Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2016

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Basis of Accounting, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Basis of Presentation

The Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. (“GAAP”).  The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of all subsidiaries and affiliates in which the Company holds a controlling financial interest as of the date the consolidated financial statements. Normally a controlling financial interest reflects ownership of a majority of the voting interests.

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of MeetMe and its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Quepasa.com de Mexico, Quepasa Serviços em Solucoes de Publicidade E Tecnologia Ltda (inactive) and MeetMe Online S/S Ltda.   All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Unaudited Interim Financial Information

The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared by the Company and reflect all normal, recurring adjustments that, in the opinion of management, are necessary for a fair presentation of the interim financial information. The results of operations for the interim periods presented are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for any subsequent quarter or for the year ending December 31, 2016. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP have been condensed or omitted under the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and notes included herein should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, filed with the SEC on March 8, 2016.

Use of Estimates, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Use of Estimates

The preparation of the Company’s consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires the Company 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 consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Significant estimates and assumptions are required in the determination of revenue recognition, accounts receivable valuation, the fair value of financial instruments, the valuation of long-lived assets, valuation of deferred tax assets, income taxes, contingencies, goodwill and intangible assets, and stock-based compensation. Some of these judgments can be subjective and complex, and, consequently, actual results may differ from these estimates. The Company’s estimates often are based on complex judgments, probabilities and assumptions that it believes to be reasonable but that are inherently uncertain and unpredictable. For any given individual estimate or assumption made by the Company, there may also be other estimates or assumptions that are reasonable.

The Company regularly evaluates its estimates and assumptions using historical experience and other factors, including the economic environment. As future events and their effects cannot be determined with precision, the Company’s estimates and assumptions may prove to be incomplete or inaccurate, or unanticipated events and circumstances may occur that might cause it to change those estimates and assumptions. Market conditions, such as illiquid credit markets, volatile equity markets, dramatic fluctuations in foreign currency rates and economic downturn, can increase the uncertainty already inherent in its estimates and assumptions. The Company adjusts its estimates and assumptions when facts and circumstances indicate the need for change. Those changes generally will be reflected in the Company’s consolidated financial statements on a prospective basis unless they are required to be treated retrospectively under the relevant accounting standard. It is possible that other professionals, applying reasonable judgment to the same facts and circumstances, could develop and support a range of alternative estimated amounts. The Company is also subject to other risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ from estimated amounts, such as changes in competition, litigation, legislation and regulations.

Revenue Recognition, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred or services have been rendered, the purchase price is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured.  The Company earns revenue from the display of advertisements on its mobile apps and website, primarily based on a cost per thousand (“CPM”) model. The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with ASC 605, “

Revenue Recognition,

” and ASC 605-45, “

Principal Agent Considerations”

(together, the “ASC Guidance”). Revenue from advertising on the Company’s website and mobile apps is generally recognized on a net basis, since the majority of its advertising revenues come from advertising agencies. The guidance provides indicators for determining whether “gross” or “net” presentation is appropriate. While all indicators should be considered, the Company believes that whether it acted as a primary obligor in its agreements with advertising agencies is the strongest indicator of whether gross or net revenue reporting is appropriate.

During the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company had transactions with several partners that qualify for principal-agent considerations. The Company recognizes revenue net of amounts retained by third party entities, pursuant to revenue sharing agreements with advertising networks for advertising and with other partners for royalties on product sales. The Company considered two key factors when making its revenue recognition determinations: (1) whether the Company performed a service for a fee, similar to an agent or a broker and (2) whether the Company was involved in the determination of product or service specifications. The Company focused on the substance of the agreements and determined that net presentation was representationally faithful to the substance, as well as the form, of the agreements. The form of the agreements was such that the Company provided services in exchange for a fee. In addition, the Company has no latitude in establishing price, and the advertising agencies were solely responsible for determining pricing with third party advertisers. The Company determined only the fee for providing its services to advertising agencies.

In instances in which the Company works directly with an advertiser, revenue is recognized on a gross basis. The Company is the primary obligor in arrangements made with direct advertisers, as there is no third party facilitating or managing the sales process. The Company is solely responsible for determining price, product or service specifications, and which advertisers to use. The Company assumes all credit risk in the sales arrangements made with direct advertisers.

During the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company’s revenue was generated from two principal sources: revenue earned from the sales of advertising on the Company’s mobile applications and website and revenue earned from in-app products.

Advertising Revenue

Advertising and custom sponsorship revenues consist primarily of advertising fees earned from the display of advertisements on the Company’s website and mobile applications. Revenue from advertising is generally recognized as advertisements are delivered. The Company recognizes advertising revenue from customers that are advertising networks on a net basis, while advertising revenues earned directly from advertisers are recognized on a gross basis. Approximately 85% and 82% of the Company’s revenue came from advertising during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

In-App Purchases

Revenue is earned from in-app purchase products sold to our mobile application and website users.  The Company offers in-app products such as Credits. Users buy Credits to purchase the Company’s virtual products. These products put users in the spotlight, helping users to get more attention from the community in order to meet more people faster. Revenue from these virtual products is recognized over time. Credits can be purchased using PayPal on the website and iTunes and Google checkout on mobile applications.  Platform users do not own the Credits but have a limited right to use the credits on virtual products offered for sale on the Company’s platform. Credits are non-refundable, the Company may change the purchase price of Credits at any time, and the Company reserves the right to stop issuing Credits in the future.  The Company’s in-app products are not transferable, cannot be sold or exchanged outside our platform, are not redeemable for any sum of money, and can only be used on the Company’s platform. In-app products are recorded in deferred revenue when purchased and recognized as revenue when: (i) the credits are used by the customer; or (ii) the Company determines the likelihood of the credits being redeemed by the customer is remote (breakage) and there is not a legal obligation to remit the unredeemed credits to the relevant jurisdiction. The determination of the breakage rate is based upon Company-specific historical redemption patterns. Breakage is recognized in revenue as the credits are used on a pro rata basis over a three month period (life of the user) beginning at the date of the Credits sale and is included in revenue in the consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive income. Breakage recognized during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 was $299,000 and $248,000, respectively. For “MeetMe+” and other subscription based products, the Company recognizes revenue over the term of the subscription.

The Company also earns revenue from advertisement products from currency engagement actions (i.e. sponsored engagement advertisements) by users on all of the Company’s platforms, including cost-per-action (“CPA”) currency incented promotions and sales on its proprietary cross-platform currency monetization product, “Social Theater.”  The Company controls and develops the Social Theater product and CPA promotions and acts as a user’s principal in these transactions and recognizes the related revenue on a gross basis when collections are reasonably assured and upon delivery of the Credits to the user’s account. When a user performs an action, the user earns Credits and the Company earns product revenue from the advertiser.

Social Theater is a product that allows the Company to offer advertisers a way to leverage the Facebook platform through guaranteed actions by Facebook’s user base. Social Theater is also hosted on the Company’s platform. Typical guaranteed actions available to advertisers are video views, fan page growth, quizzes and surveys.  Social Theater revenue is recognized when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the sales price is fixed or determinable, collectability is reasonably assured, and the service has been rendered. The Social Theater prices are both fixed and determinable based on the contract with the advertiser.  The user completes an action and the electronic record of the transaction triggers the revenue recognition. The collection of the Social Theater revenue is reasonably assured by contractual obligation and historical payment performance. The delivery of virtual currency from the hosting platform to a user evidences the completion of the action required by the customer that the service has been rendered for Social Theater revenue recognition.

Beanstock Media Inc.

Web Agreement

On September 25, 2013, the Company entered into a Media Publisher Agreement (the “Web Agreement”) with Beanstock Media, Inc. (“Beanstock”). The Web Agreement was effective from September 23, 2013 until June 2, 2015 when the Company terminated the Web Agreement as a result of non-payment by Beanstock of amounts owed.

Pursuant to the Web Agreement, Beanstock had the exclusive right and obligation to fill all of the Company’s remnant desktop in-page display advertising inventory on www.meetme.com (the “Site”), excluding, (i) any inventory sold to a third party under an insertion order that was campaign or advertiser specific, (ii) any inventory the Company reserved in existing and future agreements with third parties for barter transactions and as additional consideration as part of larger business development transactions, and (iii) any inventory reserved for premium advertising for the Site. The Company could have continued to place inventory outside of the Web Agreement in direct sales.

Beanstock was obligated to pay for all advertising requests that the Company delivered, whether or not Beanstock filled them. For the United States, Beanstock was obligated to pay the Company specified CPM rates plus a percentage of revenue in excess of those rates; for the rest of the world, Beanstock was obligated to pay the Company 90% of its net ad revenue for the Site.

The Company could terminate the Web Agreement at any time without charge or penalty by providing written notice to Beanstock. Either party could terminate the Web Agreement if the other party was in material breach of its obligations and did not cure such breach, or if the other party filed a petition for bankruptcy, became insolvent, made an assignment for the benefit of its creditors, or a receiver is appointed for such party or its business.

For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company recognized approximately $0 and $1,300,000 under the terms of the Web Agreement, respectively. On June 2, 2015, the Company terminated the Web Agreement as a result of non-payment by Beanstock of amounts owed, and resumed managing its web advertising inventory in-house. In the third quarter of 2015, the Company determined that the approximately $1,300,000 receivable in connection with the Web Agreement was deemed uncollectible and as a result the Company incurred a bad debt expense of the entire amount.

Mobile Agreement

On December 23, 2014, the Company entered into an Advertising Agreement with Beanstock (the “Mobile Agreement”). On June 2, 2015, the Company terminated the Mobile agreement with Beanstock as a result of non-payment by Beanstock of amounts owed.

Pursuant to the Mobile Agreement, Beanstock had the right and obligation to fill substantially all of the Company’s advertising inventory on its MeetMe mobile app for iOS and Android, as well as the Site when accessed using a mobile device and as optimized for mobile devices (collectively, the “App”). The Mobile Agreement did not apply to interstitially-placed advertisements, advertisements on versions of the App specific to the iPad and other Apple tablet devices, other mobile apps or in-app products or features on the App, including, without limitation, offer wall features and the Company’s Social Theater business.

Under the Mobile Agreement, the Company began placing ad calls (not including prior test calls) with Beanstock on March 1, 2015 (the “Effective Date”).

The Company could, on a basis substantially consistent with its advertising display logic (as set forth in the Mobile Agreement) (“Ad Logic”), (i) add additional sections or features to the App and provide them with ads, and (ii) change the locations and sizes of particular ad placements within the App; in any such case, all resulting ad placements would be subject to the Mobile Agreement. In addition, if the Company wished to increase the number, type, frequency or scope of placements in the Ad Logic, it would be required to first notify Beanstock and upon Beanstock’s written consent, such additional inventory would be added to the Ad Logic. If Beanstock withheld or denied said consent, then the additional inventory would remain outside of the scope of the Mobile Agreement and the Company could fill it otherwise.

Beanstock was required to pay for all ad requests that the Company delivered whether or not Beanstock filled them. Beanstock was required to pay specified CPM rates depending on the type of ad; provided, however, that if more than a stated percentage of impressions originated outside of the United States and Canada, then Beanstock was required to pay the Company a percentage of Beanstock’s gross revenue relating to such international ad impressions in excess of that percentage.

Beanstock was required to remit payments due to the Company within thirty days following the last day of each calendar month for that month regardless of advertiser campaign duration; provided, however, that if the balance owing under the Mobile Agreement exceeded a stated amount, then the Company could request Beanstock to accelerate payments so that the balance does not at any point exceed that amount, and Beanstock would be required do so within ten days and for so long as necessary to keep said balance under that amount. Beanstock assumed all risk with regards to collection of all applicable advertiser fees with respect to all of the advertising inventory and was not permitted to delay payment to the Company as a result of non-collection or delay of payment of fees by advertisers. Beanstock was not permitted to withhold or offset amounts owing the Mobile Agreement for any reason.

The Company determined the number of ad calls that it would place under the Mobile Agreement. If Beanstock determined that number to be less than 90% of the Company’s number for any particular month and the parties could not resolve the discrepancy, then the ad call number for that month would be 90% of the number that the Company originally determined.

Beanstock agreed to comply with the Company’s advertising editorial guidelines as in effect from time to time.

The Company could terminate the Mobile Agreement upon written notice (i) from the date thereof to the sixtieth day after the Effective Date, or (ii) if, in the Company’s sole discretion, the placement or running of ads on the App caused a diminution in user experience, including without limitation with respect to the crash rate.

In addition, the Mobile Agreement could be terminated upon written notice by (A) either party if the other party (i) was in material breach of its obligations and that party failed to cure said breach within ten days after receipt of written notice thereof from the non-breaching party, or (ii) filed a petition for bankruptcy, became insolvent, made an assignment for the benefit of its creditors, or a receiver was appointed for such other party or its business, or (B) the Company if Beanstock failed to pay any amount thereunder when due (any of the events in this sentence, “Cause”). If the Company terminated the Agreement for Cause or Beanstock terminated it wrongfully, then Beanstock would be required to pay the Company a stated amount as liquidated damages.

Effective March 26, 2015, the Company amended the Mobile Agreement with Beanstock (the “Amendment”). Pursuant to the Amendment, the Company provided certain price reductions on its invoices to Beanstock for the months of March, 2015 and April, 2015, contingent upon certain events to which Beanstock was required to certify. The Amendment provided that the Company would implement certain changes to the Ad Logic for the App by May 1, 2015 as well as make certain product changes with respect to the App by June 1, 2015. The Amendment increased the amount of liquidated damages payable by Beanstock under certain circumstances and provided the Company with a right to terminate the Mobile Agreement for convenience until September 1, 2015, and after such date with either sufficient advance notice or by paying a stated termination fee.

On May 6, 2015, the Company entered into a second amendment and joinder to the Mobile Agreement (the “Second Amendment”). Pursuant to the Second Amendment, Beanstock would pay in full (i) the invoice dated March 31, 2015, under the Mobile Agreement (a portion of which remained overdue) on or before June 30, 2015 and (ii) all other amounts under the Mobile Agreement and the Web Agreement as they became due. In addition, Adaptive Medias, Inc. (“Adaptive”) joined as a party to the Mobile Agreement to guarantee Beanstock’s payment obligations under both the Mobile Agreement and the Web Agreement. If Beanstock failed to pay any amounts due under either the Mobile Agreement or the Web Agreement, Adaptive would immediately, upon demand, pay all such owed amounts in full.

For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company recognized approximately $0 and $1,600,000, respectively, under the terms of the Mobile Agreement. On June 2, 2015, the Company terminated the Mobile Agreement as a result of non-payment by Beanstock of amounts owed, and resumed managing its mobile advertising inventory in-house. In the third quarter of 2015, the Company determined that the approximately $4,400,000 receivable in connection with the Mobile Agreement was deemed uncollectible and as a result the Company incurred a bad debt expense of the entire amount. 

In 2015, the accounts receivable balance written-off under both agreements was approximately $5,700,000. In addition, Beanstock owes the Company $4,000,000 of liquated damages under the Mobile Agreement that have not been recorded in the financial statements and are not included in the approximately $5,700,000 bad debt write-off.

Pinsight Media

On October 31, 2013, the Company entered into an Advertising Agreement with Pinsight Media+, Inc. (“Pinsight”) (as amended, the “Pinsight Agreement”). The Pinsight Agreement was effective from October 31, 2013 through December 31, 2014, with a post-termination transition period that ended on March 1, 2015.

Pursuant to the Pinsight Agreement, Pinsight had the right and obligation to fill all of the Company’s advertising inventory on the App. The Pinsight Agreement did not apply to other mobile apps or virtual currency features on the App, including without limitation offer wall features and the Company’s Social Theater business.

Pinsight was obligated to pay for all ad requests that the Company delivered, whether or not Pinsight fills them. Pinsight paid specified CPM rates depending on the type of ad. The stated CPM rates for certain ads were subject to renegotiation under certain conditions; in such case, if the parties did not agree on a modified rate, then such ads would be excluded from the Agreement.

Pinsight assumed all risk with regards to collection of all applicable advertiser fees with respect to all advertising inventory and was not permitted to delay payment to the Company as a result of non-collection or delay of payment by the advertisers.

Pinsight was obligated to comply with the Company’s advertising editorial guidelines as in effect from time to time.

For the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company recognized approximately $0 and $5,100,000 in revenue under the terms of the Pinsight Agreement, respectively.

Fair Value Measurement, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Fair Value Measurements

The fair values of the Company’s financial instruments reflect the amounts that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (exit price).

The carrying amounts of the Company’s financial instruments of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and  accrued liabilities approximates fair value due to their short maturities. Amounts recorded for senior loans payable, net of discount, also approximate fair value because current interest rates available to the Company for debt with similar terms and maturities are substantially the same. Certain common stock warrants are carried at fair value as disclosed in Note 2. The Company has evaluated the estimated fair value of financial instruments using available market information and management's estimates. The use of different market assumptions and/or estimation methodologies could have a significant effect on the estimated fair value amounts.

Foreign Currency Transactions and Translations Policy [Policy Text Block]

Foreign Currency

The functional currency of our foreign subsidiaries is the local currency. The financial statements of these subsidiaries are translated to U.S. dollars using period-end rates of exchange for assets and liabilities and average quarterly rates of exchange for revenues and expenses. Translation gains (losses) are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) as a component of stockholders’ equity. Net gains and losses resulting from foreign exchange transactions are included in other income (expense). The Company’s foreign operations were substantially liquidated in the first quarter of 2015. Due to our current reporting metrics, providing revenues from users attributed to the U.S. and revenues from users attributed to all other countries is impracticable.

Earnings Per Share, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Net Income per Share

Basic net income per share is computed by dividing net income attributable to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding.  Diluted net income per share is computed by dividing net income attributable to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares and common stock equivalents outstanding, calculated on the treasury stock method for options and warrants using the average market prices during the period.

The following table shows the computation of basic and diluted net income per share for the following:

	For the Three Months Ended March 31,
	2016		2015
Numerator:
Net income	$	2,354,898	$	722,054
Denominator:
Weighted-average shares outstanding		47,458,748		44,910,034
Effect of dilutive securities		6,207,878		3,336,729
Weighted-average diluted shares		53,666,626		48,246,763
Basic income per share	$	0.05	$	0.02
Diluted income per share	$	0.04	$	0.01

The following table summarizes the number of dilutive securities, which may dilute future earnings per share, outstanding for each of the periods presented, but not included in the calculation of diluted loss per share:

	For the Three Months Ended March 31,
	2016		2015
Stock options		6,030,169		7,470,129
Warrants		2,267,612		2,812,414
Convertible preferred stock		—		1,479,949
Totals		8,297,781		11,762,492

Concentration Risk, Credit Risk, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Significant Customers and Concentration of Credit Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to significant concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash equivalents and accounts receivable. The Company invests its excess cash in high-quality, liquid money market funds maintained by major U.S. banks and financial institutions. The Company has not experienced any losses on its cash equivalents.

The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers and generally does not require collateral. Except with respect to the Beanstock write-offs described above, the Company has no history of significant losses from uncollectible accounts. During the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015, two customers comprised approximately 47% and 69% of total revenues, respectively. Two customers comprised 51% and 52% of accounts receivable as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.

The Company does not expect its current or future credit risk exposure to have a significant impact on its operations. However, there can be no assurance that the Company’s business will not experience any adverse impact from credit risk in the future.

New Accounting Pronouncements, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Recent Issued Accounting Standards

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09,

Revenue from Contracts with Customers

("ASU 2014-09")

.

ASU 2014-09 supersedes the revenue recognition requirements of FASB ASC Topic 605,

Revenue Recognition

and most industry-specific guidance throughout the ASC, resulting in the creation of FASB ASC Topic 606,

Revenue from Contracts with Customers

. ASU 2014-09 requires entities to recognize revenue in a way that depicts the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. This ASU provides alternative methods of adoption. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14,

Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Deferral of the Effective Date

("ASU 2015-14"). ASU 2015-14 defers the effective date of ASU 2014-09 by one year to December 15, 2017 for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after that date and permits early adoption of the standard, but not before the original effective date for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08,

Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net)

("ASU 2016-08") clarifying the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations. Specifically, an entity is required to determine whether the nature of a promise is to provide the specified good or service itself (that is, the entity is a principal) or to arrange for the good or service to be provided to the customer by the other party (that is, the entity is an agent). The determination influences the timing and amount of revenue recognition. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10,

Revenue from Contracts with Customers, Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing

clarifying the implementation guidance on identifying performance obligations and licensing. Specifically, the amendments reduce the cost and complexity of identifying promised goods or services and improves the guidance for determining whether promises are separately identifiable. The amendments also provide implementation guidance on determining whether an entity's promise to grant a license provides a customer with either a right to use the entity's intellectual property (which is satisfied at a point in time) or a right to access the entity's intellectual property (which is satisfied over time). The effective date and transition requirements for ASU 2016-08 and ASU 2016-10 are the same as the effective date and transition requirements for ASU 2014-09. The Company is currently assessing the potential impact of adopting ASU 2014-09, ASU 2016-08 and ASU 2016-10 on its financial statements and related disclosures.

In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, which delayed the effective date of ASU 2014-09. As a result, this guidance will be effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that reporting period. Earlier application is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. We are currently evaluating the new guidance and have not determined the impact this standard may have on our consolidated financial statements, nor decided upon the method of adoption.

In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-12,

Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period

, or ASU 2014-12. ASU 2014-12 requires that a performance target that affects vesting, and that could be achieved after the requisite service period, be treated as a performance condition. As such, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant date fair value of the award. This update further clarifies that compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which the requisite service has already been rendered. ASU 2014-12 is effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of ASU 2014-12 had no material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15,

Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern

. ASU 2014-15 explicitly requires management to evaluate, at each annual or interim reporting period, whether there are conditions or events that exist which raise substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and to provide related disclosures. ASU 2014-15 is effective for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016, and annual and interim periods thereafter, with early adoption permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact of adopting this new standard on our consolidated financial statement disclosures.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03

, Interest – Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs

. The new standard requires debt issuance costs, related to a recognized debt liability, be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability instead of being presented as an asset. The update requires the guidance to be applied retrospectively. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of ASU 2015-03 had no material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-17,

Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes

, which will require entities to present all deferred tax assets (“DTAs”) and deferred tax liabilities (“DTLs”) as non-current on the balance sheet. This guidance is effective for public companies for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is permitted, and entities may choose whether to adopt this update prospectively or retrospectively. On December 31, 2015, we elected to adopt ASU 2015-17 and changed our method of classifying DTAs and DTLs as either current or non-current to classifying all DTAs and DTLs as non-current, using a prospective method. Prior balance sheets were not retrospectively adjusted. The adoption did not have a material effect on our financial position.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01,

Financial Instruments - Overall: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities

. ASU 2016-01 modifies how entities measure equity investments and present changes in the fair value of financial liabilities. Under the new guidance, entities will have to measure equity investments that do not result in consolidation and are not accounted under the equity method at fair value and recognize any changes in fair value in net income unless the investments qualify for the new practicality exception. A practicality exception will apply to those equity investments that do not have a readily determinable fair value and do not qualify for the practical expedient to estimate fair value under ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements, and as such these investments may be measured at cost. ASU 2016-01 will be effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017 and early adoption is not permitted. The adoption of ASU 2016-01 is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02,

Leases (Topic 84

2

)

. The new standard establishes a right-of-use (ROU) model that requires a lessee to record an ROU asset and a lease liability on the balance sheet for all leases with terms longer than 12 months. Leases will be classified as either finance or operating, with classification affecting the pattern of expense recognition in the income statement. ASU 2016-02 is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, and annual and interim periods thereafter, with early adoption permitted. A modified retrospective transition approach is required for lessees for capital and operating leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements, with certain practical expedients available. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of this new standard will have on the consolidated financial statements.