Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies

Business

Sonic Foundry, Inc. (the Company) is in the business of providing enterprise solutions and services for the web communications market.

Principles of Consolidation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Sonic Foundry Media Systems, Inc., Sonic Foundry International B.V. (formerly Media Mission B.V.) and Mediasite K.K. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. The name change for the subsidiary formerly known as Media Mission B.V. occurred in October 2016.

Prior to January 2014, the Company owned approximately 26% of Mediasite KK and accounted for its investment under the equity method of accounting. On January 14, 2014, the Company purchased the remaining 74% of Mediasite KK.

Reclassifications

Reclassifications have been made to the September 30, 2016 financial statements to conform to the September 30, 2017 presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on the Company’s net loss or stockholders’ equity as previously reported. See Financing Receivables below for additional details.

Use of Estimates

In preparing financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (US GAAP), management is required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expense during the period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Revenue Recognition

General

Revenue is recognized when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery occurs or services are rendered, the sales price is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. Revenue is deferred when undelivered products or services are essential to the functionality of delivered products, customer acceptance is uncertain, significant obligations remain, or the fair value of undelivered elements is unknown. Typically, the Company does not offer customers the right to return product, other than for exchange or repair pursuant to a warranty or stock rotation. The Company’s policy is to reduce revenue if it incurs an obligation for price rebates or other such programs during the period the obligation is reasonably estimated to occur. The following policies apply to the Company’s major categories of revenue transactions.

Products

Products are considered delivered, and revenue is recognized, when title and risk of loss have been transferred to the customer or upon customer acceptance if non-delivered products or services are essential to the functionality of delivered products. Under the terms and conditions of the sale, this occurs at the time of shipment to the customer. Product revenue currently represents sales of our Mediasite recorder and Mediasite related products such as our server software and other software licenses. If a license is time-based, the revenue is recognized over the term of the license agreement.

Services

The Company sells support and content hosting contracts to our customers, typically one year in length, and records the related revenue ratably over the contractual period. Our support contracts cover phone and electronic technical support availability over and above the level provided by our distributors, software upgrades on a when and if available basis, advance hardware replacement and an extension of the standard hardware warranty from 90 days to one year. The manufacturers the Company contracts with to build the units provide a limited one-year warranty on the hardware. The Company also sells installation, training, event webcasting, and customer content hosting services. Revenue for those services is recognized when performed in the case of installation, training and event webcasting services. Occasionally, the Company will sell customization services to enhance the server software. Revenue from those services is recognized when performed, if perfunctory, or under contract accounting. Service amounts invoiced to customers in excess of revenue recognized are recorded as deferred revenue until the revenue recognition criteria are met.

Revenue Arrangements that Include Multiple Elements

Sales of software, with or without installation, training, and post customer support fall within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules. Under the software revenue recognition rules, the fee from a multiple-deliverable arrangement is allocated to each of the undelivered elements based upon vendor-specific objective evidence (VSOE), which is limited to the price charged when the same deliverable is sold separately, with the residual value from the arrangement allocated to the delivered element. The portion of the fee that is allocated to each deliverable is then recognized as revenue when the criteria for revenue recognition are met with respect to that deliverable. If VSOE does not exist for all of the undelivered elements, then all revenue from the arrangement is typically deferred until all elements have been delivered to the customer.

In the case of the Company’s hardware products with embedded software, the Company has determined that the hardware and software components function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality, and therefore, the revenue from the sale of these products is accounted for under the revenue recognition rules for tangible products whereby the fee from a multiple-deliverable arrangement is allocated to each of the deliverables based upon their relative selling prices as determined by a selling-price hierarchy. A deliverable in an arrangement qualifies as a separate unit of accounting if the delivered item has value to the customer on a stand-alone basis. A delivered item that does not qualify as a separate unit of accounting is combined with the other undelivered items in the arrangement and revenue is recognized for those combined deliverables as a single unit of accounting. The selling price used for each deliverable is based upon VSOE if available, from third-party evidence (TPE) if VSOE is not available, and best estimate of selling price (ESP) if neither VSOE nor TPE are available. TPE is the price of the Company’s or any competitor’s largely interchangeable products or services in stand-alone sales to similarly situated customers. ESP is the price at which the Company would sell the deliverable if it were sold regularly on a stand-alone basis, considering market conditions and entity-specific factors. All revenue arrangements, excluding the sale of all software-only products and associated services, have been accounted for under this guidance.

The selling prices used in the relative selling price allocation method are as follows: (1)the Company’s products and services are based upon VSOE and (2) hardware products with embedded software, for which VSOE does not exist, are based upon ESP. The Company does not believe TPE exists for any of these products and services because they are differentiated from competing products and services in terms of functionality and performance and there are no competing products or services that are largely interchangeable. Management establishes ESP for hardware products with embedded software using a cost plus margin approach with consideration for market conditions, such as the impact of competition and geographic considerations, and entity-specific factors, such as the cost of the product and the Company’s profit objectives. Management believes that ESP is reflective of reasonable pricing of that deliverable as if priced on a stand-alone basis. When a sales transaction includes deliverables that are divided between Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 605 and ASC Subtopic 985-605, the Company allocates the selling price using the relative selling price method whereas value is allocated using an ESP for software developed using a percent of list price approach. The other deliverables are valued using ESP or VSOE as previously discussed.

While the pricing model, currently in use, captures all critical variables, unforeseen changes due to external market forces may result in a revision of the inputs. These modifications may result in the consideration allocation differing from the one presently in use. Absent a significant change in the pricing inputs or the way in which the industry structures its transactions, future changes in the pricing model are not expected to materially affect our allocation of arrangement consideration.

Management has established VSOE for hosting services. Billings for hosting are spread ratably over the term of the hosting agreement, with the typical hosting agreement having a term of 1 year, with renewal on an annual basis. The Company sells most hosting contracts without the inclusion of products. When the hosting arrangement is sold in conjunction with product, the product revenue is recognized immediately while the remaining hosting revenue is spread ratably over the term of the hosting agreement. The selling price is allocated between these elements using the relative selling price method. The Company uses ESP for development of the selling price for hardware products with embedded software.

The Company also offers hosting services bundled with events services. The Company uses VSOE to establish relative selling prices for its events services. The Company recognizes events revenue when the event takes place and recognizes the hosting revenue over the term of the hosting agreement. The total amount of the arrangement is allocated to each element based on the relative selling price method.

Reserves

The Company reserves for stock rotations, price adjustments, rebates, and sales incentives to reduce revenue and accounts receivable for these and other credits granted to customers. Such reserves are recorded at the time of sale and are calculated based on historical information (such as rates of product stock rotations) and the specific terms of sales programs, taking into account any other known information about likely customer behavior. If actual customer behavior differs from our expectations, it may compromise our ability to recognize revenue to these distributors at the time of shipment. Also, if the Company determines that it can no longer accurately estimate amounts for stock rotations and sales incentives, the Company would not be able to recognize revenue until resellers sell the inventory to the final end user.

Shipping and Handling

The Company’s shipping and handling costs billed to customers are included in other revenue. Costs related to shipping and handling are included in cost of revenue and are recorded at the time of shipment to the customer.

Concentration of Credit Risk and Other Risks and Uncertainties

As of September 30, 2017, of the $1.2 million in cash and cash equivalents, $103 thousand is deposited with 2 major U.S. financial institutions. At times, deposits in these institutions exceed the amount of insurance provided on such deposits. The Company has not experienced any losses on such amounts and believes that it is not exposed to any significant credit risk on these balances. The remaining $1.1 million of cash and cash equivalents is held by our foreign subsidiaries in financial institutions in Japan and the Netherlands and held in their local currency. The cash held in foreign financial institutions is not guaranteed.

We assess the realization of our receivables by performing ongoing credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition. Through these evaluations, we may become aware of a situation where a customer may not be able to meet its financial obligations due to deterioration of its financial viability, credit ratings or bankruptcy. Our reserve requirements are based on the best facts available to us and are reevaluated and adjusted as additional information is received. Our reserves are also based on amounts determined by using percentages applied to certain aged receivable categories. These percentages are determined by a variety of factors including, but not limited to, current economic trends, historical payment and bad debt write-off experience. Allowance for doubtful accounts for accounts receivable and financing receivables was $575,000 at September 30, 2017 and $225,000 at September 30, 2016.

We had billings for Mediasite product and support services as a percentage of total billings to one distributor of approximately 11% in 2017 and 14% in 2016 and to a second distributor of approximately 15% in 2017 and 13% in 2016. At September 30, 2017 and 2016, these two distributors represented 23% and 28% of total accounts receivable, respectively.

Currently all of our product inventory purchases are from one third-party contract manufacturer. Although we believe there are multiple sources of supply from other contract manufacturers as well as multiple suppliers of component parts required by the contract manufacturers, a disruption of supply of component parts or completed products, even if short term, would have a material negative impact on our revenues. At September 30, 2017 and 2016, this supplier represented 27% and 40%, respectively, of total accounts payable. We also license technology from third parties that is embedded in our software. We believe there are alternative sources of similar licensed technology from other third parties that we could also embed in our software, although it could create potential programming related issues that might require engineering resources.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. As of September 30, 2017, of the $1.2 million aggregate cash and cash equivalents held by the Company, the amount of cash and cash equivalents held by our foreign subsidiaries was $1.1 million. If the funds held by our foreign subsidiaries were needed for our operations in the United States, the repatriation of some of these funds to the United States could require payment of additional U.S. taxes.

Trade Accounts Receivable

The majority of the Company’s accounts receivable are due from entities in, or distributors or value added resellers to, the education, corporate and government sectors. Credit is extended based on evaluation of a customer’s financial condition and, generally, collateral is not required. Accounts receivable are typically due within 30 days and are stated at amounts due from customers net of an allowance for doubtful accounts. Accounts outstanding longer than the contractual payment terms are considered to be 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 become uncollectible, and payments subsequently received on such receivables are credited to the allowance for doubtful accounts. Interest is not accrued on past due receivables.

Financing Receivables

Financing receivables consist of customer receivables resulting from the sale of the Company's products and services, primarily software and long-term customer support contracts, and are presented net of allowance for losses. The Company has a single portfolio consisting of fixed-term receivables, which is further segregated into two classes based on products, customer type, and credit risk evaluation.

The Company generally determines its allowance for losses on financing receivables at the customer class level by considering a number of factors, including the length of time financing receivable are past due, historical and anticipated experience, the customer’s current ability to pay its obligation, and the condition of the general economy and the industry as a whole. The Company writes-off financing receivables when they become uncollectible, and payments subsequently received on such receivables are credited to the allowance for financing receivable losses. Interest is not accrued on past due receivables. There was an allowance of $200 thousand and $0 at September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

The Company's financing receivables are aggregated into the following categories:

Long-term customer support contracts: These contracts are typically entered into in conjunction with sale-type lease arrangements, over the life of which the Company agrees to provide support services similar to those offered within Mediasite Customer Care plans. Contract terms range from 3-5 years, and payments are generally due from the customer annually on the contract anniversary. There was $384 thousand and $0 of receivables outstanding for long-term customer support contracts as of September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively. All amounts due were current as of the balance sheet date and there are no credit losses expected to be incurred related to long-term support contracts.

Product receivables: Amounts due primarily represent sales of perpetual software licenses to a single international distributor on invoices outstanding for product delivered from March 2016 through June 2017. In prior years receivables related to this customer were classified as trade accounts receivable, however these were reclassified to financing receivables as of September 30, 2017 (and also within the September 30, 2016 consolidated balance sheets and statements of cash flows for comparability) as the Company is currently in the process of considering revised payment terms, potentially extending through December 2018. There was $2.1 million receivable as of September 30, 2017, $1.5 million of which has been deferred for revenue recognition purposes due to a history of delayed payment. As of September 30, 2016, $1.9 million was receivable from this customer, of which $625 thousand was deferred. The Company delivered $901 thousand of product to this customer and received payment of $726 thousand in FY2017. As a result of the circumstances described, the entire allowance for losses on financing receivables of $200 thousand is considered attributable to this class of customer as of September 30, 2017.

As of September 30, 2017 financing receivables consisted of the following (in thousands):



	September 30, 2017			September 30, 2016
Customer support contracts, current and long-term, gross	$	384		$	—
Product receivables, gross	$	2,051		$	1,877
Allowance for losses on financing receivables	$	(200	)	$	—
	$	2,235		$	1,877

Investment in Sales-Type Lease

The Company has entered into sales-type lease arrangements with certain customers, consisting of recorders leased with terms ranging from 3-5 years. All amounts due are current as of the balance sheet date.

As of September 30, 2017 investment in sales-type leases consisted of the following (in thousands):



	September 30, 2017		September 30, 2016
Investment in sales-type lease	$	555	$	—
	$	555	$	—

Inventory Valuation

Inventory consists of raw materials and supplies used in the assembly of Mediasite recorders and finished units. Inventory of completed units and spare parts are carried at the lower of cost or market, with cost determined on a first-in, first-out basis.

Inventory consists of the following (in thousands):



	September 30,
	2017		2016
Raw materials and supplies	$	156	$	149
Finished goods	830		1,755
	$	986	$	1,904

Capitalized Software Development Costs

Software development costs incurred in conjunction with product development are charged to research and development expense until technological feasibility is established. Thereafter, until the product is released for sale, software development costs are capitalized and reported at the net realizable value of the related product. Typically the period between achieving technological feasibility of the Company’s products and the general availability of the products has been short. Consequently, software development costs qualifying for capitalization are typically immaterial and are generally expensed to research and development costs. During 2013, the Company’s My Mediasite product release required software capitalization since there was a longer period between technological feasibility and the general availability of the product. Upon product release, the amortization of software development costs is determined annually as the greater of the amount computed using the ratio of current gross revenues for the products to their total of current and anticipated future gross revenues or the straight-line method over the estimated economic life of the products, expected to be three years. Amortization expense of software development costs of $0 thousand and $104 thousand is included in Cost of Revenue – Product for each of the years ending September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively. The gross amount of capitalized external and internal development costs was $533 thousand at September 30, 2017 and 2016. There were no software development efforts that qualified for capitalization for the years ended September 30, 2017 or 2016, respectively.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment are recorded at cost and are depreciated using the straight-line method for financial reporting purposes. The estimated useful lives used to calculate depreciation are as follows:



	Years
Leasehold improvements	5 to 10 years
Computer equipment	3 to 5 years
Furniture and fixtures	5 to 7 years

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Goodwill has an indefinite useful life and is recorded at cost and not amortized but, instead, tested at least annually for impairment. We assess the impairment of goodwill on an annual basis or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the fair value of these assets is less than the carrying value. If a qualitative assessment is used and the Company determines that the fair value of goodwill is more likely than not (i.e., a likelihood of more than 50%) less than its carrying amount, a quantitative impairment test will be performed. If goodwill is quantitatively assessed for impairment, the Company compares the estimated fair value of the reporting unit to which goodwill is allocated to its carrying value. The amount of impairment, if any, is equal to the amount by which the carrying value of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value.

For purposes of the fiscal 2017 and 2016 tests, goodwill balances are evaluated within three separate reporting units. In fiscal 2016, we performed a two-step goodwill test and determined that the fair value of goodwill was more than the carrying value. In fiscal 2017, we performed a quantitative analysis and determined that the fair value of one of the Company's reporting units is less than its carrying value, and that the fair value of the remaining reporting units is greater than their respective carrying values. The Company recognized impairment charges of $600 thousand and $0 as of September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

Long-lived assets and intangible assets other than goodwill are evaluated for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of an asset may not be recoverable based on expected undiscounted cash flows attributable to that asset. For the year ended September 30, 2017, it was determined that changes in circumstances were present, primarily the decline in the Company's market capitalization during the fiscal year. However, after performing analysis of undiscounted cash flows attributable to our long-lived assets along with other relevant factors, it was determined that there is no impairment of long-lived and intangible assets other than goodwill. Key assumptions utilized in the analysis of discounted cash flows for each asset or asset group being tested included 1) whether cash flows were attributable solely to the asset or group, or to an entire reporting unit; and 2) the useful lives of the asset or asset group. Forecasts used in the discounted cash flow analysis were also consistent with those used in determining fair value of reporting units during goodwill impairment testing. For the year ended September 30, 2016, no events or changes in circumstances occurred that required this analysis. For the year ended September 30, 2016, no events or changes in circumstances occurred that required this analysis.

Comprehensive Loss

Comprehensive loss includes disclosure of financial information that historically has not been recognized in the calculation of net income. Our comprehensive loss encompasses net loss and foreign currency translation adjustments. Assets and liabilities of international operations that have a functional currency that is not in U.S. dollars are translated into U.S. dollars at year-end exchange rates, and revenue and expense items are translated using weighted average exchange rates. Any adjustments arising on translation are included in shareholders’ equity as an element of accumulated other comprehensive loss.

Advertising Expense

Advertising costs included in selling and marketing, are expensed when the advertising first takes place. Advertising expense was $479 thousand and $403 thousand for years ended September 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

Research and Development Costs

Research and development costs are expensed in the period incurred, unless they meet the criteria for capitalized software development costs.

Income Taxes

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect in the years in which the differences are expected to reverse. We do not provide for U.S. income taxes on the undistributed earnings of our foreign subsidiaries, which we consider to be permanently invested outside of the U.S.

We make judgments regarding the realizability of our deferred tax assets. The balance sheet carrying value of our net deferred tax assets is based on whether we believe that it is more likely than not that we will generate sufficient future taxable income to realize these deferred tax assets after consideration of all available evidence. We regularly review our deferred tax assets for recoverability considering historical profitability, projected future taxable income, the expected timing of the reversals of existing temporary differences and tax planning strategies. In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, we consider both positive and negative evidence related to the likelihood of realization of the deferred tax assets. The weight given to the positive and negative evidence is commensurate with the extent to which the evidence may be objectively verified. As such, it is generally difficult for positive evidence regarding projected future taxable income exclusive of reversing taxable temporary differences to outweigh objective negative evidence of recent financial reporting losses. Generally, cumulative loss in recent years is a significant piece of negative evidence that is difficult to overcome in determining that a valuation allowance is not needed.

As of September 30, 2017 and 2016, valuation allowances have been established for all U.S. and for certain foreign deferred tax assets which we believe do not meet the “more likely than not” criteria for recognition.

The Company also accounts for the uncertainty in income taxes related to the recognition and measurement of a tax position and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in an income tax return. The Company follows the applicable accounting guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods and disclosure related to the uncertainty in income tax positions.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Nonfinancial Assets Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis

The Company’s goodwill, intangible assets and other long-lived assets are nonfinancial assets that were acquired either as part of a business combination, individually or with a group of other assets. These nonfinancial assets were initially measured and recognized at amounts equal to the fair value determined as of the date of acquisition. Fair value measurements of reporting units are estimated using an income approach involving discounted or undiscounted cash flow models and the public company guideline method that contain certain Level 3 inputs requiring management judgment, including projections of economic conditions and customer demand, revenue and margins, changes in competition, operating costs, working capital requirements, and new product introductions. Fair value measurements of the reporting units associated with the Company’s goodwill balances are estimated at least annually at the beginning of the fourth quarter of each fiscal year for purposes of impairment testing. Fair value measurements associated with the Company’s intangible assets and other long-lived assets are estimated when events or changes in circumstances such as market value, asset utilization, physical change, legal factors, or other matters indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable.

In determining the fair value of financial assets and liabilities, the Company currently utilizes market data or other assumptions that it believes market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability in the principal or most advantageous market, and adjusts for non-performance and/or other risk associated with the Company as well as counterparties, as appropriate. When considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, the following fair value hierarchy distinguishes between observable and unobservable inputs, which are categorized in one of the following levels:

Level 1 Inputs: Unadjusted quoted prices which are available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities accessible to the Company at the measurement date.

Level 2 Inputs: Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.

Level 3 Inputs: Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability used to measure fair value to the extent that observable inputs are not available, thereby allowing for situations in which there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability at measurement date.

The hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1, as this level provides the most reliable measure of fair value, while giving the lowest priority to Level 3.

Financial Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis

The initial fair values of PFG debt and warrant debt (see Note 3) were based on the present value of expected future cash flows and assumptions about current interest rates and the creditworthiness of the Company (Level 3). The fair value of the bifurcated conversion feature represented by the warrant derivative liability, which is measured at fair value on a recurring basis is based on a Black Scholes option pricing model with assumptions for stock price, exercise price, volatility, expected term, risk free interest rate and dividend yield similar to those described for share-based compensation which were generally observable (Level 2).

Financial liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized below (in thousands):



September 30, 2017	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total Fair Value
Derivative liability	$	—	$	12	$	—	$	12



September 30, 2016	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total Fair Value
PFG debt, net of discount	$	—	$	—	$	1,225	$	1,225
Warrant debt	—		—		102		102
Derivative liability	—		67		—		67
	$	—	$	67	$	1,327	$	1,394

Included below is a summary of the changes in our Level 3 fair value measurements (in thousands):



	PFG Debt, net of discount			Warrant Debt
Balance as of September 30, 2016	$	1,225		$	102
Activity during the period:
Payments to PFG	(807		)	—
Change in fair value	73			21
Balance as of September 30, 2017	$	491		$	123

Financial Instruments Not Measured at Fair Value

The Company’s other financial instruments consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, investment in sales-type lease, financing receivables, accounts payable and debt instruments, excluding the PFG debt. The book values of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, investment in sales-type lease, debt (excluding the PFG debt) and accounts payable are considered to be representative of their respective fair values. The carrying value of capital lease obligations and debt (excluding the PFG debt), including the current portion, approximates fair market value as the variable and fixed rate approximates the current market rate of interest available to the Company.

Legal Contingencies

In June 2014, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with Astute Technology, LLC (“Astute”). The key terms of the agreement were: 1) a grant of a non-revocable license of Astute patents to the Company; 2) a grant of a fully paid, non-refundable license of certain Sonic Foundry patents to Astute; 3) both Astute and our customer agreed to identify three meetings they currently capture that the other party will not seek or respond to any request for proposal; and 4) a payment of $1.35 million to Astute. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, the payments were made in three equal amounts with the first paid in June 2014, the second paid in October 2014 and the final installment paid in March 2015. The Company contributed $1.1 million of the $1.35 million payable to Astute with our customer paying the residual amount. Of the $1.1 million, $428 thousand related to prior use and was recorded as a charge to income during fiscal 2014. The remaining $672 thousand was recorded as a product right asset, which is being amortized, on a straight-line basis, over the remaining life of the patents, through 2020. Future amounts due to Astute were accrued for as of the time of settlement.

No legal contingencies were recorded for the either of the years ended September 30, 2017 or 2016, respectively.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company uses a lattice valuation model to account for all employee stock options granted. The lattice valuation model is a more flexible analysis to value options because of its ability to incorporate inputs that change over time, such as actual exercise behavior of option holders. The Company uses historical data to estimate the option exercise and employee departure behavior in the lattice valuation model. Expected volatility is based on historical volatility of the Company’s stock. The Company considers all employees to have similar exercise behavior and therefore has not identified separate homogeneous groups for valuation. The expected term of options granted is derived from the output of the option pricing model and represents the period of time that options granted are expected to be outstanding. The risk-free rate for periods the options are expected to be outstanding is based on the U.S. Treasury yields in effect at the time of grant. Forfeitures are based on actual behavior patterns. The expected exercise factor and forfeiture rates are calculated using historical exercise and forfeiture activity for the previous three years.

The fair value of each option grant is estimated using the assumptions in the following table:



	Years Ending September 30,
	2017	2016
Expected life	4.7 - 4.9 years	4.9 – 5.0 years
Risk-free interest rate	1.08%-1.51%	0.84%-1.23%
Expected volatility	56.98%-62.21%	53.8%-57.2%
Expected forfeiture rate	10.17%-11.72%	10.3 %-11.8%
Expected exercise factor	1.29-1.35	1.35-1.44
Expected dividend yield	—%	—%

Common Stock Warrants

On December 22, 2014, the company issued 74,802 warrants to two individuals, one of which is the Chairman of the Company’s Board of Directors, in combination with the sale of a like number of shares of common stock. These warrants were immediately exercisable, expire five years after the date of issuance and have an exercise price of $14.00. The remaining contractual life of these outstanding warrants as of September 30, 2017 was 2.23 years. The fair value of the warrants was determined using the lattice model and the same inputs as those used for valuing the Company’s stock option fair value. The fair value of the warrants was $133 thousand at the date of issuance. The Company determined that the warrants are freestanding and do not fall within the scope of ASC 480 or ASC 815. The warrants were recorded in conjunction with the stock issued.

See Note 3, Credit Arrangements for disclosures on additional warrants issued during fiscal 2015.

Preferred stock and dividends

In May 2017, the Company created a new series of preferred stock entitled "9% Cumulative Voting Convertible Preferred Stock, Series A" (the "Preferred Stock, Series A"). One thousand shares were authorized with a stated value and liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. In August 2017, 1,500 additional shares were authorized for an aggregated total of 2,500 shares. Holders of the Preferred Stock, Series A will receive monthly dividends at an annual rate of 9%, payable in additional shares of Preferred Stock, Series A. Dividends declared on the preferred stock are earned monthly as additional shares and accounted for as a reduction to paid-in capital since the Company is currently in an accumulated deficit position. Each share of Preferred Stock, Series A is convertible into that number of shares of common stock determined by dividing $4.23 into the liquidation amount. As of September 30, 2017, 1,510 shares of Preferred Stock, Series A have been issued and are outstanding.

The Company considered relevant guidance when accounting for the issuance of preferred stock, and determined that the preferred shares meet the criteria for equity classification. Dividends accrued on preferred shares will be shown as a reduction to net income (or an increase in net loss) for purposes of calculating earnings per share.

Per Share Computation

Basic earnings (loss) per share has been computed using the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period, less shares that may be repurchased, and excludes any dilutive effects of options and warrants. In periods where the Company reports net income, diluted net income per share is computed using common equivalent shares related to outstanding options and warrants to purchase common stock. The numerator for the calculation of basic and diluted earnings per share is net income (loss). The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted weighted average shares used in the earnings per share calculations:



	Years Ending September 30,
	2017	2016
Denominator for basic earnings (loss) per share
-weighted average common shares	4,436,333	4,389,421
Effect of dilutive options and warrants (treasury method)	—	—
Denominator for diluted earnings (loss) per share
-adjusted weighted average common shares	4,436,333	4,389,421
Options and warrants outstanding during each year, but not included in the computation of diluted earnings (loss) per share because they are antidilutive	1,940,245	1,737,624

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the "FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)”. The guidance substantially converges final standards on revenue recognition between the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board providing a framework on addressing revenue recognition issues and, upon its effective date, replaces almost all existing revenue recognition guidance, including industry-specific guidance, in current U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The FASB subsequently issued a one-year deferral of the effective date for the new revenue reporting standard for entities reporting under U.S. GAAP. In accordance with the deferral, the guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Subsequently, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations" ("ASU 2016-08"); ASU 2016-10, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing" ("ASU 2016-10"); and ASU 2016-12, "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients" ("ASU 2016-12"). The Company must adopt ASU 2016-08, ASU 2016-10 and ASU 2016-12 with ASU 2014-09.

We anticipate that adoption of FASB Topic 606 will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. While we are continuing to assess all potential impacts of the standard, particularly regarding expenses, the Company believes the most significant impact will relate to accounting for software license revenue. We expect revenue related to recorders, customer support, hosting, and events services to remain largely unchanged. Specifically, under the new standard we expect to recognize revenue for annual or multi-year software licenses predominantly at the time of billing rather than ratably over the license term as is current practice. Due to the complexity of certain of our customer contracts, the actual revenue recognition treatment required under the standard will be dependent on contract-specific terms, and may vary in some instances from recognition at the time of billing.

In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-11, "Inventory (Topic 330)" ("ASU 2015-11"). The amendments in ASU 2015-11 require an entity to measure inventory at the lower of cost and net realizable value. The amendments in ASU 2015-11 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016 and interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permitted. The amendments should be applied prospectively with earlier application permitted as of the beginning of an interim or annual reporting period. The Company does not believe the implementation of this standard will result in a material impact to its financial statements.

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-17, "Income Taxes (Topic 740)", ("ASU 2015-17"). ASU 2015-17 simplifies the presentation of deferred income taxes. The amendments in ASU 2015-17 are effective for financial statements issued for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interims periods within those annual periods. The amendments may be applied either prospectively to all deferred tax liabilities and assets or retrospectively to all periods presented. The Company does not believe the implementation of this standard will result in a material impact to its financial statements.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, "Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10)", ("ASU 2016-01"). ASU 2016-01 addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments. The amendments in ASU 2016-01 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The amendments should be applied by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment to the balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The amendments related to equity securities without readily determinable fair values should be applied prospectively to equity investments that exist at the date of the adoption. The Company is currently evaluating this guidance and its impact to the financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, "Leases (Topic 842)", ("ASU 2016-02"). ASU 2016-02 aims to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. The amendments in ASU 2016-02 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, for public entities. Early application of the amendment is permitted. The Company is currently reviewing this guidance and its impact to the financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-05, "Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815)", ("ASU 2016-05"). ASU 2016-05 clarifies the effect of novation related to a derivative instrument. The amendments in ASU 2016-05 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those fiscal years. An entity has the option to apply the amendments in ASU 2016-05 on either a prospective or a modified retrospective basis. The Company is currently evaluating this guidance and its impact to the financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-06, "Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815)", ("ASU 2016-06"). ASU 2016-06 clarify the requirements for assessing whether contingent call (put) options that can accelerate the payment of principal on debt instruments are clearly and closely related to their debt hosts. The amendments in ASU 2016-06 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Entities should apply the amendments on a modified retrospective basis to existing debt instruments as of the beginning of the fiscal year for which the amendments are effective. The Company is currently evaluating this guidance and its impact to the financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, "Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718)", ("ASU 2016-09"). ASU 2016-09 simplifies the accounting for share-based payment transactions. The amendments in ASU 2016-09 are effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods. The Company is currently evaluating this guidance and its impact to the financial statements.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-11, "Revenue Recognition (Topic 605) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815)", ("ASU 2016-11"). ASU 2016-11 rescinds SEC paragraphs pursuant to the SEC Staff Announcement, "Rescission of Certain SEC Staff Observer Comments upon Adoption of Topic 606", and the SEC Staff Announcement, "Determining Whether the Host Contract in a Hybrid Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share is More Akin to Debt or Equity", announced at the March 3, 2016 Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) meeting. The effective dates in ASU 2016-11 coincide with the effective dates of Topic 606 (ASU 2014-09) and ASU 2014-16. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting ASU 2014-09 and related amendments, such as ASU 2016-11, to determine the impact, if any, it may have on our financial statements. The Company previously reviewed ASU 2014-16 and determined that is it not applicable.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, "Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230)", ("ASU 2016-15"). ASU 2016-15 addresses classification of certain cash receipts and cash payments within the statement of cash flows. The amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods with those fiscal years. The Company is currently evaluating this guidance and its impact to the financial statements.

In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, "Income Taxes (Topic 740)", ("ASU 2016-16"). ASU 2016-16 prohibits the recognition of current and deferred income taxes for an intra-entity transfer until the asset has been sold to an outside party. The amendment in ASU 2016-16 are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within those annual reporting periods. The Company is currently evaluating this guidance and its impact to the financial statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-01 "(ASC Topic 805), Business Combination: Clarifying the Definition of a Business", ("ASU 2017-01"). The amendments in this ASU change the definition of a business to assist with evaluating when a set of transferred assets and activities is a business. The Company is required to adopt the guidance in the first quarter of fiscal 2019. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is in the process of assessing the impact, if any, of this ASU on its consolidated financial statements.

In February 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-05, "Other Income - Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20): Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets", ("ASU 2017-05"). ASU 2017-05 clarifies the scope of Subtopic 610-20, Other Income-Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets, which provides guidance for recognizing gains and losses from the transfer of nonfinancial assets in contracts with noncustomers. The amendments in ASU 2017-05 are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within those annual reporting periods. The Company is in the process of assessing the impact, if any, of this ASU on its consolidated financial statements.

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-07, "Compensation-Retirement Benefits (Topic 715): Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost", ("ASU 2017-07"). ASU 2017-07 was issued to improve the presentation of net periodic pension cost and net periodic postretirement benefit cost within an entity's financial statements. The amendments in ASU 2017-07 are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within those annual reporting periods. The Company is currently evaluating this guidance and its impact to the consolidated financial statements.

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, "Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718)", ("ASU 2017-09"). The amendments in ASU 2017-09 provide guidance about which changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award require an entity to apply modification accounting in Topic 718. The amendments in ASU 2017-09 are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within those annual reporting periods. The Company is in the process of assessing the impact, if any, of this ASU on its consolidated financial statements.

In July 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-11, "Earnings Per Share (Topic 260); Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity (Topic 480); Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815)", ("ASU 2017-11"). This update was issued to address complexities in accounting for certain equity-linked financial instruments containing down round features. The amendment changes the classification analysis of these financial instruments (or embedded features) so that equity classification is no longer precluded. The amendments in ASU 2017-11 are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim reporting periods within those annual reporting periods. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is in the process of assessing the impact, if any, of this ASU on its consolidated financial statements.

Accounting standards that have been issued but are not yet effective by the FASB or other standards-setting bodies that do not require adoption until a future date, which are not discussed above, are not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements upon adoption.

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

In August 2014, the FASB issued No. ASU 2014-15, "Presentation of Financial Statements — Going Concern" ("ASU 2014-15"), which requires management to evaluate relevant conditions, events and certain management plans that are known or reasonably knowable that when, considered in the aggregate, raise substantial doubt about an entity's ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that financial statements are issued. This ASU is effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016, and early adoption is permitted. ASU 2014-15 was early adopted by the Company on March 31, 2017, and did not have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, "Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment, ("ASU 2017-04"). ASU 2017-04 simplifies the subsequent measurement of goodwill by allowing an entity to perform its annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An entity should recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value; however, the loss recognized should not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. This update also eliminates the requirements for any reporting unit with a zero or negative carrying amount to perform a qualitative assessment and, if it fails that qualitative test, to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test. The amendments in ASU 2017-04 are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim reporting periods within those annual reporting periods. ASU 2017-04 was early adopted by the Company for the year ending September 30, 2017. The adoption may have had a material impact on the consolidated financial statements as a goodwill impairment charge was recognized for one of the Company's reporting units in the current year (which was measured based on the updated guidance outlined in ASU 2017-04), and a second reporting unit has a negative carrying amount. However, in accordance with the newly adopted requirements, a Step 2 analysis was not performed for either reporting unit, which could have resulted in additional impairment of goodwill under previous guidance. See Note 8 for further discussion of goodwill.