AURA SYSTEMS INC - Annual Report: 2007 (Form 10-K)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
Form
10-K
(Mark
One)
þ
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF
1934
For
the
fiscal year ended.................................................February
28,
2007
OR
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 number ........0-17249
AURA
SYSTEMS, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
95-4106894
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
2330
Utah Avenue
El
Segundo, California 90245
(Address
of principal executive offices)
Registrant's
telephone number, including area code: (310)
643-5300
Former
name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report:
Name
of
each exchange on which registered: None
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common
Stock
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined
in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes¨
Nox
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes¨
Nox
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to
be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 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
x
No
¨
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to
this
Form 10-K. ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated file, or a non-accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Act).
Large
Accelerated Filer ¨
|
Accelerated
Filer ¨
|
Non-accelerated
filer x
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes¨
No
x
APPLICABLE
ONLY TO REGISTRANTS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY
PROCEEDINGS
DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS:
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports
required to be filed by Section 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act
of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed
by a
court. Yesx
No
¨
On
August
31, 2006 the aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates
of the Registrant was approximately $44 million. The aggregate market value
has
been computed by reference to the last trading price of the stock on August
31,
2006.
On
January 31, 2008, the Registrant had 36,670,820 shares of common stock
outstanding.
2
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
|
|||
PART
I
|
|
|||
|
ITEM
1. BUSINESS
|
5
|
||
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
|
12
|
|||
|
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
|
16
|
||
|
ITEM
3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
|
16
|
||
|
ITEM
4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
|
16
|
||
|
ITEM
5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
AND
ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
17
|
||
|
ITEM
6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
|
19
|
||
|
|
|||
PART
II
|
|
|||
|
ITEM
7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
|
20
|
||
ITEM
7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
|
26
|
|||
|
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
|
27
|
||
ITEM
9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING
AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|
27
|
|||
ITEM
9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
|
27
|
|||
ITEM
9B. OTHER INFORMATION
|
27
|
|||
PART
III
|
|
|||
|
ITEM
10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
|
28
|
||
|
ITEM
11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
|
30
|
||
|
ITEM
12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS
AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|
39
|
||
|
ITEM
13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
|
41
|
||
|
ITEM
14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
|
42
|
||
PART
IV
|
|
|||
|
ITEM
15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
43
|
||
|
|
|||
|
SIGNATURES
|
45
|
3
SPECIAL
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This
Report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal
securities laws. Statements other than statements of historical fact included
in
this Report, including the statements under the headings “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,”
“Business” and elsewhere in this Report regarding future events or prospects are
forward-looking statements. The words “approximates,” “believes,” “expects,”
“anticipates,” “estimates,” “intends,” “plans” “would “should,” “may,” or other
similar expressions in this Report, as well as other statements regarding
matters that are not historical fact, constitute forward-looking statements..
We
caution investors that any forward-looking statements presented in this Report
are based on the beliefs of, assumptions made by, and information currently
available to, us. Such statements are based on assumptions and the actual
outcome will be affected by known and unknown risks, trends, uncertainties
and
factors that are beyond our control or ability to predict. Although we believe
that our assumptions are reasonable, they are not guarantees of future
performance and some will inevitably prove to be incorrect. As a result, our
actual future results may differ from our expectations, and those differences
may be material. Accordingly, investors should use caution in relying on
forward-looking statements to anticipate future results or
trends.
Some
of the risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results, performance
or
achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by
forward-looking statements include the following:
·
|
Our
ability to generate positive cash flow from
operations;
|
·
|
Our
ability to obtain additional financing to fund our
operations;
|
·
|
Our
business development and operating development;
and
|
·
|
Our
expectations of growth in demand for our
products.
|
We
do
not intend to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a
result of new information, future events or otherwise except to the extent
required by law. You should interpret all subsequent written or oral
forward-looking statements attributable to us or persons acting on our behalf
as
being expressly qualified by the cautionary statements in this Report. As a
result, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.
References
in this Report to “we”, “us”, “the Company,” “Aura” or “Aura Systems”, includes
Aura Systems, Inc. and its subsidiaries.
WHERE
YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
As
a
public company, we are required to file annual, quarterly and special reports,
proxy statements and other information with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “SEC”). You may read and copy any of our materials on file with
the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street N.E., Washington, DC
20549. Our filings are available to the public over the Internet at the SEC’s
website at http://www.sec.gov.
Please
call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for further information on the operation of
the
Public Reference Room. We also make available copies of our Forms 8-K,
10-K, 10-Q, Proxy Statement and Annual Report at no charge to investors through
our website, http://www.aurasystems.com, as soon as reasonably practicable
after
filing such material with the SEC.
4
PART
I
ITEM
1. BUSINESS
Introduction
and History
We
design, assemble and sell the AuraGen®,
our
patented mobile power generator that uses the engine of a vehicle to generate
electric power. The AuraGen®
delivers
on-location, plug-in electricity for any end use, including industrial,
commercial, recreational and military applications. The AuraGen®
system
consists of three primary subsystems (i) the patented axial design alternator,
(ii) the electronic control unit (“ECU”) and (iii) mounting kit that is a
mechanical interface between the alternator and the automobile. Compared to
the
traditional solutions addressing the multi-billion dollar North American mobile
power market (i.e., Gensets, traditional alternators, permanent magnet
alternators, dynamic and static inverters), we believe the AuraGen®
provides
alternating current (“AC”) power as well as simultaneous direct current (“DC”)
power with greater reliability and flexibility at a lower cost to the end user.
We began commercializing the AuraGen®
in late
1999 as a 5,000-watt 120/240V AC machine compatible with certain Chevrolet
engine models. In 2001, we added an 8,000 watt configuration and also introduced
AC/DC and the Inverter Charger System (“ICS”) options. More recently we
introduced a dual system that generates up to 16,000-watts of continuous power.
We now have configurations available for more than 90 different engine types,
including a majority of General Motors and Ford models, some Daimler Chrysler
models and numerous others engine models made by International, Isuzu, Nissan,
Mitsubishi, Caterpillar, Detroit Diesel, Cummins, and Freightliner. More
recently, a number of boats have had the AuraGen installed for both government
and recreational end-users.
To
date,
AuraGen®
units
have been sold in numerous industries, including recreational, utilities,
telecommunications, emergency/rescue, public works, catering, oil and gas,
transportation, government and the military. Our objective is to be the leading
developer and supplier of fully integrated mobile electric power
systems.
We
continue to hold several patents, in addition to those related to the
AuraGen®,
which
we believe provide the basis for economically viable products in addition to
the
AuraGen®,
but
sales of the AuraGen®
currently provide substantially
all our operating revenues.
Aura,
a
Delaware corporation, was founded in 1987 and, until 1992, was primarily engaged
in supplying defense related technologies to classified military
programs.
In
1992,
we acquired the Electronic Ceramic Facility (the Ceramic Operations). This
facility produced piezoelectric material that we required for our Actuated
Mirror Array (“AMA”) technology. In 1996, we licensed our AMA technology to
Daewoo Electronics. During the same period we acquired Delphi Electric
Components (“Delphi”), which developed and built microelectronic circuits and
components. In 1994, we started NewCom, Inc. (“NewCom”) to manufacture and sell
computer modems, sound cards and other multimedia components. By the mid -
1990s, the Company was organized into four divisions (i) AuraSound (the “Speaker
Operations”) - producing and selling audio speakers based on a new and patented
magnetic design, (ii) Aura Industrial & Automotive - developing numerous
automotive and industrial - related magnetic devices such as linear and rotary
actuators with applications for variable valves, active suspension, actuators
for many industrial machines, and the development of the AuraGen®
power
system, (iii) NewCom- manufacturing and selling modems and computer multimedia
kits, and (iv) Aura Display- using the AMA technology to develop very large
very
bright display systems. By 1998, the Company had three facilities in California,
a facility in New Hope, Minnesota, and facilities in Osaka, Japan, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, and New Delhi, India. During this period the Company was investing
large amounts of capital into the development of the AuraGen®.
In
1997,
the Company spun off NewCom as a public company, with the Company retaining
approximately 60% ownership. NewCom owed the Company approximately $40 million
that was due to be repaid by late 1998. In the summer of 1998, the computer
industry experienced a significant slow-down and most original equipment
manufacturers (“OEMs”), in order to revive their sales, introduced built - in
modems and multi-media functions as an integral part of the computer. This
caused severe pressure on NewCom’s operations. By early 1999, NewCom had ceased
operations and closed down.
5
During
1999, the Company sold the Speaker Operations, the Ceramic Operations, and
Delphi. All activities on the AMA were stopped and the Company was totally
focused on the completion of the AuraGen development and
commercialization
Since
fiscal 2002, sales of the AuraGen®
product
have accounted for substantially all of our operating revenues.
During
fiscal 2002 through fiscal 2005, we substantially reduced our internal staffing
due to the slower-than-anticipated level of AuraGen®
sales.
We also suspended substantially all research and development activities. We
continued to downscale our operations in fiscal 2005. However, the impact of
the
related cost reductions was insufficient to offset our extremely weak financial
condition, which was worsened by late fees, penalties and transaction costs
incident to financial defaults. In June 2005, we filed for protection under
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, and emerged on January 31, 2006 under a
plan
of reorganization.
The
AuraGen®
The
AuraGen®
is
composed of three basic subsystems. The first subsystem is the generator that
is
bolted to, and driven by, the vehicle's engine. The second subsystem is the
ECU,
which filters and conditions the electricity to provide clean, steady voltages
for both AC and DC power. The third subsystem consists of mounting brackets
and
supporting components for installation and integration of the generator with
the
vehicle engine.
The
AuraGen is now available in three continuous power levels, (a) 5,000 watts
AC/DC, (b) 8,000 watts AC/DC and (c) 16,000 watts AC/DC. All AC power is
pure sine wave with total harmonic distortion of less than 2.1% and is
available in both 120 VAC and or 240 VAC. In addition, the power generated
on all models can be partitioned to provide simultaneous AC and 14 or 28 volts
of DC or only DC, if required by the user. The AuraGen power levels can be
generated while the vehicle is being driven or parked. The VIPER (the military
version of the AuraGen®system
includes as an option a complete power management system which (i) monitors
in
real time the batteries’ voltage and temperature, (ii) provides a partition of
the power between AC and DC simultaneously with the ability to be programmed
from all AC to all DC, (iii) monitors the RPM of the generator, (iv) monitors
the temperatures of the generator and the ECU, (iv) monitors the raw power
generated, (v) monitors both the AC and DC loads as to voltage and current,
(vi)
provides programming of load prioritization and load shedding, and (vii)
monitors the voltage of the internal 400VDC buss.
We
provide custom engineered brackets for our models that attach to over 90
different engine and chassis models. We also provide Power Take Off (“PTO”) and
hydraulic driven interfaces for bigger trucks that do not involve direct
attachment to the vehicle engine.
Mobile
Power Industry
The
mobile power generation market is large and growing. Vehicles used in the
telecommunications, utilities, public works, construction, catering, and oil
and
gas industries, emergency/rescue and military and recreational vehicles rely
heavily on mobile power for their internal systems. In addition, mobile work
sites require on-location electricity to power equipment ranging from computers
to power tools.
Based
on
studies conducted by the U.S. government, Business Communications Company,
Inc.
and others, we estimate the annual gross North American mobile power generation
market in 2008 is at least $2.5 billion and growing. Worldwide growth is
expected to be fueled by increases in the development and construction of
industrial infrastructures, significant growth in homeland security
expenditures, and increased use of sophisticated electronic equipment in
underdeveloped areas where grid-based electricity is unavailable or unreliable.
We also believe that mobile power has become increasingly important as backup
to
electric grid power supply.
The
traditional available solutions for mobile power users are:
·
|
Gensets,
Gensets are standalone power generation units that are not incorporated
into a vehicle and require external fuel, either gasoline or diesel,
in
order to generate electricity. Gensets (i) are generally noisy and
cumbersome to transport because of their weight and size, (ii) typical
run
at constant speed to generate 50 or 60 Hz of AC power, (iii) must
be
operated at a significant part of the rated power to avoid wet staking,
(iv) are significantly derated in the presence of harmonics in the
loads
and (v) require significant scheduled maintenance and service. Genset
technology has been utilized since the 1950s.
|
6
·
|
High-Output
Alternators,
High-output alternators are traditionally found in trucks and commercial
vehicles and the vehicle’s engine is used as the prime mover. All
high-output alternators provide their rated power at very high
RPM and
significantly less power at lower RPM. In addition high-output
alternators
are generally only 30% efficient at the low RPM range and increase
to 50%
efficiency at the high end of the RPM range. The
power generated by high-output alternators is 12 or 24 Volt DC
and an
inverter is required if 120 Volt AC power is needed. In addition,
due to
the low power output at low RPMs, in order to get significant power,
a
throttle controller is used to speed-up the engine.
|
·
|
Inverters,
Inverters are devices that invert battery DC to AC. Inverters as
mobile
power generators are traditionally used in low power requirements,
typically less than 2,500 watts, and do not have the ability to recharge
the batteries used as the source of power. Thus, typical inverter
users
require other means to recharge the used batteries such as “shore-power”
or gensets. More recently dynamic inverters became available. Dynamic
inverters use power from the alternator to augment power from the
batteries and are able to achieve power levels in excess of 6,000
watts.
Dynamic inverters introduce significant stresses on both the batteries
and
alternators, which causes significant life shortening for both. Dynamic
inverters use power from the alternator. When the inverter is turned
on,
the alternator is switched off from the vehicle battery and tied
into a
transformer that uses electronics controls to change the DC alternator
inputs to AC inverter output. A separate transformer winding provides
battery charging so that fully regulated 120 Volt AC and 12 Volt
DC power
is available as long as the engine is running at high enough RPM
to
provide power for the load and the battery charging. All dynamic
inverters
require a high-output alternator to be able to output significant
AC
power. As is often the case, the limiting factor is the high-output
alternator. In order to get stable output, a very accurate throttle
controller is also needed to maintain steady speed on the engine.
|
·
|
Permanent-Magnet
Alternators.
Recently a number of companies have introduced alternators using
exotic
permanent magnets. These alternators tend to have higher power generation
capabilities than regular alternators at lower engine RPM. In order
to be
practical in an under-the-hood environment (200oF)
active cooling must be added, since the magnets are demagnetized
at
approximately 176oF.
There are other issues that require an active control system that
will add
and subtract magnetic field strength as the engine RPM
increases.
|
·
|
Fuel
Cells.
Fuel cells are solid-state devices that produce electricity by combining
a
fuel containing hydrogen with oxygen. They have a wide range of
applications, and can be used in place of the internal combustion
engine
and traditional lead-acid and lithium-ion batteries. The most
widely deployed fuel cells cost about $4,500 per kilowatt.
|
·
|
Batteries.
Batteries convert stored chemical energy to electrical
energy.
|
Competition
The
industry in which we operate is competitive. The primary competition for the
AuraGen®
is the
Genset industry, and there are approximately 44 Genset manufacturers in the
United States. These competitors include: Onan, Honda and Kohler.
There
are
many high-output alternator manufacturers. Some of the better known ones are
Delco-Remy, Bosch, Nippon Densu, Hitachi, Mitsubishi and
Prestelite.
There
are
many inverter manufacturers; some of the better-known are, Trace Engineering,
Vanner, and Xentrex.
Most
of
our competitors have greater financial, technical, and marketing resources
than
the Company, have larger budgets for research, new product development and
marketing, and have long-standing customer relationships. We also compete with
many larger and more established companies in the hiring and retention of
qualified personnel. In the past, our financial condition has limited our
ability to market the AuraGen®.
7
The
AuraGen®
uses new
technology and has only been available in the marketplace for a few years.
As
described below, because our product is radically different from traditionally
available mobile power solutions, users may require lengthy evaluation periods
in order to gain confidence in the product. OEMs and large fleet users also
typically require considerable time to make changes to their planning and
production.
Because
of our limited financial and staff resources, we have focused our sales and
marketing activities to a few industrial and military segments. In particular,
we have focused on selling to the U.S. military, including the U.S. Coast Guard
(the “USCG”), homeland security agencies and emergency/rescue operations, such
as the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
More
recently we expanded our focus and are now marketing to companies in the oil
and
gas segment, state and local governments, in particular, the Department of
Transportation (“DOT”), and in the recreational boating industry.
Competitive
Advantages of the AuraGen®
We
believe the AuraGen®
is a
superior product to all of its competition due to its convenience, cost
efficiency, fuel efficiency, reliability, flexibility in power output, and
the
quality of the electricity generated. The AuraGen®
is not
sensitive to temperature or altitude variations and generates the rated power
at
or near idle engine RPM.
The
AuraGen®
does not
require scheduled maintenance and is offered with a three-year warranty,
compared to the typical one-year warranty available for a Genset or
inverter.
In
addition, the AuraGen®
is
significantly cleaner for the environment than Gensets, the other generally
available mobile power solution. The AuraGen®
uses the
automotive engine, which is highly regulated for environmental protection.
Gensets use small engines that produce significantly higher levels of emissions
per unit of power output than the automobile engine.
We
believe that barriers to entry make it less likely that a product superior
to
the AuraGen®
will
become available in the foreseeable future. The inventions upon which the
AuraGen®
is based
are protected by patents issued by the U.S. Patent Office. To our knowledge,
there are no other patents for axial induction machines with solid rotors such
as the AuraGen®.
Manufacturers
and end users of mobile power solutions (including the military) typically
require completion of extensive evaluation and approval processes before
embracing new systems. After extensive testing, a number of federal, state,
DOT
departments, and some major industrial companies have approved the
AuraGen®
for
purchase.
Thousands
of AuraGen®
units
are currently being used for multiple applications and in all types of operating
environments, providing a good sample set for reliability analysis. The results
show very low failure rates, which we are reducing further via minor hardware
and software modifications, better assembly procedures and improved installation
training. The U.S. Army has performed its own tests and is continuing to test
the AuraGen®
under
severe conditions. The VIPER, in use by the special forces and other combat
forces, has been air-drop-certified by the U.S. Army and has been, and is,
successfully deployed in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The
AuraGen®
system
passed all of the Underwriters Laboratories (“UL”) testing in 2002 and 2003. In
late 2004 and early 2005, the U.S. Marine Corps successfully tested the VIPER
for safety and other operational capabilities at the Aberdeen Test grounds.
Target
Markets
After
the
Company emerged from Chapter 11 reorganization under new management, our sales
and marketing activities were expanded to include the following
markets.
Military,
Homeland Security Administration and Other Federal Agencies
We
believe the VIPER is a superior mobile power solution compared with existing
alternatives for numerous military applications. The VIPER capability to produce
both 120 Volt AC and 28 Volt DC power simultaneously at low engine RPM is
critical for many military applications. In addition, the VIPER’s power
management system, provides military users with the ability to monitor the
quality and quantity of available power, the state of the on-board batteries,
and the ability to prioritize different electric loads. The USCG, after three
years of testing, selected the VIPER as the power system for its 190 new patrol
boats; SAIC is using the VIPER on all of its VACIS gamma ray scan systems that
are used for homeland and base security applications, and numerous units of
special forces and regular army are using the VIPER in both Iraq and
Afghanistan. The Department of Defense issued a report to Congress in August
2006, which discussed the success of the VIPER in Iraq and Afghanistan. More
recently a number of military OEMs are exploring the use of the VIPER for
various military programs. The Company is also pursuing marketing the VIPER
for
the upcoming JLTV program.
8
Marine
We
believe that the AuraGen®
is an
ideal product for recreational boats with a length of 25 to 50 feet. The
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tested the AuraGen®
on the
“Magna Spirit”, a research vessel, for 3,000 miles on the open ocean and
reported flawless performance. The USCG tested the VIPER for three years before
choosing it to power 190 new patrol boats. The United States Navy also tested
the VIPER for over 10,000 nautical miles with flawless performance. All of
these
organizations are leaders in the introduction of new technologies and safety
for
marine applications. More recently a major boat OEM successfully tested the
AuraGen®
on one
of their production boats, and the Company is currently pursuing the required
boat related certifications from UL. While the Company is not expecting any
delays in getting the required certification, no assurances can be given as
to
when, or if, such required certification will be completed.
Oil
and Gas Industry
The
oil
and gas industry is a heavy user of mobile power for service. We have identified
a number of oil and gas service providers that require the power level, as
well
as the power quality, generated by the AuraGen®.
In
particular, there is a need for very large power to start inductive loads such
as compressors, fans and electric motors. Typically the starting power required
is known as lock rotor and can easily reach 30,000 watts. The
AuraGen®
ICS
design and architecture is such that it can easily support these power levels
for the very short times that are required to start the loads. We have
demonstrated 30,000 watts starting power for numerous compressors and
motors.
Mid
-
Size Refrigeration Trucks
Mid
size
refrigeration trucks are used throughout the country for the delivery of food.
These trucks typically have a diesel engine mounted over the cab that is used
as
a generator for the refrigeration unit. The AuraGen®
is an
ideal power source that can eliminate the need for the extra diesel engine
thus
reducing operating cost and fuel costs. The AuraGen’s®
ability
to provide high wattage, start-up power is critical for this application, since
a typical refrigeration system requires a two to four horsepower compressor.
Such compressors require 20,000 to 30,000 watts of starting power. The Company
has now sold over 100 systems for this application and is anticipating
significant growth in this segment.
Emergency/Rescue
The
emergency/rescue market relies heavily upon mobile power for lights,
communications gear, instruments, medical equipment and digital equipment and
tools. As the emergency/rescue market has undergone a transition to digital
equipment and portable computers, it has experienced constant growth in mobile
power needs. Approximately 20 of these organizations have started to use the
AuraGen®.
Recently the Red Cross has used the AuraGen®
to
power
its communication needs in support of disaster relief during Hurricane Katrina
and the wildfires in California in October 2007. In addition, hundreds of fire
trucks are now using the AuraGen®
as their
mobile power source.
Facilities,
Manufacturing Process and Suppliers
We
assemble and test the AuraGen®
at our
27,000 square foot facility in El Segundo, California, with components that
are
produced by various suppliers. Effective December 31, 2007, our current lease
expired and we are currently on a month-to-month lease. In February 2008, we
entered into a lease for a new facility of approximately 25,500 square feet,
near our current facility. The lease is for a term of five years, commencing
May
1, 2008, and carries a base rent of $28,019 per month. We feel this facility
is
sufficient for our current needs. We plan to expand our manufacturing and
warehouse capacity during the first quarter of fiscal 2008 with a new facility
in the Atlanta, Georgia area. The new facility will be no less than 50,000
square feet and will provide enough capacity to handle our projected business
for the next few years. The new facility will use the experience learned over
the last few years to trim the manufacturing process and to improve throughput.
When the new facility comes on line our production capacity will be 24,000
units
per year.
9
Early
in
our AuraGen®
program,
we determined it was most cost-effective to outsource production of components
and sub-assemblies to volume-oriented manufacturers, rather than produce these
parts in-house. As a result of this decision, and based on then anticipated
sales, prior to fiscal 2001 we purchased, a substantial inventory of components
and sub-assemblies at volume prices. Since sales did not meet our expectations,
we have been assembling, testing and selling product from this inventory for
several years. Many of the components and sub-assemblies are mechanical in
nature, do not deteriorate, and are readily usable for all of our
AuraGen®
models.
Some of the sub-assembly units are in the form of ECUs that have also not
deteriorated and, even though there have been improvements and modifications
over this period, the units in inventory required only minor applications of
parts and labor to bring them to current specifications.
In
order
to renew our inventory of components, we will need to renew contracts with
such
manufacturers or locate other suitable manufacturers. Since February 2006,
we
have renewed our relationships with a number of our old suppliers and are
developing relationships with others. To ensure quality and reliability in
the
field, we use highly qualified suppliers, the majority of which are ISO 9002
compliant.
Distribution
and Product Support
We
provide a turnkey product and service to support our customers in every area.
We
have performed all of the development, from basic physics to detailed
engineering. We believe our core capabilities provide a solid foundation to
resolve technical issues, develop an ongoing line of new products and
continually enhance our products.
Our
vehicle integration team develops, engineers, and supplies all of the brackets,
pulleys, idlers, belts, tensioners and other components that comprise a mounting
system. The group also specifies all of the requirements of the
AuraGen®
to allow
its use with other mobile drives, such as hydraulic systems and PTO
applications.
Research
and Development
From
fiscal 2002 through fiscal 2005 we reduced substantially all research and
development activities due to our weakened financial condition. Although we
believe that ongoing research and development is important to the success of
our
product in order to utilize the most recent technology, to develop additional
products and additional uses for existing products, to stay current with changes
in vehicle manufacture and design and to maintain an ongoing advantage over
potential competition, our financial condition has not allowed significant
expenditures on research and development, as all costs are being minimized
while
we seek to maintain solvency and attain profitability.
When
we
emerged from Chapter 11 reorganization, we started to rebuild our research
and
development team. We have introduced and started to ship our dual and Tamgen
systems, which generate up to 16,000 watts of continuous power with both AC
and
DC simultaneous capabilities. We have completed the design and are currently
testing a unit that is one third smaller than the current 5,000 and 8,000 watts
system that will supply 3,000 to 4,000 watts. We are also pursuing the
development of a larger unit that we expect to have 25,000 watts capability.
In
addition, we plan to start developing electric motors based on the AuraGen
technology with the focus of this development on the ½ to 10 horsepower segment
of the industry.
Patents
and Intellectual Property
Our
intellectual property portfolio consists of trademarks, proprietary know-how
and
patents.
In
the
area of electromagnetic technology, we have developed numerous magnetic systems
and designs that result in a significant increase of magnetic field density
per
unit volume that can be converted into useful power energy or work. This
increase in field density is a factor of three to four, which, when incorporated
into mechanical devices, could result in a significant reduction in size and
cost of production for the same performance.
10
The
applications of these technological advances are in machines used every day
by
industrial, commercial and consumers. We have applied technology to numerous
applications in industrial machines, such as generators, motors, actuators
and
linear motors.
The
U.S.
Patent Office awarded us 29 patents applicable to automotive and industrial
applications. Of those patents, four are focused directly on the
AuraGen®,
seven
are basic magnetic actuation, two are for control systems associated with
controlling the magnetic fields in different configurations and sixteen are
focused on the EVA application.
The
sixteen (16) patents associated with the EVA application cover the
implementation of a controlled magnetic field as applied to linear motors.
Many
of the same techniques are implemented into the AuraGen®
control
systems and, in particular, the control of the high power board used in the
new
AuraGen®
inverter
mode, which uses many elements from the EVA application.
Areas
of AuraGen®
Technology Innovation:
We
hold
the following patents: Nos. 5,734,217; 6,157,175; 6,700,214; 6,700,802; with
expiration dates of 2015, 2017, 2019 and 2019 respectively. The above patents
cover three areas, as described below.
Induction
Machine
The
basic
patent covers a new form of induction machine with superior performance in
a
much smaller size than conventional machines. The solid cast rotor, the shaped
magnetic field, the secondary conduction path through the steel, and the axial
magnetic orientation are key components of this innovation.
Control
System
This
system separates the power generation from the power delivery by introducing
a
400 VDC buss. For each cycle of each phase, part of the cycle power is drawn
from the bus to run the electronics and energize the coils, while during the
other part of the cycle, power is delivered to charge up the buss. The control
system must balance all the timing to effect zero voltage change to the buss
under dynamic variations of frequency and loads. The ability to optimize in
real
time the slip frequency is a key innovation in motor and generator control
for
variable speed, variable frequency, and variable load systems.
Bi-Directional
Power Supply (“BDP”)
The
patented ICS system developed by Aura provides a new capability in power
systems. The BDP allows a system to use multiple sources of power
simultaneously. It is a key component in providing the ability to deliver both
AC and DC power simultaneously, as well as the ability to handle large power
surges without the need for a throttle controller.
Employees
As
of
February 28, 2007, we employed 47 persons. We are not a party to any collective
bargaining agreements.
Significant
Customers
During
the year ended February 28, 2007, we conducted business with two customers
whose
sales comprised 24% of our net sales. As of February 28, 2007, three customers
accounted for 50% of our net accounts receivable.
During
the year ended February 28, 2006, we conducted business with four customers
whose sales comprised 24% of our net sales. As of February 28, 2006, two
customers accounted for 87% of our net accounts receivable.
Backlog
As
of
January 30, 2008, we had a backlog of approximately $5.3 million. Of this
amount, approximately $4.2 million is for delivery after the 2008 fiscal year
Approximately $4 million of this backlog is subject to cancellation or
renegotiation at the convenience of the government. We had no material backlog
at the prior year corresponding date.
11
ITEM
1A. Risk Factors
Risk
Factors Relating to Our Business
We
have a history of losses and we may not be profitable in any future
period.
In
each
fiscal year since our organization in 1987 we have not made an operating profit.
We have an accumulated deficit in excess of $300 million from our inception
through November 30, 2007. We cannot assure you that we will be able to achieve
or maintain profitability or positive cash flow.
If
we are unable to raise capital, our ability to implement our current business
plan and ultimately our viability as a company could be adversely
affected.
The
cash
flow generated from our operations to date has not been sufficient to fund
our
working capital needs, and we cannot predict when operating cash flow will
be
sufficient to fund working capital needs. Since fiscal 2002 we have been forced
to scale back operations due to inadequate working capital and in June 2005
we
were forced to file for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code,
from which we emerged under a court-approved plan of reorganization on January
31, 2006.
In
the
past, in order to maintain liquidity we have relied upon external sources of
financing, principally equity financing and private and bank indebtedness.
We
have no bank line of credit and require additional debt or equity financing
to
fund ongoing operations. We are seeking to raise additional capital. However,
we
have no firm commitments from third parties to provide additional financing
and
we cannot assure you that financing will be available at the times or in the
amounts required. If
we
cannot raise needed funds, we would also be forced to make further substantial
reductions in our operating expenses, which could adversely affect our ability
to implement our current business plan and ultimately our viability as a
company.
Our
revenues have declined significantly in recent years.
We
have
experienced a significant decline in operating revenues since fiscal 1998.
Our
net revenues peaked at approximately $104 million in the fiscal year ended
February 29, 1998, prior to commercial sales of the AuraGen®.
Revenues declined to $2.5 million for the fiscal year ended February, 2001.
The
decline in revenues was due primarily to the cessation of operations of our
computer peripherals subsidiary, NewCom, in fiscal 1999, and the sale of our
speaker operations, electronic component operations, and ceramics operations.
Substantially all of our operating revenues are now derived from the sales
of
our AuraGen®
products, which did not produce a material amount of revenues until the fourth
quarter of our fiscal year ended February 2001. Since fiscal 2001, annual
operating revenues have ranged between $1.1 million and $3.1 million.
Our
success over the short-term depends on the commercial success of the
AuraGen®
products, as we are not currently engaged in any other line of
business.
Because
we have focused our business on developing a single product line, rather than
on
diversifying into other areas, our success in the foreseeable future will be
dependent upon the commercial success of the AuraGen®
product
line.
We
may have difficulty managing our growth.
We
restructured our operation during fiscal 2004, 2005 and 2006 in order to
conserve cash. Our workforce declined from 101 employees as of February 28,
2002
to 47 at February 28, 2007. We will need to hire employees, rebuild our sales
and production infrastructure and improve our operating and financial systems
in
order to effectively manage any significant growth in demand for our products.
If we do not effectively manage our growth, we will not be successful in
executing our business plan, which could have a material adverse affect on
our
business, results of operations and financial condition.
12
The
market acceptance of the AuraGen®
is uncertain.
Our
business is dependent upon sales generated from the AuraGen®
family
of products and increasing acceptance of these products. We cannot assure you
that our products will achieve broad acceptance in the marketplace. The
AuraGen®
uses new
technology and has only been available in the marketplace for a few years.
Our
financial condition has limited our ability to market the AuraGen®
to
potential customers. Because our product is radically different from
traditionally available mobile power solutions, users may require lengthy
evaluation periods in order to gain confidence in the product. OEMs and large
fleet users also typically require considerable time to make changes to their
planning and production.
Our
business may be adversely affected by industry
competition.
The
industry in which we operate is competitive. We face substantial competition
from companies that have been offering traditional solutions such as Gensets
for
the last 50 years, and there are more than 40 Genset manufacturers in the United
States. These competitors include: Onan, Honda and Kohler.
Most
of
our competitors have greater financial resources than we do, have larger budgets
for research, new product development and marketing and have long-standing
customer relationships. We must compete with many larger and more established
companies in the hiring and retention of qualified personnel.
Moreover,
this market may attract new competitors that have longer operating histories,
greater name recognition and significantly greater financial, technical and
marketing resources than us. Our failure to meet our projections for our
products’ market acceptance or the ability of our competitors to capture a first
mover advantage could have a material adverse impact upon our business,
operating results and financial condition. Furthermore, new product
introductions or product enhancements by our current or future competitors
or
the use of other technologies could cause a loss of market acceptance of our
products.
We
depend on our intellectual property to provide us with a competitive
advantage.
We
rely
on a number of patents and patent applications to protect the
AuraGen®
products
from unauthorized use by competitors. Our
efforts to protect our proprietary rights may not prevent infringement by others
or ensure that these rights will provide us with a competitive advantage.
We
cannot
assure you that the patents pending relating to the AuraGen®
system
or future patent applications will be issued or that any issued patents will
not
be invalidated, circumvented or challenged.
A
portion
of our proprietary technology depends upon trade secrets and unpatented
technology and proprietary knowledge related to the development, promotion
and
operation of our products. While we generally enter into confidentiality
agreements with our employees, consultants and vendors, we cannot assure you
that our trade secrets and proprietary technology will not become known or
be
independently developed by competitors in such a manner that we have no
practical recourse, and there can be no assurance that others will not develop
or acquire equivalent expertise or develop products that render our current
or
future products noncompetitive or obsolete.
Litigation
regarding intellectual property rights could be time-consuming and expensive
and
could divert our technical and management personnel from their work. We cannot
assure you that such litigation expenses will not occur in the future. There
also can be no assurance that other parties will not take, or threaten to take,
legal action against us, alleging infringement of such parties” patents by our
current or proposed products. We cannot assure you that we will have adequate
financial resources to successfully institute or defend intellectual property
litigation. Insurance coverage to indemnify us against liability for
infringement of other parties’ intellectual property rights is either
unavailable or prohibitively expensive.
Competition
for key employees is intense, and we cannot assure you that we will be able
to
retain our key employees or that we will be able to attract, assimilate and
retain other highly qualified personnel in the future. While we may enter into
agreements with our employees regarding patents, confidentiality and related
matters, we do not generally have employment agreements with our employees.
The
loss of key personnel, especially without notice, or the inability to hire
or
retain qualified personnel, particularly given our anticipated growth, could
have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial
condition.
13
We
depend on third party manufacturers for certain product
components.
We
rely
extensively on subcontracts with third parties for the manufacture of most
components of the AuraGen®.
If
these providers do not produce these products on a timely basis, if the products
do not meet our specifications and quality control standards, or if the products
are otherwise flawed, we may have to delay product delivery, or recall or
replace unacceptable products. In addition, such failures could damage our
reputation and could adversely affect our operating results. As a result, we
could lose potential customers and any revenues that we may have at that time
may decline dramatically.
Although
we generally use standard industrial and electrical parts and components for
our
products, some of our components are currently available only from a single
source or from limited sources. We may experience delays in production of the
AuraGen®
if we
fail to identify alternate vendors or if any parts supply is interrupted or
reduced, or if there is a significant increase in production costs or decline
in
component quality.
We
will need to renew sources of supply to meet increases in demand for the
AuraGen®.
We
purchased the basic components for the AuraGen®
units
currently being sold under a bulk order placed prior to fiscal 2001. Due to
sales not meeting anticipated levels, we have been selling from this inventory.
In order to renew this inventory, we will need to renew contracts with such
manufacturers or locate other suitable manufacturers. Although we believe that
there are a number of potential manufacturers of the components, we cannot
assure you that renewed contracts for components can be obtained on favorable
terms. Any material adverse change in such contracts could increase our cost
of
goods.
Risks
Relating to Our Common Stock
Because
our operating results have been uneven and may continue to fluctuate, this
could
affect our stock price.
Because
our efforts since 1999 have been focused entirely on the introduction of the
AuraGen®
family
of products into the marketplace, our revenues and operating results have been
uneven and may continue to be so during our current fiscal year and beyond.
These fluctuations could affect our stock price. Factors which could affect
our
operating results include:
- |
The
size, timing and shipment of individual orders;
|
- |
Market
acceptance of our products;
|
- |
Development
of direct and indirect sales channels; and
|
- |
The
timing of introduction of new products or enhancements.
|
We
have a history of filing late periodic reports with the
SEC.
In
June
1999, we failed to file our Annual Report on Form 10-K on the due date
prescribed by the SEC, as we were unable to complete the audit of our financial
statements. This in turn delayed the filing of three subsequent Quarterly
Reports on Form 10-Q. The delay was occasioned by inadequate financial resources
brought about by severe financial difficulties of our computer peripherals
subsidiary, NewCom, which ceased operations in the first quarter of 1999. As
a
result of the delinquent filings, our common stock was delisted from the Nasdaq
National Market in July 1999. In February 2000, we completed our financial
restructuring and filed all delinquent SEC reports, and listed our common stock
on the NASD, Inc. OTC Bulletin Board (the “OTCBB”). From February 2005 through
the date of the filing of this report, we failed to timely file quarterly
reports on Form 10-Q and Annual Reports on Form 10-K. This delay was also caused
by inadequate financial resources, culminating in our filing for reorganization
under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in June 2005. As a result of our
failure to file these reports we were delisted from the OTCBB in July 2005
and
currently trade on the “pink sheets.” Following our emergence from bankruptcy in
January 2006, we engaged auditors and other professionals to assist in the
preparation of our delinquent SEC filings. As of the date of the filing of
this
report , all of our delinquent filings have been made and we are now eligible
for re-listing on the OTCBB, subject to meeting their other requirements.
However, we cannot assure you that our common stock will be listed on the OTCBB.
Continued listing on the OTCBB and other U.S. exchanges requires that we timely
file periodic SEC reports. Our failure to remain timely in our filings,
therefore, could result in the delisting of our common stock on the OTCBB should
we again become listed, which in turn could adversely affect the market
liquidity of our common stock.
14
We
may issue additional shares of our authorized common stock without obtaining
the
approval of our stockholders.
As
of the
date of this report, our corporate charter currently authorized our Board of
Directors to issue up to 50,000,000 shares of common stock, of which 36,670,820
shares were outstanding as of January 31, 2008. The power of the Board of
Directors to issue authorized shares of common stock is generally not subject
to
stockholder approval under Delaware state law, the state of our corporate
organization. Any additional issuance of our common stock may have the effect
of
further diluting the equity interest of stockholders, and such dilution could
be
substantial.
Because
our common stock is not traded on a national or regional market, liquidity
for
our common stock could be adversely impacted.
Effective
July 2005, our common stock was delisted from the OTCBB. As a result, an
investor may find it more difficult to dispose of or to obtain accurate price
quotations and volume information concerning our common stock than if it were
listed on the OTC Bulletin Board or a national or regional
exchange.
Because
our common stock is subject to rules governing low priced securities, market
liquidity for our common stock could be adversely
impacted.
Our
common stock trades below $5.00 per share and is not listed on the Nasdaq Stock
Market or a national or regional securities exchange. Therefore, our common
stock is subject to the low priced security or so-called “penny stock” rules
that impose additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell
such securities to persons other than established customers and accredited
investors. For any transaction involving a penny stock, unless exempt, the
rules
require, among other things, the delivery, prior to the transaction, of a
disclosure schedule required by the SEC relating to the penny stock market.
These rules also require that the broker determine, based upon information
obtained from the investor, that transactions in penny stocks are suitable
for
the investor, and require the broker to obtain the written consent of the
investor prior to effecting the penny stock transaction. The broker-dealer
must
also disclose the commissions payable to both the broker-dealer and the
registered representative, current quotations for the securities and, if the
broker-dealer is the sole market-maker, the broker-dealer must disclose this
fact and the broker-dealer’s presumed control over the market. Finally, monthly
statements must be sent disclosing recent price information for the penny stock
held in the account and information on the limited market in penny stocks. As
long as our common stock is characterized as a penny stock, the market liquidity
for these shares could be severely affected. The regulations relating to penny
stocks could limit the ability of broker-dealers to sell these securities and,
in turn, the ability of stockholders to sell their shares in the secondary
market.
The
potential exercise of outstanding warrants and options could adversely affect
the market price of our common stock, dilute the holdings of existing
stockholders and impede our ability to obtain additional equity financing.
As
of
December 31, 2007 we had outstanding 5,855,126 options and warrants to purchase
our common stock at exercise prices ranging between $2.00 and $3.50, and
commitments to issue an additional 2,506,050 options at exercise prices ranging
between $2.00 and $3.00 upon shareholder approval of these issuances. If those
option and warrant holders exercise these securities, we will be obligated
to
issue additional shares of common stock at the stated exercise price. As of
March 3, 2008, the closing price of our common stock was $1.72per share. The
existence of such rights to acquire common stock at fixed prices may prove
a
hindrance to our efforts to raise future equity funding, and the exercise of
such rights will dilute the percentage ownership interest of our stockholders
and may dilute the value of their ownership. Future sale of shares issuable
on
the exercise of outstanding warrants and options at fixed prices below
prevailing market prices, or expectations of such sales, could adversely affect
the prevailing market price of our common stock, particularly since such
warrants or options may be exercised at a fixed price and resold. Further,
the
holders of the outstanding warrants may exercise them at a time when we would
otherwise be able to obtain additional equity capital on terms more favorable
to
us.
15
We
do not expect to pay dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.
Although
our stockholders may receive dividends if, as and when declared by our Board
of
Directors, we do not presently intend to pay dividends on our common stock
until
we are able to generate revenues and profits on a sustained basis and available
cash exceeds our working capital requirements. Therefore, you should not
purchase our common stock if you need immediate or future income by way of
dividends from your investment.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
Until
December 2005, our majority owned subsidiary, Aura Realty, Inc. (“Aura Realty”),
owned the 47,000 square foot headquarters facility and adjacent 27,690 square
foot manufacturing facility in El Segundo, California that we use for production
of our AuraGen®
product.
These properties were encumbered by a deed of trust securing a note in the
original principal amount of $5.4 million, secured by our headquarters and
manufacturing facilities.
During
fiscal 2003, we sold a minority interest in Aura Realty. During fiscal 2004,
we
defaulted on payments under the note. Such default continued past year-end
and
the lender took actions regarding a possible foreclosure sale. In June 2004,
we
paid all arrearages, cured this default and were current on our obligations
under the note as of June 30, 2005.
In
December 2005, Aura Realty sold the two buildings to an unrelated third party.
At that time we leased the smaller facility for a term of two years, and moved
out of the headquarters facility. Effective December 31, 2007, our current
lease
expired and we are currently on a month-to-month lease. In February 2008, we
entered into a lease for a new facility of approximately 25,500 square feet,
near our current facility. The lease is for a term of five years, commencing
May
1, 2008, and carries a base rent of $28,019 per month. We feel this facility
is
sufficient for our current needs.
ITEM
3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Except
as
described below, we are not a party to any material pending legal proceedings.
Barovich/Chiau
et. al. v. Aura Systems, Inc. et. al. (Case No. CV
-95-3295).
As
previously reported in our fiscal 2000 report on Form 10-K, we settled
shareholder litigation in the referenced matter in January 1999. On November
20,
1999, the parties entered into an Amended Stipulation of Settlement, requiring
that we make payment of $2,260,000 (plus interest) in thirty-six equal monthly
installments of $70,350. On October 22, 2002, after we had failed to make
certain monthly payments, Plaintiffs applied for and obtained a judgment against
us for $935,350, representing the balance due. We have subsequently made only
two monthly payments of $70,350 each, reducing the amount owed to $794,650
(plus
interest) as of February 28, 2005. Subsequent to the end of fiscal 2005, the
bankruptcy court in our Chapter 11 proceeding (In re Aura Systems, Inc., United
States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California, Case Number LA
05-24550-SB), approved the settlement of this claim in the amount of
approximately $820,000 as an unsecured claim under our Chapter 11 Plan of
Reorganization. As an unsecured claim the Plan provides for the claim to be
satisfied by the issuance of approximately 465,000 shares of common stock in
the
reorganized company. Plaintiffs appealed the ruling of the bankruptcy court
to
the District Court of Appeals claiming they were a secured creditor under the
Plan of Reorganization, and therefore entitled to full payment in cash over
a
period of five years. The appellate court upheld the ruling of the bankruptcy
court, and Plaintiffs have appealed this decision to the Ninth Circuit Court
of
Appeals. The appeal is pending.
ITEM
4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
No
matters were submitted to a vote of security holders in the fourth quarter
of
fiscal 2007.
16
PART
II
ITEM
5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
From
May
21, 1991, to July 21, 1999, our common stock was listed on the NASDAQ National
Stock Market. In July 1999 the shares were de-listed from the NASDAQ National
Market as a result of our failure to meet the minimum $1.00 bid price and other
requirements. On February 1, 2001, our shares were listed on the OTC Bulletin
Board under the symbol "AURA". In July 2005, following the filing of our Chapter
11 proceeding, our common stock ceased to be quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board.
Since February 2006 our common stock has been traded on the over-the-counter
market under the symbol “AUSI”.
Set
forth
below are high and low bid prices for our common stock for each quarterly period
in the two most recent fiscal years. Such quotations reflect inter-dealer
prices, without retail mark-up, markdown or commissions and may not necessarily
represent actual transactions in the common stock. We had approximately 3,303
stockholders of record as of January 15, 2008. Stock prices for Fiscal 2006
have
been adjusted to reflect the 1 for 338 reverse split effective upon our exit
from bankruptcy on January 31, 2006.
Period
|
High
|
Low
|
|||||
Fiscal
2006
|
|||||||
First
Quarter ended May 31, 2005
|
$
|
6.76
|
$
|
5.07
|
|||
Second
Quarter ended August 31, 2005
|
$
|
5.07
|
$
|
0.34
|
|||
Third
Quarter ended November 30, 2005
|
$
|
3.72
|
$
|
0.68
|
|||
Fourth
Quarter ended February 28, 2006
|
$
|
3.38
|
$
|
0.68
|
Period
|
High
|
Low
|
|||||
Fiscal
2007
|
|||||||
First
Quarter ended May 31, 2006
|
$
|
3.25
|
$
|
0.55
|
|||
Second
Quarter ended August 31, 2006
|
$
|
0.90
|
$
|
0.53
|
|||
Third
Quarter ended November 30, 2006
|
$
|
0.80
|
$
|
0.75
|
|||
Fourth
Quarter ended February 28, 2007
|
$
|
1.63
|
$
|
0.65
|
On
January 15, 2008, the reported closing sales price for our common stock was
$2.28.
Dividend
Policy
We
have
not paid any dividends on our common stock and we do not anticipate paying
any
dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. During fiscal 2004
we
issued shares of Series A Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock and in fiscal
2005 we issued Series B Preferred Stock. Under the terms of the preferred shares
we could not pay dividends on our common stock until dividends had been paid
on
the preferred shares. Effective with the implementation of our Chapter 11
reorganization plan in January 2006 all of the outstanding shares of the Series
A Preferred Stock and the Series B Preferred Stock were converted into common
stock.
Sales
of Unregistered Securities
During
the three months ended February 28, 2007, we sold 2,620,991 shares of our common
stock to private investors for proceeds of $2,385,105.
All
such
securities were issued and sold in reliance on the exemption from registration
contained in Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, and the certificates
representing such securities contain a restrictive legend reflecting the
limitations on future transfer of those securities. The offer and sale of these
securities was made without public solicitation or advertising. The investors
represented to us that they were knowledgeable and sophisticated, and were
experienced in business and financial matters so as to be capable of evaluating
an investment in our securities and were an “accredited investor” within the
meaning of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933. Each
of
these investors was afforded full access to information regarding our
business.
17
Repurchases
of Equity Securities
We
did
not repurchase any shares of our common stock during the fourth quarter of
fiscal 2007.
Stock
Performance Graph
The
following graph compares the cumulative total stockholder return of the Company
with the cumulative total return on the NASDAQ Stock Market Index (U.S.) and
the
S&P Small Cap Industrial 600 Index†.
The
Comparisons in the graph are required by the Securities and Exchange Commission
and are not intended to forecast or be indicative of possible future performance
of the Company’s common stock.
COMPARISON
OF FIVE YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
AMONG
AURA SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED, THE NASDAQ STOCK MARKET (U.S.) INDEX AND THE S
&
P SMALL CAP INDUSTRIAL INDEX
$100
INVESTED ON 2/28/2002 IN STOCK OR INDEX-INCLUDING REINVESTMENT OF
DIVIDENDS.FISCAL YEAR ENDING FEBRUARY 28
18
Cumulative
Total Return and Year-to-Year Percent Return
Feb-02
|
Feb-03
|
Feb-04
|
Feb-05
|
Feb-06
|
Feb-07
|
||
AURA
SYSTEMS, INC.
|
Cum
ret
|
$
100
|
$
20.63
|
$
18.19
|
$
11.20
|
$
3.36
|
$
1.71
|
Y-Y
%ROI
|
-79
|
-12
|
-38
|
-70
|
-49
|
||
NASDAQ
STOCK MARKET INDEX (U.S.)
|
Cum
ret
|
$
100
|
$
74.19
|
$
112.60
|
$
113.81
|
$
126.55
|
$
134.03
|
Y-Y
%ROI
|
-26
|
52
|
1
|
11
|
6
|
||
S
& P SC INDUSTRIAL 600
|
Cum
ret
|
$
100
|
$
107.05
|
$
85.44
|
$
131.85
|
$
153.69
|
$
188.82
|
Y-Y
%ROI
|
7
|
-20
|
54
|
17
|
23
|
†
The
S&P Small Cap Industrial 600 Index is a composite of stocks including many
in related industries to the Company’s business. The trading symbol for the
index is ^SML.
ITEM
6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The
following Selected Financial Data has been taken or derived from our audited
consolidated financial statements and should be read in conjunction with and
is
qualified in its entirety by the full-consolidated financial statements, related
notes and other information included elsewhere herein.
AURA
SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
February
28, 2007
|
February
28, 2006
|
February
28, 2005
|
February
29, 2004
|
February
28, 2003
|
|||||||||||
Net
revenues
|
$
|
1,624,074
|
$
|
1,756,105
|
$
|
2,525,431
|
$
|
1,864,325
|
$
|
1,103,770
|
||||||
Cost
of goods sold
|
$
|
745,060
|
$
|
614,327
|
$
|
1,573,116
|
$
|
934,769
|
$
|
571,099
|
||||||
Inventory
write down
|
$
|
419,765
|
$
|
439,188
|
$
|
2,088,703
|
$
|
550,968
|
$
|
-
|
||||||
Gross
profit (loss)
|
$
|
459,249
|
$
|
702,590
|
$
|
(1,136,388
|
) |
$
|
378,588
|
$
|
532,671
|
|||||
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
Engineering,
research & development
|
$
|
1,048,529
|
$
|
1,483,247
|
$
|
2,482,678
|
$
|
2,135,061
|
$
|
3,956,886
|
||||||
|
|
|
$
|
|
$
|
|
$
|
|
$
|
|
||||||
Selling,
general and administrative
|
$
|
5,200,393
|
$
|
5,867,388
|
$
|
6,061,542
|
$
|
7,191,925
|
$
|
7,374,961
|
||||||
Class
action litigation & other legal settlements
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
267,726
|
$
|
2,765,192
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
233,259
|
||||||
Impairment
losses on long-lived assets
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
544,510
|
$
|
2,000,398
|
$
|
2,300,000
|
||||||
Severance
expense
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
241,243
|
||||||
Total
expenses
|
$
|
6,248,922
|
$
|
7,618,361
|
$
|
12,678,912
|
$
|
11,327,384
|
$
|
14,106,349
|
||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Loss
from operations
|
$
|
(5,789,673
|
)
|
$
|
(6,915,771
|
)
|
$
|
(13,815,300
|
)
|
$
|
(10,948,796
|
)
|
$
|
(13,573,678
|
)
|
|
Other
(income) and expense:
|
||||||||||||||||
Impairment
of investments
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
286,061
|
$
|
500,000
|
$
|
818,019
|
||||||
Loss
on sale of minority interest in Aura Realty
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
231,000
|
$
|
626,676
|
||||||
(Gain)
loss on sale of investments/assets
|
$
|
7,750
|
$
|
(2,446,798
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(201,061
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
||||
Interest
expense
|
$
|
(392,977
|
)
|
$
|
6,602,020
|
$
|
18,965,852
|
$
|
2,409,732
|
$
|
2,656,592
|
|||||
Other
|
$
|
6,453
|
$
|
(50,000
|
)
|
$
|
(166,345
|
)
|
$
|
129,337
|
$
|
(362,096
|
)
|
|||
Change
in derivative liability
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
16,254,502
|
$
|
(4,622,235
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
|||||
Provision
(benefit) for taxes
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
||||||
Minority
interest
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(3,970
|
)
|
$
|
(365,514
|
)
|
$
|
14,018
|
||||
Gain
on extinguishment of debt obligations, net of income taxes
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
1,730,979
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
67,415
|
$
|
1,186,014
|
||||||
Preferred
stock dividend
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
525,377
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
19
Net
Income (loss)
|
$
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
$
|
6,864,488
|
$
|
(28,800,040
|
)
|
$
|
(13,584,875
|
)
|
$
|
(16,140,873
|
)
|
||
Net
loss per common share
|
$
|
(0.25
|
)
|
$
|
2.24
|
$
|
(22.35
|
)
|
$
|
(10.65
|
)
|
$
|
(13.52
|
)
|
||
Weighted
average number of common shares
|
25,114,154
|
3,063,216
|
1,288,114
|
1,276,056
|
1,230,365
|
|||||||||||
Cash/cash
equivalents
|
$
|
1,051,259
|
$
|
472,482
|
$
|
61,376
|
$
|
83,200
|
$
|
163,693
|
||||||
Working
capital
|
$
|
832,744
|
$
|
2,567,684
|
$
|
(34,338,147
|
)
|
$
|
(14,011,245
|
)
|
$
|
(15,626,271
|
)
|
|||
Total
assets
|
$
|
5,549,137
|
$
|
7,891,377
|
$
|
13,305,777
|
$
|
17,760,733
|
$
|
23,767,866
|
||||||
Total
debt
|
$
|
4,907,824
|
$
|
5,140,554
|
$
|
36,535,119
|
$
|
15,545,829
|
$
|
13,345,378
|
||||||
Net
stockholders’ equity (deficit)
|
$
|
2,103,666
|
$
|
4,082,983
|
$
|
(23,883,233
|
)
|
$
|
(3,614,425
|
)
|
$
|
4,712,176
|
Prior
period amount regarding number of shares outstanding and the price per share
have been restated to give effect to a 338 for 1 reverse split which became
effective upon our exit from bankruptcy on January 31, 2006.
PART
II
ITEM
7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS
OF
OPERATIONS
Forward
Looking Statements.
This
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations includes many forward-looking statements. For cautions about relying
on such forward looking statements, please refer to the section entitled
“Forward Looking Statements” at the beginning of this Report immediately prior
to “Item 1”.
Overview
We
design, assemble and sell the AuraGen®,
our
patented mobile power generator that uses the engine of a vehicle to generate
power. The AuraGen®
delivers
on-location, plug-in electricity for any end use, including industrial,
commercial, recreational and military applications. We began commercializing
the
AuraGen®
in late
1999. To date, AuraGen®
units
have been sold in numerous industries, including recreational, utilities,
telecommunications, emergency/rescue, public works, catering, oil and gas,
transportation, government and the military.
We
were
founded in 1987 and, until 1992, primarily engaged in supplying defense
technology to classified military programs. In 1992, we transitioned to being
primarily a supplier of consumer and industrial products and services using
our
technology. In 1994, we founded NewCom, which manufactured and sold computer
modems, sound cards and other multimedia components. In 1997, we acquired MYS
Corporation of Japan (“MYS”), a manufacturer of speaker systems. NewCom ceased
operations in 1999. In fiscal 2000, we sold MYS, our business divisions
providing sound products, and other assets, restructured substantial
indebtedness and concentrated our focus on the AuraGen®
product.
Since fiscal 2002 sales and support of the AuraGen®
have
provided substantially all of our operating revenues.
20
We
have
not yet achieved a level of AuraGen®
sales
sufficient to generate positive cash flow. Accordingly, we have depended on
repeated infusions of cash in order to maintain liquidity as we have sought
to
develop sales. During fiscal 2002 through fiscal 2004, we substantially reduced
our internal staffing due to the slower-than-anticipated level of
AuraGen®
sales.
We also suspended substantially all research and development activities. We
continued to downscale our operations in fiscal 2005 and 2006. Since emerging
from Chapter 11 proceeding, we have begun to increase our research and
development activities and started to increase our staff in engineering and
sales.
In
September 2004, we entered into agreements with a group of investors and holders
of secured debt in order to recapitalize the Company. These agreements are
referred to as the “2004 Recapitalization Transactions” or “2004
Recapitalization” and are described in more detail below under “Liquidity and
Capital Resources - The 2004 Recapitalization Transactions”. Completion of the
2004 Recapitalization Transactions was intended to provide us with a more stable
financial condition by infusing new capital of up to $15 million through the
sale of units comprising shares of Series B Preferred Stock and common stock
warrants, conversion of $3.5 million of secured debt into shares of Series
B
Preferred Stock and warrants, extension of the maturity of the remaining $2.1
million of secured debt to August 2005, and the settlement of legal claims
with
former management. However, we continued to require further financing to remain
solvent. Accordingly, subsequent to the end of fiscal 2005, in June 2005 we
filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, and emerged
on January 31, 2006 under a plan of reorganization.
Our
consolidated financial statements included in this Report have been prepared
on
the assumption that we will continue as a going concern, which contemplates
the
realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course
of
business.
Our
ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon the successful
achievement of profitable operations and the ability to generate sufficient
cash
from operations and obtain financing sources to meet our obligations. There
is
no assurance that such efforts will be successful.
Our
current level of sales reflects our efforts to introduce a new product into
the
marketplace. Many purchases of the product are being made for evaluation
purposes. We seek to achieve profitable operations by obtaining market
acceptance of the AuraGen®
as a
competitive - superior - product providing mobile power, thereby causing sales
to increase dramatically to levels which support a profitable operation. There
can be no assurance that this success will be achieved.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our
management’s discussion and analysis of our financial conditions and results of
operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have
been
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America. The preparation of financial statements requires
management to make estimates and disclosures on the date of the financial
statements. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, including, but
not
limited to, those related to revenue recognition. We use authoritative
pronouncements, historical experience and other assumptions as the basis for
making judgments. Actual results could differ from those estimates. We believe
that the following critical accounting policies affect our more significant
judgments and estimates in the preparation of our consolidated financial
statements.
Revenue
Recognition
We
are
required to make judgments based on historical experience and future
expectations, as to the reliability of shipments made to our customers. These
judgments are required to assess the propriety of the recognition of revenue
based on Staff Accounting Bulletin ("SAB") No. 101, "Revenue Recognition,"
and
related guidance. Because sales are currently in limited volume and many sales
are for evaluative purposes, we have not booked a general reserve for returns.
We will consider an appropriate level of reserve for product returns when our
sales increase to commercial levels.
21
Inventory
Valuation and Classification
Inventories
consist primarily of components and completed units for our AuraGen®
product.
Inventories are valued at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out) or market.
Provision is made for estimated amounts of current inventories that will
ultimately become obsolete due to changes in the product itself or vehicle
engine types that go out of production. Due to continuing lower than projected
sales, we are holding inventories in excess of what it expects to sell in the
next fiscal year. The net inventories which are not expected to be realized
within a 12-month period based on current sales forecasts have been reclassified
as long term. Management believes that existing inventories can, and will,
be
sold in the future without significant costs to upgrade it to current models
and
that the valuation of the inventories, classified both as current and long-term
assets, accurately reflects the realizable values of these assets. The
AuraGen®
product
being sold currently is not technologically different from those in inventory.
Existing finished goods inventories can be upgraded to the current model with
only a small amount of materials and manpower. We make these assessments based
on the following factors: i) existing orders, ii) age of the inventory, iii)
historical experience and iv) our expectations as to future sales. If expected
sales volumes do not materialize or if significant discounts from current
pricing levels are granted to generate sales, there would be a material impact
on our financial statements.
Valuation
of Long-Lived Assets
Long-lived
assets, consisting primarily of property and equipment, and patents and
trademarks, comprise a small portion of our total assets. Long-lived assets
are
reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
that their carrying values may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets
is
measured by a comparison of the carrying value of an asset to the future net
cash flows expected to be generated by those assets. Net cash flows are
estimated based on expectations as to the realizability of the asset. Factors
that could trigger a review include significant changes in the manner of an
asset's use or our overall strategy.
Specific
asset categories are treated as follows:
Accounts
Receivable: We record an allowance for doubtful accounts based on management's
expectation of collectibility of current and past due accounts
receivable.
Property,
Plant and Equipment: We depreciate our property and equipment over various
useful lives ranging from five to ten years. Adjustments are made as warranted
when market conditions and values indicate that the current value of an asset
is
less than its net book value.
Long-Term
Investments: As we do not hold a sufficient interest in our investments to
exercise significant influence and the fair market value of the investments
are
not readily determinable, long-term investments have been accounted for under
the cost method. Management reviews financial and other available information
pertaining to such investments to determine if and when a decline, other than
temporary, in the value of any investment has occurred and an adjustment is
warranted.
Patents
and trademarks: As our business depends on using new technology to create new
products, impairments in patents can be triggered by changed expectations
regarding the foreseeable commercial production of products underlying such
patents.
When
we
determine that an asset is impaired, it measures any such impairment by
discounting an asset's realizable value to the present using a discount rate
appropriate to the perceived risk in realizing such value. When we determine
that an impaired asset has no foreseeable realizable value, it writes such
asset
down to zero.
Results
of Operations
Our
fiscal 2007 net loss was $6.2 million. In fiscal 2006, we reported net income
of
$6.9 million. This was primarily a result of the recording of income of $16.3
million from a change in derivative liability that essentially reversed a charge
for this amount in fiscal 2005. Our fiscal 2005 net loss was $28.8 million,
with
$17.8 million of that loss related to non-cash charges for depreciation,
amortization, asset impairments and beneficial conversion of certain debt
instruments. Net operating revenues and gross profit were $1.6 million and
$.5
million, respectively, in fiscal 2007, $1.8 million and $.7 million,
respectively, in fiscal 2006, and $2.5 million and $(1.1) million, respectively,
in fiscal 2005.
22
Revenues
Net
revenues in fiscal 2007 decreased $132,031 to $1,624,074 from $1,756,105 in
fiscal 2006, a decrease of approximately 7.5%. This slight decrease was due
to
the continued effects of the disruption to our business resulting from the
bankruptcy proceeding and the prior reduction in the sales staff.
Net
revenues in fiscal 2006 decreased $769,326 to $1,756,105 from $2,525,431 in
fiscal 2005, a decrease of approximately 30%. This was due primarily to the
lack
of financial resources, the reduction in the workforce and the filing of
bankruptcy.
Cost
of Goods
Cost
of
goods sold in fiscal 2007 increased $130,733 to $745,060 from $614,327 in fiscal
2006. As a percentage of net revenues, cost of goods sold was 45.9% in fiscal
2007 compared to 35.2% in fiscal 2006. This was a result of the mix of products
sold.
Cost
of
goods decreased to $614,327 in fiscal 2006 from $1,573,116 in fiscal 2005.
As a
percentage of costs of net revenues, cost of goods sold was 35.2% in fiscal
2006
compared to 62.3% in fiscal 2005. On the low level of sales we have had, this
percentage can vary substantially from year to year based on the mix of products
sold.
Engineering,
Research and Development
Engineering,
research and development decreased $434,718 to $1,048,529 in fiscal 2007 from
$1,483,247 in fiscal 2006. The decrease is attributable to our focusing more
of
our efforts in the area of production. As a percentage of net revenues,
engineering, research and development was 64.6% in fiscal 2007 compared to
84.5%
in fiscal 2006. Research and development activities were negligible in fiscal
2007 and 2006, as we significantly reduced our research activities due to our
financial condition. We expect research and development activities to begin
to
increase as our financial condition improves and our sales
increase.
Engineering,
research and development expense decreased $999,421to $1,483,247 in fiscal
2006
from $2,482,668 in fiscal 2005. The decrease is largely attributable to the
substantial reduction in workforce that was necessitated by our financial
condition and the filing of bankruptcy.
Selling,
General and Administrative Expense
Selling,
general and administrative expenses (“SG&A”) decreased $666,995 to
$5,200,393 in fiscal 2007 from $5,867,388 in fiscal 2006. The decrease was
due
to a reduction in legal expense of approximately $800,000, partially offset
by
an increase in our workforce as we began to rebuild after exiting
bankruptcy.
In
fiscal
2006, SG&A decreased $1,019,154 to $5,867,388 from $6,886,542 in fiscal 2005.
This decrease was primarily attributable to cost cutting efforts, including
personnel reduction.
Legal
Settlements
Legal
settlements of $2,765,192 were recorded in fiscal 2005, primarily as a result
of
the settlement of litigation against us and certain of our officers by members
of our former management and others as part of the 2004 Recapitalization.
Approximately $1.5 million of this expense arose from valuations of the
warrants, options and Series B Preferred issued as part of the settlement.
Asset
Impairment
During
fiscal 2005 we recorded an asset impairment charge of $544,510 for the book
value of our patents due to continued low sales. There were no comparable
charges in either fiscal 2007 or fiscal 2006.
Non-Operating
Income and Expenses
We
incurred $0.3 million of asset impairment charges in fiscal 2005. There were
no
comparable charges in either fiscal 2007 or fiscal 2006.
23
Net
interest expense decreased to approximately $400,000 in fiscal 2007 from $6.6
million in fiscal 2006. The decrease is a result of our substantially lower
debt
levels when we exited bankruptcy. Net interest expense in fiscal 2006 decreased
$12,363,832 to $6,602,020 from $18,965,852 in fiscal 2005. Interest expense
in
2005 consisted primarily of approximately $19.2 million in charges attributable
to a beneficial conversion feature of convertible notes, and warrants issued
as
part of the global settlement arising from the settlement of
litigation.
We
realized gains of approximately $1.7 million on extinguishment of debt in fiscal
2006 as a result of the settlement of certain debts related to our bankruptcy
filing. There was no comparable item in fiscal 2007, and a negligible amount
in
fiscal 2005.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
At
February 28, 2007, we had cash of approximately $1.05 million, compared to
approximately $0.5 million at February 28, 2006. At February 28, 2007 we had
working capital of approximately $800,000 as compared to approximately $2.6
million at the end of the prior fiscal year. The decrease in working capital
in
2007 reflects the absence of “other receivables” at February 28, 2007, compared
to $2.7 million in fiscal 2006, and an increase in current portion of notes
payable from approximately $49,000 to $611,000, offset in part by a decrease
in
accounts payable from approximately $590,000 at February 28, 2006, to $216,000
at February 28, 2007 and increased cash at February 28, 2007.
Working
capital of approximately $2.6 million at February 28, 2006, compared to a
deficit of approximately $34 million at February 28, 2005, reflects an “other
receivable” in 2006 of $2,654,864 resulting from the sale of our buildings,
subscriptions receivable from the sale of stock, and the conversion of
approximately $12.1 million of current liabilities into common stock and
warrants under the Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization effected on January 31,
2006 (the “Plan” or “Plan of Reorganization”).
At
February 28, 2007, we had accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful
accounts, of approximately $250,000 compared to approximately $88,000 at
February 28, 2006, and $637,000 at February 28, 2005.
We
acquired property and equipment at a cost of approximately $63,000 in fiscal
2007, with no spending on property and equipment in the prior fiscal year.
At
February 28, 2007, we had no material capital project that would require
funding. We believe our current plant and equipment is sufficient to support
our
current level of sales. If sales increase as anticipated, we will need to expand
our facilities to meet the required production levels.
Debt
repayments of $0.1 million were made in fiscal 2007 as compared to $4.7 million
in fiscal 2006. The large debt repayment in fiscal 2006 was due to the payoff
of
the mortgage on the buildings that were sold.
During
the year ended February 28, 2007 $167,346 of accrued and unpaid interest was
added to the principal amount of notes payable. Under the terms of the notes,
no
payments were required for the first twelve months, and all interest accrued
during this period is added to the balance of the notes.
Since
2002 substantially all of our revenues from operations have been derived from
sales of the AuraGen®.
The
cash flow generated from our operations to date has not been sufficient to
fund
our working capital needs, and we cannot predict when operating cash flow will
be sufficient to fund working capital needs. Since fiscal 2002 we were forced
to
scale back operations due to inadequate working capital and in June 2005 we
were
forced to file for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code,
from
which we emerged under a court-approved plan of reorganization in January 2006.
In
the
past, in order to maintain liquidity we have relied upon external sources of
financing, principally equity financing and private and bank indebtedness.
We
have no bank line of credit and require additional debt or equity financing
to
fund ongoing operations. We are seeking to raise additional capital. However,
we
have no firm commitments from third parties to provide additional financing
and
we cannot assure you that financing will be available at the times or in the
amounts required. The issuance of additional shares of equity in connection
with
such financing could dilute the interests of our existing stockholders, and
such
dilution could be substantial. If
we
cannot raise needed funds, we would also be forced to make further substantial
reductions in our operating expenses, which could adversely affect our ability
to implement our current business plan and ultimately our viability as a
company.
24
Principal
Capital Transactions during Fiscal 2007
During
fiscal 2007 we issued 4,412,928 shares of common stock in private placements
for
net proceeds of $3,965,156.
Principal
Capital Transactions during Fiscal 2006 - 2006 Chapter 11 Reorganization
Proceeding
We
filed
for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in June 2005 as
a
result of acute liquidity challenges. Following commencement of our bankruptcy
proceeding, we continued to rely on third party funding to cover our cash
shortfalls, which included a series of secured debt financings aggregating
more
than $3.3 million during the pendency of our Chapter 11 proceeding and
approximately $3 million raised in a private placement of common stock and
warrants to a group of “new money” investors as part of the Plan of
Reorganization. Through agreements reached by the Company with a group of
lenders holding secured notes (“Secured Notes”) with an aggregate principal
balance in excess of $6 million, and the approval of the bankruptcy court,
between July and December of 2005, we concluded a series of three new secured
financings, totaling $3.36 million, with three new lenders (the “DIP
Lenders”).
We
submitted a reorganization plan that was approved by the bankruptcy court and
voted and approved by the DIP Lenders, the secured creditors, the unsecured
creditors, the shareholders and the new money investors. The principal terms
of
the Plan, which became effective on January 31, 2006 (the “Effective Date”), are
as follows:
Secured
Note Holders
- The
holders of the Secured Notes, with an approximate principal balance of $5.5
million immediately prior to the Effective Date, received 1,134,000 shares
of
Common Stock, warrants to purchase 259,900 shares of Common Stock, and restated
Secured Notes with a reduced principal balance of $2,525,000 on the Effective
Date, after giving effect to a $75,000 cash payment by the Company on the
Effective Date. The Secured Notes, as restated, continued to be secured by
substantially all of the assets of the Company, with annual interest of 7%,
and
payable in 48 equal monthly installments commencing 12 months after the
Effective Date.
DIP
Lenders
- The
DIP Lenders converted all of their approximately $4.06 million of loans
immediately prior to the Effective Date into 6,065,699 shares of Common Stock
and warrants to purchase 606,570 shares of Common Stock on the Effective
Date.
Unsecured
Claims
-
Holders of approximately $8.3 million of unsecured claims against the Company
immediately prior to the Effective Date received approximately 4.7 million
shares of Common and warrants to purchase 945,900 shares of Common Stock on
the
Effective Date in exchange for their unsecured claims.
New
Money Investors - A
group
of new investors (“New Money Investors”) contributed a total of $3,045,000 of
new money on the Effective Date in exchange for 3,349,500 shares of Common
Stock
and warrants to purchase 669,000 shares of Common Stock, of which approximately
$1.1 million was used to pay administrative expenses of the bankruptcy
proceeding outstanding on the Effective Date. An additional 837,375 shares
of
Common Stock were issued under the Plan following the Effective Date as the
Company did not timely file a registration statement.
Series
A Preferred Stockholders
- The
holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, of which 591,110 shares were
outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Date, received a total of 357,818
shares of Common Stock and warrants to purchase 89,455 shares of Common Stock
in
exchange for their Series A Preferred Stock.
Series
B Preferred Stockholders
- The
holders of $9,979,838 of Series B Preferred Stock which was fully paid for
immediately prior to the Effective Date, received a total of 3,215,712 shares
of
Common Stock and warrants to purchase 987,195 shares of Common Stock in exchange
for their Series B Preferred Stock. The remaining, unpaid shares of Series
B
Preferred Stock were cancelled on the Effective Date.
Common
Stockholders
- The
holders of the 439,458,082 shares of Common Stock outstanding immediately prior
to the Effective Date (“Old Common Stock”) received approximately 1.3 million
shares of new Common Stock in the reorganized Company on the Effective Date
in
exchange for the Old Common Stock (i.e. one share of new Common Stock in
exchange for each 338 shares of Old Common Stock).
Aries
Group Reorganization Fee
- For
major contributions to the Plan, Disclosure Statement which describes the Plan,
business analysis and modeling, feasibility study, assistance in settlement
disputes between the Company and certain creditors, and providing valuation
analysis for pricing of the investment by the New Money Investors as well as
the
conversion rates for the DIP Lenders, the Aries Group received 2,541,500 shares
of the Company’s Common Stock and warrants to purchase 508,300 shares of Common
Stock. The Plan provided that of these 2,541,500 shares of Common Stock and
508,300 warrants received by the Aries Group, 900,000 shares of Common Stock
and
179,800 Warrants were to be delivered to Harry Kurtzman.
25
New
Warrants -The
warrants to purchase a total of approximately 3,807,319 shares of Common Stock
issued under the Plan to the New Money Investors, the DIP Lenders, holders
of
unsecured claims, holders of Series A and Series B Preferred Stock and the
Aries
Group entitled the warrant holder to purchase Common Stock at a price of $3.00
per share during the first 12 months following the Effective Date, $3.50 per
share during the second 12 months following the Effective Date, and $4.00 per
share thereafter. The warrants to purchase a total of 259,900 shares of Common
Stock issued under the Plan to the holders of the Secured Notes entitled the
warrant holder to purchase Common Stock at a price of $2.00 per share during
the
first 12 months following the Effective Date, $2.50 per share during the second
12 months following the Effective Date, and $3.00 per share thereafter. The
Plan
also provided for the reservation by the Company of warrants for 500,000 shares
for the Company’s management and 500,000 shares for the Company’s Board of
Directors.
Contractual
Obligations
The
table
below describes the Company’s future contractual obligations, including items
not included in the consolidated balance sheet, as of February 28, 2007:
Payments
Due by
Period
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Contractual
Obligations
|
|
Total
|
Less
Than 1 Year
|
1-3 Years
|
3-5 Years
|
More
Than 5 Years
|
|||||||||||||
Long
Term Debt Obligations
|
(a
|
)
|
$
|
2,594,529
|
$
|
611,411
|
$
|
1,358,614
|
$
|
624,504
|
$
|
0
|
|||||||
Capital
lease obligations
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
|||||||||
Operating
leases
|
(b
|
)
|
$
|
175,500
|
$
|
175,500
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
|||||||
Minimum
license commitment
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
|||||||||
Fixed
asset and inventory purchase commitments
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Total
contractual cash obligations
|
$
|
2,770,029
|
$
|
786,911
|
$
|
1,358,614
|
$
|
624,504
|
$
|
0
|
(a)
|
Represents
notes payable dated January 31, 2006, bearing interest at a rate
of 7% per
annum and secured by substantially all of our assets. The notes carry
a
term of five years with interest accruing the first 12 months, principal
and interest payments beginning the 13th month, and continuing through
month 60. During the year ended February 28, 2007, $167,346 in accrued
and
unpaid interest was added to the principal balance of the
notes.
|
(b)
|
Represents
obligations for the lease of our
facilities.
|
ITEM
7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
We
are
exposed to various market risks, including changes in interest rates. Market
risk is the potential loss arising from adverse changes in market rates and
prices. We consider our exposure to market risks to be immaterial. Historically,
we have not entered into derivative financial instrument transactions to manage
or reduce market risk or for speculative purposes. Our long term debt
obligations all bear interest at fixed rates and, therefore, have no exposure
to
interest rate fluctuations. Our risk related to foreign currency fluctuations
is
not material at this time, as any accounts we have in foreign denominations
are
not in themselves material.
As
we
anticipate needing to use the cash we held at year end within a short period,
we
have invested it in money market accounts, and we do not expect that the amount
of fluctuation in interest rates will expose us to any significant risk due
to
market fluctuation.
26
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
See
Index
to Consolidated Financial Statements at page F-1.
ITEM
9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE
Not
applicable.
ITEM
9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Disclosure
controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance that
information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or
submit, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods
specified in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms,
and such information is accumulated and communicated to management as
appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. Our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have evaluated our disclosure
controls and procedures and have concluded, as of February 28, 2007, that they
were not effective in view of our delinquent filings.
As
of
February 28, 2007, we were delinquent in filing all quarterly and annual SEC
reports due since November 30, 2004. We did not have adequate financial
resources to engage our outside auditors and ensure the timely filing of Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2005. In June 2005 our financial
condition required us to seek protection from creditors under Chapter 11 of
the
U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The commencement of the bankruptcy proceeding placed
additional demands on our then existing accounting personnel, including the
filing of monthly financial reports with the bankruptcy court and the SEC.
Our
limited financial and personnel resources did not allow us to fully address
our
reporting obligations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 until we emerged
from bankruptcy on January 31, 2006. We continued to be hampered by other events
which further delayed the filing of our delinquent SEC reports. Specifically,
the integrity of our financial records was severely disrupted as a result of
errors made by temporary file personnel in December 2005 in the course of moving
our principal office from 2335 Alaska Avenue to our Utah Avenue location. This
problem was compounded by a change in accounting personnel in February 2006.
In
February 2006, when we successfully emerged from bankruptcy under a plan of
reorganization, we retained a new Chief Financial Officer and other accounting
personnel. In May 2006we engaged new auditors to audit our financial statements
for fiscal years from and after February 2005 and to review our interim
quarterly financial statements for all subsequent quarters. We continue to
work
diligently towards the completion and filing of delinquent quarterly and annual
reports. However, delays are unavoidable due to the impact of the factors
discussed above and the number of financial reporting periods involved. We
expect that once we become current in our SEC filings our disclosure controls
and procedures will be adequate to ensure timely disclosure under SEC rules
and
regulations.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There
have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during
our
fiscal quarter ended February 28, 2007, that have materially affected or are
reasonably likely to materially affect our internal control over financial
reporting.
ITEM
9B. OTHER INFORMATION
Not
applicable.
27
PART
III
ITEM
10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND COOPERATE GOVERNANCE
Directors
The
following table sets forth our directors and executive officers, their age,
and
the office they hold.
Name
|
Age
|
Title
|
||
Directors
|
||||
|
|
|
||
Melvin
Gagerman
|
64
|
Chairman,
Director, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and
President
|
||
Arthur
J. Schwartz, PhD
|
59
|
Director,
Chief Technical Officer
|
||
Dr.
Maurice Zeitlin
|
65
|
Director,
Chairman - Nominating Committee; member, Compensation Committee and
Audit
Committee
|
||
Warren
Breslow
|
64
|
Director,
Chairman - Audit Committee; member, Nominating Committee and Compensation
Committee
|
||
Salvador
Diaz-Verson, Jr.
|
52
|
Director,
Chairman, Compensation Committee; member, Audit Committee and Nominating
Committee
|
||
Other
Executive Officers
|
||||
Yedidia
Cohen
|
51
|
Vice
President of Engineering
|
The
following sets forth certain information with respect to our directors and
executive officers.
Melvin
Gagerman -
Mr.
Gagerman has been the CEO and CFO of the Company since we emerged from Chapter
11 proceedings on January 31, 2006. He has many years of experience in all
aspects of managing companies and a very strong background in accounting and
finance. Mr. Gagerman was the President of Hollywood Trading Co., a distributor
of novelty items, from 2000 until February 2006, when he became CEO of the
Company. Prior to that Mr. Gagerman was the CEO of Surface Protection Industries
from 1976 to 1977, where he successfully reorganized key management positions;
established relationships with new distributors and upgraded manufacturing
abilities, developed aggressive marketing programs to revitalize mature product
lines and identified new market opportunities to increase sales and profits.
From 1973 to 1975 Mr. Gagerman was the Chairman and CEO of Applause, where
he
successfully reorganized a world famous designer, manufacturer and distributor
of licensed and generic stuffed toys which had sales of $137 million per year,
700 employees and losses of 12 million dollars a year. By aggressively altering
product lines, adding new lines, cutting overhead, restructuring several key
management positions, the company produced a $4.5 million profit within one
year. Mr. Gagerman has also served as Managing Partner of Good, Gagerman &
Berns, an accounting firm, National Audit Partner for Laventhol and Horwath
and
Audit Supervisor at Coopers and Lybrand.
Arthur
J. Schwartz, PhD
- Dr.
Schwartz has been CTO and a director of the Company since it emerged from
Chapter 11 proceedings on January 31, 2006. From 2002 to 2006 Dr. Schwartz
was a
principal in the business consulting firm Aries Group Ltd. Dr. Schwartz is
one
of the founders of the Company and was a member of Aura’s management from1987
until 2002 as Executive Vice President, CTO and director. Dr. Schwartz has
been
has been involved in all technical aspects of the Company and has been
instrumental in many of our government programs. Prior to founding Aura, Dr.
Schwartz worked at Hughes Aircraft Company as a senior scientist on classified
programs. Dr. Schwartz has a Ph.D in Physics.
Dr.
Maurice Zeitlin
- Dr.
Maurice Zeitlin has been a director of the Company since it emerged from Chapter
11 proceedings on January 31, 2006. Since 1985, Dr Zeitlin has been the
President and owner of Maurice A. Zeitlin M.D., a Medical Corporation. He
currently practices administrative medicine and is the medical director for
several Los Angeles area hospitals. Dr. Zeitlin was a Major in the USAF from
1972 until 1974 He attended the University of Chicago and received his M.D
in
1967.
Warren
Breslow
- Mr.
Breslow has been a director and Chairman of the Audit Committee since it emerged
from Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings on January 31, 2006. Mr. Breslow is
the
General Partner and Chief Financial Officer of Goldrich & Kest Industries
(“G & K Industries”), a property management firm. He joined G & K
Industries in 1972 as controller and assumed his current position as General
Partner and Chief Financial Officer in 1974. As General Partner and Chief
Financial Officer of G & K, Mr. Breslow oversees the financial aspects of G
& K’s construction activity, as well as their management operations and
information systems center. He is also past president and lifetime member of
the
board of directors of the Stephen S. Wise Temple, and supports numerous
charitable and civic organizations. Prior to his association with Goldrich
&
Kest Industries, Mr. Breslow was a manager with the International Accounting
firm of Laventhol & Horwath. He is a CPA and graduated from the Bernard
Baruch School of Business Administration.
28
Salvador
Diaz-Verson, Jr.
is a
director of the Company and has served in this capacity since June, 2007. He
previously served as a director of the Company from 1997 to 2005. Mr.
Diaz-Verson is the founder, Chairman and President of Diaz-Verson Capital
Investments, Inc., an Investment Adviser registered with the SEC, where he
has
served since 1991. Mr. Diaz-Verson served as President and member of the Board
of Directors of American Family Corporation (AFLCAC Inc.) a publicly held
insurance holding company, from 1979 until 1991. Mr. Diaz-Verson also served
as
Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer of American Family Life
Assurance Company, subsidiary of AFLAC Inc., from 1976 through 1991. He is
currently a Director of the board of Miramar Securities, Clemente Capital Inc.,
Regions Bank of Georgia and The Philippine Strategic Investment Holding Limited.
Since 1992, Mr. Diaz-Verson has also been a member of the Board of Trustees
of
the Christopher Columbus Fellowship Foundation, appointed by President George
H.W. Bush in 1992, and re-appointed by President Clinton in early 2000. Mr.
Diaz-Verson is a graduate of Florida State University.
Yedidia
Cohen
- Mr.
Cohen has been employed by us since July, 2001, developing numerous magnetic
applications, and has been our VP of Engineering since May, 2006. Prior to
being
appointed VP of Engineering he was the lead engineer on the AuraGen mechanical
tasks. Mr. Cohen has extensive experience in designing and building highly
reliable and durable weapon systems. He spent much of his professional carrier
at Raphael (Weapon development and testing facility for the Israeli Army).
In
addition to his vast experience in weapon systems, Mr. Cohen worked for
Electric Power
Corporation in Haifa, Israel, where he specialized in conceptual design of
power
generation plane, thermodynamic calculations, design of boilers, pressure
vessels and heat exchangers. In addition to his engineering skills Mr. Cohen
has
experience in building and managing teams of engineers working on complex tasks.
Mr. Cohen has a M.S.E.E degree in Mechanical Engineering from the Technion
in
Haifa, Israel
Section
16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section
16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"),
requires our officers and directors, and beneficial owners of more than ten
percent of the common stock, to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission
and the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. reports of ownership
and changes in ownership of the common stock. Based solely upon a review of
Forms 3 and 4 and amendments thereto furnished to us during our fiscal year
ended February 28, 2007, and Form 5 and amendments thereto furnished to us
covering the 2007 fiscal year filed under Section 16(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, no person who was an officer or director or beneficial
owner of more than 10% of our common stock failed to file on a timely basis,
as
disclosed in such Forms, the reports required by Section 16(a) of the Exchange
Act during such fiscal year or prior fiscal years.
Code
of Ethics
We
have a
Code of Ethics for all of our employees, including our Chief Executive Officer,
Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer. The purpose of the
Code is to ensure that our business is conducted in a consistently legal and
ethical matter. A copy of our Code of Ethics is included as an exhibit to this
Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Audit
Committee
The
Audit
Committee of our Board of Directors recommends selection of independent public
accountants to our Board, reviews the scope and results of the year-end audit
with management and the independent auditors, reviews our accounting principles
and our system of internal accounting controls and reviews our annual and
quarterly reports before filing with the SEC. The current members of the Audit
Committee are Warren Breslow, (Chairman), Dr. Maurice Zeitlin and Salvador
Diaz-Verson. Our Board has determined that all members of the Audit Committee
are “independent” under the rules of the SEC and the listing standards of
NASDAQ. Our Board also determined that Mr. Breslow is an “audit committee
financial expert” in accordance with applicable SEC regulations. The Audit
Committee has adopted a written Audit Committee charter. A copy of our current
Audit Committee Charter is included as an exhibit to this Annual Report on
Form
10-K.
29
ITEM
11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Executive
Compensation Policy and Objectives
Our
policy in compensating executive officers, including the executive officers
named in the Summary Compensation Table appearing below (the “named executive
officers”), is to establish methods and levels of compensation that will
·
|
attract
and retain highly qualified
personnel
|
·
|
provide
meaningful incentives to promote profitability and growth and reward
superior performance.
|
To
achieve these policies we follow the basic principles that annual compensation
should be competitive with similar companies and long term compensation should
generally be linked to the Company’s return to shareholders.
We
also
believe that compensation for individual executives should be aligned to the
performance of areas of the business over which the executive has the most
control.
Executive
compensation policies are implemented through a combination of annual and
long-term methods of compensation. Compensation for the named executive officers
includes
·
|
base
salary,
|
·
|
eligibility
to receive annual cash bonuses, and
|
·
|
stock-based
compensation in the form of stock options under employee stock option
plans.
|
These
primary components are available for flexible use by our company in a manner
that will effectively implement our stated objectives with respect to
compensation arrangements for each of the executive officers. Each of these
components is discussed in more detail below. When setting the compensation
arrangements for each executive officer, the Compensation Committee considers
these components individually, as well as on an aggregate (total compensation)
basis. There is no pre-determined relationship between base salary of our
executives and any of the other principal components of compensation. Each
element of compensation is considered both individually and in terms of total
overall compensation.
Role
of Company Management in Compensation Decisions
The
Compensation Committee makes decisions regarding the compensation of the Chief
Executive Officer usually in conjunction with input from the Chief Executive
Officer, including base compensation, equity incentive awards, annual incentive
award payments. The Chief Executive Officer annually reviews compensation for
the other named executive officer and makes recommendations to the Compensation
Committee based upon individual and company performance. The Compensation
Committee reviews and approves, and may exercise discretion to modify, all
recommendations made by the Chief Executive Officer.
Primary
Components of Executive Compensation.
Base
Salary
The
base
salaries of our executive officers are set by the Compensation Committee after
consideration of a number of factors, including the executive’s position, level
of responsibility, tenure and performance. The Compensation Committee also
considers the compensation levels of executives in comparable companies, along
with the executive compensation recommendations made by our chief executive
officer. In addition, the Compensation Committee evaluates whether the base
salary levels of our executives are appropriate relative to our size and
financial performance compared with the other companies reviewed. Relying
primarily on these factors, the Compensation Committee sets the base salaries
of
our executive officers at levels designed to meet its objective of attracting
and retaining highly qualified individuals. The Compensation Committee also
believes that the continuity of leadership derived from the retention of well
qualified executive officers is in the best interests of our shareholders.
The
base salaries of our executive officers are not set at any specific level as
compared to the compensation levels of companies reviewed and the Compensation
Committee does not assign relative weights or importance to any specific measure
of the company’s financial performance.
30
Effective
January 1, 2006, Mr. Gagerman’s base salary was set at $25,000 per month in
connection with his appointment as Chairman of the Board and Chief Financial
Officer. Mr. Gagerman’s base salary was later increased from $25,000 to $30,000
per month, effective November 1, 2006, pursuant to a written employment
agreement (the “Gagerman Agreement”). The decision to increase Mr. Gagerman’s
base salary was based primarily upon the increase in his responsibilities since
May 2006, when he formally assumed the role of President and Chief Executive
Officer.
Annual
Cash Incentive Payment
We
consider the use of annual performance bonuses from time to time where
appropriate, to motivate participants to achieve company growth and enhance
shareholder value. The incentive bonus plan permits plan participants to receive
a cash bonus that is tied to the company’s performance and achievement of
measures relating to an individual’s own performance during a specified
fiscal year. The types of measures and relative weight of those measures used
in
determining annual incentive awards are tailored to the named executive
officer’s position and responsibilities. We maintain an annual cash bonus plan
for Mr. Gagerman, which was established effective November 1, 2006, beginning
in
fiscal year 2007, under the terms of the Gagerman Agreement. We do not presently
have in effect an annual cash bonus plan in effect with respect to any other
named executive officer.
The
Gagerman Agreement provides for an annual bonus to be approved by the Board
of
Directors of up to $100,000 based on objective and subjective milestones and,
in
the case of the 2007 fiscal year, provided the company has the available cash,
and an additional annual bonus at the discretion of the Board of Directors
of up
to $100,000 for achievements in excess of expected milestones. The initial
qualitative milestones and their quantitative relative weight were specified
in
the Gagerman Agreement for fiscal 2007, fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009, and relate
to achievement of specified business, financial and organizational performance
goals. The Compensation Committee may change both the qualitative goals and
relative weight of the goals by giving notice to Mr. Gagerman prior to the
fiscal quarter that the change will take effect. In addition, the Compensation
Committee retains the discretion under the Gagerman Agreement to pay an annual
bonus regardless of whether the stated milestones are achieved. The milestones
are set with the expectation that it is probable that the milestones will be
met
in the applicable fiscal year. In December 2007 the Compensation Committee
determined to award Mr. Gagerman a bonus of $100,000 for the fiscal 2007
year.
Long-Term
Equity Based Compensation Awards
To
date
we have had limited cash flow from operations. As a result, we have placed
special emphasis on equity-based compensation, in the form of options and
warrants, to preserve our cash for operations. Long-term equity based
compensation awards are granted to our executive officers pursuant to our equity
plans. The Compensation Committee believes that long-term equity based
compensation awards are an effective incentive for senior management to increase
the long-term value of the company’s common stock as well as aiding the company
in attracting and retaining senior management. These objectives are accomplished
by making awards under the plan, thereby providing senior management with a
proprietary interest in the continued growth and performance of the company
and
more closely aligning their interests with those of our shareholders. In
addition, because options may sometimes terminate when an executive leaves
the
company, we believe that options are a useful incentive in promoting the
retention of executives.
2006
Employee Stock Option Plan
In
September 2006 our Board of Directors adopted an employee stock option plan,
which is subject to shareholder approval at our next annual meeting of
shareholders. The option plan authorizes the Board of Directors or a committee
of directors designated by the Board (the “Option Committee”) to grant up to
3,000,000 options to employees, directors and consultants. At the time of the
option grant the Option Committee designates the option for federal tax purposes
as an “incentive stock option” or “non-statutory stock option.” The named
executive officers are eligible to receive option grants under the option
plan.
All
determinations regarding the granting of options to executive officers,
including the amount, exercise price, and terms of vesting, are made by the
Option Committee after seeking input from management. The Option Committee
makes
long-term equity based compensation awards after a review of a number of
factors, including length of service, the performance of the company, the
relative levels of responsibility of the executive and his or her contributions
to the business, including recommendations of supervisors, and prior option
grants received by the executive. Awards
may be granted to the same executive on more than one occasion.
31
Stock
option grants may be subject to a vesting period based upon continued employment
during the option term or may fully vest upon grant. The Option Committee may
make grants at any particular time during the year. The
exercise price of the options must be at least equal to the fair market value
of
such shares on the date the stock option is granted or such later date as the
Option Committee specifies.
In
fiscal
2007, pursuant to the Gagerman Agreement, and following his appointment as
CEO
in May 2006, Mr. Gagerman was awarded a total of 300,000 options to purchase
common stock under our employee stock option plan, exercisable at $2.00 per
share, for a period of three years, of which 50,000 were designated as incentive
stock options, the maximum amount allowable as incentive stock options under
federal tax law for this grant. This grant primarily reflected his increased
responsibilities as CEO. These 300,000 options were granted in addition to
600,000 warrants which were awarded to Mr. Gagerman in connection with his
assuming the duties of Chairman and Chief Financial Officer effective February
2006. The 300,000 options vest at the rate of 25,000 per month. The Gagerman
Agreement provides for acceleration of the vesting, and termination of the
options prior to the expiration of the three year term, under circumstances
specified in the Gagerman Agreement.
Subsequent
to the end of fiscal 2007, in order to provide additional incentives to Mr.
Gagerman, and in recognition of his accomplishments as both CEO and acting
CFO,
Mr. Gagerman was granted an additional 100,000 options, exercisable at $2.00
per
share, with a term of five years. This grant is subject to shareholder approval.
In addition, subsequent to the end of fiscal 2007, we determined to extend
the
term of his 600,000 warrants from three years to five years and to fix the
exercise price at $2.00 per share during the term of the warrants, subject
to
shareholder approval.
Pursuant
to our agreements with Mr. Gagerman, all of the options and warrants granted
to
him have a “cashless exercise feature” which allows Mr. Gagerman, at his option,
to receive a reduced number of shares upon exercise of the options or warrants
instead of paying the exercise price in cash.
Other
Benefits.
We
provide all eligible employees, including executive officers, with certain
benefits, including health and dental coverage, company-paid term life insurance
coverage, disability insurance, 401(k) plan, paid time off and paid holiday
programs. Other perquisites and personal benefits, such as automobile allowances
and country club dues, are considered on a case-by-case basis. Executive
Perquisites and benefits are provided to ensure overall compensation for named
executive officers is adequate.
Our
executive officers are eligible to participate in our 401(k) plan, with Mr.
Cohen being the only executive officer to participate. We do not presently
maintain any other deferred compensation or retirement plans.
We
provide the foregoing benefit programs to provide executive officers with
benefits that are competitive with those in the marketplace without incurring
substantial cost to the company.
Employment
Agreements.
Other
than our written employment agreement with Melvin Gagerman, we do not have
employment agreements with any of our named executive officers and generally
do
not enter into long-term employment agreements with our executive officers.
Information regarding Mr. Gagerman’s written employment agreement is discussed
below.
Severance
Agreements.
Other
than severance provisions contained in our written employment agreement with
Melvin Gagerman, we generally do not enter into severance agreements or similar
agreements providing for payments upon termination of employment or
change-in-control. Such agreements, when entered into, are negotiated on a
case-by-case basis.
Material
Tax and Accounting Implications of Executive Compensation
Program.
SFAS
123R
sets forth the accounting treatment for options effective March 1, 2006. This
accounting rule 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. Prior to March 1, 2006 we followed Accounting Principles
Board Opinion No. 25 (“APB 25”), Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,
and related Interpretations for measurement and recognition of stock-based
transactions with employees. Under APB 25, generally no compensation expense
was
recognized in connection with the grant of a stock option since at the date
of
grant, the exercise price of stock options was set either at, or above, current
price at closing of market or, at the price at closing of market on a
pre-determined future date. Because the adoption of SFAS 123R’s fair value
method will have an impact on our results of operations, this may have an impact
on the level of share-based payments being issued.
32
U.S.
federal income tax law prohibits publicly held companies from deducting certain
compensation paid to a named executive officer that exceeds $1 million
during the tax year. To the extent that compensation is based upon the
attainment of performance goals set by the Compensation Committee pursuant
to
plans approved by our shareholders, the compensation is not included in the
computation of this limit. Although the Compensation Committee intends, to
the
extent feasible and where it believes it is in the best interests of the company
and our shareholders, to attempt to qualify executive compensation as tax
deductible, it does not intend to permit this tax provision to dictate the
committee’s development and execution of effective compensation
plans.
Tax
Consequences of Incentive Stock Options.
Our 2006
employee stock option plan authorizes the grant of both “incentive stock
options” and “non-qualified stock options.” The grant of an incentive stock
option will not result in any immediate tax consequences to us or the optionee.
An optionee will not realize taxable income, and we will not be entitled to
any
deduction, upon the timely exercise of an incentive stock option, but the excess
of the fair market value of the shares of our common stock acquired over the
option exercise price will be includable in the optionee’s “alternative minimum
taxable income” for purposes of the alternative minimum tax. If the optionee
does not dispose of the shares of our common stock acquired within one year
after their receipt, and within two years after the option was granted, gain
or
loss realized on the subsequent disposition of the shares of our common stock
will be treated as long-term capital gain or loss.
Tax
Consequences of Non-qualified Stock Options.
In
general, the grant of a non-qualified stock option or warrant will not result
in
any immediate tax consequences to us or the optionee. Upon the exercise of
a
non-qualified stock option or warrant, generally the optionee will realize
ordinary income and we will be entitled to a deduction, in each case, in an
amount equal to the excess of the fair market value of the shares of our common
stock acquired at the time of exercise over the exercise price.
COMPENSATION
COMMITTEE REPORT
The
Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the
“Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section included in this annual report.
Based on this review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended
to
the board of directors that the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section
be included in this annual report.
The
Compensation Committee:
Warren
Breslow
Dr.
Maurice Zeitlin
Salvatore
Diaz-Verson
33
The
following table summarizes all compensation earned for the fiscal year ended
February 28, 2007, to the individual who served as our chief executive officer
during fiscal 2007, and the one other most highly compensated executive officer
who was serving in such capacity as of February 28, 2007 (the "named executive
officers").
2007
Summary Compensation Table
Name
and Principal Position
|
Fiscal
Year
|
Salary
($)
|
Option
Awards
($)
[3]
|
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan Compensation
|
All
Other
Compensation
($)
|
Total
($)
|
|||||||||||||
Melvin
Gagerman (1)
|
2007
|
319,154
|
(2)
|
171,359
|
100,000(4
|
)
|
19,320
|
(5)
|
609,833
|
||||||||||
Chief
Executive Officer,
Chief
Financial Officer, and President
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Yedidia
Cohen
|
2007
|
164,285
|
808
|
(6)
|
165,093
|
||||||||||||||
Vice
President of Engineering
|
(1) |
Mr.
Gagerman was elected Chairman and Chief Financial Officer effective
February 1, 2006 and was elected President and Chief Executive Officer
effective May 25, 2006.
|
(2) |
Mr.
Gagerman’s salary was $25,000 per month from January 1, 2006 until
December 1, 2006 at which time it was increased to $30,000 per
month.
|
(3) |
Reflects
the amount recognized for financial statement reporting purposes
for
fiscal 2007 in accordance with FAS 123R using the assumptions set
forth in
footnote 11 to the financial statements included elsewhere in this
Annual
Report for stock options and warrants granted during and prior to
fiscal
2007, assuming no forfeitures.
|
(4) |
Represents
incentive plan cash bonus awarded to Mr. Gagerman for fiscal 2007,
which
has been earned but not yet paid.
|
(5) |
Represents
automobile and country club dues allowances, the cost of life insurance
premiums, and medical expense reimbursements for fiscal
2007.
|
(6) |
Represents
Company matching contributions to the 401(k)
plan.
|
No
bonuses or stock awards were granted to the above individuals for the fiscal
year ended February 28, 2007.
Grants
of Plan-Based Awards in the Last Fiscal Year
The
following table sets forth certain information at February 28, 2007, and for
the
year then ended, with respect to plan-based awards granted to the individuals
named in the Summary Compensation Table above.
2007
GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS TABLE
Estimated
Future Payouts Under
Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards(3)(4)
|
Option Awards:
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Options
(#)
|
Exercise or
Base
Price
of
Option
Awards
($ / Sh)
|
Grant
Date
Fair
Value
of Option
Awards
($)(1)
|
||||||||||||||
Name |
Grant
Date
(5)
|
Approval
Date
(5)
|
Threshold
($)
|
Target
($)
|
Maximum
($)
|
||||||||||||
(a)
|
(b)
|
(c)
|
(d)
|
(e)
|
(f)
|
||||||||||||
Melvin
Gagerman
|
11/01/06
|
12/01/06
|
300,000(2)
|
$2.00(2)
|
$56,359
|
||||||||||||
n/a
|
n/a
|
(3)
|
$100,000
|
$200,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||
Yedidia
Cohen
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1)
|
Reflects
the full grant date fair market value, computed in accordance with
FAS
123R using the assumptions set forth in footnote 11 to the financial
statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report for stock options
and
warrants granted in fiscal 2007, assuming no forfeitures.
|
(2)
|
Options
vest at the rate of 25,000 per month from the date of grant and are
exercisable at a price of $2.00 per share, with an initial term of
three
years. Subsequent to the end of fiscal 2007 the term of these options
were
extended from three years to five years. Under the terms of our Bylaws,
this grant is subject to shareholder
approval.
|
(3)
|
The
written employment agreement with Mr. Gagerman (the Gagerman Agreement)
provides for an annual bonus in each fiscal year to be approved by
the
Board of Directors of up to $100,000 based on objective and subjective
milestones and, in the case of the 2007 fiscal year, provided the
company
has the available cash, and an additional annual bonus at the discretion
of the Board of Directors of up to $100,000 for achievements in excess
of
expected milestones. The initial qualitative milestones and their
quantitative relative weight were specified in the Gagerman Agreement
for
fiscal 2007, fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009, and relate to achievement
of
specified business, financial and organizational performance goals.
The
Compensation Committee may change both the qualitative goals and
relative
weight of the goals by giving notice to Mr. Gagerman prior to the
fiscal
quarter that the change will take effect. In addition, the Compensation
Committee retains the discretion under the Gagerman Agreement to
pay an
annual bonus regardless of whether the stated milestones are achieved.
In
December 2007 the Compensation Committee determined to award Mr.
Gagerman
a bonus of $100,000 for the fiscal 2007 year, which amount is reflected
in
the Summary Compensation Table. He remains eligible for bonuses in
future
fiscal years.
|
(4)
|
Column
(e) represents the amount payable if all of the annual targets are
met,
and column (f) represents the maximum amount payable under the plan
established in the Gagerman
Agreement.
|
(5)
|
The
grant date reflects the effective date of the equity grant for financial
statement purposes under FAS 123R, which corresponds to the stated
effective date of the Gagerman Agreement containing the grant. The
approval date reflects the date the Compensation Committee formally
approved the Gagerman Agreement.
|
34
Outstanding
Equity Awards at 2007 Fiscal Year-End
The
following table summarizes certain information regarding the number and value
of
all options to purchase our common held by the individuals named in the Summary
Compensation Table at February 28, 2007. No stock awards or equity incentive
plan awards were issued or outstanding during fiscal 2007.
2007
OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR END
Option
Awards
|
||||||||||
Number
ofSecurities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
|
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
|
Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
|
Option
Exercise
Price
|
Option
Expiration
|
||||||
Name |
Exercisable
|
Unexercisable
|
(#)
|
($)
|
Date
|
|||||
Melvin
Gagerman (a)(b)
|
250,000(b)
|
0(b)
|
--
|
$2.50(a)
|
1/31/09
|
|||||
Melvin
Gagerman (c)(d)
|
350,000(d)
|
0(d)
|
$2.50(c)
|
1/31/09
|
||||||
Melvin
Gagerman (e)
|
75,000(e)
|
225,000(e)
|
$2.00
|
11/1/09
|
||||||
Yedidia
Cohen
|
--
|
--
|
--
|
(a)
|
Effective
January 31, 2006, Mr. Gagerman was awarded 250,000 Management Warrants
by
our Board of Directors as authorized under our Chapter 11 Plan of
Reorganization. The terms of the Management Warrants provide for
an
exercise price of $2.00 per share during the first twelve (12) months
from
the effective date of issuance (January
31, 2006),
$2.50 per share from the 13th
to
the 24th
months from the effective date of issuance; and $3.00 per share from
the
25th
to
the 36th
month from the effective date of issuance. However, under the terms
of Mr.
Gagerman’s employment agreement, which are subject to shareholder approval
under our Bylaws, the exercise price will be $2.00 per share. The
exercise
price in the table does not reflect shareholder approval. Subsequent
to
the end of fiscal 2007 the term of these options was extended from
three
years to five years, subject to shareholder
approval.
|
(b)
|
The
Management Warrants vest over a 36 month period: 1/36th
of
the shares of common stock underlying the warrant vest each month
after
the date of issuance, subject to his continuing to serve as an employee.
However, under the terms of Mr. Gagerman’s employment agreement, which are
subject to shareholder approval under our Bylaws, the warrants were
fully
vested as of May 1, 2006. The vesting information in the table assumes
shareholder approval.
|
(c)
|
Effective
January 31, 2006, Mr. Gagerman was awarded 350,000 Director Warrants
by
our Board of Directors as authorized under our Chapter 11 Plan of
Reorganization. The terms of the Director Warrants provide for an
exercise
price of $2.50 per share. However, under the terms of Mr. Gagerman’s
employment agreement, which are subject to shareholder approval under
our
Bylaws, the exercise price will be $2.00 per share. The exercise
price in
the table does not reflect shareholder approval. Subsequent to the
end of
fiscal 2007 the term of these options was extended from three years
to
five years, subject to shareholder
approval.
|
35
(d)
|
The
Director Warrants vest over a two year period: 25% of the shares
of common
stock underlying the warrant vest each six months after the effective
date
of issuance (January 31, 2006). However,
under the terms of Mr. Gagerman’s employment agreement, which are subject
to shareholder approval under our Bylaws, the warrants were fully
vested
as of May 1, 2006. The vesting information in the table assumes
shareholder approval.
|
(e)
|
These
options were granted pursuant to the Gagerman Agreement entered into
effective November 1, 2006. Options vest at the rate of 25,000 per
month
from the date of grant (November 1, 2006) and are exercisable at
a price
of $2.00 per share, with a term of three years. Subsequent to the
end of
fiscal 2007 the term of these options was extended from three years
to
five years. Under the terms of our Bylaws, this grant is subject
to
shareholder approval.
|
Option
Exercises and Stock Vesting During 2007
No
stock
options were exercised during fiscal 2007 by the individuals named in the
Summary Compensation Table. No stock awards were issued or outstanding during
fiscal 2007.
Employment
Contracts, Termination of Employment Contracts and Change in Control
Arrangements
Gagerman
Employment Agreement
Effective
November 1, 2006, we entered into a written employment agreement with Melvin
Gagerman (the “Gagerman Agreement”) regarding the terms and conditions of his
employment as CEO. The Gagerman Agreement originally was in effect through
February 28, 2010, and is automatically extended by an additional year at the
beginning of each fiscal year unless we give prior notice of our intent not
to
extend the agreement. Accordingly, the Gagerman Agreement is currently in effect
until February 28, 2011. The agreement may be terminated before its stated
expiration by either of the parties under specified terms and conditions
Following are the material terms of the Gagerman Agreement.
Base
Salary and Annual Bonus.
Mr.
Gagerman is entitled to a base salary of $360,000 per year. The Gagerman
Agreement also provides for an annual bonus to be approved by the Board of
Directors of up to $100,000 based on objective and subjective milestones and,
in
the case of the 2007 fiscal year, provided the company has the available cash,
and an additional annual bonus at the discretion of the Board of Directors
of up
to $100,000 for achievements in excess of expected milestones. The initial
qualitative milestones and their quantitative relative weight were specified
in
the Gagerman Agreement for fiscal 2007, fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009, and relate
to achievement of specified business, financial and organizational performance
goals. The company may change both the qualitative goals and relative weight
of
the goals by giving notice to Mr. Gagerman prior to the fiscal quarter that
the
change will take effect. In addition, we retain the discretion under the
Gagerman Agreement to pay an annual bonus regardless of whether the stated
milestones are achieved. Bonuses are payable within 45 days after the end of
the
applicable fiscal year.
Stock
Options
The
Gagerman Agreement provides for him to receive options to purchase 300,000
shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $2.00 per share, of which 50,000
options are designated for tax purposes as “incentive stock options” and the
remaining options are non-qualified options. The Gagerman Agreement originally
provided for a term of three years, but was subsequently extended to five years.
The options vest at the rate of 25,000 per month. Unvested options vest if
the
Gagerman Agreement is terminated by either party under specified circumstances.
All of these options vested as of November 2007.
Life
Insurance, Dues and Car Allowance
The
Gagerman Agreement requires us to pay life insurance premiums on his private
life insurance policy, up to $7,500 per year. Mr. Gagerman is also entitled
to
receive $2,000 per month as an automobile allowance and country club dues,
and
reimbursement of the country club initiation fee of up to $8,000.
36
Medical
Benefits
In
addition to health and dental insurance generally available to all of our
employees, Me. Gagerman is also entitled to receive reimbursement of up to
$15,000 per year for all non-covered medical and dental expenses for himself
and
his spouse, including deductibles and co-payments. His agreement also entitles
him to reimbursement for the cost of long term care insurance.
Early
Termination of Agreement
The
Gagerman Agreement provides that either party may terminate the agreement prior
to its stated term of February 28, 2010, upon occurrence of the following
events:
·
|
Death
or Permanent Disability
-
The agreement automatically terminates upon Mr. Gagerman’s death or
disability (as determined under our Long-Term Disability Plan, which
provides for a benefit of 50% of his monthly salary to a maximum
of $6,000
per month).
|
·
|
By
the Company For Cause
-
We may terminate the agreement for “cause”. The agreement defines “cause”
to include:
|
·
|
a
breach by Mr. Gagerman of his obligations not to compete with us
during
the term of his employment;
|
·
|
a
breach by Mr. Gagerman of his obligation to maintain confidential
information
|
·
|
commission
of an act of fraud, embezzlement or dishonesty which is injurious
to
us;
|
·
|
intentional
misconduct which is detrimental to our business or
reputation
|
·
|
By
the Company for Non-Performance
-
We may terminate the agreement upon 120 days prior notice in the
event of
“non-performance” by Mr. Gagerman. The agreement defines “non-performance”
to mean a determination by not less than 75% of the members of our
Board
of Directors that Mr. Gagerman is not performing his duties as CEO
and the
continuation of the non-performance for 15 days after receiving notice
of
the Board’s determination.
|
·
|
By
The Company Without Cause or Non-Performance
-
We may terminate the agreement upon not less than 12 months notice,
without regard to Mr. Gagerman’s
performance.
|
·
|
By
Mr. Gagerman For Cause
-
Mr. Gagerman may terminate the agreement for “cause” upon not less than 45
days notice. The agreement defines “cause” to
include:
|
· |
A
change in his job responsibilities resulting from a demotion;
and
|
· |
His
removal as a member of the Board of
Directors.
|
·
|
By
Mr. Gagerman Without Cause
-
Mr. Gagerman may terminate the agreement upon not less than 120 days
notice without regard to whether we are meeting our obligation under
the
agreement.
|
·
|
By
Mr. Gagerman Upon a Change of Control
-
Mr. Gagerman may terminate the agreement upon not less than 30 days
notice
at any time following a “change in control.” The agreement defines change
of control to mean:
|
·
|
The
acquisition by a new investor of more than 50% of our common stock,
or
|
· |
The
change of a majority of our board members either by an individual
or by
one or more groups acting together.
|
Severance
Benefits Upon Termination
Base
Salary and Bonus.
Upon
the termination of Mr. Gagerman’s employment as CEO, he is entitled to receive
accrued salary, unpaid bonus payments (if any) through the effective date of
his
termination.
Employee
Benefits.
All
employee benefits, including life insurance premiums and automobile and dues
allowances, cease to accrue as of the date of termination.
37
Stock
Options
- Upon
the termination of Mr. Gagerman’s employment as CEO the portion of the 300,000
options which are vested as of the date of termination remain exercisable in
accordance with their terms. The unvested portion of the 300,000 options
terminate upon termination of the agreement unless:
·
|
termination
is a result of a “change in control”
or
|
·
|
We
terminate the agreement other than for “cause” or
“non-performance.”
|
in
which
case the unvested options become fully exercisable upon termination.
Lump
Sum Severance Payment
- Under
the terms of the agreement Mr. Gagerman is entitle to a lump sum severance
payment within 45 days of termination equal to the greater of one year’s base
salary ($360,000), or the unpaid balance of the base salary which would have
been payable if Mr. Gagerman remained employed through the stated term of
employment in effect immediately prior to the termination if:
·
|
termination
is a result of a “change in
control”
|
·
|
Mr.
Gagerman terminates the agreement for “cause”
or
|
·
|
We
terminate the agreement other than for “cause” or
“non-performance.”
|
Each
of
these events is referred to as a “severance payment event.”
Potential
Payments to the Named Executive Officers Upon Termination or Change in
Control
Other
than the benefits provided for in Mr. Gagerman’s written employment agreement,
which are described above, none of the named executive officers are entitled
to
any payments or benefits upon termination, whether by change in control or
otherwise, other than benefits available generally to all employees.
Upon
the
occurrence of a severance payment event for Mr. Gagerman, assuming he were
terminated as of February 28, 2007, he would be entitled to a severance payment
of $1,080,000, payable within 45 days of the date of his
termination.
Mr.
Gagerman was the only named executive officer with unvested options or warrants
outstanding as of February 28, 2007. The vesting of unvested options is
accelerated upon termination of Mr. Gagerman’s employment under the
circumstances described above. However, none of Mr. Gagerman’s were exercisable
at a price less than the closing price of our Common Stock as of February 28,
2007.
Director
Compensation During Fiscal 2007
The
following table summarizes all compensation paid to directors other than named
executive officers during fiscal 2007.
2007
DIRECTOR COMPENSATION TABLE
Name
|
Fees
Earned
or
Paid
in Cash
($)
|
Stock
Awards
($)
|
Option
Awards
($)
(1)(2)
|
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compensation
($)
|
All
Other
Compensation
($)
|
Total
($)
|
||||||
Arthur
J. Schwartz (4)
|
-
|
-
|
6,617
|
-
|
142,231(10)
|
148,848
|
||||||
Maurice
Zeitlin (5)
|
-
|
-
|
6,617
|
-
|
-
|
6,617
|
||||||
Warren
Breslow (6)
|
-
|
-
|
6,617
|
-
|
|
-
|
6,617
|
|||||
Sheldon
Appel (3)(7)
|
-
|
-
|
6,617
|
-
|
|
-
|
6,617
|
|||||
Salvador
Diaz-Verson, Jr. (8)(9)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1)
|
Reflects
the amount recognized for financial statement reporting purposes
for
fiscal year 2007 in accordance with FAS 123(R) using the assumptions
set
forth in the footnote 11 to the financial statements included elsewhere
in
this Annual Report for stock option awards granted during and prior
to
2007, assuming no forfeitures.
|
(2)
|
In
fiscal 2007 Messrs. Zeitlin and Breslow were each granted Director
Warrants (options) to acquire 25,000 shares, of our common stock
at an
exercise price of $2.50 per share, respectively, being the fair market
value of our common stock on the date of grant, which options vest
at a
rate of 25% every six months and expire in May, 2009. The fair market
value of each of these options at the time of grant, computed in
accordance with FAS 123(R), was $13,233.
|
38
(3)
|
Mr.
Appel resigned as a director in June,
2007.
|
(4)
|
The
director had 25,000 options outstanding as of February 28,
2007.
|
(5)
|
The
director had 25,000 options outstanding as of February 28,
2007.
|
(6)
|
The
director had 25,000 options outstanding as of February 28, 2007.
|
(7)
|
The
director had 12,500 options outstanding as of February 28, 2007.
|
(8)
|
The
director had 0 options outstanding as of February 28,
2007.
|
(9)
|
Mr.
Diaz-Verson, Jr. was appointed as a director on January 19,
2007.
|
(10)
|
Dr.
Schwartz was a consultant to the company from March 1, 2006, until
November 30, 2006, at which time he became an employee of the
company.
|
Our
Board
of Directors may, at its discretion, compensate directors for attending board
and committee meetings and reimburse the directors for out-of-pocket expenses
incurred in connection with attending such meetings. Our directors are also
eligible to receive stock option grants under our 2006 employee stock option
plan and Director Warrants authorized under our Chapter 11 Plan of
Reorganization.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
During
the 2007 fiscal year our Compensation Committee was comprised of Messrs.
Breslow, Appel and Zeitlin. None of the members of the Compensation Committee
was an executive officer or employee of the Company. During the 2007 fiscal
year, none of our executive officers served on our Compensation
Committee.
ITEM
12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
MANAGEMENT AND
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
Common
Stock
The
following table sets forth, to the extent of our knowledge, certain information
regarding our common stock owned as of December 31, 2007 (i) by each person
who
is known to be the beneficial owner of more than five percent (5%) of our
outstanding Common Stock, (ii) by each of our Directors and the named executive
officers in the Summary Compensation Table, and (iii) by all Directors and
current executive officers as a group:
Beneficial
Owner
|
Number
of Shares of Common
Stock
|
Percent
of Common
Stock (1)
|
|||||
ICM
Asset Management, Inc. (2)(3)
|
1,492,388
|
4.1
|
%
|
||||
James
M. Simmons (2)(4)
|
1,612,012
|
4.4
|
%
|
||||
Koyah
Ventures, LLC (2)(5)
|
1,541,238
|
4.2
|
%
|
||||
Koyah
Leverage Partners, L.P. (2)(6)
|
1,260,978
|
3.4
|
%
|
||||
Melvin
Gagerman (7)
|
611,501
|
1.7
|
%
|
||||
Arthur
Schwartz (8)
|
728,659
|
2.0
|
%
|
||||
Maurice
Zeitlin (9)
|
1,116,260
|
3.0
|
%
|
||||
Warren
Breslow (10)
|
1,488,378
|
4.1
|
%
|
||||
Salvador
Diaz-Verson, Jr. (11)
|
115,934
|
*
|
|||||
Yedidia
Cohen (12)
|
57,962
|
*
|
|||||
All
current executive officers and Directors as a group (six)
|
4,118,694
|
11.2
|
%
|
*
Less
than 1% of outstanding shares.
39
(1) |
Beneficial
ownership is determined in accordance with rules of the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission. The calculation of the percentage of beneficial
ownership is based upon 36,670,820 shares of common stock outstanding
on
December 31, 2007. In computing the number of shares beneficially
owned by
any shareholder and the percentage ownership of such shareholder,
shares
of common stock which may be acquired by a such shareholder upon
exercise
or conversion of warrants or options which are currently exercisable
or
exercisable within 60 days of December 31, 2007, are deemed to be
exercised and outstanding. Such shares, however, are not deemed
outstanding for purposes of computing the beneficial ownership percentage
of any other person. Shares issuable upon exercise of warrants and
options
which are subject to shareholder approval are not deemed outstanding
for
purposes of determining beneficial ownership. Except as indicated
by
footnote, to our knowledge, the persons named in the table above
have the
sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common
stock shown as beneficially owned by them.
|
(2) |
Based
upon information contained in Schedule 13G jointly filed with the
SEC on
February 13, 2008, by ICM Asset Management, Inc., Koyah Ventures,
LLC,
Koyah Leverage Partners, L.P. and James M. Simmons. The business
address
of these filers is 601
W. Main Avenue, Suite 600, Spokane, Washington 99201. ICM
Asset Management, Inc., James M. Simmons and Koyah Ventures, LLC
constitute a group sharing beneficial ownership within the meaning
of Rule
13d-5(b)(1), but are not part of a group with any other person. Koyah
Leverage Partners, L.P. expressly disclaims membership in a group
and
disclaims beneficial ownership of the common stock covered by the
Schedule
13G. ICM Asset Management, Inc. is a registered investment adviser
whose
clients have the right to receive or the power to direct the receipt
of
dividends from, or the proceeds from the sale of, the common stock.
James
M. Simmons is the Chief Executive Officer and controlling shareholder
of
ICM Asset Management, Inc. and the manager and controlling owner
of Koyah
Ventures, LLC. Koyah Ventures, LLC is the general partner of Koyah
Leverage Partners, L.P. and other investment limited partnerships
of which
ICM Asset Management, Inc. is the investment adviser. No individual
client
of ICM, other than Koyah Leverage Partners, L.P., holds more than
five
percent of the outstanding common stock.
|
(3) |
Includes
sole dispositive and voting power of 862 shares and shared voting
and
dispositive power of 1,491,526
shares.
|
(4) |
Includes
sole dispositive and voting power of 7,771 shares and shared voting
and
dispositive power of 1,612,012
shares.
|
(5) |
Includes
sole dispositive and voting power of 119,503 shares and shared voting
and
dispositive power of 1,421,735
shares.
|
(6) |
Includes
shared dispositive and voting power of 1,260,678
shares.
|
(7) |
Includes
446,639 warrants and options exercisable within 60 days of December
31,
2007.
|
(8)
|
Includes
157,433 warrants and options exercisable within 60 days of December
31,
2007.
|
(9)
|
Includes
157,757 warrants and options exercisable within 60 days of December
31,
2007.
|
(10) |
Includes
279,313 warrants and options exercisable within 60 days of December
31,
2007.
|
(11)
|
Includes
60,989 warrants and options exercisable within 60 days of December
31,
2007.
|
(12)
|
Includes
51,327 warrants and options exercisable within 60 days of December
31,
2007.
|
The
mailing address for the officers and directors is c/o Aura Systems, Inc., 2330
Utah Avenue, El Segundo, CA 90245.
40
Securities
Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans as
of February 28, 2007
Equity
Compensation Plan Information as of February 28, 2007
|
|
Number
of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options,
Warrants
and Rights
|
|
Weighted-average
Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants and
Rights
|
|
Number
of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance Under Equity
Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column
(a))
|
Plan
Category
|
|
(a)
|
|
(b)
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
802,778
|
|
$2.15
|
|
197,222
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,000,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
802,778
|
|
$2.15
|
|
3,197,222
|
We
maintain three equity compensation plans as of February 28, 2007, two of which
have been approved by our security holders, and one which has not yet been
submitted to security holders. Under our Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Plan of
Reorganization, which was approved by our creditors and shareholders and became
effective in January 2006, a total of 500,000 warrants to purchase our common
stock were reserved for issuance to management from time to time and 500,000
warrants were reserved for issuance to our directors from time to time.
2006
Employee Stock Option Plan - In
September 2006 our Board of Directors adopted the 2006 Employee Stock Option
Plan (the “Option Plan”). The Option Plan authorizes the Board of Directors or a
committee of directors designated by the Board to grant up to 3,000,000 options
to employees, directors and consultants. The Option Plan and the options granted
under the Option Plan are subject to shareholder approval at the next Annual
Meeting of Shareholders. For further information regarding the terms of the
Option Plan see “Item 11 - Compensation Discussion and Analysis - Long-Term
Equity Based Compensation Awards.”
ITEM
13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
Related
Transactions
Since
the
beginning of the 2007 fiscal year, Mr. Breslow, a director, has made various
temporary advances to the Company totaling $900,000. The highest amount
outstanding at any one time was $500,000, and as of January 31, 2008, there
is
an outstanding balance of $500,000. Mr. Breslow also participated in a private
placement with the Company in the amount of $850,000. Interest on the advances
was at a rate of 10% per annum and totaled $1,452.05 through January 31, 2008.
Mr.
Schwartz, a director, has made various temporary advances to the Company
totaling $175,000. The highest amount outstanding at any one time was $100,000,
and as of January 31, 2008, there was no outstanding balance. Mr. Schwartz
also
participated in a private placement with the Company in the amount of $13,000.
Interest on the advances was at a rate of 10% per annum and totaled $794.52
through January 31, 2008.
41
Review
and Approval of Related Party Transactions
Our
Audit
Committee is responsible for the review and approval of all related party
transactions required to be disclosed to the public under SEC rules. This
procedure, which is contained in the written charter of our Audit Committee,
has
been established by our Board of Directors in order to serve the interests
of
our shareholders. Related party transactions are reviewed and approved by the
Audit Committee on a case-by-case basis. Under existing, unwritten policy no
related party transaction can be approved by the Audit Committee unless it
is
first determined that the terms of such transaction is on terms no less
favorable to us than could be obtained from an unaffiliated third party on
an
arms-length basis and is otherwise in our best interest.
Director
Independence
Our
Board
is comprised of a majority of independent directors under the rules of the
SEC
and the listing standards of NASDAQ. Our independent directors are
Messrs. Zeitlin, Breslow, and Diaz-Verson. Richard Armbrust, a director in
fiscal 2007 until resigning in May, 2006, was an independent director and was
a
member of the Audit Committee, Nominating Committee and Compensation Committee.
Sheldon Appel served as a director in fiscal 2007 and resigned in June, 2007.
Mr. Appel was an independent director and served on the Audit Committee,
Nominating Committee and Compensation Committee Our Board has determined that
each member of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating
Committee is independent under such rules and standards. Messrs. Gagerman and
Schwartz are not independent directors under applicable SEC rules.
ITEM
14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND DISCLOSURES
The
Audit
Committee regularly reviews and determines whether specific non-audit projects
or expenditures with our independent auditors potentially affect their
independence. The Audit Committee’s policy is to pre-approve all audit and
permissible non-audit services provided by our independent auditors.
Pre-approval is generally provided by the Audit Committee for up to one year,
as
detailed as to the particular service or category of services to be rendered,
as
is generally subject to a specific budget. The Audit Committee may also
pre-approve additional services of specific engagements on a case-by-case basis.
The
following table sets forth the aggregate fees billed to us by Kabani & Co.
for the year ended February 28, 2007 and 2006:
|
Year
Ended February 28,
|
||||||
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||
Audit
Fees(1)
|
$
|
82,500
|
$ | 82,500 | |||
Audit-related
fees(2)
|
-
|
- | |||||
Tax
fees(3)
|
-
|
- | |||||
All
other fees(4)
|
-
|
- | |||||
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
82,500
|
$ | 82,500 |
(1)
|
|
Included
fees for professional services rendered for the audit of our annual
financial statements and review of our annual report on Form 10-K
and for
reviews of the financial statements included in our quarterly reports
on
Form 10-Q for the first three quarters of the years ended February
28,
2007 and 2006.
|
|
||
(2)
|
|
Includes
fees for professional services rendered in connection with our evaluation
of internal controls.
|
42
Policy
on Audit Committee Pre-Approval of Audit and Permissible Non-Audit Services
of
Independent Auditors
The
Audit
Committee pre-approves all audit and permissible non-audit services provided
by
our independent auditors. These services may include audit services,
audit-related services, tax and other services. Pre-approval is generally
provided for up to one year, and any pre-approval is detailed as to the
particular service or category of services and is generally subject to a
specific budget. The independent auditors and management are required to
periodically report to the Audit Committee regarding the extent of services
provided by the independent auditors in accordance with this pre-approval,
and
the fees for the services performed to date. The Audit Committee may also
pre-approve particular services on a case-by-case basis. During fiscal 2006
and
2007 all services provided by Kabani and Company were pre-approved by the Audit
Committee in accordance with this policy.
PART
IV
ITEM
15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
Documents
filed as part of this Form 10-K:
1.
Financial Statements
See
Index
to Consolidated Financial Statements at page F-1
2.
Financial Statement Schedules
See
Index
to Consolidated Financial Statements at page F-1
3.
Exhibits
See
Exhibit Index
43
INDEX
TO EXHIBITS
Description
of Documents
2.1
|
First
Amended Plan of Reorganization of Aura Systems, Inc.(2)
|
3.1
|
Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Aura Systems, Inc..
(1)
|
3.2
|
Amended
and Restated Bylaws of Aura Systems, Inc. as amended to date.
(1)
|
10.1
|
Form
of Unsecured Creditor Warrants issued under First Amended Plan of
Reorganization of the Company. (3)
|
10.2
|
Form
of Management Warrants issued under First Amended Plan of Reorganization
of Aura Systems, Inc.(3)
|
10.3
|
Form
of Director Warrants issued under First Amended Plan of Reorganization
of
t Aura Systems, Inc. (3)
|
10.4
|
Aura
Systems, Inc. 2006 Stock Option Plan. (3)
|
10.5
|
Form
of Aura Systems, Inc. Non-Statutory Stock Option Agreement.
(3)
|
10.6
|
Employment
Agreement dated January 4, 2007, by and between the Company and Melvin
Gagerman. (3)
|
10.7
|
Full
Release dated as of January 31, 2006, by Aura Systems, Inc. for the
benefit of Koyah Leverage Partners, L.P., Koyah Partners, L.P. Koyah
Ventures LLC, Raven Partners, L.P., Koyah Microcap Partners Master
Fund,
L.P. and James M. Simmons. (3)
|
10.8
|
Consolidated,
Amended and Restated Security Agreement dated as of January 31, 2006,
by
Aura Systems, Inc. for the benefit of Koyah Leverage Partners, L.P.,
Koyah
Partners, L.P. Koyah Ventures LLC, Raven Partners, L.P., and Koyah
Microcap Partners Master Fund, L.P. (3)
|
10.9
|
Consolidated,
Amended and Restated Stock Pledge Agreement dated as of January 31,
2006,
by Aura Systems, Inc. for the benefit of Koyah Leverage Partners,
L.P.,
Koyah Partners, L.P. Koyah Ventures LLC, Raven Partners, L.P., and
Koyah
Microcap Partners Master Fund, L.P. (3)
|
10.10
|
Amended
and Restated Intercreditor Agreement dated as of January 31, 2006,
by and
among Aura Systems, Inc., Koyah Leverage Partners, L.P., Koyah Partners,
L.P. Koyah Ventures LLC, Raven Partners, L.P., and Koyah Microcap
Partners
Master Fund, L.P. (3)
|
10.11
|
Amended
and Restated Promissory Note dated January 31, 2006, by Aura Systems,
Inc.
in favor of Raven Partners, L.P. (3)
|
10.12
|
Amended
and Restated Promissory Note dated January 31, 2006, by Aura Systems,
Inc.
in favor of Koyah Ventures, LLC (3)
|
10.13
|
Consolidated,
Amended and Restated Promissory Note dated January 31, 2006, by Aura
Systems, Inc. in favor of Koyah Partners, L.P. (3)
|
10.14
|
Consolidated,
Amended and Restated Promissory Note dated January 31, 2006, by Aura
Systems, Inc. in favor of Koyah Microcap Partners Master Fund, L.P.
(3)
|
10.15
|
Consolidated,
Amended and Restated Promissory Note dated January 31, 2006, by Aura
Systems, Inc. in favor of Koyah Leverage Partners, L.P.
(3)
|
10.16
|
Lease
between Aura Systems Inc., and Alliance Commercial Partners
(3)
|
10.17
|
Lease
between Aura Systems Inc., and Derek Lidow as Trustee for the Lidow
Family
Trust and Alexander Lidow (3)
|
14.1
|
Code
of Ethics (3)
|
31.1
|
CEO
Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
31.2
|
CFO
Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
32.1
|
Certification
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
|
(1)
|
Incorporated
by reference from the Company's Report on Amendment to Form 8-A
filed with
the SEC on January 31, 2006.
|
(2)
|
Incorporated
by reference from the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the
SEC on January 20, 2006.
|
(3)
|
Incorporated
by reference from the Company’s Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC for
the year ended February 28, 2005.
|
44
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf
by
the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
AURA SYSTEMS, INC. | ||
|
|
|
Dated: March __, 2008 | By: | /s/ Melvin Gagerman |
Melvin Gagerman
Chief Executive Officer
|
||
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has
been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the
capacities and on the date indicated.
Signatures
|
Title
|
Date | ||
/s/
Melvin Gagerman
|
Chief
Executive Officer, Acting Chief Financial Officer Director and
|
March __ , 2008 | ||
Melvin
Gagerman
|
Chairman of the Board (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer) | |||
|
|
|||
/s/
Arthur Schwartz
|
Director
|
March __ , 2008 | ||
Arthur
Schwartz
|
||||
|
|
|||
/s/
Maurice Zeitlin
|
Director | March __ , 2008 | ||
Maurice
Zeitlin
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
/s/
Warren Breslow
|
Director | March __ , 2008 | ||
Warren
Breslow
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
/s/
Salvador Diaz-Verson, Jr.
|
Director | March __ , 2008 | ||
Salvador
Diaz-Verson, Jr.
|
|
45
Index
to Consolidated Financial Statements
Independent
Auditors' Reports on Consolidated Financial Statements and Financial
Statement Schedule
|
F-2
|
|||
|
||||
Consolidated
Financial Statements of Aura Systems, Inc. and
Subsidiaries:
|
||||
|
||||
Consolidated
Balance Sheets - February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006
|
F-3
|
|||
Consolidated
Statements of Operations - Years ended February 28, 2007, February
28,
2006 and February 28, 2005
|
F-4
|
|||
Consolidated
Statements of Stockholders' Equity (Deficit) - Years ended February
28,
2007, February 28, 2006 and February 28, 2005
|
F-5
|
|||
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows - Years ended February 28, 2007, February
28,
2006 and February 28, 2005
|
F-6
to F-8
|
|||
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
F-8
to F-21
|
|||
Consolidated
Financial Statement Schedule II: Valuation and Qualifying
Accounts
|
F-23
|
Schedules
other than those listed above are omitted because they are not required or
are
not applicable, or the required information is shown in the respective
consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.
F-1
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To
the
Board of Directors and Stockholders
Aura
Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries
We
have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Aura Systems, Inc.
(a
Delaware corporation) and subsidiaries as of February 28, 2007 and February
28,
2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended
February 28, 2007. 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 audits.
We
conducted our audits 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 made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In
our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of Aura Systems, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006, and the results
of
their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended February 28, 2007 in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America.
/s/
Kabani & Company, Inc.
Certified
Public Accountants
Los
Angeles, California
September
12, 2007
F-2
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
February
28, 2007
|
February
28, 2006
|
|||||
ASSETS
|
|
|
|||||
Current
assets
|
|
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
1,051,259
|
$
|
472,482
|
|||
Accounts
receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $164,241 and
$164,241
|
249,984
|
87,808
|
|||||
Current
inventories
|
750,000
|
615,000
|
|||||
Other
receivables
|
-
|
2,654,864
|
|||||
Other
current assets
|
243,854
|
69,690
|
|||||
Total
current assets
|
2,295,097
|
3,899,844
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Property,
plant, and equipment, net
|
58,517
|
26,669
|
|||||
Non-current
inventories net of allowance for obsolete inventories of $3,268,374
and
$2,967,751
|
3,195,523
|
3,964,864
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
5,549,137
|
$
|
7,891,377
|
|||
|
|||||||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|||||||
Current
liabilities
|
|||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$
|
216,225
|
$
|
590,577
|
|||
Current
portion of notes payable
|
611,411
|
48,766
|
|||||
Accrued
expenses
|
470,092
|
528,192
|
|||||
Deferred
income
|
164,625
|
164,625
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Total
current liabilities
|
1,462,353
|
1,332,160
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Notes
payable, net of current portion
|
1,983,118
|
2,476,234
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Total
liabilities
|
3,445,471
|
3,808,394
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
Stockholders'
equity
|
|||||||
Common
stock, $0.0001par value, 50,000,000 shares authorized, 28,695,638
and
24,282,710 issued and outstanding at February 28, 2007 and
2006
|
2,870
|
2,428
|
|||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
347,261,713
|
343,073,025
|
|||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(345,160,917
|
)
|
(338,992,470
|
)
|
|||
|
|||||||
Total
stockholders' equity
|
2,103,666
|
4,082,983
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Total
liabilities and stockholders' equity
|
$
|
5,549,137
|
$
|
7,891,377
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements
F-3
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For
the
Years Ended February 28, 2007, February 28, 2006, and February 28,
2005
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Net
revenues
|
$
|
1,624,074
|
$
|
1,756,105
|
$
|
2,525,431
|
||||
Cost
of goods sold
|
745,060
|
614,327
|
1,573,116
|
|||||||
Inventory
write down
|
419,765
|
439,188
|
2,088,703
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
459,249
|
702,590
|
(1,136,388
|
) | ||||||
|
||||||||||
Operating
expenses
|
||||||||||
Engineering,
research and development
|
1,048,529
|
1,483,247
|
2,482,668
|
|||||||
Selling,
general, and administrative
|
5,200,393
|
5,867,388
|
6,886,542
|
|||||||
Legal
settlements
|
-
|
267,726
|
2,765,192
|
|||||||
Impairment
losses on long-lived assets
|
-
|
-
|
544,510
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
6,248,922
|
7,618,361
|
14,767,615
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Loss
from operations
|
(5,789,673
|
)
|
(6,915,771
|
)
|
(13,815,300
|
)
|
||||
|
||||||||||
Other
income (expense)
|
||||||||||
Impairment
of investments
|
-
|
-
|
(286,061
|
)
|
||||||
Gain
on disposition of assets
|
7,750
|
2,446,798
|
-
|
|||||||
Interest
expense, net
|
(392,977
|
)
|
(6,602,020
|
)
|
(18,965,852
|
)
|
||||
Other
income (expense), net
|
6,453
|
(50,000
|
)
|
166,345
|
||||||
Change
in derivative liability
|
-
|
16,254,502
|
4,622,235
|
|||||||
Bankruptcy
settlements
|
-
|
1,730,979
|
-
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Total
other income (expense)
|
(378,774
|
)
|
13,780,259
|
(14,463,333
|
)
|
|||||
|
||||||||||
Net
Income (Loss) before Minority interest in subsidiary
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
6,864,488
|
(28,278,633
|
)
|
|||||
Minority
interest
|
-
|
-
|
3,970
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss) before preferred stock dividend
|
$
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
$
|
6,864,488
|
$
|
(28,274,663
|
)
|
||
Preferred
stock dividend
|
-
|
-
|
525,377
|
|||||||
Net
Income (Loss) applicable to common shareholders
|
$
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
$
|
6,864,488
|
$
|
(28,800,040
|
)
|
||
|
||||||||||
Basic
and diluted loss per share
|
$
|
(0.25
|
)
|
$
|
2.24
|
$
|
(22.35
|
)
|
||
|
||||||||||
Weighted-average
shares outstanding
|
25,114,154
|
3,063,216
|
1,288,114
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements
F-4
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)
|
Preferred
Stock Shares
|
Preferred
Stock Amount
|
Common
Stock
Shares
|
Common
Stock
Amount
|
Committed
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-In Capital
|
Accumulated
Deficit
|
Total
Stockholders' Equity (Deficit)
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance,
February 29, 2004
|
591,110
|
$
|
2,956
|
1,276,056
|
$
|
127
|
$
|
3,102,958
|
$
|
310,336,452
|
$
|
(317,056,918
|
)
|
$
|
(3,614,425
|
)
|
|||||||||
Reclassify
prior year warrant expense as liability
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1,617,403
|
)
|
-
|
(1,617,403
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||
Penalty
shares issued on global settlement
|
-
|
-
|
24,116
|
3
|
-
|
292,269
|
-
|
292,272
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Series B for note conversion
|
500,000
|
2,500
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2,497,500
|
-
|
2,500,000
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Series B for global settlement
|
91,717
|
459
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
458,124
|
-
|
458,583
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Series B creditors settlement
|
290,311
|
1,452
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
1,450,103
|
-
|
1,451,555
|
|||||||||||||||||
Series
B issued in private placement
|
1,089,245
|
5,446
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
5,440,779
|
-
|
5,446,225
|
|||||||||||||||||
Net
Loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(28,800,040
|
)
|
(28,800,040
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||
Balance,
February 28, 2005
|
2,562,383
|
$
|
12,813
|
1,300,172
|
$
|
130
|
$
|
3,102,958
|
$
|
318,857,824
|
$
|
(345,856,958
|
)
|
$
|
(23,883,233
|
)
|
|||||||||
Series
B issued in private placements
|
26,963
|
123
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
123,338
|
-
|
123,461
|
|||||||||||||||||
Cancel
preferred stock
|
(2,589,346
|
)
|
(12,936
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(13,903,525
|
)
|
-
|
(13,916,461
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Cancel
common stock
|
-
|
-
|
(1,300,172
|
)
|
(130
|
)
|
(3,102,958
|
)
|
(305,077,637
|
)
|
-
|
(308,180,725
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Stock
issued for cancelled common stock
|
-
|
-
|
1,300,172
|
130
|
-
|
308,180,595
|
-
|
308,180,725
|
|||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for cancelled preferred stock
|
-
|
-
|
3,319,403
|
332
|
-
|
13,916,129
|
-
|
13,916,461
|
|||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for additional claims
|
-
|
-
|
254,127
|
25
|
-
|
856,324
|
-
|
856,349
|
|||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued in exchange for secured debt
|
-
|
-
|
1,134,000
|
113
|
-
|
2,899,887
|
-
|
2,900,000
|
|||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for new money contribution
|
-
|
-
|
3,349,500
|
335
|
-
|
2,952,665
|
-
|
2,953,000
|
|||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for DIP financing
|
-
|
-
|
6,065,699
|
607
|
-
|
4,063,411
|
-
|
4,064,018
|
|||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for administrative claims
|
-
|
-
|
2,766,786
|
277
|
-
|
(277
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||||||
Penalty
shares issued on new money contribution
|
-
|
-
|
837,375
|
84
|
-
|
(84
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for unsecured debt
|
-
|
-
|
4,611,247
|
461
|
-
|
8,125,478
|
-
|
8,125,939
|
|||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for legal settlements
|
-
|
-
|
644,401
|
64
|
-
|
1,135,501
|
-
|
1,135,565
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of warrants
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
943,396
|
-
|
943,396
|
|||||||||||||||||
Net
Income
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
6,864,488
|
6,864,488
|
|||||||||||||||||
Balance,
February 28, 2006
|
-
|
-
|
24,282,710
|
$
|
2,428
|
-
|
$
|
343,073,025
|
$
|
(338,992,470
|
)
|
$
|
4,082,983
|
||||||||||||
Common
stock issued in private placements
|
-
|
-
|
4,412,928
|
442
|
-
|
3,964,714
|
-
|
3,965,156
|
|||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of warrants
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
223,974
|
-
|
223,974
|
|||||||||||||||||
Net
Loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||
Balance,
February 28, 2007
|
|
-
|
|
-
|
28,695,638
|
$
|
2,870
|
-
|
$
|
347,261,713
|
$
|
(345,160,917
|
)
|
$
|
2,103,666
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements
F-5
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For
the Years Ended February 28, 2007, February 28, 2006 and February 28,
2005
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
$
|
6,864,488
|
$
|
(28,800,040
|
)
|
||
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating
activities
|
||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
30,948
|
65,091
|
416,161
|
|||||||
Gain
on disposition of assets
|
(7,750
|
)
|
(2,446,798
|
)
|
-
|
|||||
Change
in allowance for doubtful accounts
|
2,646
|
88,682
|
32,134
|
|||||||
Change
in reserve for inventory obsolescence
|
419,765
|
439,188
|
2,088,703
|
|||||||
Impairment
of long-lived assets and investments
|
-
|
-
|
830,571
|
|||||||
Gain
on extinguishment of debt
|
-
|
(1,730,979
|
)
|
(17,221
|
)
|
|||||
Minority
interest in net income of consolidated subsidiary
|
-
|
-
|
(3,970
|
)
|
||||||
Change
in derivative liability
|
-
|
(16,254,502
|
)
|
(4,622,235
|
)
|
|||||
Beneficial
conversion feature on convertible debt
|
-
|
3,801,457
|
19,259,334
|
|||||||
Operating
expense charged for warrants issued
|
223,974
|
943,396
|
-
|
|||||||
Operating
expenses satisfied with note payable
|
167,346
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Operating
expenses satisfied with stock
|
-
|
300,000
|
750,855
|
|||||||
(Increase)
decrease in
|
||||||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
(164,822
|
)
|
460,946
|
12,732
|
||||||
Inventories
|
214,576
|
302,760
|
895,628
|
|||||||
Other
current assets
|
2,480,700
|
626,467
|
(437,068
|
)
|
||||||
Other
assets
|
-
|
-
|
594,271
|
|||||||
Increase
(decrease) in
|
||||||||||
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
(432,452
|
)
|
1,974,022
|
2,156,666
|
||||||
Deferred
income
|
-
|
-
|
3,750
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(3,233,516
|
)
|
(4,565,782
|
)
|
(6,839,729
|
)
|
||||
|
||||||||||
Cash
flows from investing activities
|
||||||||||
Purchase
of property, plant, and equipment
|
(62,796
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
Proceeds
from disposal of property, plant, and equipment
|
7,750
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(55,046
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
F-6
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Cash
flows from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Proceeds
from notes payable
|
-
|
-
|
2,150,000
|
|||||||
Payments
on notes payable
|
(97,817
|
)
|
(103,727
|
)
|
(778,320
|
)
|
||||
Net
proceeds from issuance of preferred stock
|
-
|
123,461
|
5,446,225
|
|||||||
Net
proceeds from issuance of common stock
|
3,965,156
|
4,957,154
|
-
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
3,867,339
|
4,976,888
|
6,817,905
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Net
increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
578,777
|
411,106
|
(21,824
|
)
|
||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
472,482
|
61,376
|
83,200
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of year
|
$
|
1,051,259
|
$
|
472,482
|
$
|
61,376
|
||||
|
||||||||||
Supplemental
disclosures of cash flow information
|
||||||||||
Interest
paid
|
$
|
46,045
|
$
|
550,255
|
$
|
674,383
|
||||
|
||||||||||
Income
taxes paid
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
Supplemental
schedule of non-cash financing and investing activities:
During
the year ended February 28, 2007 $167,346 of accrued and unpaid interest was
added to the principal amount of notes payable.
During
the year ended February 28, 2006, we:
·
|
issued
1,134,000 shares of common stock upon conversion of $2,900,000 of
secured
debt
|
·
|
issued
2,766,786 shares of common stock for administrative claims arising
out of
the bankruptcy filing
|
·
|
issued
837,375 shares of common stock as penalty shares for failure to timely
file a registration statement
|
·
|
issued
4,611,247 shares of common stock in satisfaction of $8,125,939 of
unsecured debt
|
·
|
issued
644,401 shares of common stock as legal settlements
|
During
the year ended February 28, 2005, we:
·
|
issued
290,311 shares of Series B convertible preferred stock in satisfaction
of
$ 1,451,555 in liabilities issued 500,000 shares of Series B convertible
preferred stock upon conversion of $2,500,000 of note payable
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements
F-7
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE
1 - ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS
General
Aura
Systems, Inc., ("Aura" or the "Company") a Delaware corporation, was founded
to
engage in the development, commercialization, and sales of products, systems,
and components, using its patented and proprietary electromagnetic and
electro-optical technology. Aura develops and sells AuraGen®
mobile
induction power systems to the industrial, commercial, and defense mobile power
generation markets. In addition, we hold patents for other technologies that
have not been commercially exploited.
Chapter
11 reorganization
On
June
24, 2005 we filed for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code, in the United States Bankruptcy Court, Central District of California,
(Case Number LA 05-24550-SB). We secured a Debtor in Possession (“DIP”) loan
from Blue Collar Films LLC (“BCF”) for one million dollars and secured an
additional $1.2 million DIP loan from AGP Lender LLC. In addition a group of
individual investors provided an additional $1.16 million in DIP financing.
We
submitted a reorganization plan that was approved by the court and voted and
approved by the DIP lenders, the secured creditors, the unsecured creditors,
the
shareholders and the new money investors. Under the reorganization plan (i)
the
secured creditor retained $2.5 million in a secured note payable over 48 months
at 7% annual interest with the first payment starting 12 months after the
reorganization, (ii) the Series B Preferred Stock holders received new common
shares calculated by dividing the total cash invested in the Series B Placement
by $3.37, (iii) the Series A Preferred Stock holders converted their 1.8 Series
A Preferred Stock for one new common share, (iv) the common shareholders
converted 338 of their shares for one new share, and (v) the DIP loans converted
their loans into approximately 6.07 million new shares of common stock, and
(vi)
all the unsecured creditors received new shares of common stock valued at one
share per $1.75 in claim. An additional 5.89 million shares of common stock
were
issued for the new money and reorganization related fees.254,127 additional
shares were issued to shareholders to settle their claims in excess of the
bankruptcy court approval.
All
of
the outstanding litigation and disputes were settled during the bankruptcy.
The
real estate was sold to an unrelated third party in December 2005 for gross
proceeds of $8,750,000. After satisfaction of the mortgage liabilities and
payment of the costs of the sale, approximately $2.9 million was due us. From
this amount, $1.9 million was paid to the minority shareholder, approximately
$470,000 was used to satisfy outstanding legal bills, and the balance of
$595,000 was received by the Company in March of 2006. All disputes regarding
the real estate were settled.
We
emerged from the Chapter 11 effective January 31, 2006.
NOTE
2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Principles
of Consolidation
The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Aura and our
subsidiary, Aura Realty, Inc. Investments in affiliated companies are accounted
for by the equity or cost method, as appropriate. Significant inter-company
amounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
Revenue
Recognition
The
Company’s revenue recognition policies are in compliance with Staff accounting
bulletin (SAB) 104. Sales revenue is recognized at the date of shipment to
customers when a formal arrangement exists, the price is fixed or determinable,
the delivery is completed, no other significant obligations of the Company
exist
and collectibility is reasonably assured. Payments received before all of the
relevant criteria for revenue recognition are satisfied are recorded as unearned
revenue.
F-8
We
recognize revenue for product sales upon shipment and when title is transferred
to the customer. When Aura performs the installation of the product, revenue
and
cost of sales are recognized when the installation is complete. We have in
the
past earned a portion of our revenues from license fees and recorded those
fees
as income when we fulfilled our obligations under the particular
agreement.
Comprehensive
Income
We
utilize Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 130, "Reporting
Comprehensive Income." This statement establishes standards for reporting
comprehensive income and its components in a financial statement. Comprehensive
income as defined includes all changes in equity (net assets) during a period
from non-owner sources. Examples of items to be included in comprehensive
income, which are excluded from net income, include foreign currency translation
adjustments and unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities.
Comprehensive income is not presented in our financial statements since we
did
not have any of the items of comprehensive income in any period
presented.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash
and
equivalents include cash in hand and cash in time deposits, certificates of
deposit and all highly liquid debt instruments with original maturities of
three
months or less. We maintain cash deposits at multiple banks located in
California. Deposits at each bank are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation up to $100,000. We have not experienced any losses in such accounts
and believe we are not exposed to any significant risk on cash and cash
equivalents.
Accounts
Receivable
Accounts
receivable consist primarily of amounts due from customers. We have provided
for
an allowance for doubtful accounts, which we believe to be sufficient to account
for all uncollectible amounts.
Inventories
Inventories
are valued at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out) or market. Due to
continuing lower than projected sales, we are holding inventories in excess
of
what we expect to sell in the next fiscal year. As of February 28, 2007 and
February 28, 2006 $3,195,523, and $3,964,864, respectively, of inventories
have
been classified as long-term assets. (See Note 4.)
Property,
Plant, and Equipment
Property,
plant, and equipment, including leasehold improvements, are recorded at cost,
less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation is provided using
the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the respective
assets as follows:
Buildings
|
40
years
|
|||
Machinery
and equipment
|
5
to 10 years
|
|||
Furniture
and fixtures
|
7
years
|
Improvements
to leased property are amortized over the lesser of the life of the lease or
the
life of the improvements. Amortization expense on assets acquired under capital
leases is included with depreciation and amortization expense on owned
assets.
Maintenance
and minor replacements are charged to expense as incurred. Gains and losses
on
disposals are included in the results of operations.
F-9
Long-Term
Investments
We
account for all investments where we hold less than a 20% voting interest,
cannot exercise significant influence, and where the fair market value of those
securities is not readily determinable under the cost basis. Investments in
voting interests between 20% and 50% where we can exercise significant influence
are accounted for under the equity method of accounting, and investments greater
than 50% are generally consolidated for the purposes of financial reporting.
As
we do not hold a sufficient interest in our investments to exercise significant
influence and the fair market value of the investments are not readily
determinable, long-term investments have been accounted for under the cost
method. A decline in the value of any investment below cost that is deemed
other
than temporary is charged to earnings. As of February 28, 2007, we have impaired
all of our long-term investments.
Patents
and Trademarks
We
capitalize the cost of obtaining or acquiring patents and trademarks.
Amortization of patent and trademark costs is provided for by the straight-line
method over the shorter of the legal or estimated economic life. Amortization
expense was $0, $0, and $657,728 for the years ended February 28, 2007, February
28, 2006 and February 28, 2005, respectively. Accumulated amortization was
$1,228,061 as of February 28, 2007 and 2006. If a patent or trademark is
rejected, abandoned, or otherwise invalidated, the unamortized cost is expensed
in that period. During fiscal 2004, we recorded a $2,000,398 long-lived asset
impairment charge resulting from the write off of some of our patents and
trademarks. We reevaluated our intentions with regard to its patents and
trademarks related to products outside our core business and wrote-off the
carrying value of patents not related to products in production. In fiscal
2005,
due to the continued low sales volume, we wrote off the carrying value of the
balance of our patents.
Valuation
of Long-Lived Assets
We
review
long-lived assets and identifiable intangibles in accordance with SFAS No.
144,
"Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets," on at least
an
annual basis or whenever events or circumstances indicate that the carrying
amount of such assets may not be fully recoverable. During the year ended
February 28, 2005, we recorded asset impairment charges on certain of our
long-lived assets (see Note 8).
Stock-Based
Compensation
SFAS
No.
123, "Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation," establishes and encourages
the
use of the fair value based method of accounting for stock-based compensation
arrangements under which compensation cost is determined using the fair value
of
stock-based compensation determined as of the date of grant and is recognized
over the periods in which the related services are rendered. The statement
also
permits companies to elect to continue using the current implicit value
accounting method specified in Accounting Principles Board ("APB") Opinion
No.
25, "Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees," to account for stock-based
compensation. We have elected to use the implicit value based method and to
disclose the pro forma effect of using the fair value based method to account
for its stock-based compensation.
If
we had
elected to recognize compensation expense based upon the fair value at the
grant
date for awards under this plan consistent with the methodology prescribed
by
SFAS No. 123, our net loss and loss per share would be reduced to the pro forma
amounts indicated below for the years ended February 28, 2007, February 28,
2006
and February 28, 2005:
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss), as reported
|
$
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
$
|
6,864,488
|
$
|
(28,800,040
|
)
|
||
Intrinsic
value expense
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Stock-based
employee compensation expense determined under fair value presentation
for
all options
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Pro
forma net income (loss)
|
$
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
$
|
6,864,488
|
$
|
(28,800,040
|
)
|
||
|
||||||||||
Basic
income (loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||
As
reported
|
$
|
(0.25
|
)
|
$
|
2.24
|
$
|
(22.35
|
)
|
||
Pro
forma
|
$
|
(0.25
|
)
|
$
|
2.24
|
$
|
(22.35
|
)
|
F-10
There
were no options granted during the years ended February 28, 2005, 2006 and
2007.
The
Black-Scholes option valuation model was developed for use in estimating the
fair value of traded options which do not have vesting restrictions and are
fully transferable. In addition, option valuation models require the input
of
highly subjective assumptions, including the expected stock price volatility.
Because our employee stock options have characteristics significantly different
from those of traded options, and because changes in the subjective input
assumptions can materially affect the fair value estimate, in management's
opinion, the existing models do not necessarily provide a reliable single
measure of the fair value of its employee stock options.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
Our
financial instruments include cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable,
and notes receivable, long-term investments, accounts payable, and accrued
expenses. The carrying amounts of these instruments approximate their fair
value
due to their short maturities.
Advertising
Expense
Advertising
costs are charged to expense as incurred and were immaterial for the years
ended
February 28, 2007, February 28, 2006 and February 28, 2005.
Research
and Development
Research
and development costs are expensed as incurred. These costs include the expenses
incurred in the development of the 200amp ECU, the Tamgen (dual generator),
and
the eight inch generator.
Income
Taxes
We
utilize SFAS No. 109, "Accounting for Income Taxes," which requires the
recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future
tax
consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements
or
tax returns. Under this method, deferred income taxes are recognized for the
tax
consequences in future years of differences between the tax bases of assets
and
liabilities and their financial reporting amounts at each period end based
on
enacted tax laws and statutory tax rates applicable to the periods in which
the
differences are expected to affect taxable income. Valuation allowances are
established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount
expected to be realized.
We
have
significant income tax net operating losses; however, due to the uncertainty
of
the realizability of the related deferred tax asset, a reserve equal to the
amount of deferred income taxes has been established at February 28, 2007 and
February 28, 2006.
F-11
Loss
per Share
The
consolidated net loss per common share is based on the weighted-average number
of common shares outstanding during the year.
Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting
period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Major
Customers
During
the year ended February 28, 2007, we conducted business with two customers
whose
sales comprised 24% of net sales. As of February 28, 2007, two customers
accounted for 39 % of net accounts receivable. During the year ended February
28, 2006, we conducted business with four customers whose sales comprised 24%
of
net sales. As of February 28, 2006, four customers accounted for 87% of net
accounts receivable.
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In
February 2006, FASB issued SFAS No. 155, "Accounting for Certain Hybrid
Financial Instruments". SFAS No. 155 amends SFAS No 133, "Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities", and SFAF No. 140, "Accounting
for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of
Liabilities". SFAS No. 155, permits fair value remeasurement for any hybrid
financial instrument that contains an embedded derivative that otherwise would
require bifurcation, clarifies which interest-only strips and principal-only
strips are not subject to the requirements of SFAS No. 133, establishes a
requirement to evaluate interest in securitized financial assets to identify
interests that are freestanding derivatives or that are hybrid financial
instruments that contain an embedded derivative requiring bifurcation, clarifies
that concentrations of credit risk in the form of subordination are not embedded
derivatives, and amends SFAS No. 140 to eliminate the prohibition on the
qualifying special-purpose entity from holding a derivative financial instrument
that pertains to a beneficial interest other than another derivative financial
instrument. This statement is effective for all financial instruments acquired
or issued after the beginning of the Company's first fiscal year that begins
after September 15, 2006. The management is currently evaluating the effect
of
this pronouncement on financial statements.
In
March
2006, FASB issued SFAS 156 ‘Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets’ this
Statement amends FASB Statement No. 140, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing
of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities, with respect to the
accounting for separately recognized servicing assets and servicing liabilities.
This Statement:
1.
|
Requires
an entity to recognize a servicing asset or servicing liability each
time
it undertakes an obligation to service a financial asset by entering
into
a servicing contract.
|
2.
|
Requires
all separately recognized servicing assets and servicing liabilities
to be
initially measured at fair value, if
practicable.
|
3.
|
Permits
an entity to choose ‘Amortization method’ or ‘Fair value measurement
method’ for each class of separately recognized servicing assets and
servicing liabilities:
|
4.
|
At
its initial adoption, permits a one-time reclassification of
available-for-sale securities to trading securities by entities with
recognized servicing rights, without calling into question the treatment
of other available-for-sale securities under Statement 115, provided
that
the available-for-sale securities are identified in some manner as
offsetting the entity’s exposure to changes in fair value of servicing
assets or servicing liabilities that a servicer elects to subsequently
measure at fair value.
|
5.
|
Requires
separate presentation of servicing assets and servicing liabilities
subsequently measured at fair value in the statement of financial
position
and additional disclosures for all separately recognized servicing
assets
and servicing liabilities.
|
F-12
This
Statement is effective as of the beginning of the Company’s first fiscal year
that begins after September 15, 2006. The management is currently evaluating
the
effect of this pronouncement on financial statements.
In
September 2006, FASB issued SFAS 157 ‘Fair Value Measurements’. This Statement
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and expands disclosures about
fair value measurements. This Statement applies under other accounting
pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements, the Board having
previously concluded in those accounting pronouncements that fair value is
the
relevant measurement attribute. Accordingly, this Statement does not require
any
new fair value measurements. However, for some entities, the application of
this
Statement will change current practice. This Statement is effective for
financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007,
and interim periods within those fiscal years. The management is currently
evaluating the effect of this pronouncement on financial
statements.
In
September 2006, FASB issued SFAS 158 ‘Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit
Pension and Other Postretirement Plans—an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87,
88, 106, and 132(R)’ This Statement improves financial reporting by requiring an
employer to recognize the over funded or under funded status of a defined
benefit postretirement plan (other than a multiemployer plan) as an asset or
liability in its statement of financial position and to recognize changes in
that funded status in the year in which the changes occur through comprehensive
income of a business entity or changes in unrestricted net assets of a
not-for-profit organization. This Statement also improves financial reporting
by
requiring an employer to measure the funded status of a plan as of the date
of
its year-end statement of financial position, with limited exceptions. An
employer with publicly traded equity securities is required to initially
recognize the funded status of a defined benefit postretirement plan and to
provide the required disclosures as of the end of the fiscal year ending after
December 15, 2006. An employer without publicly traded equity securities is
required to recognize the funded status of a defined benefit postretirement
plan
and to provide the required disclosures as of the end of the fiscal year ending
after June 15, 2007. However, an employer without publicly traded equity
securities is required to disclose the following information in the notes to
financial statements for a fiscal year ending after December 15, 2006, but
before June 16, 2007, unless it has applied the recognition provisions of this
Statement in preparing those financial statements:
a)
|
A
brief description of the provisions of this Statement
|
b)
|
The
date that adoption is required
|
c)
|
The
date the employer plans to adopt the recognition provisions of this
Statement, if earlier.
|
The
requirement to measure plan assets and benefit obligations as of the date of
the
employer’s fiscal year-end statement of financial position is effective for
fiscal years ending after December 15, 2008. The management is currently
evaluating the effect of this pronouncement on financial statements.
In
February 2007, FASB issued FASB Statement No. 159, The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. FASB 159 is effective for fiscal
years beginning after November 15, 2007. Early adoption is permitted subject
to
specific requirements outlined in the new Statement. Therefore, calendar-year
companies may be able to adopt FASB 159 for their first quarter 2007 financial
statements.
The
new
Statement allows entities to choose, at specified election dates, to measure
eligible financial assets and liabilities at fair value that are not otherwise
required to be measured at fair value. If a company elects the fair value option
for an eligible item, changes in that item's fair value in subsequent reporting
periods must be recognized in current earnings. FASB 159 also establishes
presentation and disclosure requirements designed to draw comparison between
entities that elect different measurement attributes for similar assets and
liabilities.
F-13
NOTE
3 - INVENTORIES
Inventories
at February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006 consisted of the
following:
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Raw
materials
|
$
|
2,939,395
|
$
|
2,909,930
|
|||
Finished
goods
|
4,274,502
|
4,637,685
|
|||||
|
7,213,897
|
7,547,615
|
|||||
Reserve
for potential product obsolescence
|
(3,268,374
|
)
|
(2,967,751
|
)
|
|||
|
|||||||
|
3,945,523
|
4,579,864
|
|||||
Non-current
portion
|
3,195,523
|
3,964,864
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Current
portion
|
$
|
750,000
|
$
|
615,000
|
Inventories
consist primarily of components and completed units for the Company’s
AuraGen®
product.
Early
in
its AuraGen®
program,
we determined it was most cost-effective to outsource production of components
and subassemblies to volume-oriented manufacturers, rather than produce these
parts in house. As a result of this decision, and based on then anticipated
sales, we purchased, prior to fiscal 2001, a substantial inventory of components
at volume prices, most of which was then assembled into finished
AuraGen®
units.
Since sales did not meet such expectations, we have been selling product from
this inventory for several years. Management has analyzed its inventories based
on its current business plan, current orders for future delivery, and pending
proposals with prospective customers and has determined we do not expect to
realize all of its inventories within the next year. The net inventories as
of
February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006, which are not expected to be realized
within a 12-month period have been reclassified as long term.
We
assessed the net realizability of these assets, and the potential obsolescence
of inventory. In accordance with this assessment, management has recorded a
reserve of $3,268,374 and $2,967,751 at February 28, 2007 and February 28,
2006,
respectively.
NOTE
4 - PROPERTY, PLANT, AND EQUIPMENT
Property,
plant, and equipment at February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006 consists of
the
following:
2007
|
2006
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Machinery
and equipment
|
903,017
|
911,308
|
|||||
Furniture
and fixtures
|
1,399,636
|
1,509,492
|
|||||
|
2,302,653
|
2,420,800
|
|||||
Less
accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
2,244,136
|
2,394,131
|
|||||
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
$
|
58,517
|
$
|
26,669
|
Depreciation
and amortization expense was $30,948, $65,091, and $416,161 for the years ended
February 28, 2007, February 28, 2006 and February 28, 2005,
respectively.
F-14
In
December 2005, our majority owned subsidiary, Aura Realty, sold the buildings
we
operate in to an unrelated third party for gross proceeds of $8,750,000. After
satisfaction of the mortgage liabilities and payment of the costs of the sale,
approximately $2.9 million was due us. From this amount, $1.9 million was paid
to the minority shareholder, approximately $470,000 was used to satisfy
outstanding legal bills, and the balance of $595,000 was received by the Company
in March of 2006. We then entered into a lease arrangement with the purchasers
to lease one of the properties for a period of two years beginning January
1,
2006.
NOTE
5 - LONG-TERM INVESTMENTS
We
have
made long-term investments in the common stock of three companies as follows:
Aquajet-$923,835; Algo Technology-$1,348,652 and Telemac-$715,153. As of
February 29, 2004, we had fully written off our investment in Aquajet and Algo
Technology, and had a net book value in our Telemac investment of $286,061.
During fiscal 2005, we wrote off the balance of our investment in Telemac and
as
of February 28, 2007 and 2006, we have fully written off all our long-term
investments.
NOTE
6 - NOTES PAYABLE
Notes
payable at February 28, 2007 and 2006 consisted of the following:
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Note
payable (a)
|
$
|
2,594,529
|
$
|
2,525,000
|
|||
Less
current portion
|
611,411
|
48,766
|
|||||
Long-term
portion
|
$
|
1,983,118
|
$
|
2,476,234
|
(a)
Represents notes payable dated January 31, 2006, bearing interest at a rate
of
7% per annum and secured by our intellectual property. The notes carry a term
of
five years with interest accruing the first twelve months, principal and
interest payments beginning the thirteenth month, and continuing through month
sixty. During the year ended February 28, 2007, $167,346 in accrued and unpaid
interest was added to the principal balance of the notes.
Future
maturities of notes payable at February 28, 2007 are as follows:
Year
Ending February 28,
|
|
|||
2008
|
$
|
611,411
|
||
2009
|
655,610
|
|||
2010
|
703,004
|
|||
2011
|
624,504
|
|||
Total
|
$
|
2,594,529
|
F-15
NOTE
7 - ACCRUED EXPENSES
Accrued
expenses at February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006 consisted of the
following:
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Accrued
payroll and related expenses
|
$
|
324,636
|
$
|
178,170
|
|||
Accrued
interest
|
16,833
|
||||||
Other
|
145,456
|
333,189
|
|||||
Total
|
$
|
470,092
|
$
|
528,192
|
NOTE
8 - COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Leases
At
February 28, 2007, we did not have any significant long-term operating leases.
Rent expense charged to operations amounted to $268,380, $858,368, and $838,458
for the years ended February 28, 2007, February 28, 2006 and February 28, 2005,
respectively.
Litigation
Barovich/Chiau
et. al. v. Aura Systems, Inc. et. al. (Case No. CV
-95-3295).
As
previously reported in our fiscal 2000 report on Form 10-K, we settled
shareholder litigation in the referenced matter in January 1999. On November
20,
1999, the parties entered into an Amended Stipulation of Settlement, requiring
that we make payment of $2,260,000 (plus interest) in thirty-six equal monthly
installments of $70,350. On October 22, 2002, after we had failed to make
certain monthly payments, Plaintiffs applied for and obtained a judgment against
us for $935,350, representing the balance due. We have subsequently made only
two monthly payments of $70,350 each, reducing the amount owed to $794,650
(plus
interest) as of February 28, 2005. Subsequent to year end, the bankruptcy court
(see footnote 18) approved the settlement of this claim in the amount of
approximately $820,000 as an unsecured claim, to be satisfied by the issuance
of
approximately 465,000 shares of common stock in the recapitalized company.
Plaintiffs appealed the settlement claiming they are a secured creditor entitled
to full payment in cash over a period of five years. The appellate court upheld
the settlement provisions, and Plaintiffs have appealed this decision. The
appeal is pending.
NOTE
9 - STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
During
the year ended February 28, 2005, we issued 1,971,273 shares of Series
B:
1,089,245
of these shares were issued for cash totaling $5,446,225
500,000
of these shares were issued in conversion of $2,500,000 of notes
payable
91,717
of
these shares were issued as part of the global settlement totaling
$458,583
290,311
of these shares were issued in settlement of liabilities totaling
$1,451,555
During
the year ended February 28, 2006, we issued 26,963 shares of Series B Preferred
Stock for consideration of $123,461.
As
part
of the reorganization plan, all Series A and Series B Preferred Stock was
converted into common stock of the reorganized company. As of February 28,
2007,
there is no outstanding preferred stock.
F-16
Common
Stock
At
February 28, 2007, 2006 and 2005, we had 50,000,000 shares of $0.0001 par
value
common stock authorized for issuance. During the years ended February 28,
2007
and 2006, we issued 4,412,928 and 24,282,710 shares of common stock,
respectively.
In
the
year ended February 28, 2007, we issued 4,412,928 shares of common stock for
net
proceeds of $3,965,156.
In
the
year ended February 28, 2006, we issued 24,282,710 shares of common stock as
follows:
·
|
1,134,000
shares upon conversion of $2,900,000 of secured debt
|
·
|
2,766,786
shares for administrative claims arising out of the bankruptcy
filing
|
·
|
837,375
shares as penalty shares for failure to timely file a registration
statement
|
·
|
4,611,247
shares in satisfaction of $8,125,939 of unsecured
debt
|
·
|
1,300,172
shares in exchange for the old common
stock
|
·
|
3,319,403
shares for cancelled preferred
stock
|
·
|
254,127
additional shares to settle claims in excess of the bankruptcy
approval
|
·
|
644,401
issued for legal settlements
|
·
|
6,065,699
shares for DIP financing
|
·
|
3,349,500
shares for new money contribution
|
As
described below, as of February 28, 2005 we had commitments to issue, in
exchange for consideration already received, approximately 65,000 shares of
common stock.
During
the year ended February 28, 2005, we issued 24,116 common shares as penalty
shares on the shares purchased in the real estate transaction, for failure
to
file a registration statement.
Director
Stock Options
We
have
granted nonqualified stock options to certain directors. Options were granted
at
fair market value at the date of grant, vested immediately, and were exercisable
at any time within a 10-year period from the date of grant. These options were
cancelled as part of the Reorganization Plan as of February 28,
2006.
A
summary
of our outstanding options and activity under the director’s plan is as
follows:
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
||||||
Outstanding,
February 28, 2005
|
1,331
|
$
|
696.28-777.40
|
||||
Exercisable,
February 28, 2005
|
1,331
|
$
|
696.28-777.40
|
||||
Cancelled,
February 28, 2006
|
(1,331
|
)
|
$
|
696.28-777.40
|
|||
Outstanding,
February 28, 2006
|
0
|
Employee
Stock Options
The
1989
Stock Option Plan has granted the maximum allowable number of options
authorized. In March 2000, our Board of Directors adopted the 2000 Stock Option
Plan, a non-qualified plan which was subsequently approved by the stockholders.
The 2000 Stock Option Plan authorized the grant of options to purchase up to
10%
of our outstanding common shares.
Options
issued to employees and employee directors were issued with an exercise price
equal to the fair market value of our common stock and the value of options,
as
determined by the Black-Scholes model, of consultant options was not
material.
F-17
As
part
of the reorganization plan, all outstanding employee options in both plans
were
cancelled.
Activity
in the employee stock option plans was as follows:
|
1989
Plan
|
2000
Plan
|
|||||||||||
|
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
Outstanding,
February 28, 2004
|
2,112
|
$
|
605.02-2,470.78
|
163,906
|
$
|
16.90-216.32
|
|||||||
Exercisable,
February 28, 2004
|
2,112
|
$
|
605.02-2,470.78
|
155,428
|
$
|
16.90-216.32
|
|||||||
Outstanding,
February 28, 2005
|
2,112
|
$
|
605.02-2,470.78
|
163,906
|
$
|
16.90-216.32
|
|||||||
Exercisable,
February 28, 2005
|
2,112
|
$
|
605.02-2,470.78
|
155,428
|
$
|
16.90-216.32
|
|||||||
Cancelled
|
(2,112
|
)
|
$
|
605.02-2,470.78
|
(163,906
|
)
|
$
|
16.90-216.32
|
|||||
Outstanding,
February 28, 2006
|
0
|
$
|
-
|
0
|
$
|
0
|
The
exercise prices for the options outstanding at February 28, 2006, and
information relating to these options is as follows:
Range
of Exercise Prices
|
Stock
Options Outstanding
|
|
Stock
Options Exercisable
|
|
Weighted-Average
Remaining Contractual Life
|
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of Options Outstanding
|
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of Options Exercisable
|
|
None
|
Warrants
As
of
February 29, 2005, the aggregate number of outstanding options, warrants, and
common share equivalents was significantly in excess of the authorized but
unissued number of shares of our common stock. Management intended to seek
shareholder approval of an increase in the Company’s authorized shares
sufficient to satisfy all existing commitments and create available shares
for
potential future investments. However, such approval was not granted. Hence,
management determined that the value of the warrants was required to be
classified as a liability under the provisions of EITF 00-19 - Accounting for
Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed To and Potentially Settled In a
Company’s Own Stock. As of February 28, 2005, the value of the warrants has been
classified as a liability.
Activity
in issued and outstanding warrants was as follows:
Number
of Shares
|
Exercise
Prices
|
||||||
Outstanding,
February 29, 2004
|
130,909
|
$
|
16.90-858.52
|
||||
Issued
|
443,786
|
$
|
6.76-16.90
|
||||
Exercised
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Expired
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Outstanding,
February 28, 2005
|
574,684
|
$
|
6.76-858.52
|
||||
Cancelled
|
(574,684
|
)
|
$
|
6.76-858.52
|
|||
Issued
|
5,022,948
|
$
|
2.00-3.00
|
||||
Outstanding,
February 28, 2006
|
5,022,948
|
$
|
3.50
|
||||
Issued
|
1,155,589
|
$
|
2.00-3.00
|
||||
Outstanding,
February 28, 2007
|
6,178,537
|
$
|
2.00-3.50
|
F-18
As
part
of the reorganization plan, all warrants outstanding as of January 31, 2006
were
cancelled.
During
the year ended February 28, 2007, we issued 1,155,589 warrants with exercise
prices ranging from $2.00 to $3.00, and vesting periods of three to five
years.
During
the year ended February 28, 2006, we issued 5,022,945 warrants with a grant
date
of January 31, 2006, as part of the reorganization plan. The warrants are
exercisable for a period of five years from the date of grant and are
exercisable at a price of $3.00 the first twelve months, $3.50 the second twelve
months, and $4.00 thereafter.
The
exercise prices for the warrants outstanding at February 28, 2007, and
information relating to these warrants is as follows:
Range
of Exercise Prices
|
Stock
Warrants Outstanding
|
|
Stock
Warrants Exercisable
|
|
Weighted-Average
Remaining Contractual Life
|
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of Warrants Outstanding
|
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of Warrants Exercisable
|
Intrinsic
Value
|
||
$3.50
|
5,022,945
|
5,022,945
|
47
months
|
$3.50
|
$3.50
|
$0.00
|
||||||
$2.00-$3.00
|
1,155,589
|
893,089
|
59
|
$2.71
|
$2.80
|
$0.00
|
NOTE
10 - INCOME TAXES
We
have
not incurred any income tax expense since inception. The actual tax benefit
differs from the expected tax benefit computed by applying the United States
federal corporate tax rate of 34% to loss before income taxes as follows for
the
years ended February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006 and February 28, 2005:
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Expected
tax benefit
|
34.0
|
%
|
34.0
|
%
|
34.0
|
%
|
||||
State
income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
6.0
|
6.0
|
6.0
|
|||||||
Changes
in valuation allowance
|
(40.0
|
)
|
(40.0
|
)
|
(40.0
|
)
|
||||
Total
|
-
|
%
|
-
|
%
|
-
|
%
|
The
following table summarizes the significant components of our deferred tax asset
at February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006:
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||
Deferred
tax asset
|
|
|
|||||
Net
operating loss carryforward
|
119,900,000
|
115,500,000
|
|||||
Valuation
allowance
|
(119,900,000
|
)
|
(115,500,000
|
)
|
|||
Net
deferred tax asset
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
We
recorded an allowance of 100% for its net operating loss carryforward due to
the
uncertainty of its realization.
A
provision for income taxes has not been provided in these financial statements
due to the net loss. At February 28, 2007, we had operating loss carryforwards
of approximately $299,600,000, which expire through 2022.
F-19
NOTE
11 - EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS
We
sponsor two employee benefit plans: The Employee Stock Ownership Plan (the
"ESOP") and a 401(k) plan.
The
ESOP
is a qualified discretionary employee stock ownership plan that covers
substantially all employees. We did not make any contributions to the ESOP
during the years ended February 28, 2007, February 28, 2006 and February
28,
2005.
We
sponsor a voluntary, defined contribution 401(k) plan. The plan provides
for
salary reduction contributions by employees and matching contributions by
us of
20% of the first 7% of the employees' pre-tax contributions. The matching
contributions included in selling, general, and administrative expenses were
$8,196, $10,552 and $17,863 for the years ended February 28, 2007, February
28,
2006 and February 28, 2005, respectively.
NOTE
12 - SEGMENT INFORMATION
We
are a
United States based company providing advanced technology products to various
industries. The principal markets for our products are North America, Europe,
and Asia. All of our operating long-lived assets are located in the United
States. We operate in one segment.
Total
net
revenues from customer geographical segments are as follows for the years ended
February 28, 2007 and February 28, 2006 and February 28, 2005:
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||
United
States
|
$
|
1,416,145
|
$
|
1,583,509
|
$
|
2,420,136
|
||||
Canada
|
198,737
|
105,243
|
43,523
|
|||||||
Europe
|
4,948
|
7,246
|
7,826
|
|||||||
Asia
|
4,244
|
60,107
|
53,946
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
1,624,074
|
$
|
1,756,105
|
$
|
2,525,431
|
NOTE
13 - QUARTERLY FINANCIAL INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)
The
following tables list our quarterly financial information for the years ended
February 28, 2007, February 28, 2006 and February 28, 2005:
2007
|
||||||||||||||||
|
First
Quarter
|
Second
Quarter
|
Third
Quarter
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
Total
Year
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
revenues
|
$
|
244,462
|
$
|
591,898
|
$
|
354,109
|
$
|
433,605
|
$
|
1,624,074
|
||||||
Gross
profit
|
$
|
13,306
|
$
|
400,010
|
$
|
145,098
|
$
|
(99,165
|
) |
$
|
459,249
|
|||||
Loss
from operations
|
$
|
(1,434,293
|
)
|
$
|
(1,347,389
|
)
|
$
|
(1,443,631
|
)
|
$
|
(1,564,360
|
)
|
$
|
(5,789,673
|
)
|
|
Net
loss
|
$
|
(1,455,780
|
)
|
$
|
(1,377,724
|
)
|
$
|
(1,652,910
|
)
|
$
|
(1,682,033
|
)
|
$
|
(6,168,447
|
)
|
|
Basic
and diluted loss per share
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
$
|
(0.07
|
)
|
$
|
(0.25
|
)
|
F-20
2006
|
||||||||||||||||
|
First
Quarter
|
Second
Quarter
|
Third
Quarter
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
Total
Year
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
revenues
|
$
|
530,703
|
$
|
274,007
|
$
|
574,231
|
$
|
377,164
|
$
|
1,756,105
|
||||||
Gross
profit
|
$
|
335,651
|
$
|
171,949
|
$
|
395,431
|
$
|
(200,441
|
) |
$
|
702,590
|
|||||
Loss
from operations
|
$
|
(1,249,927
|
)
|
$
|
(1,237,150
|
)
|
$
|
(1,143,838
|
)
|
$
|
(3,284,856
|
)
|
$
|
(6,915,771
|
)
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
(5,262,942
|
)
|
$
|
18,445,502
|
$
|
(1,418,084
|
)
|
$
|
(4,751,380
|
)
|
$
|
6,864,488
|
|||
Basic
and diluted income (loss) per share
|
$
|
(4.06
|
)
|
$
|
13.52
|
$
|
(1.09
|
)
|
$
|
(6.13
|
)
|
$
|
2.24
|
2005
|
||||||||||||||||
|
First
Quarter
|
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
Total
Year
|
|||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
revenues
|
$
|
685,834
|
$
|
599,443
|
$
|
631,774
|
$
|
608,380
|
$
|
2,525,431
|
||||||
Gross
profit
|
$
|
416,836
|
$
|
470,024
|
$
|
377,300
|
$
|
(2,400,548
|
)
|
$
|
(1,136,388
|
)
|
||||
Loss
from operations
|
$
|
(1,491,525
|
)
|
$
|
(3,810,130
|
)
|
$
|
(2,024,533
|
)
|
$
|
(5,664,112
|
)
|
$
|
(13,815,300
|
)
|
|
Net
loss
|
$
|
(2,571,476
|
)
|
$
|
(11,690,737
|
)
|
$
|
(16,504,722
|
)
|
$
|
1,966,895
|
$
|
(28,800,040
|
)
|
||
Basic
and diluted loss per share
|
$
|
(2.03
|
)
|
$
|
(9.13
|
)
|
$
|
(12.84
|
)
|
$
|
3.43
|
$
|
(22.35
|
)
|
F-21
SUPPLEMENTAL
INFORMATION
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To
the
Board of Directors and Stockholders
Aura
Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries
Our
audits were conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and were made for the purpose of
forming an opinion on the basic consolidated financial statements taken as
a
whole. The consolidated supplemental schedule II is presented for purposes
of
complying with the Securities and Exchange Commission's rules and is not a
part
of the basic consolidated financial statements. This schedule has been subjected
to the auditing procedures applied in our audits of the basic consolidated
financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material
respects in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as
a
whole.
/s/
Kabani & Company, Inc.
Certified
Public Accountants
Los
Angeles, California
September
12, 2007
F-22
VALUATION
AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS - SCHEDULE II
|
Balance,
Beginning of Year
|
|
Additions
charged to Operations
|
|
Deductions
from
Reserve
|
|
Balance,
End
of
Year
|
||||||
Reserve
for doubtful accounts (see Note 3 and 6)
|
|||||||||||||
February
28, 2007
|
$
|
164,241
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
164,241
|
|||||
February
28, 2006
|
$
|
2,220,474
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
2,056,233
|
$
|
164,241
|
|||||
February
28, 2005
|
$
|
2,188,340
|
$
|
86,537
|
$
|
54,403
|
$
|
2,220,474
|
|||||
Reserve
for obsolete inventories (see Note 5)
|
|||||||||||||
February
28, 2007
|
$
|
2,967,751
|
$
|
300,623
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
3,268,374
|
|||||
February
28, 2006
|
$
|
4,038,047
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
1,070,296
|
$
|
2,967,751
|
|||||
February
28, 2005
|
$
|
2,032,000
|
$
|
2,006,047
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
4,038,047
|
|||||
Reserve
for investment (see Note 8)
|
|||||||||||||
February
28, 2007
|
$
|
2,987,640
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
2,987,640
|
|||||
February
28, 2006
|
$
|
2,987,640
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
2,987,640
|
|||||
February
28, 2005
|
$
|
2,701,579
|
$
|
286,061
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
2,987,640
|
F-23