XML 26 R10.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.19.1
Note 3 - Investments and Fair Value Measurements
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2018
Notes to Financial Statements  
Fair Value Disclosures [Text Block]
3.
      INVESTMENTS AND FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
 
The Company’s fair value hierarchy for its cash equivalents, marketable securities and derivative instruments as of
December 
31,
2018
and
December 
31,
2017,
respectively, was as follows:
 
(In thousands)
                               
December 31, 2018
 
Level 1
   
Level 2
   
Level 3
   
Total
 
Money market securities
  $
16
    $
    $
    $
16
 
Certificate of deposit - restricted cash
   
523
     
     
     
523
 
Certificate of deposit - restricted investment (1)
   
400
     
     
     
400
 
Convertible notes receivable
   
     
     
655
     
655
 
Total assets
  $
939
    $
    $
655
    $
1,594
 
 
 
December 31, 2017
 
Level 1
   
Level 2
   
Level 3
   
Total
 
Money market securities
  $
16
    $
    $
    $
16
 
Total assets
  $
16
    $
    $
    $
16
 
Derivative instrument payable
  $
    $
356
    $
    $
356
 
Contingent consideration
   
     
     
45
     
45
 
Total liabilities
  $
    $
356
    $
45
    $
401
 
 
(
1
) Investment is a
12
-month certificate of deposit classified as available for sale and included in Deposits and other assets on the balance sheet.
 
 
Fair Value Measurements
 
Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level
3
- recurring basis)
(In thousands)
 
Contingent
   
Convertible Notes
 
   
Consideration
   
Receivable
 
Balance at December 31, 2017
  $
45
    $
 
Payments
   
(45
)
   
 
Investments
   
     
655
 
Fair value adjustments
   
     
 
Balance at December 31, 2018
  $
    $
655
 
 
 
There were
no
transfers between Level
3
and Level
2
in
2018
as determined at the end of the reporting period. The convertible notes receivable balance is with Virtual Power Systems ("VPS"). The convertible notes receivable are considered a restricted security. The fair value measurement of a restricted security includes consideration of whether the restriction would be factored in by market participants in pricing the asset. The fair value of a restricted security could be based on the quoted price for an otherwise identical unrestricted security of the same issuer that trades in a public market, adjusted to reflect the effect of the restriction. The adjustment would reflect the amount market participants would demand because of the risk relating to the inability to access a public market for the security for the specified period. The Company concluded based on the history of VPS having raised substantial funds under its bridge loan/purchase agreement prior to and subsequent to CUI’s investments, that the value of the notes have neither increased significantly or decreased significantly. While VPS continues to grow and continues to develop and sell its products, it is reasonable to conclude that the value of VPS is increasing. However, since VPS continues to sell restricted convertible notes, it is also a consideration that the value per note has been diluted somewhat as well. We have concluded that any dilution has been offset by the increased value of VPS. This is evidenced by the fact that VPS continues to be able to market and sell its restricted securities at the same terms as CUI had participated previously in. Since there are
not
unrestricted securities with similar terms to the restricted ones that CUI has invested in, we have concluded, that the fair value of CUI’s convertible notes receivable with VPS remain the face value of the initial investments of
$500,000
and
$155,000
plus the accrued interest earned through
December 31, 2018.
 
The contingent consideration liability was associated with the acquisition of Tectrol in
March 2015
and represented the present value of the expected future contingent payments based on revenue projections of select Tectrol legacy products. The inputs used to measure the convertible notes receivable and the contingent consideration are classified as Level
3
within the valuation hierarchy. These valuations are
not
supported by market criteria.
 
The Company's valuation of the contingent consideration reflected the Company’s internal revenue forecasts. Since the valuation was
not
supported by market criteria, the valuation was completely dependent on unobservable inputs. During quarterly updates of the valuation, the calculation of the value was based on actual and reasonably estimated future revenues. The contingent consideration was fully satisfied in
2018.
 
The fair values of the reporting units subject to the Company’s quantitative impairment analysis were determined utilizing a blend of a market and an income approach to determine the estimated fair values of the reporting units, as discussed in Note
2.
The fair value measurements and models were classified as non-recurring Level
3
measurements.