Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

3 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2015

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Earnings Per Share, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Net Income per Common Share

We compute net income per common share using the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period, and diluted net income per common share using the additional dilutive effect of all dilutive securities. The dilutive impact of stock options account for the additional weighted average shares of common stock outstanding for our diluted net income per common share computation. We calculated basic and diluted net income per common share as follows

(in thousands, except per share data):

	Three Months Ended September 30,
	2015		2014
Numerator
Net income	$	1,213	$	487
Denominator
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding		6,521		6,836
Dilutive effect of stock options		174		38
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding		6,695		6,874
Basic net income per common share	$	0.19	$	0.07
Diluted net income per common share	$	0.18	$	0.07

We excluded shares related to stock options totaling 100,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2015, and 160,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2014, from the calculation of diluted net income per common share, as the effect of their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.

Revenue Recognition, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Revenue Recognition

To recognize revenue, four basic criteria must be met: (1) there is evidence that an arrangement exists; (2) delivery has occurred; (3) the fee is fixed or determinable; and (4) collectability is reasonably assured. Revenue from sales transactions where the buyer has the right to return the product is recognized at the time of sale only if (a) the seller’s price to the buyer is substantially fixed or determinable at the date of sale; (b) the buyer has paid the seller, or the buyer is obligated to pay the seller and the obligation is not contingent on resale of the product; (c) the buyer’s obligation to the seller would not be changed in the event of theft or physical destruction or damage of the product; (d) the buyer acquiring the product for resale has economic substance apart from that provided by the seller; (e) the seller does not have significant obligations for future performance to directly bring about resale of the product by the buyer; and (f) the amount of future returns can be reasonably estimated. We recognize revenue upon determination that all criteria for revenue recognition have been met. The criteria are usually met at the time title passes to the customer, which usually occurs upon shipment. Revenue from shipments where title passes upon delivery is deferred until the shipment has been delivered.

We record reductions to gross revenue for estimated returns of private label contract manufacturing products and branded products. The estimated returns are based on the trailing six months of private label contract manufacturing gross sales and our historical experience for both private label contract manufacturing and branded product returns. However, the estimate for product returns does not reflect the impact of a potential large product recall resulting from product nonconformance or other factors as such events are not predictable nor is the related economic impact estimable.

We followed the provisions of ASU No. 2009-13 for all multiple element agreements. Under this guidance, the delivered item(s) has value to the customer on a standalone basis and, if the arrangement includes a general right of return relative to the delivered item(s), delivery or performance of the undelivered item(s) is considered probable and substantially in our control.

A delivered item is considered a separate unit of accounting when the delivered item has value to the partner on a standalone basis based on the consideration of the relevant facts and circumstances for each arrangement. Arrangement consideration is allocated at the inception of the agreement to all identified units of accounting based on their relative selling price. The relative selling price for each deliverable is determined using vendor specific objective evidence, or VSOE, of selling price or third-party evidence of selling price if VSOE does not exist. If neither VSOE nor third-party evidence of selling price exists, we use our best estimate of the selling price for the deliverable. The amount of allocable arrangement consideration is limited to amounts that are fixed or determinable. The consideration received is allocated among the separate units of accounting, and the applicable revenue recognition criteria are applied to each of the separate units. Changes in the allocation of the sales price between delivered and undelivered elements can impact revenue recognition but do not change the total revenue recognized under any agreement. If facts and circumstances dictate that a deliverable has standalone value from the undelivered items, the deliverable is identified as a separate unit of accounting and the amounts allocated to the deliverable are recognized upon the delivery of the deliverable, assuming the other revenue recognition criteria have been met. However, if the amounts allocated to the deliverable through the relative selling price allocation exceed the upfront fee, the amount recognized upon the delivery of the deliverable is limited to the upfront fee received. If facts and circumstances dictate that the deliverable does not have standalone value, the transaction price, including any upfront fee payments received, is allocated to the identified separate units of accounting and recognized as those items are delivered and accepted.

We currently own certain U.S. patents, and each patent’s corresponding foreign patent applications. All of these patents and patent rights relate to the ingredient known as beta-alanine marketed and sold under the CarnoSyn® trade name. From March 2009 to April 2015, we had an agreement with Compound Solutions, Inc. (CSI) to grant a license to manufacture, offer for sale and/or sell products incorporating, using or made in accordance with our patent rights to customers of CSI who purchase beta-alanine under the CarnoSyn® trade name from CSI. Our most recent agreement with CSI expired on March 31, 2015. We elected not to renew our agreement with CSI and, effective April 1, 2015, we began directly selling beta-alanine, and licensing the related patent and trademark rights, in order to take advantage of strategic opportunities, including opportunities to provide additional contract manufacturing services, and to increase our top-line revenue and profit profile.

We recorded royalty, licensing income and raw material sales as a component of revenue in the amount of $5.3 million during the three months ended September 30, 2015 and $961,000 during the three months ended September 30, 2014. These income amounts result in royalty expense paid to the original patent holders from whom NAI acquired the patents and its patent rights. We recognized royalty expense as a component of cost of goods sold in the amount of $264,000 during the three months ended September 30, 2015 and $174,000 during the three months ended September 30, 2014.

Share-based Compensation, Option and Incentive Plans Policy [Policy Text Block]

Stock-Based Compensation

We have an omnibus incentive plan that was approved by our Board of Directors effective as of October 15, 2009 and approved by our stockholders at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on November 30, 2009. Under the plan, we may grant nonqualified and incentive stock options and other stock-based awards to employees, non-employee directors and consultants. Our prior equity incentive plan was terminated effective as of November 30, 2009.

We estimate the fair value of stock option awards at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option valuation model. The Black-Scholes option valuation model was developed for use in estimating the fair value of traded options that have no vesting restrictions and are fully transferable. Option valuation models require the input of highly subjective assumptions. Black-Scholes uses assumptions related to volatility, the risk-free interest rate, the dividend yield (which we assume to be zero, as we have not paid any cash dividends) and employee exercise behavior. Expected volatilities used in the model are based on the historical volatility of our stock price. The risk-free interest rate is derived from the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect in the period of grant. The expected life of stock option grants is derived from historical experience. The fair value of restricted stock shares granted is based on the market price of our common stock on the date of grant. We amortize the estimated fair value of our stock awards to expense over the related vesting periods.

We did not grant any restricted shares during the three months ended September 30, 2015 or the three months ended September 30, 2014.

Our net income included stock based compensation expense of approximately $130,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2015 and approximately $83,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2014.

On October 1, 2015, the Board of Directors approved the grant of 75,000 shares of restricted stock in connection with the appointments of a new President and a new Chief Financial Officer pursuant to our 2009 Omnibus Incentive Plan. These restricted stock grants will vest over five years and the unvested shares cannot be sold or otherwise transferred and the rights to received dividends, if declared by our Board of Directors, are forfeitable until the shares become vested. Both appointments were the result of promotions of current employees.

Fair Value Measurement, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (i.e., the “exit price”) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. We use a three-level hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from independent sources. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect our assumptions about the inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability and are developed based on the best information available under the circumstances.

The fair value hierarchy is broken down into three levels based on the source of inputs. In general, fair values determined by Level 1 inputs use quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access. We classify cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities balances as Level 1 assets. Fair values determined by Level 2 inputs are based on quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active and models for which all significant inputs are observable or can be corroborated, either directly or indirectly by observable market data. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability, and include situations where there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability. These include certain pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies and similar techniques that use significant unobservable inputs.

As of September 30, 2015 and June 30, 2015, we did not have any financial assets or liabilities classified as level 1. We classify derivative forward exchange contracts as Level 2 assets. The fair value of our forward exchange contracts as of September 30, 2015 was a net liability of $156,000. The fair value of our forward exchange contracts as of June 30, 2015 was a net asset of $474,000. As of September 30, 2015 and June 30, 2015, we did not have any financial assets or liabilities classified as Level 3. We did not transfer any assets or liabilities between Levels during fiscal 2015 or the three month period ended September 30, 2015.