XML 40 R27.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.19.2
20. Fair Value Measurements
12 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2019
Fair Value Disclosures [Abstract]  
Fair Value Disclosures [Text Block]

20.                Fair Value Measurements


FASB ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements” defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value under generally accepted accounting principles and prescribes disclosures about fair value measurements.


As defined in ASC 820, fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (exit price). The Company utilizes market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated, or generally unobservable. The Company classifies fair value balances based on the observability of those inputs. ASC 820 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (level 3 measurement).


The three levels of the fair value hierarchy defined by ASC 820 are as follows:


Level 1 – Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis. Level 1 primarily consists of financial instruments such as exchange-traded derivatives, marketable securities and listed equities.


Level 2 – Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets included in level 1, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported date. Level 2 includes those financial instruments that are valued using models or other valuation methodologies. These models are primarily industry-standard models that consider various assumptions, including quoted forward prices for commodities, time value, volatility factors, and current market and contractual prices for the underlying instruments, as well as other relevant economic measures. Substantially all of these assumptions are observable in the marketplace throughout the full term of the instrument, can be derived from observable data or are supported by observable levels at which transactions are executed in the marketplace. Instruments in this category generally include non-exchange-traded derivatives such as commodity swaps, interest rate swaps, options and collars.


Level 3 – Pricing inputs include significant inputs that are generally less observable from objective sources. These inputs may be used with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate of fair value.


The valuation techniques that may be used to measure fair value are as follows:


Market approach — Uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities


Income approach — Uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts to a single present amount based on current market expectations about those future amounts, including present value techniques, option-pricing models and excess earnings method


Cost approach — Based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset (replacement cost)


The carrying value of the Company’s borrowings is a reasonable estimate of its fair value as borrowings under the Company’s credit facility have variable rates that reflect currently available terms and conditions for similar debt.


The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment, and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.


The following table sets forth by level within the fair value hierarchy the Company’s financial assets and liabilities that were accounted for at fair value as of March 31, 2019 and March 31, 2018. As required by FASB ASC 820, financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.


The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment, and may affect the valuation of fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.


March 31, 2019

 

Level I

   

Level II

   

Level III

   

Total

 
                                 

Warrant Liability

  $ -     $ -     $ 43,500     $ 43,500  

Total Liabilities

  $ -     $ -     $ 43,500     $ 43,500  

March 31, 2018

 

Level I

   

Level II

   

Level III

   

Total

 
                                 

Warrant Liability

  $ -     $ -     $ -     $ -  

Total Liabilities

  $ -     $ -     $ -     $ -  

ASC 815, “Derivatives and Hedging” requires that we mark the value of our warrant liability to market and recognize the change in valuation in our statement of operations each reporting period. Determining the warrant liability to be recorded requires us to develop estimates to be used in calculating the fair value of the warrant.


The following table provides a summary of the changes in fair value of our Level 3 financial liabilities for the years ended March 31, 2019 and 2018 as well as the unrealized gains or losses included in income.


   

March 31, 2019

   

March 31, 2018

 

Fair value, at beginning of period

  $ -     $ 95,000  
                 

New purchases and issuances

    -       -  

Sales and settlements

    -       -  

Change in fair value

    43,500       (95,000

)

                 

Fair value, at end of period

  $ 43,500     $ -  

The common stock warrants were not issued with the intent of effectively hedging any future cash flow, fair value of any asset, liability or any net investment in a foreign corporation.  The warrants do not qualify for hedge accounting, and, as such, all changes in the fair value of these warrants are recognized as other income/expense in the statement of operations until such time as the warrants are exercised or expire.  Since these common stock warrants do not trade in an active securities market, the Company recognized a warrant liability and estimated the fair value of these warrants using the Black-Scholes options model until the payment of the loan in November 2014.


The holder has the right, exercisable at any time, in writing (the “Warrant Put Notice”), to cause the Company, subject to the terms and conditions hereof, to purchase from the holder all, or any portion, of the warrant for the warrant put repurchase price (the “Repurchase Price”). The Repurchase Price is the greater of 1) Adjusted EBITDA (as defined below) per share as of the date of the Warrant Put Notice, less $0.01, multiplied by the number of warrants or 2) the product of the current market price per share as of the date of the Warrant Put Notice, less the purchase price of the warrant or warrants, multiplied by the number of warrants, if this amount is higher. “Adjusted EBITDA” means EBITDA, multiplied by 5, plus cash and cash equivalents less unpaid debt divided by the number of shares outstanding on a fully diluted basis.


The Company has remaining warrants with an outside investor to purchase 50,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $3.35 per share or exercising the “put option” to the Company.  The warrant liability of the 50,000 warrants was $43,500 at March 31, 2019 as compared to $-0- at March 31, 2018.