XML 63 R15.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.8
FAIR VALUE MEASUREMEMENTS
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2013
FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS [Abstract]  
FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

 

The Company measures fair value in accordance with Topic 820 of the FASB ASC, Fair Value Measurement ("ASC 820"), which provides a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy under ASC 820 are described as follows:

 

  Level 1 - Inputs to the valuation methodology are unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that the Company has the ability to access.

 

  Level 2 - Inputs to the valuation methodology include:

• Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets;

  Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in inactive markets;
  Inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability;
  Inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.

 

If the asset or liability has a specified (contractual) term, the Level 2 input must be observable for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.

 

  Level 3 - Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

 

The asset's or liability's fair value measurement level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Valuation techniques used need to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs.

 

The Company values its derivative liability associated with the variable conversion feature on its Series C Convertible Preferred Stock (Note 5) based on the market price of its common stock.  For each reporting period the Company calculates the amount of potential common stock that the Series C Preferred Stock could convert into based on the conversion formula (incorporating market value of our common stock) and multiplies those converted shares by the market price of its common stock on that reporting date.  The total converted value is subtracted by the consideration paid to determine the fair value of the derivative liability. The Company classified the derivative liability of $80,000 and $120,000 at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

 

The warrant issued in connection with the Tonaquint Note (the "Tonaquint Warrants," see Note 13) are measured at fair value and liability-classified because the Tonaquint Warrants contain "down-round" protection and therefore do not meet the scope exception under FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging ("ASC 815"). Since "down-round" protection is not an input to the fair value of the warrants, the warrants cannot be considered indexed to the Company's own stock which is a requirement for the scope exception as outlined under ASC 815.  The Company valued the warrants at $8,000 at December 31, 2013, and $26,000 upon issuance at July 16, 2013, in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

 

Similarly, the conversion feature of the Tonaquint Note (Note 13) also contains "down-round" protection and therefore does not met the scope exception under FASB ASC 815.  The Company classified the derivative liability of $0 at December 31, 2013, and $19,000 upon issuance at July 16, 2013, in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

 

The methods described above may produce a fair value calculation that may not be indicative of net realizable value or reflective of future fair values. Furthermore, while the Company believes its valuation method is appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value could result in a different fair value measurement at the reporting date.