specific accounting guidance for a lessee, a lessor and sale and leaseback transactions. Lessees and lessors are required to disclose qualitative and quantitative information about leasing arrangements to enable a user of the financial statements to assess the amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. This guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within that reporting period, and requires a modified retrospective adoption, with early adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact on our consolidated financial statements upon the adoption of this guidance.

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-17, Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes (“ASU 2015-17”). The ASU is part of the Board’s simplification initiative aimed at reducing complexity in accounting standards and requires companies to classify all deferred tax assets and liabilities, along with any related valuation allowance, as noncurrent on the balance sheet. Although ASU 2015-17 isn’t required for public companies to implement until fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016 (and private companies until fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017), early adoption is allowed. We have decided to adopt ASU 2015-17 early and have classified all of our deferred tax assets and liabilities as noncurrent on the balance sheet. We early adopted ASU 2015-17 as the Company considers this change an improvement in the usefulness of information provided to users of the Company’s financial statements. The Company applied the standard prospectively and did not retrospectively adjust any prior periods. Retrospective adjustments were immaterial to the Company’s total current assets and the adoption had no impact on our results of operation.

In August 2015, FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” – Deferral of the Effective Date (“ASU 2015-14”). The purpose of this update is to defer the effective date of ASU 2014-09, detailed below, by one year. Therefore, ASU 2014-09 is now to be effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within such annual period.

In April 2015, FASB issued ASU No. 2015-05 “Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement” (“ASU 2013-05”). The objective of ASU 2015-05 is to provide guidance to reporting entities in the accounting for fees paid in a cloud computing arrangement. Specifically, if a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, then the entity should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the entity should account for the arrangement as a service contract. The guidance will not change GAAP for an entity’s accounting for service contracts. The amendments in this ASU are effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, including interim periods within those annual periods. Therefore, ASU 2015-05 is now effective. Adoption of this standard has had no impact on our results of operations, cash flows or financial position as the Company has no cloud computing arrangements to which it applies.

In August 2014, FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15 “Preparation of Financial Statements - Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40)”. Under U.S. GAAP, continuation of a reporting entity as a going concern is presumed as the basis for preparing financial statements unless and until the entity’s liquidation becomes imminent. Preparation of financial statements under this presumption is commonly referred to as the going concern basis of accounting. If and when an entity’s liquidation becomes imminent, financial statements should be prepared under the liquidation basis of accounting in accordance with Subtopic 205-30, Presentation of Financial Statements-Liquidation Basis of Accounting. Even when an entity’s liquidation is not imminent, there may be conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. In those situations, financial statements should continue to be prepared under the going concern basis of accounting, but the amendments in the update should be followed to determine whether to disclose information about the relevant conditions and events. The amendments in this ASU are effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. Therefore ASU 2014-15 is now effective. We have evaluated the going concern considerations in this ASU and have determined that it is appropriate to provide additional disclosure to our financial statements (see Note 2).

In June 2014, FASB issued ASU No. 2014-12 “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718)” (“ASU 2014-12”). The objective of ASU 2014-12 is to resolve the diverse accounting treatment being applied in practice by reporting entities in the accounting for share-based payment awards that require a specific performance target to be achieved in order for employees to become eligible to vest in the awards, particularly those awards whose terms may provide that the performance target could be achieved after the employee completes the requisite service period. That is, the employee would be eligible to vest in the award regardless of whether the employee is rendering service on the date the performance target is achieved. ASU 2014-12 is effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and earlier adoption is permitted. The share-based payment awards we currently have outstanding which have performance targets do not contain clauses wherein the performance target could be achieved after the employee completes the requisite service period; accordingly, adoption of ASU 2014-12 did not have a material impact on our results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

In May 2014, FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”). ASU 2014-09 is the end result of a joint project initiated by FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”). IASB is the body that sets International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). The goal of FASB’s and IASB’s joint project was to clarify the principles for recognizing revenue and to develop a common revenue standard for U.S. GAAP and under IFRS. Specifically, ASU 2014-09:

1.	Removes inconsistencies and weaknesses in revenue requirements.
2.	Provides a more robust framework for addressing revenue issues.

3.	Improves comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities, industries, jurisdictions, and capital markets.
4.	Provides more useful information to users of financial statements through improved disclosure requirements.
5.	Simplifies the preparation of financial statements by reducing the number of requirements to which an entity must refer.

The core principle of ASU 2014-09 is that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. ASU 2014-09 is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within such annual period. Early adoption is not permitted. We are currently evaluating this ASU in order to determine whether or not its adoption will have a material impact on our results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

In April 2014, FASB issued ASU No. 2014-08 “Presentation of Financial Statements (Topic 205) and Property, Plant and Equipment (Topic 360)” (“ASU 2014-08”). The objective of ASU 2014-08 is to address issues in Subtopic 205-20, “Presentation of Financial Statements – Discontinued Operations”, that give rise to complexity and difficulties in practice. Generally, ASU 2014-08 is effective for discontinued operations that occur within annual periods beginning on or after December 31, 2014, and interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permitted, but only for discontinued operations that have not been reported in financial statements previously issued or available for issuance. We currently have no discontinued operations to report; consequently, adoption of ASU 2014-08 did not have a material impact on our results of operations, cash flows or financial position.