10KSB 1 v065759_10ksb.htm
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
 


FORM 10-KSB
 
x
Annual report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004.
 
o
Transition report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the transition period from ____________ to ___________.

Commission File No. 0-24812

ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION
(Name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)

Delaware
56-1781650
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
 
13701 Riverside Drive, Suite 701, Sherman Oaks, CA 91423
(Address of principal executive offices)
 
818-501-2238
(Issuer's telephone number)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:
 
NONE

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:

Common Stock, $.001 par value
 
(Title of class)

Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes o No x

Check if there is no disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item 405 of Regulation S-B in this form and no disclosure will be contained, to the best of issuer's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-KSB or any amendment to this Form 10-KSB. o

The issuer's revenues for the most recent fiscal year were $3,398. As of June 6, 2006, the aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the issuer was approximately $266,983 based upon the average bid and asked price of such common stock as of such date. As of June 13, 2006, there were 3,094,350,600 shares of common stock outstanding and 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock outstanding.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

None.

Transitional small business disclosure format Yes o No x
 


ORBIT BRANDS COROPORATION
FORM 10-KSB
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTS


PART I
   
     
ITEM 1. Description of Business
 
3
     
ITEM 2. Description of Property
 
14
     
ITEM 3. Legal Proceedings
 
15
     
ITEM 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security holders
 
26
     
PART II
   
     
ITEM 5. Market for the Common Equity and Related Stockholder
 
28
     
ITEM 6. Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation
 
39
     
ITEM 7. Financial Statements
 
F-1
     
ITEM 8. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
 
54
     
ITEM 8 A Controls and Procedures
 
54
     
PART III
   
     
ITEM 9. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant
 
56
     
ITEM 10. Executive Compensation
 
57
     
ITEM 11. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
 
60
     
ITEM 12. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
 
60
     
ITEM 13. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K
 
60
     
ITEM 14 Principal Accountant Fees and services
 
67
     
SIGNATURES
 
68

2

 
CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Some of the information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB may contain forward-looking statements. Such statements include, in particular, statements about our plans, strategies and prospects under the headings "Description of Business" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations." You can identify forward- looking statements by our use of forward-looking terminology such as "may," "will," "expect," "anticipate," "estimate," "continue" or other similar words. Although we believe that our plans, intentions and expectations reflected in or suggested by such forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that our
plans, intentions or expectations will be achieved. When considering such forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind the following important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement:

The Company may not be able to meet our short-term or long-term liquidity needs on terms favorable to us, if at all and consequently may not be able to operate in the future;

Given these uncertainties, we caution you not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to publicly release the results of any revisions to these forward-looking statements that may be made to reflect any future events or circumstances or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

ITEM 1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS.

(a) Overview.

The Company was incorporated in Delaware on November 12, 1991 under the name Longview Golf Corporation. The Company changed its name to Brassie Golf Holdings, Ltd. on September 18, 1992, and then again, on March 29, 1993, to Brassie Golf Corporation. On June 2, 1998, the Company changed its name to Divot Golf Corporation. Subsequently, in March 2000, the Company changed its name to ORBITTRAVEL.COM CORPORATION. In 2003, the Company’s stockholders approved a new name change to ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION, and the Company officially changed its name to “ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION” on March 18, 2004.

The Company was assessed by the State of Delaware in the amount of approximately $344,000 for corporate franchise taxes and related charges for the years 2000, 2001 and 2002, which assessments were not paid at the time they were issued. During this same period, the Company’s business operations were dormant. As a result of the Company’s failure to file its annual reports for the years 2000, 2001 and 2002 and its non-payment of franchise taxes, the Company temporarily was not in good standing in the State of Delaware. However, based upon the Company’s filing of its State of Delaware franchise tax returns on March 16, 2004, the franchise tax assessments were recalculated and adjusted downward to the aggregate sum of approximately $944 based on the Company’s report of annual revenues for the years 2000, 2001 and 2002. Accordingly, on March 16, 2004, the Company also remitted the reduced tax assessments to the State of Delaware, which resulted in the immediate issuance of a Certificate of Renewal and Revival of the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation from the Delaware Secretary of State, effective as of February 28, 2002, and the restoration of the Company’s good standing in Delaware as of said date. The last Delaware franchise tax return filed by the Company was for the 2003 tax year.
 
3


During the past two years, because the Company did not file its annual reports with the SEC when due, the Company also did not file its 2004 and 2005 tax returns . The Company did file all required Forms 8-K in a timely manner.

In May 2004, the Company’s shareholders authorized the Company to file for protection pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, Title 11 United States Code Sections 101, et. seq., at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors.

However, on June 25, 2004, before the Company affirmatively sought relief under the Bankruptcy Code, several of the Company’s creditors filed an Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition against the Company in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, in Los Angeles, California (the “Bankruptcy Case”). The Company published notice of the commencement of the involuntary bankruptcy case to all of its shareholders, pursuant to the filing of an SEC Form 8-K regarding the filing of the Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

In filing the Involuntary Petition, the Company's creditors expressed their concern that management had been required to devote considerable time and resources to the pending litigation (including, without limitation, the Miller Action and the Company Action) and, as a result, that it had not been able to devote its efforts to the Company’s business activities, as well as noting the financial burden of continuing to defend against claims brought by the same plaintiffs, or assisted by the same individuals, in several states where the Company had conducted business, and that the interests of creditors and shareholders had been compromised as a result. They believed the involuntary proceeding would bring a halt to the pending and threatened litigation and protect their interests as creditors, as well as the interests of shareholders.

The Company ultimately consented to the entry of an order for relief, converting the case to a Voluntary Chapter 11 case on or about December 14, 2004. The Company timely filed its Chapter 11 Schedules and Statement of Financial Affairs on December 29, 2004.

 
The First meeting of Creditors in the Bankruptcy Case was conducted on February 8, 2005, and the Court convened the initial Chapter 11 Status Conference on March 17, 2005. At the hearing, the Court continued the Status Conference to June 16, 2005. By motion, the Company obtained an order setting April 22, 2005 as the claims bar date. At the Status Conference held on June 16, 2005, the Court received the Company’s report on its reorganization efforts and continued the Status Conference to October 13, 2005.
 
On July 13, 2005, the Company filed a motion for an order authorizing debtor-in-possession financing under Section 364 of the Bankruptcy Code in order to fund various administrative expenses in connection with the Chapter 11 case. The motion was unopposed, and on August 3, 2005, the Bankruptcy Court issued its order granting the motion and approving the financing as requested by the Company.
 
4


On July 25, 2005, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the “Creditors Committee”) gave notice of its application to employ a financial and reorganization consultant and for authorization of a post-petition retainer to the consultant. The Creditors Committee’s application was filed on August 2, 2005, together with the Company’s stipulation to the granting of the application. The application was not opposed, and on August 15, 2005, the Bankruptcy Court issued its order granting the application and approving the employment of the Creditors Committee’s consultant and authorizing the requested post-petition retainer.

On June 20, 2006, the Company filed an application to employ a public accounting firm, Malone & Bailey, P.C., as its independent auditor, in conjunction with the preparation and filing of its updated Securities and Exchange Commission quarterly and annual reporting requirements, and sought Bankruptcy Court authorization to pay a post-petition retainer to Malone & Bailey, P.C. The Creditors Committee supported this application, and on July 17, 2006, the Court entered its Order granting the Company’s application to employ Malone & Bailey, P.C. as the Company’s independent auditor.

On September 22, 2006, the Company filed its motion to approve a compromise pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9019 with respect to the litigation described in detail in Section “F,” infra. As described therein, the compromise involves the proposed settlement and dismissal, with prejudice, not only of the Molus Action (see Section “F,” infra), but also the dismissal, with prejudice, of the Teakwood Action (see Section “A,” supra,), the Miller Action (see Section “C,” supra), and the Dollinger Action (see Section “G,” infra), as well as the mutual and general release of all claims, known and unknown, asserted and unasserted, between all of the parties to the Molus Action, the Miller Action and the Dollinger Action, and the Company’s claims as set forth in the Company Action (see Section “B,” supra).

Pursuant to an order of the Bankruptcy Court, the compromise approval motion was initially scheduled for hearing on November 14, 2006. However, in evaluating the motion, the Bankruptcy Court decided that notice needed to be provided not only to creditors and other parties in interest but also to the Company’s shareholders, and recommended that the Company re-notice the motion more broadly or incorporate the motion and proposed compromise into its proposed amended disclosure statement and amended plan of reorganization. The Company intends to follow the Court’s recommendation and to incorporate the motion and proposed compromise into its reorganization proposal.

As a result of the compromise, once approved, all of the foregoing actions are expected to be dismissed, with prejudice, in the first quarter of 2007, upon approval of the Company’s motion, or upon the subsequent approval of the Company’s Plan of Reorganization by the United States Bankruptcy Court.

The Company is currently restructuring its financial program for its successful emergence from Chapter 11. In this regard, the Company filed its original proposed disclosure statement and original proposed Chapter 11 plan of reorganization (collectively, its “plan proposal”) on September 16, 2005. The Company filed its amended plan proposal on September 14, 2006. However, based upon pending business developments and the need to incorporate the settlement and compromise of its litigation with certain of its creditors, as described herein, into its amended plan proposal, the Company intends to file its second amended plan proposal by January 31, 2007, in accordance with an order of the Bankruptcy Court. The Court has scheduled a hearing for February 15, 2007 on the status of the Chapter 11 case and is expected to schedule further hearings to approve the plan proposal at that time.
 
5

 
Once the Chapter 11 plan of reorganization is confirmed, the Company will emerge from Chapter 11 and continue to implement its immediate and long-range business plan.
 
The Company’s executive offices are located at 13701 Riverside Drive, Suite 701, Sherman Oaks, California, 91423. Its telephone number is (818) 501-2238.

(b) Corporate Structure, Background and Business Activities of the Company.

Corporate Structure

The Company has four (4) wholly-owned subsidiaries which are Delaware corporations: SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc., (“Smart Voice”), Itrex International Corporation (“Itrex”), Malibu Beach Beverage Group (“Malibu”) and Malibu Entertainment Group, Inc.(“MEG”). The Company has one (1) wholly-owned subsidiary which is a Nevada corporation: Malibu Mixers Company/BBKO (“BBKO”).

Itrex’s intended business plan is to facilitate development and funding of early stage , high growth companies in the technology, health and fitness, and consumer goods industries. SmartVoice’s intended business plan is to develop and market certain proprietary telecommunications technology. Malibu’s intended business plan is the production, marketing and distribution of healthy fruit and green tea blends as an alternative to carbonated soft drinks. MEG’s intended business plan is the development and production of various television, film and media projects. The BBKO subsidiary will be renamed Floating Bed International (“FB”). FB is a specialty bed manufacturer who designs and manufactures beds , which are uniquely advantageous for the human mind and body by focusing on improving blood circulation.

The Company intends currently to focus its efforts and business strategy on seeking financing for its core business, internet-based technologies, as well as product development and the distribution of related consumer products throughout North America. The Company intends to raise additional capital in the form of equity and/or debt to fund the acquisition and growth of its subsidiaries and recent acquisitions, as described above, which could significantly change the capital structure and cause a change of control in the Company.
 
6


Since January 2001, through the date of this filing, the Company has been essentially non-operative. Its only significant business activity during this period has been raising capital through Itrex to fund the operations of its subsidiaries and to pay certain of the Company’s professionals, employees and other individuals and entities in connection with attempting to restructure the Company.

Background

ITREX INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION

Since the formation of Itrex International Corporation (“Itrex”) in 2002, the Company has utilized convertible promissory notes to finance all of the development stage activities of the other Orbit subsidiaries, and from time to time Itrex has up-streamed funds to the Company in order to facilitate the Company’s own business operations. The primary asset of Itrex is its intellectual property, including the “Media Exchange,” which is described below.
 
The Media Exchange plans to enter the multi-billion dollar global music, media and entertainment industry with a revolutionary technology (the “MX”) that could redefine the financing tools of the industry. The MX is an integrated multi-function exchange platform for the offering and trading of a novel formulation of securities, backed by the current and future revenue streams of the issuers (including artists, record labels, and entertainers). The MX can serve the interests of all segments of the music entertainment industry, including artists, labels, studios, producers, fans, and investors, by diversifying the risks and rewards of financing industry growth, and insuring a transparent public market.
 
The MX provides a financing vehicle which will raise growth capital for artists and other segments of the music, media and entertainment industry through the issuance of asset-based securities. These securities will be backed by rights to a percentage of the underlying intellectual property (e.g., music) and associated revenues generated through(a) publishing and licensing of music, (b) royalties, (c) merchandising, (d) album sales, and (e) bookings and promotional appearances.

The MX is a seamless financial product. Its methodology can be readily expanded into other facets of the entertainment industry, such as television, film, publishing, and other media, and as it gains broad acceptance in the public markets, we anticipate extending its scope to other segments of related industries, and beyond.
 
For the major entertainment industry participants, particularly the larger record labels, the MX offers the ability to hedge risk and diversify exposure, while retaining revenues from the sale of record albums (cd’s, ipod and other current media). At the same time, the record labels can securitize their existing royalty streams in order to raise new capital, by shifting a portion of their royalty streams into the public market. This will allow the record labels to reduce their risk without a corresponding reduction in profits, and will provide new operating capital while generating broad exposure for their stable of new and existing artists.
 
7

 
In many if not all aspects of the entertainment industry, artists at all stages of their careers can be viewed as growth businesses. Achieving commercial success requires being properly capitalized to produce albums, conduct marketing campaigns, and underwrite touring expenses, among other requirements. Artists have intellectual property with intrinsic value, multiple revenue streams, and a potentially high growth curve when they are properly funded and even moderately successful. Using the MX platform, the issuers can market themselves to intrinsic and other potential investors. Between the ubiquitous “garage band” and the major recording star, there is a wide range of artists who have loyal followings, generate revenues, and are “on track” to becoming even more successful.
 
The MX will offer intrinsic investors the unique opportunity of investing in their favorite artists, satisfying the desire not only to share in, but to benefit from, their artistic and commercial success.

SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc.

SMARTVoice will seek to develop and market telecommunication technology for IP telephony and applications. IP Telephony is the technology of using the Internet to transport voice conversations.

SMARTVoice intends to be an IP Telephony service provider with two product lines: (1) internet protocol telephone devices and communication services, and (2) hosted services which implement the functionality of a private branch exchange, or PBX, over data networks. Its first product line will include analog telephone adaptors and communication software and services that work over broadband networks. SMARTVoice expects to sell internet protocol telephony software and services that will enable its customers to provision and use voice communication services with IP telephones and other end-point devices. SMARTVoice has established its website at “www.smartvoice-ip.com”. Effective January 1, 2004, the Company through a subsidiary SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc, a Delaware corporation (“SMARTVoice”) agreed to acquire the intellectual property of SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc, a Georgia corporation (“Georgia”) formed on May 6, 2003. The net liabilities of Georgia were initially acquired by the Company for no consideration. In addition, the Company entered into an employment contract with an individual to serve as the Chief Executive Officer of SMARTVoice (see below). On October 19, 2004, the agreement was amended to adjust the purchase price to include an additional amount of $570,000 in the form notes payable and amend certain terms of the employment agreement.

The acquisition was accounted for as a purchase and the results of operations have been included in the consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition. SMARTVoice will seek to develop and market telecommunication technology for IP telephony and applications. IP telephony is the technology of using the internet to transport voice conversations.
 
8


The summarized balance sheet at the acquisition date as adjusted for the notes is as follows:

Current assets
 
$
4,754
 
Due to affiliates
   
11,284
)
Notes payable
   
(570,000
)
Other current liabilities
   
(216,215
)
 
 
$
(792,745
)

The net cost of the acquisition of $792,745 was recorded as goodwill and subsequently impaired.

Prior to this, Georgia was an affiliate of the Company, and between December 16, 2003 and May 31, 2004, the Company caused certain of its convertible debenture holders to invest approximately $405,905 of the amounts discussed below into Georgia for use as working capital for both Georgia ($250,905) and the Company ($155,000). On January 1, 2004 SMARTVoice executed employment agreements with Charles P. Shuster, as Chairman and CEO of SMARTVoice and Frederick Alger as Chief Financial Officer of SMARTVoice. The terms of the employment contracts for Fredrick Alger are for 90 day renewal periods at compensation rates yet to be determined. The employment contract between Fredrick Alger was not renewed after the initial 90 day period. The term of the employment contract with Charles Shuster is for a period of seven years at a base salary of $275,000 per annum and a signing bonus of $150,000. In addition he is entitled to options to purchase 5,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company at fair market value exercisable for 5 years. The contract also contains certain anti-dilution provisions, incentive compensation and severance pay in the amount of $900,000 in the event of default or termination for certain reasons. The contract was amended on October 19, 2004, to remove the anti-dilution provisions effective at the inception of the contract and remove the right to the 5,000,000 options. The compensation has been deferred for all executive employment agreements of SMARTVoice. The Company has formed a compensation committee to review the terms of the Executive Employment Agreements.

Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC

On November 26, 2003, Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC (“Malibu” and/or “MBBG”) purchased certain intellectual property rights from Amy L. Goldman, the duly appointed, qualified and acting Chapter 7 Trustee of the bankruptcy estate of MBB, Inc. in that certain Chapter 7 bankruptcy case pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, San Fernando Valley Division, In re: Malibu Beach Beverage Co., Inc., Debtor, Case No.: SV 01- 17743-AG, including the right to use the trade name of “Malibu Beach Beverage Company,” among other assets (the “Rights”), for a purchase price of $20,000. MBB Group is a Delaware limited liability company in which Joseph R.
Cellura, the Company’s Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and majority shareholder, owns a 25% interest.

Effective June 30, 2004, Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC, a Delaware LLC (“Malibu”) was acquired by the Company. MBBG sold all of its rights, title and interests in all intellectual property of the low carb beverages including but not limited to any and all formulas, copyrights and applications, patents and applications, trademarks and applications, licensing, contracts, proprietary information, any other claimed proprietary information, and any other tangible and intangible intellectual property of the low carb beverage business of the MBBG. The net liabilities of MBBG were acquired by the Company for no consideration. The Company’s Chairman and CEO, Joseph Cellura, holds a 25% membership interest in MBBG.
 
9


The acquisition was accounted for as a purchase and the results of operations have been included in the consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition.

The summarized balance sheet at the acquisition date is as follows:

Current assets
 
$
242,542
 
Property and equipment
   
6,300
 
Due to related parties
   
(1,239,056
)
Current liabilities
   
(142,891
)
   
$
(1,133,105
)

The net cost of the acquisition of $1,133,105 was recorded as goodwill and subsequently impaired.

The following summarized unaudited pro forma information assumes the acquisition had occurred on January 1:

   
2004
 
2003
 
Net sales
 
$
12,222
 
$
-
 
Net (loss)
 
$
(8,645,286
)
$
(1,256,839
)
Net (loss) per share
             
Basic and diluted
 
$
(0.00
)
 
(0.00
)

Malibu Entertainment Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation

In May 2004, Malibu Entertainment Group (“MEG”) was formed as a media and entertainment company for the purpose of developing and financing television, film and media projects for distribution and exploitation worldwide. MEG seeks to finance or co-finance various media projects, at such time as it secures the appropriate financing and/or distribution advances.
 
Over the past two years, MEG has entered into non-exclusive consulting agreements with several experienced film and television executives in order to create media opportunities for the company. These executives include Jim Townsend, Dean Hamilton, Bert Bedrosian and Frederico LaPenda.

 
Floating Bed International, Inc., f/k/a BBKO Corporation, f/k/a Malibu Mixers Company, a Nevada corporation
 
10


Floating Bed International, Inc. (“FB Int’l.”) develops, markets and sells high quality rest and relaxation devices in the form of beds and hammocks. Its patent-pending technology utilizes gentle motion to provide many health benefits to end users. The benefits of this type of motion have been established in independent scientific studies over a number of years. The company currently has one core product which can be customized and accessorized at the end of its manufacturing process. This feature allows purchasers to use the product in many ways in different settings, in order to serve a number of diverse purposes. The company’s products are sold to individuals and also to commercial users, such as hotels and health spas.

The Hammock Industry Overview

The hammock is an established piece of furniture with which most people are familiar. However, no significant improvements have been made to the hammock in recorded history. Thus, the company’s product represents a giant step forward for this unique item.

A major trend has emerged as people are turning to outdoor areas (yards, decks, rooftops -- basically, whatever is available) to expand their practical living space. Outdoor furniture sales are booming. Traditional indoor products are being adapted and new products are being developed for outdoor use. Thirty years ago, the general public could not have been sold on the idea of a bathtub in the yard. However, in today’s vernacular, anyone with the space and the money has to have a hot tub. Attitudes change, and people are thinking of their yards and open spaces in new ways. Given the increasing cost of housing construction and the scarcity of indoor space, this trend will likely continue into the foreseeable future.

The Company intends currently to focus its efforts and business strategy on seeking financing for its core business, internet-based technologies, as well as product development and the distribution of related consumer products throughout North America. The Company intends to raise additional capital in the form of equity and/or debt to fund the acquisition and growth of its subsidiaries and recent acquisitions, as described above, which could significantly change the capital structure and cause a change of control in the Company.
 
During the current year, the Company’s affiliate, Itrex International Corporation, raised an aggregate of approximately $1.2 million in the form of convertible notes. The terms of the notes are that they pay 12 percent interest per annum for the period outstanding and are convertible into the Companies common stock at a rate between $.0005 and $.015 per share. A portion of these funds were utilized for the payment of certain professionals required to assist in the preparation of the Company’s corporate legal work and securities filings. (See discussion, supra.) In addition, Itrex restructured Company debt and paid for business expenses attributable to 2002 and 2003 operations and for the business acquisition activities associated with Malibu Beach Beverage Company, Inc., and SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc.
 
11

 
The Company intends currently to focus its efforts and business strategy on seeking financing for its core business, internet-based technologies, as well as product development and the distribution of related consumer products throughout North America in 2005 and 2006. The Company intends to raise additional capital in the form of equity and/or debt to fund the acquisition and growth of its various subsidiaries, which could significantly change the capital structure and cause a change of control in the Company.
 
Since January 2001, through the date of this Form 10-KSB, the Company has been essentially non-operative. Its only significant business activity during this period has been raising capital through Itrex to fund the operations of its subsidiaries, and to pay certain of the Company’s professionals, employees and other individuals and entities in connection with attempting to restructure the Company, which includes, but is not limited to, the preparation of this Form 10-KSB.

(c) Prior History of the Company.

Golf Course Ownership, Design and Development, Management Sales of Consumer Products, Hospitality, Food and Beverage, Internet, Internet Travel, Telephony and Communications. As of 1997, the Company owned four golf courses and managed more than 20 other golf courses. Through April 1998, the Company was engaged in acquiring, designing, developing, constructing, owning, operating and managing private, semi-private and public golf courses throughout the United States.

At that time, the Company focused its core business activities on certain opportunities in the World Golf Village resort, a destination golf resort located near Jacksonville, Florida. The Company became actively involved in the development of various amenities, including Sam Snead's Tavern and World Golf Spa & Bungalows, managed by Canyon Ranch Management, LLC. The Company also acquired parcels of land in the World Golf Village in December 1996 and January 1998. In addition, the Company paid $250,000 to the World Golf Village Foundation (which included the United States Golf Association, the PGA TOUR, and other leading golf organizations) for various consumer product license agreements at the World Golf Village, in order to establish a unique platform for sales of consumer products called “Interactive Information Technology and Entertainment” (“IIT&E”), by means of a virtual golf pro shop, “divot.com,” a product and service-based portal with direct access to the Intranet at World Golf Village and the worldwide Internet. The license agreements covered various Miller Golf products and related travel products for a term of 20 years.

Due to ongoing labor issues, the capital requirements associated with continued ownership and management of its golf courses, and unsatisfactory operating results, the Company decided to refocus its business strategy on consumer products. The Company chose to continue its efforts at the World Golf Village, but instead of concentrating its efforts on golf course ownership, design and management, the Company shifted its focus to developing, licensing and marketing golf-related products and services. In July 1997, the Company sold its division responsible for managing third party-owned golf courses, and in August 1997, the Company sold its golf course design subsidiary to KSL Fairways. (See related exhibits, infra, for terms and conditions of sale, etc.) During the period from November 1997 through April 1998, the Company sold the golf courses it owned.
 
12


In order to implement its new strategic focus, the Company became one of the initial founding sponsors of the “FIRST TEE Program”. In addition, the Company acquired or assumed certain golf-related products, companies, license agreements, and joint content revenue share distribution agreements in April 1998, including Divot Corporation, Divot Development Corporation, and Divot Golf Corporation, a designer and supplier of golf accessories. The Company’s acquisition of Divot Golf Corporation provided it with patents on several unique products. In addition, the Company acquired the assets of Divot Spa WGV, Inc., two parcels of land located at the World Golf Village, under a management agreement with Canyon Ranch Management, LLC.

(See related exhibits, infra, for description of consideration.)

On April 8, 1998, the Company also acquired Miller Golf, Inc., a 49-year old supplier of golf accessory products, for $4 million in cash and $300,000 in common stock of the Company. Miller Golf’s product line included a wide range of logo golf products, tournament prizes, and awards to private and public golf courses and golf course management companies. At the time of its acquisition in April 1998, Miller Golf had produced in 1997 revenues of $9.5 million, with $900,000 in earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”).

However, with the loss of the Company’s World Golf Village acquisitions, including the real estate it had acquired, the Company scaled back its efforts in the areas of golf-related products and services, and concentrated its efforts and new strategic focus on its internet properties.

In approximately January 1998, the Company concluded that the Internet technology strategies developed under its IIT&E platform could increase its growth, while utilizing the licenses at the World Golf Village for which the Company had paid $250,000. IIT&E featured golf and spa destination travel packages and consumer products ranging from logo premiums to travel packages for golf, spa, fishing and residence club shares, offered via the worldwide Internet, the Intranet at the World Golf Village, and the Company’s web-based portal, www.divot.com, its virtual golf pro shop.
 
In February 1999, facing a challenge ostensibly led by a recalcitrant shareholder who sought to oust the Company’s existing management team, in response to representations that the Company’s proposed new management team, headed by Jeremiah F. Daly, had obtained certain financing commitments necessary for the Company to maintain its asset base and to cure a technical default of its wholly-owned subsidiary, Miller Golf (which Mr. Daly served as President), to its senior secured lender, Citizens Bank of Massachusetts, and in order to avoid using the Company’s resources in litigation, Mr. Cellura elected to resign as the Chairman and CEO of the Company. However, between February 1999 and June 1999, new management was unable to deliver the reported new funding commitments, and the Company proceeded to lose all of its assets and properties at the World Golf Village, including the real estate it had acquired. In addition, Miller Golf was sold to certain insiders of the Company, including its previous owner, in a private transaction for $1.2 million, although the Company had paid $4.3 million ($4 million in cash and $300,000 in stock) to acquire Miller Golf in April 1998, little more than a year prior to the forced sale of Miller Golf by the Company.
 
13


In June 1999, Mr. Cellura was re-appointed as Chairman and CEO of the Company. Upon the resumption of his prior positions, $10 million in new funding commitments were quickly established in order to take the Company forward, which permitted the implementation of the Company’s new IIT&E Internet marketing strategies.

In late 1999, after the demise of the Company’s golf-related products and services operations, the Company repositioned itself as a value-added service provider, specializing in business-to-business e-commerce applications, distribution services, and on-line marketing solutions to the travel industry worldwide. Through its wholly-owned subsidiary, OrbitTravel.com, Inc., the Company refocused its efforts on the creation of an independent travel, entertainment, and financial distribution and e-commerce business that specialized in assisting travel suppliers and tourism destinations in promoting, distributing and selling their products electronically to travel purchasers worldwide, by means of the Internet, airline global distribution systems, America Online, British Airways, and One World, an affiliation of the largest airlines, private “intranets” and other electronic distribution networks.
 
(d) Employees.

As of December 31st, 2004, the Company has one full-time employee, Joseph R. Cellura, who serves in the capacities of Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer. In addition, Douglas R. Dollinger has served the Company as Chief Legal Officer at various times since February 1999 through October, 2003. The Company currently utilizes several professionals engaged to address legal, accounting, audit and tax matters.

ITEM 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY.

The Company’s principal business office is located at 13701 Riverside Drive, Suite 701, Sherman Oaks, California, 91423. The Company’s telephone number is (818) 501-2238.

During August 2004, Itrex International, Inc. (“Itrex”), a subsidiary of the Company, entered into a lease for a residential property to be used as an office. The term of the lease was for six months. The Company agreed to issue an aggregate of 7,500,000 shares of common stock in consideration for the lease term. The fair market value of the shares issued was amortized over the term of the lease.
 
14

 
During May 2005, Itrex entered into a lease for another residential property to be utilized as an office. The lease commenced June 1, 2005 for an initial term of one year at an annual rental of $96,000. The lease provides for two renewal options, for four years and five years, respectively. The first option has been exercised.
 
Future minimum lease payments are as follows:

2005:
 
$
56,000
 
2006:
 
$
96,000
 
2007:
 
$
96,000
 
2008:
 
$
96,000
 
2009:
 
$
96,000
 
2010:
 
$
40,000
 

Rent expense for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 including the above lease was $48,000 and $48,000.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.

I.  
Previously non-disclosed, Pending or Threatened Litigation. In regard to pending or threatened litigation, the Company submits the following:
   
A.
Orbittravel.com Corporation, etc., et al, Plaintiffs, v. Teakwood Ventures, L.L.C., etc., et al, Defendants, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No. 01-CV-10077-SWK (the “Teakwood Action”).

In November 2001, the Company, along with two other plaintiffs, filed suit against an investor group headed by Teakwood Ventures, LLC, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Teakwood Action”). In the Teakwood Action, the Company sought to recover in excess of $10 million in damages and other relief against Defendant Teakwood Ventures, LLC and related individuals and entities. The Company asserted claims of fraud, misrepresentation, breach of contract and violation of RICO statutes, among other claims. Prior to the commencement of the Teakwood Action, on or about October 18, 2001, the Company had reached an overall settlement with the Defendants (the “Teakwood Settlement”), pursuant to the terms of which approximately 184,277,000 shares of common stock which had been issued by the Company to the defendants were returned to the Company for its benefit. The Teakwood Action presently remains open on the District Court docket, pending the consummation of the settlement.

Based upon the settlement of the Molus Action (defined and described in Section “F,” infra), it is anticipated that the Teakwood Action will be dismissed, with prejudice, in the late first quarter or early second quarter of 2007, upon approval of the Company’s motion to approve the settlement, or upon approval of the Company’s Plan of Reorganization by the United States Bankruptcy Court.

B.
ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, vs. Douglas R. Dollinger,  Joanne Bertolini, and Dean E. Miller, etc., et al. (the “Company Action”).
 
15


In February 2004, the Company commenced suit against the above-named individuals in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles (the “Superior Court”), seeking damages for breach of fiduciary duty, professional negligence, breach of contract, intentional interference with business relations, negligent interference with business relations, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and common counts, and an accounting (the “Company Action”). The Company anticipated amending the suit to add additional parties and additional claims.

By motion filed in January 2005, the defendants sought the dismissal of the Superior Court action on jurisdictional grounds. Since the Company had voluntarily converted its creditors’ involuntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy case, filed in June 2004, to a voluntary Chapter 11 case in December 2004 (see below), the Company elected to dismiss the Superior Court action, without prejudice, preserving its rights to proceed against the defendants in the bankruptcy case and related proceedings.
 
The total amount of damages claimed by the Company in the Superior Court Company Action exceeded $1 million. Based upon the settlement of the Molus Action (defined and described in Section “F,” infra), the Company’s claims (and the claims asserted by the defendants in the above litigation against the Company and its officers and agents) will be mutually and generally released, effective in the late first quarter or early second quarter of 2007, upon approval of the Company’s motion to approve the settlement, or upon approval of the Company’s Plan of Reorganization by the United States Bankruptcy Court.


C.
Dean E. Miller, Plaintiff, vs. Orbittravel.Com Corporation and Joseph R. Cellura, Defendants; ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION and Joseph R. Cellura, Counterclaimants, vs. Dean E. Miller, Counter-Defendant, Delaware Court of Chancery Case No. CA 253-N (the “Miller Action”).

In February 2004, the Company and Mr. Cellura were named as defendants in this suit, filed in Delaware Chancery Court by a former employee of the Company, Dean Miller, who had been terminated in or about 2001. Mr. Miller is acting as his own counsel. Mr. Miller also is a minority shareholder in the Company. The suit is based upon an alleged failure to hold annual stockholders meetings and alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duties, misappropriation and embezzlement of funds and securities.

The Company and Mr. Cellura answered the lawsuit in April 2004, categorically denying Mr. Miller’s contentions, and filed a counterclaim for declaratory relief.
 
In late April 2004, Mr. Miller filed motions to amend his Complaint and for summary judgment, along with his answer to the counterclaim. At a status conference in May 2004, the Chancery Court determined that Mr. Miller had not actually filed his proposed amended complaint, and determined to treat his motion solely as a motion to amend and that any motion for summary judgment was premature. The Court scheduled a hearing on the motion to amend for June 2004.
 
16


In late May 2004, the Company was informed that Mr. Miller purportedly had called for a special meeting of the Company or of its “Shareholders Oversight Committee” to be held on May 27, 2004, at which time Mr. Miller intended to take various corporation actions. In response, the Company and Mr. Cellura immediately notified Mr. Miller, in writing, that the proposed meeting was in contravention of the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and By-Laws and Delaware Corporation Law, and that the proposed meeting and any purported corporate action to be taken at the meeting were, and would be deemed to be, null, void and without effect.

Thereafter, at the June 2004 hearing on Mr. Miller’s motion to amend his Complaint, Mr. Miller did not appear, and the Chancery Court denied the motion.

Following the filing of a creditors’ Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition against the Company in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California on June 25, 2004 (see Section “E,” infra), Defendants filed notice of the filing of the Involuntary Petition, which automatically stayed the litigation under Title 11 U.S.C. § 362(a), and as a result, there has been no subsequent activity in the Miller Action since that date.

In or about December 2004, Mr. Miller filed the first of three separate proofs of claim against the Company with the Bankruptcy Court, thereby preserving his right to assert his claims as against the Company and submitting to the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court with respect to his claims. The Company maintained the right to object to Mr. Miller’s claims and to have its objections determined by the Bankruptcy Court through the claims objection procedure under the Bankruptcy Code and the Bankruptcy Rules.

Based upon the settlement of the Molus Action (defined and described in Section “F,” infra, the Miller Action will be dismissed, with prejudice, in the late first quarter or early second quarter of 2007. In addition, the claims asserted by Miller against the Company (and the claims asserted by the Company against Miller in its counterclaim) will be mutually and generally released, effective in the late first quarter or early second quarter of 2007, upon approval of the Company’s motion to approve the settlement, or upon approval of the Company’s Plan of Reorganization by the United States Bankruptcy Court.

D.
Mark Savoretti, Plaintiff, vs. Spartan Capital Management, Inc., a Delaware corporation, a/k/a Spartan Capital, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; Divot Golf Corporation, a Delaware corporation, n/k/a Orbittravel.com, Inc., a Delaware corporation; and Joseph R. Cellura, Defendants, Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial District in and for Pinellas County, Florida, Circuit Civil Uniform Case No. 522004 CA 000646 XX CICI, Ref. Case No. 04-646-CI-11
- and -
In re. ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION, Alleged Debtor; Mark SavorettiPlaintiff, vs. Spartan Capital Management, Inc., a Delaware corporation, a/k/a  Spartan Capital, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; Divot Golf    Corporation, a Delaware corporation, n/k/a Orbittravel.com, Inc., a Delaware   corporation; and Joseph R. Cellura, Defendants, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida, Chapter 11 (Involuntary) Case No. MP 04-00006-MGW (together, the “Savoretti Action”).
 
17

 
In January 2004, the Company, an affiliate of the Company, and Mr. Cellura, as well as a third party, were named as defendants in this action filed in Florida Circuit Court for damages in excess of $100,000 based on claims for fraudulent inducement, constructive trust, breach of contract, fraudulent transfer and alter ego, arising from a failed business transaction which occurred in late 1999 and early 2000 (the “Savoretti Action”).

In September 2004, Mr. Cellura removed the lawsuit to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida, based on the pendency of the Company’s Involuntary Chapter 11 proceedings in the Central District of California, and thereafter Mr. Cellura filed and served his answer to the Complaint in September 2004.

In January 2005, Mr. Cellura filed a motion to transfer the Savoretti Action to the Central District of California. Plaintiff consented to the motion to transfer by stipulation, and the lawsuit was thereafter transferred to the Central District of California in or about March 2005, where it was placed on the docket of the United States Bankruptcy Court as an adversary proceeding in the Company’s Chapter 11 case.

In November 2005, the Bankruptcy Court dismissed the adversary proceeding for lack of prosecution by Plaintiff. However, inasmuch as Plaintiff also had filed a proof of claim with the Bankruptcy Court in or about March 2005, Plaintiff preserved his right to assert his claims as against the Company and submitted to the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court with respect to his claims.

In October 2006, Plaintiff informed the Company that he estimated his claim for damages at in excess of $20 million. Both the Company and Mr. Cellura vigorously deny any liability to Plaintiff and further deny that Plaintiff has suffered damages in any sum or at all.
 
Nonetheless, in November 2006, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the Bankruptcy’s Court’s order dismissing the adversary proceeding, which was heard by the Bankruptcy Court on January 11, 2007. Both the Company and Cellura opposed the motion. At the hearing, the Bankruptcy Court denied the motion, but stated that its decision was without prejudice to Plaintiff’s claim as an unsecured creditor in the Company’s Chapter 11 proceeding.

The Company previously had noted that it disputed Plaintiff’s claim and that it intended to object to Plaintiff’s proof of claim which was filed with the Bankruptcy Court. The Company expects to have its objections determined by the Bankruptcy Court through the claims objection procedure provided under the Bankruptcy Code and the Bankruptcy Rules.

The Company intends to resist Plaintiff’s claims vigorously in the Chapter 11 case, as the Company continues to deny any and all liability to Plaintiff. However, it is not possible to predict the outcome of Plaintiff’s claims for damages or the amounts, if any, for which the Company could be determined to be liable.
 
18

 
E.
In re. ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION, Debtor, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, Los Angeles Division, Chapter 11 Case No. LA 04-24171-ES (RN) (the “Bankruptcy Case”).

In May 2004, the Company’s shareholders authorized the Company to file for protection pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, Title 11 United States Code Sections 101, et. seq., at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors.

However, on June 25, 2004, before the Company affirmatively sought relief under the Bankruptcy Code, several of the Company’s creditors filed an Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition against the Company in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, in Los Angeles, California (the “Bankruptcy Case”). The Company published notice of the commencement of the involuntary bankruptcy case to all of its shareholders, pursuant to the filing of an SEC Form 8-K regarding the filing of the Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

In filing the Involuntary Petition, the Company's creditors expressed their concern that management had been required to devote considerable time and resources to the pending litigation (including, without limitation, the Miller Action and the Company Action) and, as a result, that it had not been able to devote its efforts to the Company’s business activities, as well as noting the financial burden of continuing to defend against claims brought by the same plaintiffs, or assisted by the same individuals, in several states where the Company had conducted business, and that the interests of creditors and shareholders had been compromised as a result. They believed the involuntary proceeding would bring a halt to the pending and threatened litigation and protect their interests as creditors, as well as the interests of shareholders.

The Company ultimately consented to the entry of an order for relief, converting the case to a Voluntary Chapter 11 case on or about December 14, 2004. The Company timely filed its Chapter 11 Schedules and Statement of Financial Affairs on December 29, 2004.

The First Meeting of Creditors in the Bankruptcy Case was conducted on February 8, 2005, and the Court convened the initial Chapter 11 Status Conference on March 17, 2005. At the hearing, the Court continued the Status Conference to June 16, 2005. By motion, the Company obtained an order setting April 22, 2005 as the claims bar date. At the Status Conference held on June 16, 2005, the Court received the Company’s report on its reorganization efforts and continued the Status Conference to October 13, 2005.
 
On July 13, 2005, the Company filed a motion for an order authorizing debtor-in-possession financing under Section 364 of the Bankruptcy Code in order to fund various administrative expenses in connection with the Chapter 11 case. The motion was unopposed, and on August 3, 2005, the Bankruptcy Court issued its order granting the motion and approving the financing as requested by the Company.
 
19


On July 25, 2005, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the “Creditors Committee”) gave notice of its application to employ a financial and reorganization consultant and for authorization of a post-petition retainer to the consultant. The Creditors Committee’s application was filed on August 2, 2005, together with the Company’s stipulation to the granting of the application. The application was not opposed, and on August 15, 2005, the Bankruptcy Court issued its order granting the application and approving the employment of the Creditors Committee’s consultant and authorizing the requested post-petition retainer.

On June 20, 2006, the Company filed an application to employ a public accounting firm, Malone & Bailey, P.C., as its independent auditor, in conjunction with the preparation and filing of its updated Securities and Exchange Commission quarterly and annual reporting requirements, and sought Bankruptcy Court authorization to pay a post-petition retainer to Malone & Bailey, P.C. The Creditors Committee supported this application, and on July 17, 2006, the Court entered its Order granting the Company’s application to employ Malone & Bailey, P.C. as the Company’s independent auditor.

On September 22, 2006, the Company filed its motion to approve a compromise pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9019 with respect to the litigation described in detail in Section “F,” infra. As described therein, the compromise involves the proposed settlement and dismissal, with prejudice, not only of the Molus Action (see Section “F,” infra), but also the dismissal, with prejudice, of the Teakwood Action (see Section “A,” supra,), the Miller Action (see Section “C,” supra), and the Dollinger Action (see Section “G,” infra), as well as the mutual and general release of all claims, known and unknown, asserted and unasserted, between all of the parties to the Molus Action, the Miller Action and the Dollinger Action, and the Company’s claims as set forth in the Company Action (see Section “B,” supra).

Pursuant to an order of the Bankruptcy Court, the compromise approval motion was initially scheduled for hearing on November 14, 2006. However, in evaluating the motion, the Bankruptcy Court decided that notice needed to be provided not only to creditors and other parties in interest but also to the Company’s shareholders, and recommended that the Company re-notice the motion more broadly or incorporate the motion and proposed compromise into its proposed amended disclosure statement and amended plan of reorganization. The Company intends to follow the Court’s recommendation and to incorporate the motion and proposed compromise into its reorganization proposal.

As a result of the compromise, once approved, all of the foregoing actions are expected to be dismissed, with prejudice, late in the first quarter or early in the second quarter of 2007, upon approval of the Company’s motion, or upon the subsequent approval of the Company’s Plan of Reorganization by the United States Bankruptcy Court.

The Company is currently restructuring its financial program for its successful emergence from Chapter 11. In this regard, the Company filed its original proposed disclosure statement and original proposed Chapter 11 plan of reorganization (collectively, its “plan proposal”) on September 16, 2005. The Company filed its amended plan proposal on September 14, 2006. However, based upon pending business developments and the need to incorporate the settlement and compromise of its litigation with certain of its creditors, as described herein, into its amended plan proposal, the Company intends to file its second amended plan proposal in February or March 2007. The Court has scheduled a hearing for February 15, 2007 on the status of the Chapter 11 case and is expected to schedule further hearings in regard to the Company’s plan proposal at that time.
 
20

 
F.
Carol Molus and Michael Molus, Plaintiffs, vs. Joseph Cellura, etc., et al., Defendants, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 04 CC 08612, removed to United States District Court for the Central District of California on January 6, 2005, assigned Case No. SA CV-05-23-JVS (the “Molus Action”).

In December 2004, the Molus Action was filed and served on the named defendants. Although the Plaintiffs did not name the Company in this action, they did name Joseph Cellura, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and the Company’s attorneys, Ben-Zvi & Beck, LLP. The complaint purports to state a variety of causes of action, including but not limited to allegations of breach of contract, fraud, elder abuse, violations of the federal securities laws, and professional negligence against the Company’s attorneys.

The defendants removed the Molus Action to Federal District Court on or about January 6, 2005 and in late January 2005, they filed their respective answers to the complaint, wholly denying plaintiffs’ allegations of wrongdoing and asserting a variety of affirmative defenses to plaintiffs’ claims. In addition, the defendants filed and served separate third-party complaints against Douglas R. Dollinger, the Company’s former Chief Legal Officer and outside counsel, for partial and full indemnity.

In April 2005, Dollinger filed and served his answer to the third-party complaints and concurrently filed and served his own counterclaim for indemnity against both the defendants and additional, unrelated third parties. The defendants timely filed their respective answers to Dollinger’s counterclaim.

In August 2005, Dollinger sought permission to file a “Fourth Party” “impleader” with “cross and counterclaims” against further additional parties, to which the defendants stipulated. However, the Dollinger “Fourth Party” action has never been filed or served.

On August 16, 2005, Plaintiffs dismissed the lawsuit, with prejudice, as to one of the Company’s attorneys.

The defendants are defending the lawsuit vigorously, and they intend to continue to defend the lawsuit in such manner. They deny any liability to Plaintiffs.
 
The District Court established a discovery cutoff of December 31, 2005 and initially scheduled the trial to commence on April 11, 2006. A settlement conference was originally set for November 30, 2005. Beginning in November 2005, the parties began conducting depositions. Plaintiffs’ depositions were taken but not completed at that time, and were scheduled to resume in January 2006, by agreement of the parties. When the depositions resumed, Plaintiff Michael Molus’ deposition was completed, but prior to the completion of the deposition of Plaintiff Carol Molus and prior to the depositions of the principal defendants and Dollinger, the parties initiated settlement discussions which, by agreement, took precedence over the scheduled depositions.
 
21

 
The settlement discussions led to a tentative settlement, subject to definitive settlement documentation to be drawn by the parties. Over the course of the next two months, the parties exchanged drafts of various settlement agreements, but the settlement was not presented to the District Court, as the parties had agreed that important details still had to be resolved and that they needed to memorialize the settlement in a comprehensive and formal written settlement agreement containing mutual general releases. As of March 2006, the parties’ settlement efforts had broken down, as they reached several impasses in their ongoing negotiations to resolve the open issues and details of the proposed settlement documentation.

The defendants reported on the status of the settlement negotiations to the District Court,, which vacated the scheduled April 11, 2006 trial date and directed the parties to attend a mandatory settlement conference on April 12, 2006. The District Court thereafter conducted the mandatory settlement conference on April 12, 2006, at which time the plaintiffs and defendants appeared, but the third party defendant and counterclaimant, Dollinger, acting pro se, did not appear.

At the settlement conference, the plaintiffs’ main action against the defendants was settled, and the settlement was placed on the record in open court. Due to the absence of Dollinger, the defendants’ third party counterclaim for indemnification against Dollinger, and Dollinger’s third party counterclaim and purported fourth party counterclaim against the defendants remained unsettled and pending.

In the days that followed, Dollinger notified the defendants that he intended to challenge the settlement reached with the plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs themselves sent a letter to the District Court seeking to rescind their settlement. The District Court then scheduled a further status conference regarding the settlement and related issues on May 4, 2006.

At the May 4, 2006 status conference, conducted via telephonic conference call and which Dollinger attended (by telephone), the District Court reiterated its view that the Plaintiffs’ main action had in fact been settled, and the District Court directed the plaintiffs and their counsel to cooperate in executing a written settlement agreement by May 12, 2006. In the event that the plaintiffs did not sign the settlement agreement by May 12, the District Court directed the defendants to file a motion to enforce the settlement. The plaintiffs did not execute the settlement agreement, and therefore the defendants prepared a motion to enforce the settlement, as directed by the District Court, which was filed on June 14, 2006 and set for hearing on July 10, 2006.
 
22


On or about June 12, 2006, acting pro se, the plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to compel enforcement of the aborted January 2006 settlement and an award of sanctions against the defendants, which was also set for hearing on July 10, 2006.

With regard to Dollinger’s third party counterclaim for indemnification and his purported fourth party counterclaim against the defendants, the District Court scheduled a further mandatory settlement conference on June 15, 2006, which Dollinger and the defendants were ordered to attend in person, together with their respective counsel.

At the June 15, 2006 mandatory settlement conference, Dollinger did not appear in person, attempting to appear instead via telephone, with local counsel appearing specially on his behalf. As a result of Dollinger’s failure to appear in person, in violation of the Local Rules of the District Court and the Court’s Standing Order, the District Court continued the mandatory settlement conference to July 11, 2006 but awarded sanctions totaling $3,420 in favor of defendants and their respective counsel and against Dollinger. The District Court further advised that in the event Dollinger did not pay the sanctions award by June 23, 2006, it would consider issuing terminating sanctions with respect to all of the claims asserted by Dollinger in the Molus Action; however, Dollinger caused the sanctions award to be paid by the Court’s deadline.

The parties’ respective motions set for hearing on July 10, 2006 were continued in view of the pending (continued) mandatory settlement conference set for the following day. On July 11, 2006, after extensive negotiations in which the Court, through United States Magistrate Judge Marc Goldman, participated personally, the parties agreed to and entered into a settlement in open court in the Santa Ana Division of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The settlement resolved not only the Molus Action pending in that court, but also the Dollinger Action pending in the Southern District of New York (see Section “G,” infra) and the Miller Action pending in Delaware Chancery Court (see Section “C,” supra), as well as other actions then pending and related to the parties (see Section “A,” supra) and various claims which had been asserted between and among the parties (see Section “B,” supra), all of which were agreed to be mutually and generally released, and to be memorialized in a written settlement agreement to be prepared and circulated for execution by the parties. The parties further agreed to obtain approval of the settlement from the United States Bankruptcy Court in the Bankruptcy Case (as described in Section “E,” supra), since, inter alia, the settlement called for the issuance of common stock of the Company to various parties as specified therein.

Pursuant to the parties’ agreement and as referenced in the settlement placed on the record in the District Court, a formal written “Settlement Agreement and Release” was subsequently prepared by counsel for the parties in order to memorialize the agreement. The Settlement Agreement and Release (“SAR”) was circulated for approval and fully executed as of August 31, 2006. By its terms, the SAR shall become effective on the 11th day following the entry of the order of the Bankruptcy Court approving the SAR. As noted in Section “E,” supra, a motion to approve the compromise constituting the parties’ settlement was filed with the Bankruptcy Court on September 22, 2006 and was initially scheduled for hearing on November 14, 2006. However, based upon the Bankruptcy Court’s determination that broader notice of the motion to approve the compromise (to now include the Company’s shareholders) was appropriate, the Company intends to incorporate the proposed compromise into its amended plan proposal to be filed in February or March 2007.
 
23


In support of the compromise motion, the Company has noted that the settlement is in the best interests of the Company’s creditors, in that it minimizes the impact on the bankruptcy estate by issuing shares of the Company’s common stock to the plaintiffs in the litigation (representing in the aggregate a minority holding of less than 10% of the Company’s authorized common shares) without requiring the payment of any funds whatsoever, and without incurring the substantial expense and delay, as well as the risk, attendant to a trial on the merits. Thus, the settlement serves the paramount interests of both the Company’s creditors and its equity holders, because it is to be achieved with the least possible expenditure of the Company’s resources.

Accordingly, the Molus Action has been settled, subject only to the approval of the United States Bankruptcy Court pursuant to either a renewed motion to approve the settlement or approval by the Bankruptcy Court of the Company’s Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization, which is anticipated to occur late in the first quarter or early in the second quarter of 2007.

G.
Douglas R. Dollinger, Individually and as Escrow Agent on Behalf of Certain Intended Beneficiaries, Plaintiffs, v. Joseph R. Cellura, etc., et al, Defendants, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No. 05 CIV. 3097 (assigned to Judge Stephen C. Robinson) (the “Dollinger Action”).

In late March 2005, the complaint in the Dollinger Action was filed and thereafter served on the defendants named in this lawsuit. Although the Plaintiffs did not name the Company in this action, the named defendants include Joseph Cellura, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, the Company’s attorneys, Ben-Zvi & Beck, LLP, and a brokerage house previously utilized by the Company in Florida, Park Financial Group. The complaint purports to state a variety of claims for relief, including but not limited to allegations of breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, tortious interference with contract, violations of common law duties, violations of the federal securities laws, and negligence, and seeks injunctive relief and the imposition of a constructive trust.

On or about May 13, 2005, the Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in the Dollinger Action, in which at least three additional defendants were named, including several of the Company’s shareholders and another of the Company’s attorneys. On the same date, on behalf of certain defendants (the Company’s attorneys, Ben-Zvi & Beck, LLP), a motion to dismiss, stay and/or transfer the Dollinger Action was filed and served on the Plaintiffs. Mr. Cellura joined in this motion. The Plaintiffs subsequently filed and served their opposition to defendants’ motion, in June 2005, and the defendants thereafter filed and served their reply in July 2005. The motion stands submitted, and the Court has taken the matter under submission pending its ruling, which has not been issued to date.
 
24


Accordingly, none of the defendants originally named in the Dollinger Action has filed or served an answer to the complaint or to the amended complaint. The defendants intend to deny the allegations of wrongdoing asserted by the plaintiffs and to defend the suit vigorously, if the amended complaint survives the pending motion.

The Court has not yet scheduled a status conference, nor has any trial date been set.

Based upon the settlement of the Molus Action (defined and described in Section “F,” infra, the Dollinger Action will be dismissed, with prejudice, late in the first quarter or early in the second quarter of 2007, upon approval of the Company’s motion to approve the settlement, or upon approval of the Company’s Plan of Reorganization by the United States Bankruptcy Court.

H.
Mary Jean Ribas, Plaintiff, vs. Joseph R. Cellura, and Doe 1 through and including Doe 100, Defendants, Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Central District, Case No. BC 351042 (the “Ribas Action”).

In April 2006, the Ribas Action was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Although the Plaintiff did not name the Company in this action, she did name Mr. Cellura, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, as the sole named defendant. The action seeks damages of approximately $14,500, plus interest, statutory penalties, and attorneys’ fees and costs, based upon claims for breach of contract and wages allegedly due to the Plaintiff brought under the California Labor Code and the Fair Labor Standards Act, arising from an independent contractor relationship which ended in December 2005.

The Ribas Action was commenced by the filing of the Summons and Complaint on April 20, 2006. The Company believes that Plaintiff elected not to sue it due to the pendency of the Company’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy case.

Mr. Cellura responded to the Complaint by filing his Answer on July 25, 2006. On September 8, 2006, Plaintiff filed her First Amended Complaint, and on October 6, 2006,
 
Mr. Cellura filed his Answer to the First Amended Complaint, in which he denied Plaintiff’s allegations of wrongdoing and asserted a variety of affirmative defenses to Plaintiff’s claims.

On August 23, 2006, the Court conducted a Case Management Conference and ordered the parties to mediation to attempt to resolve the case. The mediation was held on January 8, 2007 but was unsuccessful. The Court also held a Post-Mediation Status Conference on January 25, 2007. The Court has scheduled the Final Pretrial Conference on April 27, 2007 and the trial on May 8, 2007.

Mr. Cellura intends to defend the lawsuit vigorously, as he denies any liability to Plaintiff. The Company also maintains the right to object to Plaintiff’s claims in the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case and to have its objections determined by the Bankruptcy Court through the claims objection procedure provided under the Bankruptcy Code and the Bankruptcy Rules.
 
25


Based upon the foregoing developments, it is not possible to predict whether the Ribas Action will be settled, or the outcome in the event the Ribas Action goes to trial. Thus, it is not possible to predict the outcome of the Ribas Action or the amount of damages, if any, for which Mr. Cellura, who would be entitled to indemnification from the Company, could be determined to be liable, nor is it possible to predict the amount of damages, if any, for which Plaintiff could be determined. to be liable to Mr. Cellura or to third parties, on their possible claims against Plaintiff.

II. Unasserted Claims and Assessments. The Company currently is unaware of any unasserted claims or assessments contemplated against the Company which are not discussed elsewhere in this Report.

III. Other Matters. With regard to other matters, please be advised that the Company is aware of no other threatened lawsuits or claims.

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.

In July 2003, under Delaware General Law 228, the Company received approval from greater than 51% of the Company's issued and outstanding common shares held by less than 9 shareholders approving the following actions:
 
·  To authorize the proposed change of the Company's name to ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION in order to more accurately reflect the business of the Company [this occurred formally as of March 18, 2004];

·  To authorize the reverse split of the Company’s stock 500 to 1. (This was authorized in May, 2004,however the split has not yet been effected);

· To change the Company's auditors; and

· To authorize the change in the Company's stock transfer agent [this also was deferred until April 2004].

In April 2004, under Delaware General Law 228, the Company received approval from greater than 51% of the Company's issued and outstanding common shares held by less than 9 shareholders approving the following actions:

· To authorize and approve the election of a third Director to fill a vacancy in the Company’s Board of Directors;

· To adopt and approve an amendment to the Company’s Amended Certificate of Incorporation to ratify the change of the Company’s name to ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION and to increase the total number of shares the Company is authorized to issue to two billion (2,000,000,000) shares of common stock, at $.001 par value per share, and ten million (10,000,000) shares of preferred series A stock, at $.001 par value per share;
 
26


· To ratify the prior appointment of the Company’s auditors, based upon the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors;

· To appoint various professionals as the Company’s General Counsel, SEC Counsel, and Delaware Counsel;

· To authorize the Company’s participation in certain legal proceedings, as described above;

· To ratify the prior appointment of an escrow agent for certain of the Company’s common stock beneficially owned by the “Teakwood Group” of the Company’s shareholders;

· To approve a proposed financing transaction between the Company, certain of its shareholders and a qualified third party lender, and to authorize the negotiation of additional financing opportunities deemed
advisable by the Board of Directors;

· To authorize the Company to enter into transactions to acquire SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc. and Malibu Beach Beverage Company, Inc., as described, infra;

· To ratify the prior formation, transactions and activities of Itrex, and of Itrex with the Company;

· To approve and authorize the Company to enter into a proposed settlement of certain legal proceedings known and identified as the “Guerin Action”;

· To approve and authorize the filing of registration statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for public offerings of the securities of SMARTVoice and MBB, in the discretion of the Board of
Directors;

· To authorize the Board of Directors, in its discretion, to cause the Company to file for relief under the applicable provisions of the United States Bankruptcy Code, if necessary; and
 
·
To ratify, confirm and approve prior actions taken by any officer or director of the Company in furtherance of the foregoing resolutions.

On December 6, 2004 the Company amended its Articles of Incorporation to increase its authorized capital to 5,000,000,000 shares of $.001 par value common stock.
 
27


PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR THE COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.

On June 13th, 2006, the Company had approximately 400 stockholders of record of its common stock. The Company has not declared or paid any dividend on its common stock since its inception. The Company does not anticipate declaring or paying any dividends on its common stock for the foreseeable future.

The Company’s common stock was de-listed on March 22, 1999 from the NASDAQ’s National Market System (“NMS”), and traded on the “Bulletin Board” until on or about June 1, 2003, when it was delisted. Thereafter, the Company’s stock has since been traded on the “Pink Sheets.” The Company intends to list its common stock on the Bulletin Board, but it cannot assure it will be able to do so. (SEE “Risk Factors”.)

The quotations set forth herein may reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail market, mark-down or commission, and may not represent actual transactions.

Its common stock has been traded over-the-counter under the symbols “OBTV” and currently “OBBCQ.PK”. The following table sets forth the quarterly high and low sales prices per share of the Company’s common stock as reported on the over-the-counter market:

Source of Quotations: NASDAQ Electronic Market Quotation System.
 
Closing Price

Per Share
         
Period or Quarter
   
High
   
Low
 
First Quarter 2003
   
.002
   
.002
 
Second Quarter 2003
   
.004
   
.003
 
Third Quarter 2003
   
.002
   
.002
 
Fourth Quarter 2003
   
.004
   
.004
 
First Quarter 2004
   
.000
   
.000
 
Second Quarter 2004
   
.000
   
.000
 
Third Quarter 2004
   
.000
   
.000
 
Fourth Quarter 2004
   
.000
   
.000
 
 
On June 6, 2006, the last reported sales price of the Company’s common stock on the over-the-counter market was $.0003 per share.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

During the current year, the Company issued, by itself, and through its affiliate (and subsequently wholly-owned subsidiary) Itrex an aggregate of approximately $4,500,000 of unregistered convertible debentures to numerous investors and service providers, convertible into the Company’s common stock (the “Debentures”). Approximately $240,000 of the proceeds from the sale of the Debentures was used to fund the working capital of SMARTVoice, which subsequently became the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary. (See “Business of the Company”, MD&A, and “Financial Information”). Approximately $890,000 of the proceeds from the sale of the Debentures was used to fund the working capital of the Company. (See Business of the Company”, MD&A, and “Financial Information”) Approximately $200,000 of the proceeds from the sale of the Debentures was used to fund the working capital of Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC, an entity 25% beneficially owned by the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Joseph R.Cellura, and from whom Itrex subsequently obtained certain rights to receive revenue in the form of royalties (See Business of the Company”, MD&A, and “Financial Information”). The Company believes, but cannot assure that these transactions were exempt from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Act”), in that the Company believes that each transaction met the criteria for the private placement exemption provided by Section 4(2). No underwriters were used in these transactions, nor were any commissions paid to anyone by the Company.
 
28

 
As described above, the responsibility for all of the Company’s corporate governance, the Company’s filing and payment of its local, state and federal tax returns and taxes, the Company’s preparation and filing of its quarterly and annual federal securities reports and related periodic filings, the Company’s issuance of legal opinions regarding a variety of subjects, and the Company’s maintenance and preservation of its books and records, all had reposed in the Company’s Chief Legal Officer, Mr. Douglas R. Dollinger, up to and including October 2003.

The relationship between Mr. Dollinger and the Company became strained in 2003, and by October 2003, it had become sufficiently problematic that the Company determined that changes were mandated, particularly after the Company received certain communications from Mr. Dollinger on or about October 14, 2003. At that point, the Company sought to retrieve its books and records and other documents in Mr. Dollinger’s possession or control. After a number of unsuccessful attempts to obtain the Company’s books and records from Mr. Dollinger, the Company embarked on a course of reconstructing its books and records independently of Mr. Dollinger and his “administrative assistant,” Ms. Joanne Bertolini.

During the course of the following months, through March 2004, the Company began to take the necessary actions to file its hitherto unfiled corporate tax returns, pay its corporate franchise taxes, revive its corporate charter and reinstate its good standing in the State of Delaware, and defend litigation in the Delaware Court of Chancery brought by a terminated former employee and minority shareholder, Dean E. Miller. In addition, the Company resuscitated its relationships with its stock transfer agent, its outside accountants and its outside auditors, all of whom had suspended or terminated their engagements with the Company based on lack of communication and/or failure to pay their respective professional fees and expenses. The Company thereupon undertook to bring itself back into compliance with applicable securities laws and regulations, beginning with its Form 10-KSB filing for the 2003 calendar year.
 
29

 
Prior to these events, on or about August 22nd, 2003, a majority of the shareholders of the Company, acting pursuant to written consent in lieu of notice under Delaware General Corporate Law Section 228, approved the change in the Company’s auditors to the firm of Stark Winter Schenkein & Co., LLP, as well as the change in the Company’s name from OrbitTRAVEL.com Corporation to ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION. Both of these changes were disclosed in the filing of an SEC Form 8-K on or about August 22nd, 2003. Mr. Dollinger personally prepared and/or was aware of each of these documents at the time they were executed or filed. The Form 8-K was provided to the Company’s outside accountants, Kingery, Crouse & Hohl, P.A. for preparation for filing, and subsequent filing, with the SEC.

With respect to the Company’s preferred stock, on October 16, 2003, Mr. Cellura notified the Board of Directors that he intended to convert a portion of the Company’s $3.4 million indebtedness to him to preferred stock. Unbeknownst to Mr. Cellura or the Company at that time, among many other duties and responsibilities which the Company ultimately learned Mr. Dollinger had not performed in 2002 and 2003, the Company’s certificate of incorporation had never been amended to authorize the issuance of preferred stock in accordance with the June 24, 1999 Settlement Agreement between the Company and Mr. Cellura. As a result, no action could be taken at that time to cause the issuance of preferred stock to Mr. Cellura.

Thereafter, following the Company’s renewal of its good standing in the State of Delaware and the resolution of its relationship with its stock transfer agent, inter alia, on April 29, 2004, a majority of the shareholders of the Company, acting pursuant to written consent in lieu of notice under Delaware General Corporate Law Section 228, approved an amendment to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation which authorized 10,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock.

During April 2004 the Company amended its Articles of Incorporation to increase its authorized capital to 2,000,000,000 shares of $.001 par value common stock and 10,000,000 shares of $.001 par value preferred stock. The Company also authorized the designation of Series A convertible preferred stock as follows:

(a) Designation. The series of Preferred Stock created hereby shall be designated the “Series A Preferred Stock”.

(b) Authorized Shares. The number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock shall be Ten Million (10,000,000) Shares.

(c) Liquidation Rights. In the event of any liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Corporation, either voluntary or involuntary, after setting apart or paying in full the preferential amounts due to holders of senior capital stock, if any, the holders of Series A Preferred Stock and parity capital stock, if any, shall be entitled to receive, prior and in preference to any distribution of any of the assets or surplus funds of the Corporation to the holders of junior capital stock, including Common Stock, an amount equal to the market value of the Series A Preferred Stock as of such date divided by the number of common shares into which this series of preferred stock converts per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends (the “Liquidation Preference”). If upon such liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Corporation, the assets of the Corporation available for distribution to the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock and parity capital stock, if any, shall be insufficient to permit in full the payment of the Liquidation Preference, then all such assets of the Corporation shall be distributed ratably among the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock and parity capital stock, if any. Neither the consolidation or merger of the Corporation, nor the sale, lease or transfer by the Corporation of all or a part of its assets, shall be deemed a liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Corporation, for purposes of this Section (c ).
 
30


(d) Dividends. The Series A Preferred Stock shall not be entitled to receive any dividends.

(e) Conversion Rights. Each share of Series A Preferred Stock shall be convertible, at the option of the holder, into 1000:1 fully paid and nonassessable shares of the Corporation's Common Stock, provided, however, that such conversion would not violate any applicable federal, state or local law, rule, or regulation, or any judgment, writ, decree or order binding upon the Corporation or the holder, or any provision of the Corporation’s or the holder’s Amended Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws, nor conflict with or contravene the provisions of any agreement to which the Corporation or the holder are parties, or by which they are bound. Said conversion rate shall be subject to equitable adjustment at the reasonable discretion of the Board of Directors of the Corporation in the event of the occurrence of capital events which make such adjustment appropriate, such as a dividend payable in shares of common stock, combinations of the common stock, a merger or consolidation, or the like.

 
(i) Conversion Procedure.

 
The holder shall effect conversions by surrendering the certificate(s) representing the Series A Preferred Stock to be converted to the Corporation, together with a form of conversion notice satisfactory to the Corporation, which shall be irrevocable. If the holder is converting less than all of the shares of Series A Preferred Stock represented by the certificate tendered, the Corporation shall promptly deliver to the holder a new certificate representing the Series A Preferred Stock not converted. Not later than five (5) trading days after the conversion date, the Corporation shall deliver to the holder a certificate or certificates, which shall be subject to restrictive legends and trading restrictions required by law, representing the number of shares of Common Stock being acquired upon the conversion; provided, however, that the Corporation shall not be obligated to issue such certificates until the Series A Preferred Stock is delivered to the Corporation. If the Corporation does not deliver such certificate(s) by the date required under this paragraph (e)(I), the holder shall be entitled, by written notice to the Corporation at any time on or before receipt of such certificate(s), to rescind such conversion.

31

 
(ii) Value Maintenance and Reset Provision

 
The number of common shares that this series of convertible preferred shares convert into is initially set as of the date of this certificate. The number of shares is calculated by taking the conversion ratio and multiplying the amount of common shares available per preferred share by the number of preferred shares designated by the preferred share certificate attached to this certificate. However, this number shall be adjusted at the end of each month, or on any date upon which a demand for conversion occurs. The purpose of this provision is to maintain the original underlying value of the preferred shares on the date of the original issuance of the preferred shares. This will be accomplished using the following formula:

 
One divided by the quotient of the common stock price on the day of conversion divided by the common stock price as of the original date of issuance of the preferred shares. This result shall be multiplied by the number of original common shares that the preferred shares could have been converted to, i.e., assume the original common stock price was $10, and the current stock price is $5. To convert the convertible shares today, the number of common shares per conversion would increase by the following formula: 1 / ($5 per share / $10 per share) = 2. Then multiply the original number of common shares that the preferred stock could have converted into by 2. However, in no case shall the preferred shares be convertible into a number of common shares that is less then the original number of common shares that the preferred shareholders had the right to convert into as of the date of issuance.

(iii) Conversion Penalty.

 
In the event the Corporation breaches its obligation to timely deliver the Common Stock on conversion, without limiting the shareholder's other rights and remedies, the Corporation shall pay to the shareholder $5.00 per day for each such breach for each 1000:1 shares of Common Stock subject to the conversion, with pro rata payments for amounts less than 1000:1 shares.

(iv) Adjustments on Stock Splits, Dividends and Distributions.

 
If the Corporation, at any time while any Series A Preferred Stock is outstanding, (a) shall pay a stock dividend or otherwise make a distribution or distributions on shares of its Common Stock payable in shares of its capital stock (whether payable in shares of its Common Stock or of capital stock of any class), (b) subdivide outstanding shares of Common Stock into a larger number of shares, (c) combine outstanding shares of Common Stock into a smaller number of shares, or (d) issue reclassification of shares of Common Stock into any shares of capital stock of the Corporation, the Conversion Ratio shall be adjusted by multiplying the number of shares of Common Stock issuable by a fraction, of which the numerator shall be the number of shares of Common Stock of the Corporation outstanding after such event and the denominator shall be the number of shares of Common Stock outstanding before such event. Any adjustment made pursuant to this paragraph (e)(iv) shall become effective immediately after the record date for the determination of stockholders entitled to receive such dividend or distribution, or immediately after the effective date in the event of a subdivision, combination or reclassification. Whenever the Conversion Ratio is adjusted pursuant to this paragraph, the Corporation shall promptly mail to the shareholder a notice setting forth the Conversion Ratio after such adjustment and a brief statement of the facts requiring such adjustment.
 
 
32


(v) Adjustments on Reclassifications, Consolidations and Mergers.

 
In the event of a reclassification of the Common Stock or a consolidation or merger of the Corporation with or into another person, the sale or transfer of all or substantially all of the assets of the Corporation, or any compulsory share exchange pursuant to which the Common Stock is converted into other securities, cash or property, then each holder of Series A Preferred Stock then outstanding shall have the right thereafter to convert such Series A Preferred Stock only into the shares of stock or other securities or property receivable upon, or deemed to be held by holders of Common Stock following, such reclassification, consolidation, merger, sale, transfer or share exchange, and the holder shall be entitled upon such event to receive such amount of securities or property as the shares of the Common Stock into which such Series A Preferred Stock could have been converted immediately prior to such reclassification, consolidation, merger, sale, transfer or share exchange would have been entitled. The terms of any such consolidation, merger, sale, transfer or share exchange shall include such terms as are necessary or required in order to continue to give to the holder the right to receive the securities or property set forth in this paragraph (e)(v) upon any conversion following such consolidation, merger, sale, transfer or share exchange. This provision shall similarly apply to successive reclassifications, consolidations, mergers, sales, transfers or share exchanges.

 
(vi) Fractional Shares; Issuance Expenses.

 
Upon a conversion of Series A Preferred Stock, the Corporation shall not be required to issue stock certificates representing fractions of shares of Common Stock, but shall issue that number of shares of Common Stock which is rounded to the nearest whole number. The issuance of certificates for shares of Common Stock on conversion of Series A Preferred Stock shall be made without charge to the holder for any documentary stamp or similar taxes that may be payable in respect of the issuance or delivery of such certificate, provided that the Corporation shall not be required to pay any tax that may be payable in respect of any such transfer involved in the issuance and/or delivery of any such certificate upon conversion in a name other than that of the holder, and the Corporation shall not be required to issue or deliver such certificates unless or until the person or persons requesting the issuance thereof shall have paid to the Corporation the amount of such tax, or shall have established to the satisfaction of the Corporation that such tax has been paid.
 
33

 
(f) Voting Rights. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein or as required by law, the holders of shares of Series A Preferred Stock shall be entitled to vote on any matters considered and voted upon by the Corporation's Common Stock. The holders of Series A Preferred Stock shall be entitled to 1000:1 votes per share of Series A Preferred Stock. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein or as required by law, the holders of Series A Preferred Stock and the holders of Common Stock shall vote as separate classes.

(g) Reservation of Shares of Common Stock. The Corporation covenants that it will at all times reserve and maintain available out of its authorized and unissued Common Stock, solely for the purpose of issuance upon conversion of Series A Preferred Stock as herein provided, free from preemptive rights or any other actual contingent purchase rights of persons other than the holders of Series A Preferred Stock, such number of shares of Common Stock as shall be issuable upon conversion of the outstanding Series A Preferred Stock. If at any time the number of authorized but unissued shares of Common Stock shall not be sufficient to effect the conversion of all outstanding Series A Preferred Stock, the Corporation shall take such corporate action as may be necessary to increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock which are required to satisfy such purpose. The Corporation covenants that all shares of Common Stock that shall be so issuable shall, upon issuance, be duly and validly authorized, issued, fully paid and nonassessable.

(h) No Reissuance of Series A Preferred Stock. No shares of Series A Preferred Stock acquired by the Corporation by reason of redemption, purchase, conversion or otherwise, shall be reissued, and all such shares shall be cancelled, retired and/or eliminated from the shares of capital stock which the Corporation shall be authorized to issue.

(i) Mandatory Redemption. There shall be no mandatory redemption.

(j) Assignment. There shall be no restrictions prohibiting a preferred stock holder from assigning, pledging or hypothecating his, her or its preferred shares.

Subsequently, on June 3, 2004, the Company’s Board of Directors met and determined that because the Company had been unable to pay in excess of approximately $3,500,000 of accrued debt owed to Mr. Cellura as of December 31, 2003, based on previous and unpaid settlements, accrued and unpaid compensation and expenses, and accrued and unpaid benefits, and because Mr. Cellura had indicated that he was willing to forego payment of $750,000 of said indebtedness in exchange for shares of convertible preferred stock of the Company, the Company would be authorized to issue 5,000,000 shares of the Series A convertible preferred stock to Mr. Cellura, in accordance with the Company’s Certificate of Designation of Series A Preferred Stock.The preferred stock had a fair market value on the date of issuance of $20,000,000. The Company determined that this transaction as originally reported in the June 2004 10QSB was incorrect and will file an amended June 2004 10QSB reflecting the correction of this error. The Company originally ascribed a value of $750,000 to the issuance of the preferred stock pursuant to the amount of debt forgiven. Subsequently, the Company determined it was more appropriate to record the issuance at fair market value based on the underlying common stock value at the date of issuance.The Company recorded a loss of $19,250,000 with respect to this issuance.
 
34

 
On or about February 21st,2004 the Company entered into a Security Agreement and Promissory Note with Sherman & Peabody, LLC (“S&P”) (the “S&P Note”). Pursuant to the S&P Agreement, S&P was to loan Itrex the sum of $250,000 for a period of up to 365 days at an interest rate of 12% per annum, secured by shares of the Company’s common stock. S&P, however, only funded $155,000 of the $250,000, and on or about June 5th, 2004, the Company and S&P reached a new agreement whereby the S&P Agreement was rescinded, S&P received an unsecured promissory note in the amount of the $155,000 it had paid the Company (the “S&P Replacement Note”). The S&P Replacement Note is convertible at S&P’s option into either: (a) an amount of cash equal to the 5-day average trailing price of the Company’s common shares multiplied by 5,500,000; or (b) an amount of cash equal to 150% of the outstanding balance owed by the Company to S&P. Additionally, S&P is entitled to receive a 35% Loan Management Fee. This note was included as an Exhibit in the Company’s 2003 10 KSB.

During June 2004 the Company, through Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC borrowed $100,000 pursuant to a promissory note. The note bears interest at 0% per annum and was due on September 30, 2004. There are certain loan administration fees attached to this note. The note is currently in default. The lender has the option to convert the note and fee into shares of the Company’s common stock at the rate of $.015 per share.

During August 2004 the majority shareholder of the Company entered into a loan agreement (“Argyle agreement”) whereby he arranged to personally borrow an amount up to the value of 33% of the bid price of 119,714,050 shares of the Company’s common stock . Any advances under the agreement bear interest at the prime rate and are due on August 19, 2007. On August 25, 2004 the shareholder borrowed $295,000 pursuant to the agreement and loaned these proceeds to the Company. The Argyle loan agreement was fully disclosed in the Company’s 2003 10 KSB.

During December 2004, Sutra Group, LLC (“Sutra”) entered into an agreement with the Company’s subsidiary, Malibu Entertainment Group (“MEG”), to loan MEG the sum of $185,000 in order to capitalize a licensing agreement between Summit Crest Productions, Inc. (“Summit Crest”), one of MEG’s shareholders, acting on behalf of MEG, and The Havana Company (“Havana”). In consideration for the loan, the Company issued a promissory note in favor of Sutra, convertible into common stock of the Company, at an interest rate and for a number of shares to be negotiated and agreed to by the parties. The Company is currently in negotiations with Sutra to fix the remaining terms of the note. The proceeds of the Sutra loan were received and deposited into MEG’s bank account.
 
35


The Company believes that it took reasonable steps to ensure that each of the offerees in these transactions was an accredited investor under Rule 501 of the Securities Act. The Company believes, but cannot assure, that the above- referenced recent sales of unregistered securities were effected in compliance with applicable federal securities laws and state “blue sky” securities laws. In the event that any of these transactions are, in the future, deemed not in compliance with such laws, the Company may have to give rescission offers to these securities holders. The acceptance of some or all of such rescission offers (if any) may have a materially adverse effect on the Company’s finances.

Subsequent Events

In May 2005, the Company secured a loan commitment from Avalon International Group (“Avalon”), a disinterested third party, to borrow $150,000 in order to provide working capital to its BBKO subsidiary. The Company offered an unsecured convertible promissory note to Avalon which would bear interest at a rate to be negotiated, with the interest to accrue and be payable in kind or in cash. The Avalon note (including all principal and interest due under the note) was to be convertible into the common stock of the Company at a conversion ratio per share to be negotiated. The Company is currently in negotiations with Avalon to fix the remaining terms of the note. The proceeds of the Avalon loan were received and deposited into BBKO’s bank account.
 
On May 11, 2005, BBKO,LLC entered into a license agreement with the Company’s subsidiary, BBKO, Inc. f/k/a Malibu Mixers Company (“BBKO”). The license provided for the granting of certain rights associated with a property known as “Beats, Bouts, and Knockouts”, whereby BBKO,Inc. would distribute the property and remit royalties to BBBKO, LLC as Licensor. In January, 2006 the parties involved in the licensing agreement entered into a settlement agreement due to several disputes that had arisen among the parties. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement, BBKO LLC paid BBKO, Inc. $141,000. In exchange, BBKO, LLC retains all rights related to the property as the license agreement is rescinded. BBKO, Inc. must set aside 85 million shares of Orbit Brands Corporation stock to settle any such claims that might present themselves in the future as a result of this transaction.

On June 15, 2005, the Company secured a loan commitment from M2B, a disinterested third party, to borrow $100,000 in order to fund administrative expenses associated with the Company’s Chapter 11 proceedings. The M2B loan was subject to approval from the Bankruptcy Court, which approval was forthcoming, following the Company’s application for authority to borrow the funds. The Company executed an unsecured convertible promissory note in favor of M2B bearing interest at the rate of 10% per annum, with the interest accruing and payable in kind or in cash. The M2B note matures on the second anniversary date following confirmation of the Company’s Chapter 11 Plan. The M2B note (including all principal and interest due under the note) may be converted into the common stock of the Company at the conversion ratio of $.001 per share. The proceeds of the M2B loan were deposited into the Company’s “debtor-in-possession” bank account.
 
36


On October 3, 2005, through its BBKO subsidiary, the Company entered into a loan agreement with Harbor View Fund, Inc. (“Harbor View”), a disinterested third party, pursuant to which Harbor View agreed to loan BBKO the sum of $300,000 for operating capital for an initial term of six months, which term can be extended by agreement of the parties. In consideration for the loan, the Company executed an unsecured convertible promissory note in favor of Harbor View which accrued simple interest at the rate of 4% per annum. The Harbor View note (including all principal and interest due under the note) may be converted into the common stock of the Company. The proceeds of the Harbor View loan were deposited into BBKO’s bank account.

On March 27, 2006, the Company entered into a Binding Memorandum of Understanding with the founder of Floating Bed, Inc. whereby the Company will rename its BBKO subsidiary as Floating Bed International(“FB”). Pursuant to this agreement, the founder will grant FB a non-exclusive license to manufacture, market, distribute and sell floating beds for an initial period which commenced on April 1, 2006.

At such time as FB has secured working capital of at least $500,000, the non-exclusive license shall be converted to an exclusive license. Should the Company fail to secure the $500,000 pursuant to contractual benchmarks, the license shall be nullified.

The founder and/or Floating Bed, Inc. shall be issued a convertible promissory note or warrants for 4.9% of the presently outstanding and issued common stock of the Company, not to exceed 125,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. The founder shall enter into an employment agreement with FB whereby he will act as President of the FB. The founder shall have the right to sell FB, and shall retain control over the terms of such sale. If and when FB is sold, the Company shall receive 1% of the sales price for every $20,000 invested by the Company, not to exceed 25% of the total sales price.

On April 19, 2006, through its Itrex subsidiary, the Company entered into a loan agreement with M2B, Inc. (“M2B”), a disinterested third party, pursuant to which M2B agreed to loan Itrex and the Company the sum of $46,000 for various operating costs, including transfer agent expenses and other ordinary business expenses. The Company executed an unsecured convertible promissory note in favor of M2B bearing interest at the rate of 12% per annum, with the interest accruing and payable in kind or in cash. The M2B note matures on April 19, 2007. The M2B note (including all principal and interest due under the note) may be converted into the common stock of the Company at the conversion ratio of $.0003 per share. The proceeds of the M2B loan were deposited into Itrex’ bank account.

On September 27, 2006, and October 4, 2006, through its Itrex subsidiary, the Company entered into two loan agreements with Todd Silverstein (“TS”), a disinterested third party, pursuant to which TS agreed to loan Itrex and the Company the sum of $40,000($30,000 and $10,000 respectively)for various operating costs, including bankruptcy proceeding expenses and other ordinary business expenses. The Company executed unsecured convertible promissory notes in favor of TS bearing interest at the rate of 5% per annum, with the interest accruing and payable in kind or in cash. The TS notes mature one year from the date of issuance.The TS notes (including all principal and interest due under the note) may be converted into the common stock of the Company at the conversion ratio of $.0002 per share. The proceeds of the TS loan were deposited into Itrex’ bank account.
 
37

 
On December 7, 2006, The Company and two of its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Malibu Entertainment Group(“MEG”), and “BBKO” , entered into non-binding term sheets with Cleveland BioLabs, Inc. (“CBLI”) which provided that the Company would accept CBLI’s investment of a total of $300,000 in the Company in exchange for a 20% minority common stock position in the Company, 10% minority common stock positions in three of the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, Itrex International(“Itrex”), Malibu Beach Beverage Group(“Malibu”), and Smartvoice Telecommunication, Inc.(“SVT”). CBLI receives 95% majority common stock positions in MEG and BBKO.

Pursuant to the term sheet, MEG and BBKO each issued a promissory note convertible into common stock for the sum of $25,000 each on or about December 7, 2006, and an additional promissory note convertible into stock for the sum of $25,000 each on or about January 2, 2007. The term sheets contemplate that two further promissory notes convertible into common stock for the sum of $75,000 each shall be issued on or about February 2, 2007, and that two final promissory notes for the sum of $25,000 each shall be issued on or about March 2, 2007. CBLI anticipates utilizing its majority position in MEG and BBKO to raise capital to support its innovative research and development into cancer treatment agents.

On January 18, 2007, through its Itrex subsidiary, the Company entered into a loan agreement with Michael Silverstein (“MS”), a disinterested third party, pursuant to which MS agreed to loan Itrex and the Company the sum of $25,000 for various operating costs, including bankruptcy proceeding expenses and other ordinary business expenses. The Company executed a unsecured convertible promissory note in favor of MS bearing interest at the rate of 6% per annum, with the interest accruing and payable in kind or in cash. The MS note matures one year from the date of issuance. The MS note (including all principal and interest due under the note) may be converted into the common stock of the Company at the conversion ratio of $.0002 per share. The proceeds of the MS loan were deposited into Itrex’ bank account.

During the periods covered by these financial statements the Company issued shares of common stock and convertible debentures without registration under the Securities Act of 1933. Although the Company believes that the sales did not involve a public offering of its securities and that the Company did comply with the “safe harbor” exemptions from registration, it could be liable for rescission of the sales if such exemptions were found not to apply and this could have a material negative impact on the Company’s financial position and results of operations.
 
38


ITEM 6. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS OF THE COMPANY, INCLUDING ITS WHOLLY-OWNED SUBSIDIARIES.
 
You should read the following discussion and analysis in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION (“Orbit” or “the Company) for calendar years 2003 and 2004, included in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB.
 
 Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Proceeding
 
In May 2004, the Company’s shareholders authorized the Company to file for protection pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, Title 11 United States Code Sections 101, et. seq., at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors.

However, on June 25, 2004, before the Company affirmatively sought relief under the Bankruptcy Code, several of the Company’s creditors filed an Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition against the Company in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, in Los Angeles, California (the “Bankruptcy Case”). The Company published notice of the commencement of the involuntary bankruptcy case to all of its shareholders, pursuant to the filing of an SEC Form 8-K regarding the filing of the Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

In filing the Involuntary Petition, the Company's creditors expressed their concern that management had been required to devote considerable time and resources to the pending litigation (including, without limitation, the Miller Action and the Company Action) and, as a result, that it had not been able to devote its efforts to the Company’s business activities, as well as noting the financial burden of continuing to defend against claims brought by the same plaintiffs, or assisted by the same individuals, in several states where the Company had conducted business, and that the interests of creditors and shareholders had been compromised as a result. They believed the involuntary proceeding would bring a halt to the pending and threatened litigation and protect their interests as creditors, as well as the interests of shareholders.

The Company ultimately consented to the entry of an order for relief, converting the case to a Voluntary Chapter 11 case on or about December 14, 2004. The Company timely filed its Chapter 11 Schedules and Statement of Financial Affairs on December 29, 2004.
 
The First Meeting of Creditors in the Bankruptcy Case was conducted on February 8, 2005, and the Court convened the initial Chapter 11 Status Conference on March 17, 2005. At the hearing, the Court continued the Status Conference to June 16, 2005. By motion, the Company obtained an order setting April 22, 2005 as the claims bar date. At the Status Conference held on June 16, 2005, the Court received the Company’s report on its reorganization efforts and continued the Status Conference to October 13, 2005.
 
39

 
On July 13, 2005, the Company filed a motion for an order authorizing debtor-in-possession financing under Section 364 of the Bankruptcy Code in order to fund various administrative expenses in connection with the Chapter 11 case. The motion was unopposed, and on August 3, 2005, the Bankruptcy Court issued its order granting the motion and approving the financing as requested by the Company.

On July 25, 2005, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the “Creditors Committee”) gave notice of its application to employ a financial and reorganization consultant and for authorization of a post-petition retainer to the consultant. The Creditors Committee’s application was filed on August 2, 2005, together with the Company’s stipulation to the granting of the application. The application was not opposed, and on August 15, 2005, the Bankruptcy Court issued its order granting the application and approving the employment of the Creditors Committee’s consultant and authorizing the requested post-petition retainer.

On June 20, 2006, the Company filed an application to employ a public accounting firm, Malone & Bailey, P.C., as its independent auditor, in conjunction with the preparation and filing of its updated Securities and Exchange Commission quarterly and annual reporting requirements, and sought Bankruptcy Court authorization to pay a post-petition retainer to Malone & Bailey, P.C. The Creditors Committee supported this application, and on July 17, 2006, the Court entered its Order granting the Company’s application to employ Malone & Bailey, P.C. as the Company’s independent auditor.

On September 22, 2006, the Company filed its motion to approve a compromise pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9019 with respect to the litigation described in detail in Section “F,” infra. As described therein, the compromise involves the proposed settlement and dismissal, with prejudice, not only of the Molus Action (see Section “F,” infra), but also the dismissal, with prejudice, of the Teakwood Action (see Section “A,” supra,), the Miller Action (see Section “C,” supra), and the Dollinger Action (see Section “G,” infra), as well as the mutual and general release of all claims, known and unknown, asserted and unasserted, between all of the parties to the Molus Action, the Miller Action and the Dollinger Action, and the Company’s claims as set forth in the Company Action (see Section “B,” supra).

Pursuant to an order of the Bankruptcy Court, the compromise approval motion was initially scheduled for hearing on November 14, 2006. However, in evaluating the motion, the Bankruptcy Court decided that notice needed to be provided not only to creditors and other parties in interest but also to the Company’s shareholders, and recommended that the Company re-notice the motion more broadly or incorporate the motion and proposed compromise into its proposed amended disclosure statement and amended plan of reorganization. The Company intends to follow the Court’s recommendation and to incorporate the motion and proposed compromise into its reorganization proposal.

As a result of the compromise, once approved, all of the foregoing actions are expected to be dismissed, with prejudice, in the first quarter of 2007, upon approval of the Company’s motion, or upon the subsequent approval of the Company’s Plan of Reorganization by the United States Bankruptcy Court.
 
40


The Company is currently restructuring its financial program for its successful emergence from Chapter 11. In this regard, the Company filed its original proposed disclosure statement and original proposed Chapter 11 plan of reorganization (collectively, its “plan proposal”) on September 16, 2005. The Company filed its amended plan proposal on September 14, 2006. However, based upon pending business developments and the need to incorporate the settlement and compromise of its litigation with certain of its creditors, as described herein, into its amended plan proposal, the Company intends to file its second amended plan proposal by January 31, 2007, in accordance with an order of the Bankruptcy Court. The Court has scheduled a hearing for February 15, 2007 on the status of the Chapter 11 case and is expected to schedule further hearings to approve the plan proposal at that time.

Overview and Background.

ITREX INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION

Since the formation of Itrex International Corporation (“Itrex”) in 2002, the Company has utilized convertible promissory notes to finance all of the development stage activities of the other Orbit subsidiaries, and from time to time Itrex has up-streamed funds to the Company in order to facilitate the Company’s own business operations. The primary asset of Itrex is its intellectual property, including the “Media Exchange,” which is described below.
 
The Media Exchange plans to enter the multi-billion dollar global music, media and entertainment industry with a revolutionary technology (the “MX”) that could redefine the financing tools of the industry. The MX is an integrated multi-function exchange platform for the offering and trading of a novel formulation of securities, backed by the current and future revenue streams of the issuers (including artists, record labels, and entertainers). The MX can serve the interests of all segments of the music entertainment industry, including artists, labels, studios, producers, fans, and investors, by diversifying the risks and rewards of financing industry growth, and insuring a transparent public market.
 
The MX provides a financing vehicle which will raise growth capital for artists and other segments of the music, media and entertainment industry through the issuance of asset-based securities. These securities will be backed by rights to a percentage of the underlying intellectual property (e.g., music) and associated revenues generated through(a) publishing and licensing of music, (b) royalties, (c) merchandising, (d) album sales, and (e) bookings and promotional appearances.
 
41


The MX is a seamless financial product. Its methodology can be readily expanded into other facets of the entertainment industry, such as television, film, publishing, and other media, and as it gains broad acceptance in the public markets, we anticipate extending its scope to other segments of related industries, and beyond.
 
For the major entertainment industry participants, particularly the larger record labels, the MX offers the ability to hedge risk and diversify exposure, while retaining revenues from the sale of record albums (cd’s, ipod and other current media). At the same time, the record labels can securitize their existing royalty streams in order to raise new capital, by shifting a portion of their royalty streams into the public market. This will allow the record labels to reduce their risk without a corresponding reduction in profits, and will provide new operating capital while generating broad exposure for their stable of new and existing artists.
 
In many if not all aspects of the entertainment industry, artists at all stages of their careers can be viewed as growth businesses. Achieving commercial success requires being properly capitalized to produce albums, conduct marketing campaigns, and underwrite touring expenses, among other requirements. Artists have intellectual property with intrinsic value, multiple revenue streams, and a potentially high growth curve when they are properly funded and even moderately successful. Using the MX platform, the issuers can market themselves to intrinsic and other potential investors. Between the ubiquitous “garage band” and the major recording star, there is a wide range of artists who have loyal followings, generate revenues, and are “on track” to becoming even more successful.
 
The MX will offer intrinsic investors the unique opportunity of investing in their favorite artists, satisfying the desire not only to share in, but to benefit from, their artistic and commercial success.

MALIBU BEACH BEVERAGE GROUP, a DELAWARE CORPORATION

On March 28, 2003, through its affiliate (and subsequently, its wholly-owned subsidiary, Itrex International Corporation), the Company executed a definitive acquisition agreement to acquire Malibu Beach Beverage Group (“MBBG”). MBBG had been in business since 1998 as a specialty beverage manufacturer of natural juice blends and teas.

On November 26, 2003, Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC (“MBB Group”) purchased certain intellectual property rights from Amy L. Goldman, the duly appointed, qualified and acting Chapter 7 Trustee of the bankruptcy estate of MBB, Inc. in that certain Chapter 7 bankruptcy case pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, San Fernando Valley Division, In re: Malibu Beach Beverage Co., Inc., Debtor, Case No.: SV 01- 17743-AG, including the right to use the trade name of “Malibu Beach Beverage Company,” among other assets (the “Rights”), for a purchase price of $20,000. MBBG is a Delaware limited liability company in which Joseph R. Cellura, the Company’s Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and majority shareholder, owns a 25% interest.
 
42

 
Effective June 30, 2004, Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC, a Delaware LLC (“MBBG”) was acquired by the Company. MBBG sold all of its rights, title and interests in all intellectual property of the low carb beverages including but not limited to any and all formulas, copyrights and applications, patents and applications, trademarks and applications, licensing, contracts, proprietary information, any other claimed proprietary information, and any other tangible and intangible intellectual property of the low carb beverage business of the MBBG. The net liabilities of MBBG were acquired by the Company for no consideration. The Company’s Chairman and CEO, Joseph Cellura, holds a 25% membership interest in MBBG.

The acquisition was accounted for as a purchase and the results of operations have been included in the consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition.

The summarized balance sheet at the acquisition date is as follows:
 
Current assets
 
$
242,542
 
Property and equipment
   
6,300
 
Due to related parties
   
(1,239,056
)
Current liabilities
   
(142,891
)
 
 
$
(1,133,105
)

The net cost of the acquisition of $1,133,105 was recorded as goodwill and subsequently impaired.

Low carbohydrate diets such as “Atkins,” “South Beach” and the “Zone” are no longer passing fads. They represent a major consumer trend and a significant lifestyle change. According to market researcher A.C. Nielsen, over 32 million people in the United States were predicted to move to a low carb diet in 2004 alone. The U.S. market alone for low carb products was projected to grow to over $16 billion in 2004. The NPD (National Product Development) Group has estimated that 25 million Americans currently are trying some type of low-carb diet. A web site called “lowcarbdietworld.com” claims that more than 68 million people are on, or have been on, some type of low-carb diet.
 
With the production and distribution of high quality, all natural, low-carb, low-cal, new age beverages in a growing market; MBB seeks to capitalize on increasing market share and the demand for low calorie, vitamin-enhanced, low carbohydrate beverages. Guided by the creative vision and business acumen of its senior management team and operations support, MBB is positioned to achieve great success in this highly lucrative market segment. MBB has presented the Malibu beverage line at the 2004 FMI Food and Beverage Show and earned the #2 award for best new age beverage product in the beverage category.

The company’s primary focus at present is to obtain the financing necessary to develop large national accounts and continue to fund the production and support- related expenses required to implement its business plan strategy.
 
43


SMARTVoice Telecommunications,Inc., a Delaware corporation
 
Effective January 1, 2004, the Company through a subsidiary SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc, a Delaware corporation (“SMARTVoice”) agreed to acquire the intellectual property of SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc, a Georgia corporation (“Georgia”) formed on May 6, 2003. The net liabilities of Georgia were initially acquired by the Company for no consideration. In addition, the Company entered into an employment contract with an individual to serve as the Chief Executive Officer of SMARTVoice (see below). On October 19, 2004, the agreement was amended to adjust the purchase price to include an additional amount of $570,000 in the form notes payable and amend certain terms of the employment agreement.

The acquisition was accounted for as a purchase and the results of operations have been included in the consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition. SMARTVoice will seek to develop and market telecommunication technology for IP telephony and applications. IP telephony is the technology of using the internet to transport voice conversations.

The summarized balance sheet at the acquisition date as adjusted for the notes is as follows:

Current assets
 
$
4,754
 
Due to affiliates
   
(11,284
)
Notes payable
   
(570,000
)
Other current liabilities
   
(216,215
)
 
 
$
(792,745
)

The net cost of the acquisition of $792,745 was recorded as goodwill and subsequently impaired.

Prior to this, Georgia was an affiliate of the Company, and between December 16, 2003 and May 31, 2004, the Company caused certain of its convertible debenture holders to invest approximately $405,905 of the amounts discussed below into Georgia for use as working capital for both Georgia ($250,905) and the Company ($155,000). On January 1, 2004 SMARTVoice executed employment agreements with Charles P. Shuster, as Chairman and CEO of SMARTVoice and Frederick Alger as Chief Financial Officer of SMARTVoice. The terms of the employment contracts for Fredrick Alger are for 90 day renewal periods at compensation rates yet to be determined. The employment contract between Fredrick Alger was not renewed after the initial 90 day period. The term of the employment contract with Charles Shuster is for a period of seven years at a base salary of $275,000 per annum and a signing bonus of $150,000. In addition he is entitled to options to purchase 5,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company at fair market value exercisable for 5 years. The contract also contains certain anti-dilution provisions, incentive compensation and severance pay in the amount of $900,000 in the event of default or termination for certain reasons. The contract was amended on October 19, 2004, to remove the anti-dilution provisions effective at the inception of the contract and remove the right to the 5,000,000 options.
 
44


Since the creation of SMARTVoice Telecommunications Inc., a Delaware corporation (“SVT”) in 2004, the company has been involved in the development and marketing of telecommunications technology for IP telephony and related applications. SVT is an IP telephony service provider featuring two product lines: (i) internet protocol telephone devices and internet communication services, and (ii) hosted services that implement the functionality of a private branch exchange, or PBX, over data networks. Charles P. (“Pat”) Shuster, the Chief Executive Officer of SVT, believes that the key to future success will be identifying niche markets in which the company can differentiate itself from numerous emerging carriers. The company remains focused on developing relationships in international markets, where it believes it can sustain a competitive advantage.
 
IP telephony is an alternative technology that can replace services provided by the traditional telephone network. IP telephony technology translates voice transmissions into data packets, transmits the packets over data networks, and reconverts them into voice transmissions at the selected destination. Unlike traditional telephone networks, IP telephony does not utilize dedicated circuits for each telephone call. Instead, the same IP telephony network can be shared by multiple users for voice, data and video simultaneously. This type of data network is more efficient than a dedicated circuit network, because the data network is not restricted by the one-call, one-line limitation of a traditional telephone network. This improved efficiency creates cost savings that can be passed on to the consumer in the form of lower rates or retained by the IP telephony provider.

Malibu Entertainment Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation

In May 2004, Malibu Entertainment Group (“MEG”) was formed as a media and entertainment company for the purpose of developing and financing television, film and media projects for distribution and exploitation worldwide. MEG seeks to finance or co-finance various media projects, at such time as it secures the appropriate financing and/or distribution advances.
 
Over the past two years, MEG has entered into non-exclusive consulting agreements with several experienced film and television executives in order to create media opportunities for the company. These executives include Jim Townsend, Dean Hamilton, Bert Bedrosian and Frederico LaPenda.

 Floating Bed International, Inc., f/k/a BBKO Corporation, f/k/a Malibu Mixers Company, a Nevada corporation

Floating Bed International, Inc. (“FB Int’l.”) develops, markets and sells high quality rest and relaxation devices in the form of beds and hammocks. Its patent-pending technology utilizes gentle motion to provide many health benefits to end users. The benefits of this type of motion have been established in independent scientific studies over a number of years. The company currently has one core product which can be customized and accessorized at the end of its manufacturing process. This feature allows purchasers to use the product in many ways in different settings, in order to serve a number of diverse purposes. The company’s products are sold to individuals and also to commercial users, such as hotels and health spas.
 
45


The Hammock Industry Overview

The hammock is an established piece of furniture with which most people are familiar. However, no significant improvements have been made to the hammock in recorded history. Thus, the company’s product represents a giant step forward for this unique item.

A major trend has emerged as people are turning to outdoor areas (yards, decks, rooftops -- basically, whatever is available) to expand their practical living space. Outdoor furniture sales are booming. Traditional indoor products are being adapted and new products are being developed for outdoor use. Thirty years ago, the general public could not have been sold on the idea of a bathtub in the yard. However, in today’s vernacular, anyone with the space and the money has to have a hot tub. Attitudes change, and people are thinking of their yards and open spaces in new ways. Given the increasing cost of housing construction and the scarcity of indoor space, this trend will likely continue into the foreseeable future.

The Company intends currently to focus its efforts and business strategy on seeking financing for its core business, internet-based technologies, as well as product development and the distribution of related consumer products throughout North America. The Company intends to raise additional capital in the form of equity and/or debt to fund the acquisition and growth of its subsidiaries and recent acquisitions, as described above, which could significantly change the capital structure and cause a change of control in the Company.
 
Since January 2001, through the date of this filing, the Company has been essentially non-operative. Its only significant business activity during this period has been raising capital through Itrex to fund the operations of Itrex and the other subsidiaries, and to pay certain of the Company’s professionals, employees and other individuals and entities in connection with attempting to restructure the Company.
 
M, D & A

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act, including our statements regarding factors that could impact our gross margins; our cost estimates under contracts accounted for using the percentage of completion method; efforts to raise additional financing; commitment of resources, and reduction in operating costs including the possible sale or cessation of certain business segments and the possible further reduction of personnel and suspension of salary increases and capital expenditures. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including our good faith assumptions being incorrect, our business expenses being greater than anticipated due to competitive factors or unanticipated development or sales costs; revenues not resulting in the manner anticipated due to a continued slow down in technology spending, particularly in the telecommunications market; our failure to generate investor interest or to sell certain of our assets or business segments. The forward-looking statements may also be impacted by the additional risks faced by us as described in this Report, including those set forth under the section entitled Factors that May Affect Future Results. All forward-looking statements included in this Report are based on information available to us on the date hereof, and we assume no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements.
 
46

 
Risk Factors.

Investing in the Company’s securities involves a high degree of risk. An investor should carefully consider the following factors and other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, including the Company’s consolidated financial statements and related notes, before making a decision to invest in the Company’s securities. Additional risks and uncertainties, including those generally affecting the market in which the Company operates or that the Company currently deems immaterial, may also impair the Company’s current or future business. The Company has a history of losses and therefore cannot assure investors that it will be profitable.

Since June 2004, Orbit has operated under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, in a case pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, as the parent company of the various wholly-owned subsidiaries which are described below.
 
The Company is currently restructuring its financial program for its successful emergence from Chapter 11. In this regard, the Company filed its original proposed disclosure statement and original proposed Chapter 11 plan of reorganization (collectively, its “plan proposal”) on September 16, 2005. The Company filed its amended plan proposal on September 14, 2006. However, based upon pending business developments and the need to incorporate the settlement and compromise of its litigation with certain of its creditors, as described herein, into its amended plan proposal, the Company intends to file its second amended plan proposal by January 31, 2007, in accordance with an order of the Bankruptcy Court. The Court has scheduled a hearing for February 15, 2007 on the status of the Chapter 11 case and is expected to schedule further hearings to approve the plan proposal at that time.
 
47

 
The Company has been delinquent in filing various reports required under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including, but not limited to, Forms 10QSB and 10KSB for the period from September 2004 to the current period. Although the Company intends to file such late reports in the near future, it cannot assure when such reports will be filed.

The Company has recently experienced operating and net losses. Currently the Company has a net operating loss carry forward. The Company lost approximately $31.42 million in 2004 and approximately $3.024 million in 2003. In the future, the Company may not be able to generate sufficient revenue from operations to pay all of its operating or other expenses. If the Company fails to generate sufficient cash from its operations to pay these expenses, its management will need to identify other sources of funds. The Company may not be able to borrow money or issue more shares of common stock to meet its cash needs. Even if the Company can complete such financing transactions, it may not be on terms favorable to the Company. If the Company cannot raise sufficient capital to fund operations, the Company may not be able to continue its business, and the value of its securities could decline or experience significant dilution, require a change in the capital structure of the Company, or even become worthless.

The Company’s securities could experience wide fluctuations in trading price and volume, or its securities may not have a market that trades. Although the Company intends to list its securities for trading on NASDAQ’s “Bulletin Board” exchange, there can be no assurance that it will meet the requirements of the Bulletin Board, or otherwise be able to trade on this exchange, which could adversely impact the liquidity of the Company’s securities and its ability to raise capital.

The Company’s charter documents contain anti-takeover provisions that could prevent or delay a change in control of the Company, or adversely affect the market price of its common stock.

The Company’s by-laws and amended certificate of incorporation give the Company’s Board of Directors the authority to issue up preferred stock and to determine the rights and preferences of the preferred stock without obtaining shareholder approval. The existence of this preferred stock could make it more difficult or discourage an attempt to obtain control of the Company by means of a tender offer, merger, proxy contest or otherwise. Furthermore, the preferred stock could be issued with other rights, including economic rights, senior to the Company’s common stock, and, therefore, the issuance or conversion of the preferred stock could have an adverse effect upon the market price of the Company’s common stock, change the capital structure of the Company, or even result in a change in control.

Some provisions of Delaware law could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire the Company or hinder a change in management, even if doing so would be beneficial to the Company’s shareholders. In addition, the Company may in the future adopt other measures that may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing an unsolicited takeover, even if such a change in control was at a premium price or favored by a majority of unaffiliated shareholders. These measures may be adopted without any further vote or action by the Company’s shareholders.
 
48


Future issuances and sales into the market of the Company’s common stock will dilute its current stockholders and may depress the market price of the Company’s common stock.

As of June 13, 2006, the Company had approximately 3,094,350,600 shares of its common stock outstanding and 5 million of preferred.

All of the shares issued in exchange for the outstanding convertible notes are restricted but may be eligible for resale if the note holders comply with Rule 144 of the Securities Act. The Company believes that all or substantially all of the note holders of its convertible preferred stock and convertible debt securities have held such securities for in excess of one year. Therefore, upon issuance of the common stock, such note holders may be deemed to have complied with Rule 144(d) of the Securities Act, as their holding period for the common stock may tack with their holding period for the convertible securities, as permitted by Rule 144(d)(ii) of the Securities Act. Persons who have held such securities for more than two years will be eligible to resell their shares under Rule 144(k) of the Securities Act.

Because the Company’s common stock is currently traded on the Over-the-Counter Pink Sheets, sales of its common stock may:

· cause the market price of the common stock to decrease in value;

· decrease the level of public interest in its common stock;

· inhibit buying activity that might otherwise help support the market price of its common stock;

· prevent possible upward price movements in its common stock; or

· not trade in a public market.

The Company’s employment contract with its executive officer could have the effect of precluding or otherwise delaying a change in control of the Company that could be beneficial to the Company’s stockholders.

The employment contract with the Company’s executive officer provides for the payment of significant severance payments in the event the executive officer is terminated.

For example, Mr. Cellura's employment agreement, which expires on June 24, 2010, would require the Company to pay him, upon termination, an aggregate severance amount of up to $2.15 million plus the remaining base salary amounts, and $3.5 million in convertible preferred promissory notes due to him under the employment agreement, if the Company terminates him without cause. Even if the Company were to be successful in terminating Mr. Cellura's employment with cause, the Company still would be required to pay him $900,000 in addition to the $3.5 million in convertible preferred promissory notes. This could have the effect of precluding or otherwise delaying a change of control of the Company that would otherwise be in the best interest of its stockholders. See Executive Compensation--Employment Contracts, infra.
 
49


Financing Activity.

During the current year, the Company issued, by itself, and through its affiliate (and subsequently wholly-owned subsidiary) Itrex an aggregate of approximately $4,500,000 of unregistered convertible debentures to numerous investors and service providers, convertible into the Company’s common stock (the “Debentures”). Approximately $240,000 of the proceeds from the sale of the Debentures was used to fund the working capital of SMARTVoice, which subsequently became the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary. (See “Business of the Company”, MD&A, and “Financial Information”). Approximately $890,000 of the proceeds from the sale of the Debentures was used to fund the working capital of the Company. (See Business of the Company”, MD&A, and “Financial Information”) Approximately $200,000 of the proceeds from the sale of the Debentures was used to fund the working capital of Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC, an entity 25% beneficially owned by the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Joseph R.Cellura, and from whom Itrex subsequently obtained certain rights to receive revenue in the form of royalties (See Business of the Company”, MD&A, and “Financial Information”). The Company believes, but cannot assure that these transactions were exempt from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Act”), in that the Company believes that each transaction met the criteria for the private placement exemption provided by Section 4(2). No underwriters were used in these transactions, nor were any commissions paid to anyone by the Company.

The Company intends to raise additional capital in the form of equity and debt to fund the acquisition and growth of its recent acquisitions, as described above, which could significantly change the capital structure and cause a change of control in the Company.

Results of Operations.

As described herein, the Company was inactive from an operational standpoint and therefore generated no revenue during the reporting period.

Comparison of 2003 to 2004.

Revenues.

The Company generated no revenue in 2003 and $3,398 in 2004.

Operating Expenses. Operating expenses in 2003 and 2004 were $1.236 million and $27.789 million respectively. These expenses were incurred through issuances of debt for services provided to the Company during the reporting period and general administrative expenses primarily related to litigation, management, and the operations of the SmartVoice and Malibu subsidiaries. In addition, in 2004, the Company incurred $2,267,000 in impairment losses attributable to the Smartvoice and Malibu Beach Beverage Group acquisitions(see Item 1). The Company recognized compensation expense of $19,250,000 related to the issuance of preferred stock issued in exchange for the forgiveness of certain debt.(See Note 7 in Notes to the Financial Statements)
 
50


Other Expenses. Other expenses in 2003 and 2004 consisted of $1.788 and $3.634 million respectively. Approximately $1.788 and $1.930 was related to interest payable on unsecured debt owed by the company for 2004 and 2003 respectively.
 
The Company recognized a $1,024,000 net loss in converting debt to common stock during the period. The Company recognized a loss of $644,000 attributable to certain derivative liabilities as discussed in Notes 7and 8of the Financial Statement Notes. The Company recognized $35,000 of expense associated with reorganization activity during the year.

Net Loss. The company and it’s subsidiaries incurred a loss of $3.024 million in 2003 and $ 31.420 million in 2004.

Liquidity and Capital Resources.

Capitalization. The Company’s charter authorizes the issuance of 5 billion shares of common stock and 10.0 million shares of preferred stock. As of June 13th, 2006, the Company had approximately 3.1 billion shares of common stock outstanding and approximately 5 million in preferred stock.

Current and Future Liquidity Needs. The Company has not generated net cash from operations for any period since 1996. The Company has primarily financed its operations since 1996 through private sales of equity and debt securities. As of this filing date, the Company has no principal source of cash or liquidity.

Plan of Operation

The company has developed wholly owned subsidiaries and plans to focus on business opportunities in separate and distinct markets. Following is a brief description of the intended activities for each of the subsidiaries:

SMARTVOICE

IP Telephony is an alternative technology that can replace services provided by the traditional telephone network. IP Telephony technology translates voice into data packets, transmits the packets over data networks and reconverts them into voice at the destination. Unlike traditional telephone networks, IP Telephony does not use dedicated circuits for each telephone call; instead, the same IP Telephony network can be shared by multiple users for voice, data and video simultaneously. This type of data network is more efficient than a dedicated circuit network because the data network is not restricted by the one-call, one-line limitation of a traditional telephone network. This improved efficiency creates cost savings that can be passed on to the consumer in the form of lower rates or retained by the IP Telephony provider.
 
51

 
We intend to focus SMARTVoice on High Margin Opportunities in Emerging Markets. SMARTVoice will targets international markets undergoing telecommunications deregulation, which we believe will provide high margin opportunities. We intend to continue to enhance our global distribution chain by securing new resellers with strong local sales and marketing channels. Our plan is to develop and integrate new services into our existing managed platform.

In many of the foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct or plan to conduct business, the primary provider of significant in-country transmission facilities is the national telephone company, which may be the only provider in that country. Accordingly, we may have to lease transmission capacity at artificially high rates from such a monopolistic provider, and consequently, we may not be able to generate a profit on those calls.

MALIBU BEACH BEVERAGE GROUP

Malibu Beach Beverage Group (“MBBG”) is a specialty beverage manufacturer which produces three low carbohydrate, low calorie, all natural fruit juice blends, and three flavored micro-brewed green tea blends. MBBG was established to distribute and sell these product lines. In July 2004, Orbit entered into a letter agreement with MBBG to acquire MBBG for a combination of cash and stock.

Low carbohydrate diets such as “Atkins,” “South Beach” and the “Zone” are no longer passing fads. They represent a major consumer trend and a significant lifestyle change. According to market researcher A.C. Nielsen, over 32 million people in the United States were predicted to move to a low carb diet in 2004 alone. The U.S. market alone for low carb products was projected to grow to over $16 billion in 2004. The NPD (National Product Development) Group has estimated that 25 million Americans currently are trying some type of low-carb diet. A web site called “lowcarbdietworld.com” claims that more than 68 million people are on, or have been on, some type of low-carb diet.
 
With the production and distribution of high quality, all natural, low-carb, low-cal, new age beverages in a growing market; MBBG seeks to capitalize on increasing market share and the demand for low calorie, vitamin-enhanced, low carbohydrate beverages. Guided by the creative vision and business acumen of its senior management team and operations support, MBBG is positioned to achieve great success in this highly lucrative market segment. MBBG has presented the Malibu beverage line at the 2004 FMI Food and Beverage Show and earned the #2 award for best new age beverage product in the beverage category.

Malibu Entertainment Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation

In May 2004, Malibu Entertainment Group (“MEG”) was formed as a media and entertainment company for the purpose of developing and financing television, film and media projects for distribution and exploitation worldwide. MEG seeks to finance or co-finance various media projects, at such time as it secures the appropriate financing and/or distribution advances.
 
52

 
Over the past two years, MEG has entered into non-exclusive consulting agreements with several experienced film and television executives in order to create media opportunities for the company. These executives include Jim Townsend, Dean Hamilton, Bert Bedrosian and Frederico LaPenda.
 
Floating Bed International, Inc., f/k/a BBKO Corporation, f/k/a Malibu Mixers Company, a Nevada corporation

Floating Bed International, Inc. (“FB Int’l.”) develops, markets and sells high quality rest and relaxation devices in the form of beds and hammocks. Its patent-pending technology utilizes gentle motion to provide many health benefits to end users. The benefits of this type of motion have been established in independent scientific studies over a number of years. The company currently has one core product which can be customized and accessorized at the end of its manufacturing process. This feature allows purchasers to use the product in many ways in different settings, in order to serve a number of diverse purposes. The company’s products are sold to individuals and also to commercial users, such as hotels and health spas.

The Hammock Industry Overview

The hammock is an established piece of furniture with which most people are familiar. However, no significant improvements have been made to the hammock in recorded history. Thus, the company’s product represents a giant step forward for this unique item.

A major trend has emerged as people are turning to outdoor areas (yards, decks, rooftops -- basically, whatever is available) to expand their practical living space. Outdoor furniture sales are booming. Traditional indoor products are being adapted and new products are being developed for outdoor use. Thirty years ago, the general public could not have been sold on the idea of a bathtub in the yard. However, in today’s vernacular, anyone with the space and the money has to have a hot tub. Attitudes change, and people are thinking of their yards and open spaces in new ways. Given the increasing cost of housing construction and the scarcity of indoor space, this trend will likely continue into the foreseeable future.
 
53

 
ITEM 7. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
 
ORBIT BRANDS  CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31,2004

CONTENTS

Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firms
 F-2
   
Financial Statements:
 
   
Balance Sheet
 F-4
   
Statements of Operation
 F-5
   
Statement of Stockholders' (Deficit)
 F-6
   
Statements of Cash Flows
 F-7
   
Notes to Financial Statements
 F-8
   

F-1

 

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors of Orbit Brands Corporation
Sherman Oaks, California

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Orbit Brands Corporation as of December 31, 2004 and the related consolidated statement of operations, stockholders’ deficit, and cash flow for the year ended December 31, 2004. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform an audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Orbit Brands Corporation as of December 31, 2004 and the results of operations and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2004, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that Orbit Brands Corporation will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, Orbit Brands, Inc. suffered recurring losses from operations and has a working capital deficiency, which raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans regarding those matters also are described in Note 2. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

MALONE & BAILEY, PC

www.malone-bailey.com
Houston, Texas

February 9, 2007
 
F-2

 
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Stockholders and Board of Directors
Orbit Brands Corporation

We have audited the consolidated balance sheet of Orbit Brands Corporation as of December 31, 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' (deficit) and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2003. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Orbit Brands Corporation as of December 31, 2003, and results of its operations and its cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2003, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, the Company has suffered a loss from operations and has working capital and stockholders' deficits. These factors raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans in regard to this matter are also discussed in Note 2. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

Stark Winter Schenkein & Co., LLP
 
Denver, Colorado
June 3, 2004
 
F-3

 
 
Orbit Brands Corporation
(DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION)
Consolidated Balance Sheet
December 31, 2004
 
Assets
     
       
Current Assets
       
Cash 
 
$
789
 
 Total current assets
   
789
 
         
Property & equipment 
   
5,238
 
         
   
$
6,027
 
         
Liabilities and Stockholders' (Deficit)
       
         
Current liabilities subject to compromise:
       
Accounts payable 
 
$
2,251,044
 
Accrued interest 
   
5,716,053
 
Accounts payable and accrued expenses - related parties 
   
5,839,518
 
Derivative liability 
   
2,672,776
 
Convertible notes payable - related parties 
   
947,229
 
Convertible notes payable  
   
17,756,288
 
 Total current liabilites subject to compromise
   
35,182,908
 
         
Stockholders' (deficit):
       
Preferred stock, $.001 par value, Series A convertible 
       
 10,000,000 shares authorized,
       
 5,000,000 shares issued and outstanding
   
20,000,000
 
Common stock, $.001 par value,  
       
 5,000,000,000 shares authorized,
       
 1,126,107,071 shares issued and outstanding
   
1,126,106
 
Paid in capital 
   
59,686,430
 
Accumulated (deficit) 
   
(115,989,417
)
     
(35,176,881
)
         
   
$
6,027
 
 
 See the accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
 
F-4

 
Orbit Brands Corporation
(DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION)
Consolidated Statements of Operations
Years Ended December 31, 2004 and 2003
 
   
2004
 
2003
 
           
Revenue
 
$
3,398
 
$
-
 
               
Operating Expenses:
             
Selling, general and administrative expenses 
   
4,968,599
   
986,144
 
Compensation 
   
20,553,490
   
250,000
 
Impairments 
   
2,267,329
   
-
 
     
27,789,418
   
1,236,144
 
               
Loss from operations
   
(27,786,020
)
 
(1,236,144
)
               
Other (income) expense:
             
Interest 
   
1,930,436
   
1,787,800
 
Reorganization expenses 
   
35,000
   
-
 
Loss on derivative liability 
   
644,262
   
-
 
Loss on conversion of debt to common stock 
   
1,024,000
   
-
 
     
3,633,698
   
1,787,800
 
               
Net (loss)
 
$
(31,419,718
)
$
(3,023,944
)
               
Per share information - basis and fully diluted:
             
               
Weighted average shares outstanding 
   
844,772,026
   
610,680,704
 
               
Net loss per share 
 
$
(0.04
)
$
-
 
 
See the accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
 
F-5

 
Orbit Brands Corporation
(DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION)
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' (Deficit)
Years Ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 

   
Common Stock
 
Preferred Stock
 
Treasury Stock
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Shares
 
Amount
 
Shares
 
Amount
 
Shares
 
Amount
 
 Paid in Capital
 
 Accumulated
(Deficit)
 
 Total
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Balance December 31, 2002
   
610,680,704
 
$
610,680
   
281,250
 
$
281
   
281,250
 
$
(210,937
)
$
59,252,605
 
$
(81,545,755
)
$
(21,893,126
)
 
                                     
Retirement of preferred stock
   
-
   
-
   
(281,250
)
 
(281
)
 
(281,250
)
 
210,937
   
(210,656
)
     
-
 
Net (loss)
   
-
   
-
   
-
   
-
   
-
   
-
   
   
   
(3,023,944
)
 
(3,023,944
)
 
                                     
Balance December 31, 2003
   
610,680,704
   
610,680
   
-
   
-
   
-
   
-
   
59,041,949
   
(84,569,699
)
 
(24,917,070
)
 
                                     
Conversion of debt
   
521,745,956
   
521,746
                   
2,803,684
       
3,325,430
 
Issuance of preferred stock for related party debt
           
5,000,000
   
20,000,000
                   
20,000,000
 
Derivative liability
                           
(2,159,203
)
     
(2,159,203
)
Error correction
   
(6,319,589
)
 
(6,320
)
                         
(6,320
)
Net (loss)
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
(31,419,718
)
 
(31,419,718
)
 
                                     
Balance December 31, 2004
   
1,126,107,071
 
$
1,126,106
   
5,000,000
 
$
20,000,000
   
-
 
$
-
 
$
59,686,430
 
$
(115,989,417
)
$
(35,176,881
)
 
                                     
 
F-6

 
Orbit Brands Corporation
(DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION)
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
Years Ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 
 
   
2004
 
2003
 
           
Cash flows from operating activities:
             
Net (loss)
 
$
(31,419,718
)
$
(3,023,944
)
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) to net cash (used in)  
             
 operating activities:
             
Depreciation  
   
1,062
       
Impairments 
   
2,267,329
       
Compensation - exchange of related party debt for preferred stock 
   
19,250,000
       
Notes payable issued for services 
   
2,915,199
   
809,430
 
Issuance of common stock and warrants for services 
   
182,334
   
-
 
Loss on derivative liability 
   
644,262
       
Loss on conversion of debt to common stock 
   
1,024,000
       
Changes in:
             
Other current assets 
   
(23,995
)
 
(2,800
)
Accounts payable 
   
598,797
   
15,882
 
Accrued interest 
   
1,376,438
   
1,713,800
 
Accounts payable and accrued expenses - related parties 
   
1,930,297
   
323,268
 
Net cash (used in) operating activities:
   
(1,253,995
)
 
(164,364
)
               
Cash flows from financing activities:
             
Proceeds from notes payable 
   
1,208,191
   
209,300
 
               
Net increase in cash
   
(45,804
)
 
44,936
 
               
Beginning - cash balance
   
46,593
   
1,657
 
               
Ending - cash balance
 
$
789
 
$
46,593
 
               
Supplemental cash flow information:
             
               
Cash paid for income taxes 
 
$
-
 
$
-
 
               
Cash paid for interest 
 
$
-
 
$
-
 
 
See the accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
 
F-7

 
NOTE 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Organization

The Company has four (4) wholly-owned subsidiaries which are Delaware Corporations: SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc., (“Smart Voice”), Itrex International Corporation (“Itrex”), Malibu Beach Beverage Group (“Malibu”), and Malibu Entertainment Group, Inc.(“MEG”). The Company has one (1) wholly-owned subsidiary which is a Nevada Corporation: Malibu Mixers Company/BBKO (“BBKO”).

Since January 2001, through the date of this filing, the Company has been essentially non-operative. Its only significant business activity during this period has been raising capital through Itrex to fund the operations of its subsidiaries and to pay certain of the Company’s professionals, employees and other individuals and entities in connection with attempting to restructure the Company.

Operations have ceased and there have been no operations since June 2004.

Consolidation

The financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All significant inter-company accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Reclassifications

Certain items presented in the previous year’s financial statements have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation.

Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenue from services at the time the services are completed and revenue from the sale of products at the time that title passes to the buyer.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment is recorded at cost. Depreciation of assets is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets.

Financial Instruments

Fair value estimates discussed herein are based upon certain market assumptions and pertinent information available to management as of December 31, 2004. The respective carrying value of certain on-balance-sheet financial instruments approximated their fair values. These financial instruments include cash, accounts payable and notes payable. Fair values were assumed to approximate carrying values for these financial instruments because they are short term in nature and their carrying amounts approximate fair values. The carrying value of the Company’s long-term debt approximated its fair value based on the current market conditions for similar debt instruments.
 
F-8


Derivative Financial Instruments

The Company does not use derivative instruments to hedge exposures to cash flow, market, or foreign currency risks.

We review the terms of convertible debt and equity instruments issued to determine whether there are embedded derivative instruments, including embedded conversion options that are required to be bifurcated and accounted for separately as a derivative financial instrument. In circumstances where the convertible instrument contains more than one embedded derivative instrument, including the conversion option that is required to be bifurcated, the bifurcated derivative instruments are accounted for as a single, compound derivative instrument The Company may also issue options or warrants to non-employees in connection with consulting or other services they provide.

Derivative financial instruments are initially measured at their fair value. For derivative financial instruments that are accounted for as liabilities, the derivative instrument is initially recorded at its fair value using binomial lattice model utilizing the probability of weighted average cash flow scenarios and is then re-valued and is re-measured at each reporting date, with changes in the fair value reported as charges or credits to income. For option-based derivative financial instruments like warrants, the Company also uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value the derivative instruments. To the extent that the initial fair values of the freestanding and/or bifurcated derivative instrument liabilities exceed the total proceeds received, an immediate charge to income is recognized, in order to initially record the derivative instrument liabilities at their fair value.

If the derivative exists at the inception of the instrument, the discount from the face value of the convertible debt or equity instruments resulting from allocating some or all of the proceeds to the derivative instruments, together with the stated interest on the instrument, is amortized over the life of the instrument through periodic charges to income, using the effective interest method. If the instrument is determined not to contain embedded derivatives at inception, but later becomes one because of a tainting event caused by a instrument entered into subsequent to the inception of the convertible debt, the resulting liability is reduced from Additional Paid in Capital.

The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is re-assessed periodically, including at the end of each reporting period. If re-classification is required, the fair value of the derivative instrument, as of the determination date, is re-classified. Any previous charges or credits to income for changes in the fair value of the derivative instrument are not reversed. Derivative instrument liabilities are classified in the balance sheet as current or non-current based on whether or not net-cash settlement of the derivative instrument could be required within twelve months of the balance sheet date.

Long Lived Assets

The carrying value of long-lived assets is reviewed on a regular basis for the existence of facts and circumstances that suggest impairment. The Company will measures the amount of any impairment based on the amount that the carrying value of the impaired assets exceed the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposal of the impaired assets.

Net Income (Loss) Per Common Share

The Company calculates net income (loss) per share as required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) 128, "Earnings per Share." Basic earnings (loss) per share is calculated by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings (loss) per share is calculated by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of common shares and dilutive common stock equivalents outstanding. During periods in which the Company incurs losses common stock equivalents, if any, are not considered, as their effect would be anti-dilutive.
 
F-9


Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Income Taxes

The Company follows SFAS 109 "Accounting for Income Taxes" for recording the provision for income taxes. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are computed based upon the difference between the financial statement and income tax basis of assets and liabilities using the enacted marginal tax rate applicable when the related asset or liability is expected to be realized or settled. Deferred income tax expenses or benefits are based on the changes in the asset or liability each period. If available evidence suggests that it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized, a valuation allowance is required to reduce the deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. Future changes in such valuation allowance are included in the provision for deferred income taxes in the period of change.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company accounts for equity instruments issued to employees for services based on the fair value of the equity instruments issued and accounts for equity instruments issued to other than employees based on the fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instruments, whichever is more reliably measurable.

The Company accounts for stock based compensation in accordance with SFAS 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation." The provisions of SFAS 123 allow companies to either expense the estimated fair value of stock options or to continue to follow the intrinsic value method set forth in APB Opinion 25, "Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees" (“APB 25”) but disclose the pro forma effects on net income (loss) had the fair value of the options been expensed. The Company has elected to continue to apply APB 25 in accounting for its stock option incentive plans.

SFAS 123 requires the Company to provide pro-forma information regarding net income and earnings per share as if compensation cost for the Company's stock option plans had been determined in accordance with the fair value based method prescribed in SFAS 123. The fair value of the option grants is estimated on the date of grant utilizing the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following weighted average assumptions for grants during the years ended December 31 2003: expected life of options of 5 years, expected volatility of 361%, risk-free interest rate of 3% and no dividend yield. The weighted average fair value at the date of grant for warrants granted during the year ended December 31, 2003, approximated $0.00 per warrant. Compensation costs charged to operations aggregated $0 for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003. These results may not be representative of those to be expected in future years.

Recent Pronouncements
 
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, which is a revision of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and amends SFAS No. 95, Statement of Cash Flows. Generally, the approach in SFAS No. 123R is similar to the approach described in SFAS No. 123. However, SFAS No. 123R requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Pro forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. SFAS No. 123R became effective for Orbit as of January 1, 2006.
 
F-10


SFAS No. 123R requires public companies, as well as nonpublic companies that used the fair value method of accounting prescribed by SFAS No. 123 for either recognition or pro forma disclosure purposes, to adopt its requirements using one of two methods: (i) a “modified prospective” method in which compensation cost is recognized beginning with the effective date (a) based on the requirements of SFAS No. 123R for all share-based payments granted after the effective date and (b) based on the requirements of SFAS No. 123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date of SFAS No. 123R that remain unvested on the effective date, or (ii) a “modified retrospective” method which includes the requirements of the modified prospective method described above, but also permits entities to restate, based on the amounts previously recognized under SFAS No. 123 for purposes of pro forma disclosures, either (a) all prior periods presented or (b) prior interim periods of the year of adoption.

Orbit accounts for derivative financial instruments in accordance with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities. SFAS No. 133 requires that an entity recognize all derivatives, as defined, as either assets or liabilities measured at fair value. In addition, all derivatives used in hedging relationships must be designated, reassessed and documented pursuant to the provisions of SFAS No. 133.
 
Certain of Orbit’s debt instruments contained imbedded derivatives, as defined. Orbit has not designated these imbedded derivatives as hedges under SFAS No. 133 and, as such, changes in their fair value are being recognized in earnings as derivative gains or losses.
 
NOTE 2. BASIS OF REPORTING

The Company’s financial statements are presented on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. Since January 2001, through the date of this filing, the Company has been essentially non-operative. Its only significant business activity during this period has been raising capital through Itrex to fund the operations of its subsidiaries and to pay certain of the Company’s professionals, employees and other individuals and entities in connection with attempting to restructure the Company.

The Company has experienced a significant loss from operations as a result of its investment necessary to achieve its operating plan, which is long-range in nature. For the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Company incurred net losses of $31,419,718 and $3,023,944 and has working capital and stockholder deficits of $35,182,119 and $35,176,881 at December 31, 2004.

Since June 2004, Orbit has operated under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, in a case pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, as the parent company of the various wholly-owned subsidiaries which are described below.
 
The Company is currently completing the reorganization process in Chapter 11. It is scheduled to provide a definitive disclosure statement in February 2007, after which a hearing will be set on confirmation of the Company’s proposed Chapter 11 plan of reorganization. Once the Chapter 11 plan of reorganization is confirmed , the Company will emerge from Chapter 11 and continue to implement its immediate and long-range business plan.
 
The Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is contingent upon its ability to attain profitable operations and secure financing. In addition, the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern must be considered in light of the problems, expenses and complications frequently encountered by entrance into established markets and the competitive environment in which the Company operates.
 
F-11


The Company intends currently to focus its efforts and business strategy on seeking financing for its core business, internet-based technologies, as well as product development and the distribution of related consumer products throughout North America. The Company intends to raise additional capital in the form of equity and/or debt to fund the acquisition and growth of its subsidiaries and recent acquisitions, as described above, which could significantly change the capital structure and cause a change of control in the Company.

The financial statements do not include any adjustments to reflect the possible future effects on the recoverability and classification of assets or the amounts and classification of liabilities that may result from the possible inability of the Company to continue as a going concern.

NOTE 3. ACQUISITIONS

Effective January 1, 2004, the Company through a subsidiary SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc, a Delaware corporation (“SMARTVoice”) agreed to acquire the intellectual property of SMARTVoice Telecommunications, Inc, a Georgia corporation (“Georgia”) formed on May 6, 2003. The net liabilities of Georgia were initially acquired by the Company for no consideration. In addition, the Company entered into an employment contract with an individual to serve as the Chief Executive Officer of SMARTVoice (see below). On October 19, 2004, the agreement was amended to adjust the purchase price to include an additional amount of $570,000 in the form notes payable and amend certain terms of the employment agreement.

The acquisition was accounted for as a purchase and the results of operations have been included in the consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition. SMARTVoice will seek to develop and market telecommunication technology for IP telephony and applications. IP telephony is the technology of using the internet to transport voice conversations.

The summarized balance sheet at the acquisition date as adjusted for the notes is as follows:

Current assets
 
$
4,754
 
Due to affiliates
   
(11,284
)
Notes payable
   
(570,000
)
Other current liabilities
   
(216,215
)
 
 
$
(792,745
)

The net cost of the acquisition of $792,745 was recorded as goodwill and subsequently impaired.

Effective June 30, 2004, Malibu Beach Beverage Group, LLC, a Delaware LLC (“MBBG”) was acquired by the Company. MBBG sold all of its rights, title and interests in all intellectual property of the low carb beverages including but not limited to any and all formulas, copyrights and applications, patents and applications, trademarks and applications, licensing, contracts, proprietary information, any other claimed proprietary information, and any other tangible and intangible intellectual property of the low carb beverage business of the MBBG. The net liabilities of MBBG were acquired by the Company for no consideration. The Company’s Chairman and CEO, Joseph Cellura, holds a 25% membership interest in MBBG.

The acquisition was accounted for as a purchase and the results of operations have been included in the consolidated financial statements since the date of acquisition.
 
F-12


The summarized balance sheet at the acquisition date is as follows:

Current assets
 
$
242,542
 
Property and equipment
   
6,300
 
Due to related parties
   
(1,239,056
)
Current liabilities
   
(142,891
)
   
$
(1,133,105
)
 
The net cost of the acquisition of $1,133,105 was recorded as goodwill and subsequently impaired. The Company also booked impairment losses of $274,092 relating to Malibu Beach Beverage inventories and $67,387 related to obsolete Smartvoice equipment.

NOTE 4. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES-RELATED PARTY

Accounts payable and accrued expenses consists of the following at December 31, 2004:

Accrued salaries
 
$
2,464,515
 
Settlement accrual (see note 10)
   
2,500,000
 
Accrued consulting expenses
   
338,205
 
Other miscellaneous accruals
   
536,798
 
   
$
5,839,518
 

NOTE 5. CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE

Notes payable consists of the following at December 31, 2004:

Unsecured convertible 12 % notes payable due January 1999, Principal and interest payable at maturity
 
$
1,527,500
 
Unsecured convertible 12% debentures due at various dates in 2000, principal and interest payable at maturity, unless converted into common stock
   
2,935,907
 
Unsecured convertible 5 % and 12 % debentures due at various dates in 2001, principal and interest payable at maturity, unless converted into common stock
   
4,910,000
 
Unsecured convertible 12 % debentures due at various dates in 2002, principal and interest payable at maturity, unless converted into common stock
   
3,573,145
 
Unsecured convertible 12% debentures due at various dates in 2003, principal and interest payable at maturity, unless converted into common stock
   
850,130
 
Unsecured convertible 12% debentures due at various dates in 2004, principal and interest payable at maturity, unless converted into common stock
   
3,198,431
 
Other notes payable
   
761,704
 
         
   
$
17,756,289
 
 
Convertible notes payable to related parties at December 31, 2004 amounted to $947,229.

F-13

 
Substantially all of the notes are currently in default. Certain debenture agreements contain covenants, which require the Company to perform a reverse split of not less than fifteen shares of the Company's common stock for one share of common stock.

The convertible notes have contractual conversion rates of between $0.0002 and $0.015 (see Note 12).

As discussed in Note 7, when the company issued the preferred stock , the company re-evaluated the determination under SFAS 133 and EITF 00-19, of whether or not the embedded conversion feature was in need of bifurcation and separate fair value reporting as a derivative liability. The Company determined that the embedded conversion feature did now in fact meet the definition for liability accounting and required bifurcation and fair value recording because the issuance of preferred shares caused an “indeterminate” amount of shares to be issued. At inception of the preferred stock issuance, the entire population of convertible notes was considered to be “tainted” and now contained embedded derivative liabilities. The value of the derivative liability associated with the embedded conversion feature at June 3, 2004 was $1,761,889. Since this determination was made subsequent to the inception of the original notes, this resulted in a decrease in Additional paid-in capital.

The fair value of these embedded conversion features was estimated using a binomial lattice model utilizing the probability of weighted average cash flows under different scenarios.

The primary factors driving the economic value of the embedded derivatives are stock price, stock volatility, an event of default and successful restructuring. Management then made projections of these variables over the term of the valuations. The assumptions at the date (6/3/2004) the Notes were initially tainted were:
 
·  
The stock price would increase at the cost of equity with a volatility of 200%
 
·  
The company is in a state of default and will remain in default for a period of 12 months, after which, an event of default would occur 5% of the time, increasing 0.1% per month
 
·  
The Company would automatically convert “in-the-money” notes if the registration was effective and the company was not in default
 
·  
Successful restructuring would be initially 0% for 12 months then increase to 30% with a .005 stock price and increment monthly by 2% to a maximum of 95%.

At December 31, 2004 the company re-measured the fair value of the embedded conversion feature and the market value was $2,604,716. As a result a loss was recorded in the amount of $973,516 for the year ended December 31, 2004.

NOTE 6. INCOME TAXES

Deferred income taxes reflect the net effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. Significant components of the Company's deferred tax assets at December 31, 2004 are approximated as follows:

Deferred tax assets:
       
Net operating loss carryforwards
 
$
14,166,667
 
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets
   
(14,166,667
)
Net deferred tax assets
 
$
-
 
 
F-14

 
At December 31, 2004, the Company has a net operating loss carry forward of approximately $42.5 million, which will begin to expire in the year 2012 and continue to expire through the year 2024. Given the changes in the business and ownership, management believes it is highly unlikely that the net operating loss will be available to offset future income. The tax benefits of these items are reflected in the above table of deferred tax assets and liabilities. U.S. tax rules impose limitations on the use of net operating losses following certain changes in ownership. If a change were to occur, the limitation could reduce the amount of these benefits that would be available to offset future taxable income each year, starting with the year of ownership change.

The reconciliation of income tax attributable to continuing operations computed at the U.S. federal statutory tax rates to income tax expense is approximated as follows:

   
YEARS ENDED
DECEMBER 31,
 
   
2004
 
2003
 
Income tax benefit at U.S. statutory rate
 
$
(1,150,000
)
$
(1,030,000
)
State tax benefit, net
   
(170,000
)
 
(150,000
)
Change in valuation allowance
   
1,320,000
   
1,180,000
 
Tax expense
 
$
-
 
$
-
 
 
NOTE 7. STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT

As of December 31, 2004, warrants to purchase 100,000,000 shares of the Company's common stock were outstanding. These warrants expire March 28, 2008 and had an exercise price of $.001 per share.

Stock Option Plan

In November 2000, the Board of Directors and the stockholders of the Company adopted a stock option plan. The number of options, which may be granted under the plan aggregates 175,000,000. The purchase price for any Stock Awards and the exercise price for any Options may not be less than the fair market value for the common stock on the date of grant. There are currently no options outstanding under the plan.

Preferred Stock

On June 3, 2004, the Company issued 5,000,000 Shares of Series A convertible preferred stock to a related party in exchange for forgiveness of $750,000 of debt. The preferred stock had a fair market value on the date of issuance of $20,000,000. The Company determined that this transaction as originally reported in the June 2004 10QSB was incorrect and will file an amended June 2004 10QSB reflecting the correction of this error. The Company originally ascribed a value of $750,000 to the issuance of the preferred stock pursuant to the amount of debt forgiven. Subsequently, the Company determined it was more appropriate to record the issuance at fair market value based on the underlying common stock value at the date of issuance. The Company recorded compensation expense of $19,250,000 with respect to this issuance.

The Company examined the terms of the preferred stock in accordance with SFAS 133 and determined that the conversion feature was clearly and closely related to the host contract and therefore did not need to be bifurcated and valued as a liability. However under the terms of the “reset provision” which states the number of common shares that this series of convertible preferred shares convert into is initially set as of the date of this certificate. The number of shares is calculated by taking the conversion ratio and multiplying the amount of common shares available per preferred share by the number of preferred shares designated by the preferred share certificate attached to this certificate. However, this number shall be adjusted at the end of each month, or on any date upon which a demand for conversion occurs. The purpose of this provision is to maintain the original underlying value of the preferred shares on the date of the original issuance of the preferred shares. This will be accomplished using the following formula:

F-15

 
One divided by the quotient of the common stock price on the day of conversion divided by the common stock price as of the original date of issuance of the preferred shares. This result shall be multiplied by the number of original common shares that the preferred shares could have been converted to, i.e., assume the original common stock price was $10, and the current stock price is $5. To convert the convertible shares today, the number of common shares per conversion would increase by the following formula: 1 / ($5 per share / $10 per share) = 2. Then multiply the original number of common shares that the preferred stock could have converted into by 2. However, in no case shall the preferred shares be convertible into a number of common shares that is less then the original number of common shares that the preferred shareholders had the right to convert into as of the date of issuance.

This in fact caused a “tainting” of the conversion features within all the outstanding convertible notes and warrants, creating the need for re-evaluation of the outstanding convertible debt and warrants. See Notes 5 and 8.

Common Stock

During August 2004, the Company converted $1,451,189 of debt into 96,745,956 shares of the company’s common stock as part of the restructuring of the company’s capitalization. The shares issued were valued at their fair market value of $96,746. The difference between the fair market value of the shares issued for the above conversion has been recorded as a(loss) on the settlement of debt during the period of $1,354,443. In addition to this conversion the Company also converted $1,321,000 of debt during the year into 425,000,000 shares of common stock. The loss on settlement attributable to this conversion was $1,318,552. The Company also recorded an increase to APIC of approximately $131,000 related to derivative liabilities associated with debt conversions.

NOTE 8. WARRANTS

During 2003, the company issued 100,000,000 warrants to outsiders for services. As a result of the issuance of the preferred stock, the company re-evaluated these warrants under SFAS 133 and determined that they were considered to be “tainted” and should be valued as derivative liabilities.

At June 3, 2004, the derivative liability associated with the warrants was determined to be $397,314.

At December 31, 2004 the company re-measured the fair value of the derivative liability associated with the warrants and estimated it to be $68,060 using Black Scholes pricing model. The assumptions used in this model included (1) 250%volatility, (2) expected term of 5 years, (3) risk free rate of return associated with the remaining term of the warrant (4) expected dividends of zero. This resulted in a gain in the amount of $329,254 for the year ended December 31, 2004.
 
NOTE 9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Operating Leases

F-16

 
During August 2004, Itrex International, Inc. (“Itrex”), a subsidiary of the Company, entered into a lease for a residential property to be used as an office. The term of the lease was for six months. The Company agreed to issue an aggregate of 7,500,000 shares of common stock in consideration for the lease term. The fair market value of the shares issued was amortized over the term of the lease.
 
During May 2005, Itrex entered into a lease for another residential property to be utilized as an office. The lease commenced June 1, 2005 for an initial term of one year at an annual rental of $96,000. The lease provides for two renewal options, for four years and five years, respectively. The first option has been exercised.
 
Future minimum lease payments are as follows:

2005
 
$
56,000
 
2006
   
96,000
 
2007
   
96,000
 
2008
   
96,000
 
2009
   
96,000
 
2010
   
40,000
 
 
Rent expense for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 including the above lease was $48,000 and $48,000.

Employment Contract

The Company extended the employment with an executive officer, which now expires during June 2010. The agreement provides for minimum salary levels and minimum expense reimbursements as well as for incentive bonuses, which are payable if specified management goals are attained. Minimum commitments for future salaries and expense reimbursement, excluding bonuses aggregate $358,000 per year.

Litigation

A.
Orbittravel.com Corporation, etc., et al, Plaintiffs, v. Teakwood Ventures, L.L.C. et al.

In November 2001, Orbit sued an investor group headed by Teakwood Ventures, LLC. On October 18, 2001, Orbit had reached an overall settlement requiring the return of 184,277,000 shares of common stock which had been issued to the defendants. This lawsuit is still unresolved and is expected to be dismissed in the bankruptcy proceedings.
 
B.
ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, vs. Douglas R. Dollinger, et al.

In February 2004, Orbit sued its former in-house counsel and others for professional negligence and other claims. This lawsuit is still unresolved and is expected to be dismissed in the bankruptcy proceedings.

C.
Dean E. Miller, Plaintiff, vs; ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION

In February 2004, Orbit was sued by a former employee of the Company, Dean Miller, who had been terminated in 2001 This lawsuit is still unresolved and is expected to be dismissed in the bankruptcy proceedings.

F-17


D.
Mark Savoretti, Plaintiff, vs. Orbittravel.com, Inc., et al,
 
In January 2004, Orbit was sued for fraudulent inducement, constructive trust, breach of contract, fraudulent transfer and alter ego, arising from a failed business transaction which occurred in late 1999 and early 2000. The bankruptcy court dismissed the proceeding but allowed the claim to be considered as an unsecured claim in the bankruptcy. Unsecured creditors are expected to get no payments when the bankruptcy is resolved.

E.
In re. ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION, Debtor

In May 2004, Orbit filed for protection pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, Title 11.

Orbit is currently restructuring its financial program for its successful emergence from Chapter 11. Its first plan of reorganization was filed on September 16, 2005. Orbit intends to file its second amended plan proposal in February or March 2007. The Court has scheduled a hearing for February 15, 2007 on the status of the Chapter 11 case.

F.
Carol Molus and Michael Molus, Plaintiffs, vs. Joseph Cellura, etc., et al.

In December 2004, Orbit and others were sued by certain investors for breach of contract, fraud, elder abuse, violations of the federal securities laws, and professional negligence against the Company’s attorneys. A pending settlement authorizes issuance of common shares representing up to 10% of total outstanding shares, pending a re-hearing and approval of the Court.

G.
Douglas R. Dollinger, Individually and as Escrow Agent on Behalf of Certain Intended Beneficiaries, Plaintiffs, v. Joseph R. Cellura, etc., et al, Defendants, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No. 05 CIV. 3097 (assigned to Judge Stephen C. Robinson) (the “Dollinger Action”).

In late March 2005, Orbit and others were sued by its former in-house counsel Orbit expects this lawsuit to be dismissed in the bankruptcy proceedings.

H.
Mary Jean Ribas, Plaintiff, vs. Joseph R. Cellura, et al.

In April 2006, a former employee sued Orbit’s CEO for lost wages and damages. Orbit disputes this case, which is expected to be dismissed or resolved in the bankruptcy proceedings.

During 2003 and 2004, Orbit sold common stock and convertible debentures without registration under the Securities Act of 1933. Although Orbit believes that the sales did not involve a public offering of its securities and that Orbit did comply with the “safe harbor” exemptions from registration, it could be liable for rescission of the sales if such exemptions were found not to apply and this could have a material negative impact on Orbit’s financial position and results of operations.
 
NOTE 10. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

At December 31, 2003 the Company was indebted to an officer in the aggregate amount of approximately $3,500,000 which was included in accounts payable and accrued expenses - related parties. This amount relates principally to a settlement agreement for $2,500,000 and unpaid salary and expenses.

On June 3, 2004, because the Company had been unable to pay approximately $3,500,000 of accrued debt owed to an officer and director of the Company, and because of the importance of said officer and director to the Company, the Company’s Board of Directors met and voted in favor of the issuance of a Series A Super Majority Voting Preferred class of stock to said officer and director, as ratified by a majority vote of the Company’s shareholders. As of December 31, 2003, based on previous and unpaid settlements, accrued and unpaid compensation and expenses, and accrued and unpaid benefits, and because said officer and director had indicated that he was willing to forego the payment of $750,000 of said indebtedness in exchange for shares of convertible preferred stock of the Company, the Company was duly authorized to issue 5,000,000 shares of the aforementioned Series A convertible preferred stock to said officer and director, in accordance with the Company’s Certificate of Designation of Series A Preferred Stock. The preferred stock had a fair market value on the date of issuance of $20,000,000. The Company determined that this transaction as originally reported in the June 2004 10QSB was incorrect and will file an amended June 2004 10QSB reflecting the correction of this error. The Company recorded compensation expense of $19,250,000 with respect to this issuance.

F-18


NOTE 11. CORPORATE RESTRUCTURING

In July 2003, Orbit changed its name to Orbit Brands Corporation.

In May 2004, Orbit authorized a 500-to-1 reverse stock split, but this hasn’t occurred yet.

During April 2004, Orbit increased its authorized capital to 2,000,000,000 shares of $.001 par value common stock and 10,000,000 shares of $.001 par value preferred stock. Orbit also authorized the designation of Series A convertible preferred stock with liquidation rights and no dividends. Each share of preferred is convertible into 1000 shares of common stock.

On December 6, 2004, Orbit increased its authorized capital to 5,000,000,000 shares of $.001 par value common stock.
 
NOTE 12. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

In May 2005, Orbit borrowed $150,000 from Avalon International Group under an unsecured convertible promissory note. Orbit is currently in negotiations with Avalon to fix the remaining terms of the note.
 
On May 11, 2005, BBKO, LLC entered into a license agreement with Orbit’s subsidiary, BBKO, Inc. f/k/a Malibu Mixers Company (“BBKO”), that was later rescinded. BBKO, LLC paid BBKO $141,000 and BBKO, LLC got its license back. Also, Orbit owes 85 million common shares to BBKO, LLC.

On June 15, 2005, Orbit borrowed $100,000 from M2B under an unsecured convertible promissory note with interest at 10% APR. The note is due 2 years following confirmation of Orbit’s Chapter 11 Plan, and may be converted into common stock at $.001 per share.

On October 3, 2005, through its BBKO subsidiary, borrowed $300,000 from Harbor View Fund, Inc. under an unsecured convertible promissory note with interest at 4% APR. Orbit is currently in negotiations with Harbor View to fix the remaining terms of the note, including the conversion terms.

On April 19, 2006, through its Itrex subsidiary, Orbit borrowed $46,000 from M2B, Inc. under an unsecured convertible promissory note with interest at 12% APR, and maturing on April 19, 2007. The note may be converted into common stock at $.0003 per share.

On September 27, 2006, and October 4, 2006, through its Itrex subsidiary, Orbit borrowed a total of $40,000 from Todd Silverstein under unsecured convertible promissory notes with interest at 5% APR and maturing one year from each date of issuance. The notes may be converted into common stock at $.0002 per share.

F-19

 
Upon confirmation of emergence from Chapter 11, Orbit will transfer a 95% interest in two of its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Malibu Entertainment Group (“MEG” and “BBKO”). In connection with this transfer, MEG and BBKO borrowed $250,000 and agreed to borrow another $50,000 from Cleveland BioLabs, Inc. (“CBLI”) in exchange for a convertible promissory note, a 20% minority common stock position in Orbit, 10% minority common stock positions in three of Orbit’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, Itrex,,Malibu Beach Beverage Group (“Malibu”), and Smartvoice Telecommunication, Inc. (“SVT”), and also 95% majority common stock positions in MEG and BBKO.

On January 18, 2007, through its Itrex subsidiary, Orbit borrowed $25,000 from Michael Silverstein under an unsecured convertible promissory note with interest at 6% APR and maturing on January 18, 2008. The note may be converted into common stock at $.0002 per share.
 
F-20


ITEM 8. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.

On January 4, 2006, with the approval of the Audit Committee and the concurrence of the Board of Directors, ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION(the "Registrant")initially engaged Malone & Bailey, PC (“MB”), as its independent auditors, in place of its former independent auditors, Stark Winter Schenkein & Co (“SWS”),effective as of that date. On May 18, 2006, MB was retained to audit the Company for the Fiscal years ended 2004 and 2005 and perform review procedures on the Company’s quarterly SEC filings.

On July 29, 2003, with the approval of the Audit Committee and the concurrence of the Board of Directors, the Company engaged Stark Winter Schenkein & Co., LLP ("SWS") as its independent auditors., having dismissed its former independent auditors, Holtz Rubenstein & Co., LLP ("HR"), effective as of that date. Prior to the engagement of SWS, HR had served as the independent auditors of the Registrant since December 2001. Prior to the engagement, there were no consultations between SWS and the Registrant regarding the treatment of accounting, auditing or financial reporting issues.

SWS’s and HR's audits of the Registrant's financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2000 thru 2003, contained no adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion and were not qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting principles except for a paragraph regarding uncertainty concerning the Company's ability to continue as a going concern; such statements did not contain any adjustments for uncertainty stated therein.

There have been no disagreements between the Registrant and SWS or HR in connection with the audit of the Registrant's financial statements for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2000 thru 2003, and in the subsequent interim period through June 30, 2004, on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of SWS or HR, would have caused SWS or HR to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreements in their respective reports on the Registrant's financial statements for any such periods. None of the reportable events listed in Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, occurred with respect to the Registrant's two most recent fiscal years or the subsequent interim period through June 30, 2004 preceding the dismissal of SWS.

Item 8-A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.

Prior to the filing date of this report, the Company conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. This evaluation was conducted and supervised by the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Joseph R. Cellura. Based on this evaluation, the Company concluded that the controls and other procedures it employs for recording, processing, summarizing and reporting information the Company is required to disclose in the reports it files under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as Amended (the “Exchange Act”)(15 U.S.C. §§ 78a, et seq.), were not effective as of the end of the period covered by this report.
 
54


The Company concluded that most of the ineffectiveness of its controls and procedures could be attributed to its relationship with Chief Legal Officer, Douglas R. Dollinger, Esq. (See Footnote 1, supra.) Since on or about February 17, 1999 through the end of the period covered by this report, Mr. Dollinger’s corporate responsibilities included, without limitation, the maintenance of certain corporate books and records, and the preparation and filing of all reports under the Exchange Act. (See Footnote 1, supra.) A significant number of the Company’s books and records, including, but not limited to, by-laws, articles of incorporation and amendments thereto, material agreements and other documents are in the possession, custody and/or control of Mr. Dollinger. However, the company has in its possessions copies of the documents required to prepare this filing.

Since on or about October 14, 2003, the Company has continually requested of Mr. Dollinger, both orally and in writing, that he deliver all Company books and records in his possession, custody and/or control back to the Company. To date, Mr. Dollinger has refused to deliver or return such books and records to the Company.
 
Our independent accountants have also reported to our Board of Directors certain matters involving internal controls that the accountants consider to be weaknesses under standards established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. The identified weaknesses relate to a lack of segregation of duties within our accounting and financial management functions and inadequate dedication of resources to the financial review and analysis functions. Due to the size of the Company, the lack of operations and significant financial constraints, the Company has been unable to employ the necessary resources for proper internal financial review and analysis. The Company recorded adjustments identified by the auditors for the valuation of preferred stock issued to retire related party debt, the value of derivatives, derivative liabilities, stock for services, and losses on extinguishment of debt. The company will endeavor to correct this going forward.

The Company has begun to implement procedures and controls designed to increase the effectiveness of its disclosure under the Exchange Act. Since on or about October 14, 2003,the Company has worked with and continues to work with new general and securities counsel, its auditors and accountants to prepare and file any and all such delinquent reports as soon as practicable. The Company commenced suit against Mr. Dollinger, among others, for damages for, inter alia, breach of fiduciary duty, professional negligence, breach of contract, intentional interference with business relations, negligent interference with business relations, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and common counts, and for an accounting. The Company anticipates that these and other claims against the defendants may be adjudicated in the Company’s Chapter 11 Bankruptcy case, if the Company determines that it is advisable to do so. (See Item 3, “Legal Proceedings,” supra.)
 
55

 
PART III

ITEM 9. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, PROMOTERS AND CONTROL PERSONS; COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16(a) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT.

The following table sets forth information regarding our executive officers and directors:
 
Name
 
Age
 
Position
         
Joseph R. Cellura
 
51
 
Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer
         
Denise Bertolini
 
41
 
Director and Secretary
 
Joseph R. Cellura has served as the Company’s Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer since June 1999. Mr. Cellura previously served as Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer from September 3, 1997 until February 17, 1999. During the interim period between serving as Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Cellura independently sought further business opportunities for the Company. Mr. Cellura originally joined the Company as a result of the Company’s acquisition of Divot Corporation and Divot Development Corporation.

Mr. Cellura had served as an executive officer and owned a majority interest in the common stock of Divot Corporation since 1989 and Divot Development Corporation since 1994. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Cellura had been involved in various and progressively more responsible positions throughout his career, with extensive travel experience throughout the USA, Europe and Asia. The Company believes Mr. Cellura has the experience and business acumen necessary to successfully assist the Company in its planned restructuring.

During the period from 1976 to 1992, Mr. Cellura was an investment banker with Shearson & Kidder Peabody & Co. Mr. Cellura attended the State University of New York at Amherst, New York.

Denise Bertolini has served on the Company’s Board of Directors since April 2004. Ms. Bertolini joined Globaltronix, an internet banking firm, in 2000. While at Globaltronix, she helped implement and manage an online banking application, oversaw the implementation of certain investment banking applications to raise capital utilizing a “dutch auction” methodology in the public and private sectors, and interfaced with the SEC to obtain an approved model. Prior to joining Globaltronix, Ms. Bertolini was a trader’s assistant and compliance administrator at Brookehill Equities, Inc. from 1995 to 2000. Prior to Brookehill Equities, Inc., Ms. Bertolini worked for EGS Partners as a trader’s assistant, and for Goldman, Sachs & Co. as an administrative assistant, from 1981-1989.
 
56

 
The Company’s directors and executive officers are required to file with the SEC, by a specified date, reports regarding their transactions involving the Company’s common stock. To the Company’s knowledge, based solely upon information furnished to the Company, none of the Company’s directors or executive officers filed any such reports during 2004. The Company is not aware of any transactions involving its common stock by any of its directors or executive officers.

ITEM 10. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.

The Company’s directors have served without compensation for their services as directors but have been reimbursed for expenses incurred in connection with their duties. It is anticipated that the Company’s directors will continue to serve without compensation (other than reimbursement of expenses). Other than the employment contracts described below, the Company had no standard arrangements or policies for compensation of its executives. The Board of Directors will, from time to time, determine the compensation of senior management in accordance with its prevailing financial condition, as the Board shall determine, and provide other incentives to promote successful management of its business. There were no bonus, stock option or other incentive plans in effect for any level of management as of the end of 2002, except for the Company’s 1998 Incentive Stock Option Plan and 1994 Stock Option Plan, and the performance bonuses included in the employment agreement of Mr. Cellura, as more fully described below.

The following table sets forth information with respect to compensation paid to the Company’s Chief Executive Officer in 2004. No other executive officer received compensation in excess of $100,000 in 2004.

Summary Compensation

       
Annual Securities
Compensation Underlying
     
Name and Principal Position
 
Year
 
Salary
 
Options Bonus
 
All Other Compensation
 
Joseph R. Cellura
   
2004
 
$
250,000
       
$
19,358,000
 
Chief Executive Officer
   
2003
 
$
250,000
         
108,000
 
 
   
2002
 
$
250,000
         
108,000
 
 
Mr. Cellura served on the Company’s Board of Directors as its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from

September 3, 1997 until he resigned on February 17, 1999. On February 17, 1999, the remaining members of the Board elected Jeremiah M. Daly, another Board member and the Company’s then President, to serve as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Daly resigned from all of those positions, including as a member of the Board of Directors, effective April 28, 1999, at which time the Board of Directors appointed Kenneth Craig to serve as President and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Craig was appointed Chairman on May 6, 1999. He was succeeded as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer by Mr. Cellura on June 24, 1999.
 
57


All stock options that the Company has granted since its inception have been forfeited. As of the end of 2004, there were no unexercised options or stock appreciation rights held by executives of the Company which were then outstanding.

Employment Contracts.

The Company extended the employment with an executive officer, which now expires during June 2010. The agreement provides for minimum salary levels and minimum expense reimbursements as well as for incentive bonuses, which are payable if specified management goals are attained. Minimum commitments for future salaries and expense reimbursement, excluding bonuses aggregate $358,000 per year.

In addition to these amounts, the Company has agreed to pay an annual performance/incentive bonus on the following terms:

Company Fiscal Year Revenue
 
Bonus
 
       
$0 to $2.0 million
   
5% of base salary
 
$2.0 million to $5.0 million
   
15% of base salary
 
$5.0 million to $10.0 million
   
30% of base salary
 
$10.0 million or greater
   
50% of base salary
 
 
The employment agreement also provides for the issuance of 5 million options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock upon the Company’s adoption of a new stock option plan, all of which will be immediately exercisable. The employment agreement provides anti-dilution protection such that in the event the Company ever issues any additional shares at a price less than the exercise price then in effect for the options granted to him, the exercise price of his options will be proportionately reduced. In addition, the Company may be required to record compensation expense on each occasion the exercise price of the options is reduced.

The employment contract allows the employee at all times to maintain his proportionate equity interest in the Company by means of the issuance of additional shares of common stock to him in sufficient amounts to preserve his percentage ownership in the Company. This may be accomplished by purchase at the price or on terms included in the employment contract or his election to convert debt owed to him by the Company.

If the Company terminates the employment agreement without cause at any time during the term the Company is required to fulfill the following severance obligations:

(1) The Company must continue to reimburse the employee after the termination of his employment approximately $9,000 per month to enable him to maintain an office and residence in New York City, California, Florida, or any other geographic location in the best interest of the employee, for the balance of the term of the agreement;
 
58


(2) In the event the employee continues after the termination of his employment to hold options, warrants or other securities convertible into the Company’s common stock, the exercise prices of such securities shall be proportionately reduced if the Company issues common stock at a price lower than the exercise price then in effect for the employees options;

(3) The Company must pay the employee a lump sum equal to the sum of the present value of 100% of his base salary for the balance of the term of the employment agreement;

(4) The Company must pay the employee an additional lump sum equal to $1.25 million; and

(5) The Company must execute a UCC-1 financing statement in favor of the employee enabling him to record a lien against the Company’s assets in order to secure payment of the $1.25 million severance payment.

In addition, regardless of whether the Company has previously terminated the employee’s employment, if upon the expiration of the employment term, the Company elects not to offer an additional five-year employment contract, the Company must pay him an additional lump sum payment in the amount of $900,000.

The Company may only avoid these severance obligations if it terminates employment for cause. In order for the Company to terminate employment for cause, it must follow the procedures set forth in his employment agreement. The Company would be required to give a 90 days' prior written notice of his termination for cause. The employee would then have 90 additional days to elect whether to object to his termination. If so objected, the Board of Directors would be required to convene a special meeting within 30 days, at which the employee would have the right to appear, to review his objection and determine whether sufficient evidence existed to terminate employment for cause. The employee may again object to the Board of Directors' determination by filing a request for arbitration within 30 days of the Board's determination. The arbitration would be required to take place within 60 days of notice of such request. If the employee objected to termination of his employment for cause, he would remain in his position as Chief Executive Officer and continue to receive the amounts due to him under his employment agreement, until the contested matters were finally determined. This process could take a substantial amount of time. Even if the Company were to be successful in terminating employment for cause, if upon expiration of the employment term, the Company elects not to offer an additional five year employment contract, the Company would be obligated to pay him an additional lump sum payment of $900,000, as well as paying existing payable of approximately $3,500,000.

The Company also entered into a consulting agreement with an officer of the Company relating to services to be performed for Malibu Beach Beverage Group. This agreement provides for an annual consulting fee of $250,000 per annum. This agreement was nullified effective January 1, 2005.
 
59

 
ITEM 11. SECURITIES OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT.

Information regarding the beneficial ownership of the Company’s common stock as of this filing by each director, each executive officer, all executive officers and directors as a group, and each person known to the Company to beneficially own more than 5% percent of the Company’s common stock, is set forth below.

Name of Beneficial Owner Owned Shares (1)
 
Number of Shares Beneficially
 
Percent of All
 
               
Joseph R. Cellura
   
236,163,238
   
21.0
%

(1) Based on 1,126,107,071 shares outstanding.

Since approximately 21% of the Company’s voting common stock is currently concentrated in the Company’s chief executive officer and, based upon the provisions of his executive employment agreement, which includes anti-dilution protection, the chief executive officer is entitled to convert his Series A Super Majority Voting Preferred Stock into voting common stock in amounts that would result, in the event of such an election by the chief executive officer, in the concentration of approximately 85% or more of the Company’s voting common stock in the Company’s chief executive officer, he may be able to directly control the Company’s future.

ITEM 12. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS.

None
 
ITEM 13. EXHIBITS

(a) Exhibits --

2.1(1)
 
Stock Purchase Agreement effective as of April 20, 1998 by and among the Company, Talisman Tools Incorporated and Daniel S. Shedd and Dixon Newbold;
     
2.2(2)
 
Stock Purchase Agreement effective as of April 15, 1998 by and among the Company, Divot Golf Corporation, a Florida corporation, and Joseph R. Cellura;
     
2.3(3)
 
Stock Purchase Agreement effective as of January 28, 1998 by and among the Company, Miller Golf, Inc., Robert Marchetti, Louis Katon and John Carroll;
 
60

 
2.4(10)
 
Sale and Assignment Agreement dated as of January 27, 2000 by and among Mark Savoretti and Spartan Capital Management, LLC;
     
2.5(10)
 
Assignment Agreement dated as of January 27, 2000 by and among the Company and Spartan Capital Management, LLC;
     
2.6(10)
 
Right to Use Agreement dated as of November 1, 1999 by and among the Company and Orbit Network, Inc.;
     
2.7(10)
 
Letter of Intent dated as of February 9, 2000 by and among the Company and AnimInet, Inc.;
     
2.8(10)
 
Stock Acquisition Agreement dated as of January 31, 2000 by and among the Company and Wilhelmina Artist Management, LLC;
     
3.1(4)
 
The Company’s Certificate of Incorporation;
     
3.2(4)
 
The Company’s Bylaws;
     
3.3(5)
 
Amendment to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation, filed July 18, 1994;
     
3.4
 
Amendment to articles of incorporation Orbit filed dated March 18th, 2004
     
3.5
 
Certificate of Good Standing State of Delaware dated March 16th, 2004
     
3.6
 
Certificate of Designation State of Delaware dated June 1st, 2004
     
3.7
 
Certificate of Designation State of Delaware Correction dated June 1st, 2004
     
3.8
 
Board of Directors Minutes dated April 4th, 2004
     
3.9
 
Board of Directors Minutes dated June 3rd, 2004
     
3.10
 
228 Written Consent dated May 3rd, 2004
     
3.11
 
228 Written Consent dated May 25th, 2004
     
3.12
 
Board of Directors Minutes dated September 25,2004
     
3.13
 
Board of Directors Minutes dated September 22, 2005
     
3.14
 
Board of Directors Minutes dated September 29, 2006
     
3.15
 
Amended articles of incorporation dated December 6, 2004
     
4.1(6)
 
Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of the Company’s 1997 Convertible Preferred Stock dated December 29, 1997;
     
4.2(6)
 
Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of 10,500 shares of the Company’s 1997 Convertible Preferred Stock dated January 13, 1998;
 
61

 
4.3(10)
 
Form of Exchange Letter between the Company and the holders of the Company’s 1997 Convertible Preferred Stock;
     
4.4(10)
 
Funding Commitment Letter and Subscription Agreement as of February 15, 2000 by and between the Company and Teakwood Ventures, LLC;
     
10.1 (7)
 
Form of Warrant issued to the Summit Stockholders dated June 30, 1995;
     
10.2(7)
 
Form of Warrant and Registration Rights Agreement issued to Financial Advisor dated June 30, 1995;
     
10.3(8)
 
Agreement in Principle dated February 21, 1996 between the Company, Gordon Ewart, the Company’s four golf course subsidiaries, and the Company’s three pension fund partners;
     
10.4(6)
 
Form of Convertible Debenture Agreement dated November 18, 1997 between the Company and signatories, with form of warrant to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock;
     
10.5(6)
 
Form of Private Placement Purchase Agreement dated December 3, 1997 between the Company and signatories, with form of warrant to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock;
     
10.6(3)
 
Form of Private Placement Memorandum dated April 3, 1998 between the Company and signatories, with form of warrant to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock;
     
10.7(10)
 
Employment Agreement dated June 24, 1999 between the Company and Joseph R. Cellura;
     
10.8(10)
 
Employment Agreement dated November 1, 1999 between the Company and Dean E. Miller;
     
10.9(10)
 
Employment Agreement dated November 1, 1999 between the Company and David A. Noosinow;
     
10.10(10)
 
Employment Agreement dated December 1, 1999 between the Company and Douglas R. Dollinger;
     
10.11(10)
 
Intentionally Omitted;
     
10.12(10)
 
Intentionally Omitted;
     
10.13(10)
 
Form of Exchange Letter between the Company and holders of the Company’s convertible debt;
     
10.14(10)
 
Settlement Agreement dated as of June 24, 1999 between the Company and Joseph R. Cellura;
     
10.15(10)
 
Separation Agreement dated as of September 1, 1999 between the Company and Kenneth Craig;
 
62

 
10.16(10)
 
Settlement Agreement dated as of January 31, 2000 between the Company and Clifford F. Bagnall;
     
10.17(10)
 
Settlement Agreement dated as of January 31, 2000 between the Company and Kirk Scoggins;
     
10.18(10)
 
Memorandum of Settlement dated as of June 29, 1999 between the Company and the Plaintiff Group;
     
10.19(9)
 
The Company’s 1998 Incentive Stock Option Plan;
     
10.20(10)
 
Form of OrbitTravel.com, Inc. Convertible Note;
     
10.21(10)
 
Management Agreement dated November 17, 1999 between OrbitTravel.com, Inc. and Bonveno.com Limited;
     
10.22(10)
 
European Specific Software Development Agreement dated November 17, 1999 between OrbitTravel.com, Inc. and Bonveno.com Limited;
     
10.23(10)
 
Operational Agreement dated November 17, 1999 between OrbitTravel.com, Inc. and Bonveno.com Limited;
     
10.24(10)
 
Interactive Services Agreement between America Online, Inc. and Orbit Network, Inc. dated as of May 1, 1999;
     
10.25(10)
 
Agreement dated as of July 1, 1996 between Applied Information Services, Inc. and Amadeus Marketing, S.A.;
     
10.26(10)
 
Associate Distribution and Services Agreement dated as of April 2, 1998 between Orbit Network, Inc. and The Sabre Group, Inc.;
     
10.27(10)
 
Services Display and Reservations Agreement dated as of November 24, 1998 between Orbit Network, Inc. and Galileo International, L.L.C.;
     
10.28(10)
 
Associate Participation Global Reference System Agreement dated as of August 2, 1999 between Orbit Network, Inc. and WorldSpan, L.P.;
     
10.29(10)
 
Certificate of Incorporation of OrbitTravel.com, Inc.;
     
10.30(10)
 
Bylaws of OrbitTravel.com, Inc.;
     
10.31(10)
 
Joint Venture Agreement dated November 17, 1999 among WebTravel Systems Limited, OrbitTravel.com, Inc., and Bonveno.com Limited;
     
10.32(10)
 
Form of Indemnification Agreement;
     
10.33(10)
 
Joint Content Distribution Agreement dated January 9, 2000 between OrbitTravel.com, Inc. and AsiaGateway.com, Ltd.;
     
10.34(10)
 
Consulting Services Agreement and Joint Consent Agreement dated February 7, 2000 by and among OrbitTravel.com, Inc. and Laspata/Decaro Studio Corp.;
 
63

 
10.35(11)
 
Settlement Agreement between Divot Golf Corporation and Joseph Salvani dated March 1, 2000; *
     
10.36(11)
 
Settlement Agreement between Divot Golf Corporation and Joseph Cellura Trust, dated March 1, 2000; *
     
10.37(11)
 
Addendum to Funding Commitment Letter and Subscription Agreement between Teakwood Ventures, LLC and OrbitTRAVEL.com, Inc.; *
     
10.38(12)
 
Restated and Amended Funding Agreement and Secured Revolving Credit Agreement between Teakwood Ventures, LLC and OrbitTRAVEL.com, Inc.;
     
10.38
 
Promissory Notes Template ITREX International Corporation
     
10.39
 
Promissory Notes Affidavit Template ITREX International Corporation
     
10.40
 
Teakwood Settlement dated October 18th, 2001
     
10.41
 
Promissory Note Sherman and Peabody dated June 4th, 2004
     
10.42
 
Acquisition Agreement of Smartvoice Telecommunications Incorporated (Georgia) by Smartvoice Telecommunication Incorporated (Delaware) dated January 1st, 2004
     
10.43
 
Acquisition Agreement of Malibu Beach Beverage Group dated June 30, 2004
     
10.44
 
Employment Agreement between ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION and Pat Shuster dated January 1st, 2004
     
10.45
 
Intentionally omitted
     
10.46
 
Intentionally omitted
     
10.47
 
Intentionally omitted
     
10.48
 
License agreement with BBKO, LLC dated May 11, 2005.
     
10.49
 
Settlement agreement with BBKO, LLC dated January, 2006.
     
10.50
 
Loan documentation for $25,000 M2B loan dated February 25, 2005
     
10.51
 
Loan documentation for $25,000 M2B loan dated March 29, 2005
     
10.52
 
Loan documentation for $10,000 M2B loan dated April 8, 2005
     
10.53
 
Loan documentation for $100,000 M2B loan dated June 15, 2005.
     
10.54
 
Loan documentation for $100,600 M2B loan dated September 9, 2005
     
10.55
 
Loan documentation for $10,000 M2B loan dated September 13, 2005
 
64

 
10.56
 
Loan documentation for $12,000 M2B loan dated September 13, 2005
     
10.57
 
Loan documentation for $300,000 Harbor View convertible note dated October 3, 2005.
     
10.58
 
Memorandum of Understanding regarding potential acquisition of Floating Beds Inc. dated March 27, 2006.
     
10.59
 
Loan documentation for $46,000 M2B loan dated April 19, 2006.
     
10.60
 
Loan documentation for $30,000 Todd Silverstein note dated September 27, 2006
     
10.61
 
Loan documentation for $10,000 Todd Silverstein note dated October 4, 2006
     
10.62
 
Loan documentation for $25,000 Cleveland Biolabs, Inc.(“CBLI”) note with Malibu Entertainment Group(“MEG’),dated December 7, 2006
     
10.63
 
Loan documentation for $25,000 CBLI note with BBKO dated December 7, 2006
     
10.64
 
Loan documentation for $25,000 CBLI note with MEG dated January 4, 2007
     
10.65
 
Loan documentation for $25,000 CBLI note with BBKO dated January 4, 2007
     
10.66
 
Loan documentation for $75,000 CBLI note with MEG dated February 2, 2007
     
10.67
 
Loan documentation for $75,000 CBLI note with BBKO dated February 2, 2007
     
10.68
 
Loan documentation for $25,000 Mike Silverstein note dated January 18, 2007
     
21(10)
 
The Company’s subsidiaries;
     
31.1
 
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002;
     
32.1
 
Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 
(1) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 20, 1998.

(2) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 15, 1998.

(3) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 8,1998.
 
65


(4) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Form 10 filed on December 13, 1993.

(5) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Form 10 filed on September 15, 1994.

(6) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for 1997.

(7) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for 1995.

(8) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 30, 1996.

(9) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed September 1, 1998.

(10) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for 1999.

(11) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for March 31, 2000.

(12) Incorporated by reference from the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for September 30, 2000.

(b) Reports on Form 8-K

(1)  A report on Form 8-K dated June 30, 2004 disclosing Company’s creditors filing an Involuntary Chapter 11 Petition against the Company with the objective of reorganizing the Company in the United States Bankruptcy Court

(2) A report of Form 8-K dated December 30, 2005, disclosing a change in the Company’s Independent Certified Public Accountants.
 
66

 
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.

The following table sets forth fees billed to us by our auditors during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003 for: (i) services rendered for the audit of our annual financial statements and the review of our quarterly financial statements and services by our auditor that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of our financial statements and that are not reported as Audit Fees, (ii) services rendered in connection with tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning, and (ii) all other fees for services rendered.

   
December 31, 2004
 
December 31, 2003
 
(i) Audit and audit-related fees
 
$
103,000
 
$
17,500
 
               
(ii) Tax Fees
 
$
0
 
$
0
 
               
(iii) All Other
 
$
0
 
$
0
 
 
67


SIGNATURES

In accordance with Sections 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, the registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized on or as of March 1, 2004.

ORBIT BRANDS CORPORATION fka OrbitTRAVEL.com Corporation
 
       
By: /s/ Joseph R.Cellura
   

Joseph R. Cellura
   
Chairman
   
Chief Executive Officer
     
 
In accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated:

Signature
 
Title
 
Date
         
         
/s/ Joseph R. Cellura
 
Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive And Accounting Officer
 
February 12, 2007
 
68