DSS, INC. - Quarter Report: 2006 September (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
QUARTERLY
REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For
the quarterly period ended September
30, 2006
1-32146
|
Commission
file number
|
DOCUMENT
SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC.
|
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its
charter)
|
New
York
|
|
16-1229730
|
(State
of incorporation)
|
|
(IRS
Employer Identification Number)
|
28
Main Street East, Suite 1525
|
Rochester, NY 14614
|
(Address
of principal executive office)
|
(585)
325-3610
|
(Registrant's
telephone number)
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant:
|
|
(1)
filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the
Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter
period
that the registrant was required to file such reports)
|
And
|
(2)
has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90
days.
Yes
x
No o
|
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated
filer” and “large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
one):
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer o | 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
o No x
Applicable
only to corporate issuers
As
of November 10, 2006 (the most recent practicable date), there
were
12,926,989 shares of the issuer's Common Stock, $0.02 par value
per share,
outstanding.
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined
in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act)
|
Yes
o
No x
|
DOCUMENT
SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC.
FORM
10-Q
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
PART
I FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
|
|
||
Item
1
|
|
Financial
Statements
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
|
|
F-1
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations
|
|
F-2
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
F-3
|
|
|
Notes
to Financial Statements
|
|
F-4
|
Item
2
|
|
Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
|
1
|
Item
3
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
11
|
||
Item
4
|
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART
II OTHER
INFORMATION
|
|
|
||
Item
1
Item
1a
|
|
Legal
Proceedings
Risk
Factors
|
|
12
|
3Item
2
|
|
Unregistered Sales
of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
|
13
|
Item
3
|
|
Defaults
upon Senior Securities
|
|
20
|
Item
4
|
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
|
20
|
Item
5
|
|
Other
Information
|
|
20
|
Item
6
|
|
Exhibits
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
SIGNATURES
|
i
PART
I
ITEM
1 -
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DOCUMENT
SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|||||||
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
|
|||||||
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
(unaudited)
|
(audited)
|
||||||
ASSETS
|
|||||||
Current
assets:
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
1,520,360
|
$
|
3,953,482
|
|||
Accounts receivable, net of allowance
|
|||||||
of
$25,000 ($13,000 -2005)
|
719,941
|
164,726
|
|||||
Inventory
|
249,438
|
148,804
|
|||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
124,974
|
225,114
|
|||||
Total
current assets
|
2,614,713
|
4,492,126
|
|||||
Restricted
cash
|
—
|
240,000
|
|||||
Fixed
assets, net
|
623,700
|
451,195
|
|||||
Other
assets
|
159,862
|
229,050
|
|||||
Goodwill
|
1,396,734
|
711,785
|
|||||
Other
intangible assets, net
|
4,994,754
|
4,208,962
|
|||||
Total
Assets
|
$
|
9,789,763
|
$
|
10,333,118
|
|||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|||||||
Current
liabilities:
|
|||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$
|
1,298,827
|
$
|
547,512
|
|||
Accrued
expenses & other current liabilities
|
229,692
|
212,559
|
|||||
Deferred
revenue
|
595,783
|
—
|
|||||
Current
portion of capital lease obligations
|
34,817
|
33,374
|
|||||
Current
portion of long-term debt
|
—
|
50,891
|
|||||
Total
current liabilities
|
2,159,119
|
844,336
|
|||||
Long-term
debt
|
—
|
167,309
|
|||||
Long-term
capital lease obligations
|
58,784
|
84,931
|
|||||
Commitments
and contingencies (See Note 8)
|
|||||||
Stockholders'
equity
|
|||||||
Common
stock, $.02 par value;
|
|||||||
200,000,000
shares authorized,
|
|||||||
12,926,989 shares
issued and outstanding (12,698,872 in 2005)
|
258,540
|
253,977
|
|||||
Additional paid-in capital
|
23,114,276
|
21,377,996
|
|||||
Accumulated deficit
|
(15,800,956
|
)
|
(12,395,431
|
)
|
|||
Total
stockholders' equity
|
7,571,860
|
9,236,542
|
|||||
Total
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
|
$
|
9,789,763
|
$
|
10,333,118
|
|||
See
accompanying notes.
F-1
DOCUMENT
SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. AND
SUBSIDIARIES
|
|||||||||||||
Consolidated
Statements of
Operations
|
|||||||||||||
(unaudited)
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
Three
Months Ended
|
Nine
Months Ended
|
||||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
||||||||||
2006
|
2005
|
2006 | 2005 | ||||||||||
Revenue,
net
|
|||||||||||||
Security
products & printing
|
$
|
849,264
|
$
|
222,158
|
$
|
2,608,619
|
$
|
864,352
|
|||||
Royalties
|
246,528
|
28,251
|
343,223
|
51,600
|
|||||||||
Legal
products
|
167,518
|
122,714
|
483,983
|
381,445
|
|||||||||
Total
Revenue
|
1,263,310
|
373,123
|
3,435,825
|
1,297,397
|
|||||||||
Costs
of revenue
|
|||||||||||||
Security
products & printing
|
581,370
|
123,936
|
1,665,325
|
475,285
|
|||||||||
Legal
products
|
86,355
|
62,713
|
267,240
|
196,960
|
|||||||||
Total
costs of revenue
|
667,725
|
186,649
|
1,932,565
|
672,245
|
|||||||||
Gross
profit
|
595,585
|
186,474
|
1,503,260
|
625,152
|
|||||||||
Operating
expenses:
|
|||||||||||||
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
1,435,016
|
674,018
|
3,919,925
|
1,956,675
|
|||||||||
Research
and development
|
93,693
|
79,165
|
262,577
|
239,750
|
|||||||||
Amortization
of intangibles
|
275,714
|
135,000
|
763,989
|
270,000
|
|||||||||
Operating expenses
|
1,804,423
|
888,183
|
4,946,491
|
2,466,425
|
|||||||||
Operating
loss
|
(1,208,838
|
)
|
(701,709
|
)
|
(3,443,231
|
)
|
(1,841,273
|
)
|
|||||
Other
income (expense):
|
|||||||||||||
Interest income
|
7,200
|
29,797
|
51,338
|
67,222
|
|||||||||
Interest expense
|
(2,788
|
)
|
(6,494
|
)
|
(13,632
|
)
|
(20,543
|
)
|
|||||
Loss
before income taxes
|
(1,204,426
|
)
|
(678,406
|
)
|
(3,405,525
|
)
|
(1,794,594
|
)
|
|||||
Income
taxes
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(1,204,426
|
)
|
$
|
(678,406
|
)
|
$
|
(3,405,525
|
)
|
$
|
(1,794,594
|
)
|
|
Net
loss per share, basic and diluted
|
$
|
(0.09
|
)
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
$
|
(0.26
|
)
|
$
|
(0.15
|
)
|
|
Weighted
average common shares outstanding, basic and
diluted
|
12,920,315
|
12,285,029
|
12,868,887
|
11,856,511
|
|||||||||
See
accompanying notes.
F-2
DOCUMENT
SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|||||||
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
|
|||||||
For
the Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
(unaudited)
|
(unaudited)
|
||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|||||||
Net loss
|
$
|
(3,405,525
|
)
|
$
|
(1,794,594
|
)
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used by operating
activities:
|
|||||||
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
927,635
|
404,960
|
|||||
Stock
based compensation
|
591,684
|
29,521
|
|||||
(Increase) decrease in assets:
|
|||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
(389,229
|
)
|
235,226
|
||||
Inventory
|
(30,487
|
)
|
(77,176
|
)
|
|||
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
(20,541
|
)
|
(73,238
|
)
|
|||
Increase in liabilities:
|
|||||||
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
234,719
|
58,179
|
|||||
Deferred
revenue
|
595,783
|
—
|
|||||
Net
cash used by operating activities
|
(1,495,961
|
)
|
(1,217,122
|
)
|
|||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|||||||
Purchase
of fixed assets
|
(78,204
|
)
|
(83,941
|
)
|
|||
Acquisition
|
(1,301,670
|
)
|
—
|
||||
Purchase
of other intangible assets
|
(453,542
|
)
|
(185,283
|
)
|
|||
Net
cash used by investing activities
|
(1,833,416
|
)
|
(269,224
|
)
|
|||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|||||||
Repayment of long-term debt
|
(218,200
|
)
|
(35,663
|
)
|
|||
Decrease
in restricted cash
|
240,000
|
51,000
|
|||||
Repayment
of capital lease obligations
|
(24,704
|
)
|
(22,714
|
)
|
|||
Issuance
of common stock, net
|
899,159
|
2,555,664
|
|||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
896,255
|
2,548,287
|
|||||
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
(2,433,122
|
)
|
1,061,941
|
||||
Cash
and cash equivalents beginning of period
|
3,953,482
|
2,657,865
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents end of period
|
$
|
1,520,360
|
$
|
3,719,806
|
|||
See
accompanying notes.
F-3
NOTES
TO INTERIM CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
September
30, 2006
(Unaudited)
1.
Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies
Document
Security Systems, Inc. (the “Company”), a New York corporation, operates in the
market for secured documents and solutions. The Company licenses its patented
technology and sells products that use its patented optical anti-scanning,
anti-counterfeiting technologies. The Company’s customers include governments,
law enforcement agencies, security printers, check and forms printers and
corporations. In addition, the Company, through its consolidated subsidiaries,
operates a retail printing operation and sells supplies to the legal industry.
Interim
Financial Statements
The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Document Security
Systems, Inc and its wholly owned subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”)
after elimination of intercompany transactions, profits, and balances. The
consolidated financial statements have been prepared from the Company’s records
without audit and, in management’s opinion, include all adjustments (consisting
of only normal recurring adjustments) necessary to fairly reflect the financial
condition and the results for the periods presented. Certain information
and
footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in
accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles have been
condensed or omitted under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s
rules and regulations.
These
consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the
audited
consolidated financial statements included in the Company’s Annual Report on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005. The results of
operations for the interim periods presented in these consolidated financial
statements are not necessarily indicative of the results expected for the
year
ended December 31, 2006.
Reclassifications
Certain
prior period amounts in the accompanying consolidated financial statements
and
notes thereto have been reclassified to current period presentation. These
classifications had no effect on the results of operations for the period
presented. These reclassifications include the reclassification of state
business fees from income tax to selling, general and administrative and
amortization of intangibles from selling, general and administrative to a
separate line on the statement of operations.
Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles requires the Company to make estimates
and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue
and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities.
Certain of the Company’s accounting policies require higher degrees of judgment
than others in their application. These include impairments and estimation
of
useful lives of long-lived assets, inventory valuation, reserves for
uncollectible accounts receivable, and contingencies and litigation. The
Company
bases its estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions
that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of
which
form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and
liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results
may
differ from these estimates under different assumptions or
conditions.
F-4
Share-Based
Payments
Prior
to
January 1, 2006, the Company accounted for stock option awards granted
under the Company’s Stock Incentive Plans in accordance with the recognition and
measurement provisions of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25,
“Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees”, (“APB 25”) and related
Interpretations, as permitted by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation”, (“SFAS 123”).
Share-based employee compensation expense was not recognized in the Company’s
consolidated statements of operations prior to January 1, 2006, as all
stock option awards granted had an exercise price equal to or greater than
the
market value of the common stock on the date of the grant, except for
modifications of stock option awards, which triggered compensation expense
in
accordance with provisions of FASB FIN 44 -“Accounting for Certain Transactions
Involving Stock Compensation”. As permitted by SFAS 123, the Company reported
pro-forma disclosures presenting results and earnings per share as if the
Company had used the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS 123 in the
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements. Stock-based compensation related to
non-employees were accounted for based on the fair value of the related stock
or
options in accordance with SFAS 123 and its interpretations.
Effective
January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the provisions of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based
Payment”, (“SFAS 123(R)”) using the modified prospective transition method. See
Note 5 for further detail on the impact of SFAS 123(R) to the Company’s
consolidated financial statements.
Revenue
Recognition
Sales
of
custom document security products amd printing, retail printing and legal
products are recognized when a product or service is delivered, shipped or
provided to the customer and all material conditions relating to the sale
have
been substantially performed. We
also
enter into arrangements under which we provide hosted software applications.
We
recognize revenue for these arrangements based on the provisions of EITF
No.
00-3, Application of AICPA SOP 97-2 to Arrangements That Include the Right
to
Use Software Stored on Another Entity's Hardware ("EITF 00-3"), and the
provisions of Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 101, Revenue Recognition in
Financial Statements, as amended by SAB No. 104, when there is persuasive
evidence of an arrangement, collection of the resulting receivable is probable,
the fee is fixed or determinable and acceptance has occurred. Our revenues
related to these arrangements consist of system implementation service fees
and
software subscription fees. We have determined that the system implementation
services represent set-up services that do not qualify as separate units
of
accounting from the software subscriptions as the customer would not purchase
these services without the purchase of the software subscription. As a result,
we recognize system implementation fees ratably over a period of time from
when
the core system implementation services are completed and accepted by the
customer over the remaining customer relationship life, which we have determined
is the contractual life of the customer's subscription agreement. We recognize
software subscription fees, which typically commence upon completion of the
related system implementation, ratably over the applicable subscription period.
Amounts billed and/or collected prior to satisfying our revenue recognition
policy are reflected as deferred revenue.
We
recognize revenue from technology licenses once
all the following criteria for revenue recognition have been met: (1) persuasive
evidence of an agreement exists; (2) the right and ability to use the product
or
technology has been rendered; (3) the fee is fixed and determinable and not
subject to refund or adjustment; and (4) collection of the amounts due is
reasonably assured.
F-5
2.
Inventory
Inventory
consisted of the following:
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
(unaudited)
|
(audited)
|
||||||
Finished
Goods
|
$
|
178,745
|
$
|
148,804
|
|||
Materials
|
70,693
|
-
|
|||||
$
|
249,438
|
$
|
148,804
|
3.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Other
Intangible Assets
-
Other
intangible assets are comprised of the following:
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
|||||||||
Useful
Life
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||
Royalty
rights
|
5
years
|
$
|
90,000
|
$
|
90,000
|
|||||
Other
Intangibles
|
5
years
|
666,300
|
41,000
|
|||||||
Patent
and contractual rights
|
Varied
(1
|
)
|
5,556,052
|
4,634,071
|
||||||
6,312,352
|
4,765,071
|
|||||||||
Less
accumulated amortization
|
1,317,598
|
556,109
|
||||||||
Net
carrying value
|
$
|
4,994,754
|
$
|
4,208,962
|
||||||
(1)-
patent rights are amortized over their expected useful life which
is
generally the legal life of the patent. As of September 30, 2006
the
weighted average expected useful life of these assets was 6.7
years.
|
F-6
Goodwill
-
In
accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 142, "Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets" (SFAS 142), the Company performs an annual fair value test of its
recorded goodwill for its reporting units using a discounted cash flow and
capitalization of earnings approach. During the first quarter of 2006, the
Company recorded a preliminary estimate of goodwill of $942,000 associated
with
its acquisition of the assets of Plastic Printing Professionals. During the
second quarter of 2006, the Company revised its estimate of goodwill associated
with this acquisition to $685,000. As of September 30, 2006, the Company’s
goodwill of $1,397,000 consists of $81,000 attributable to the legal segment
and
$1,316,000 attributable to the document security and production segment.
The
Company plans to conduct annual impairment tests in the fourth quarter of
each
year, unless impairment indicators exist at an earlier date.
4.
Acquisition
On
February 7, 2006, the Company acquired substantially all of the assets of
Plastic Printing Professionals, Inc. ("P3") for $1.25 million in cash, 18,704
shares of the Company’s Common Stock valued at $250,000 and the assumption of
certain liabilities. The cash portion of the purchase price was paid using
the
Company’s cash on hand. P3 is a security printer specializing in plastic cards
containing security technologies. P3 has 25 full-time employees and had sales
of
approximately $2.7 million in 2005. Commencing
on February 7, 2006, the results of P3’s operations are included in the
consolidated financial statements of the Company. The Company accounted for
the
acquisition as a business combination under FASB 141 “Business Combinations”.
During the quarter ended June 30, 2006, the Company revised its allocations
from
its preliminary estimates based upon the receipt of a valuation report that
resulted in an increase in the amount allocated to acquired intangibles and
a
corresponding decrease in the amount allocated to goodwill of $225,000. The
purchase price has been allocated based on the estimated fair market value
of
the assets acquired and liabilities assumed as follows:
Accounts
receivable
|
$
|
166,000
|
||
Inventory
& pre-paid assets
|
83,000
|
|||
Fixed
assets
|
258,000
|
|||
Identified
intangible assets
|
625,000
|
|||
Goodwill
|
685,000
|
|||
Total
Assets
|
$
|
1,817,000
|
||
Liabilities
Assumed
|
$
|
(265,000
|
)
|
|
Total
Purchase Price
|
$
|
1,552,000
|
Set
forth
below is the unaudited pro forma revenue, operating loss, net loss and loss
per
share of the Company as if P3 had been acquired by the Company as of January
1,
2005:
Three
Months Ended September 30,
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30,
|
||||||||||||
2006
|
2005
|
2006
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Revenue
|
$
|
1,263,310
|
$
|
994,185
|
$
|
3,685,931
|
$
|
3,237,348
|
|||||
Operating
Loss
|
(1,208,838
|
)
|
(687,444
|
)
|
(3,448,001
|
)
|
(1,796,714
|
)
|
|||||
Net
Loss
|
(1,204,426
|
)
|
(664,141
|
)
|
(3,409,849
|
)
|
(1,750,035
|
)
|
|||||
Basic
and diluted loss per share
|
(0.09
|
)
|
(0.05
|
)
|
(0.26
|
)
|
(0.15
|
)
|
F-7
5.
Stock Based Compensation
In
December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued SFAS 123R,
Share-Based Payment (“SFAS 123R”). SFAS 123R supersedes SFAS 123, Accounting for
Stock Based Compensation, and Accounting Principles Board Opinion 25, Accounting
for Stock Issued to Employees (“APB 25) and its related implementation guidance.
On January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the provisions of SFAS 123R using
the
modified prospective transition method. Under this method, the Company is
required to record compensation expense for all stock based awards granted
after
the date of adoption and for the unvested portion of previously granted awards
that remain outstanding as of the beginning of the adoption and prior periods
have not been restated. Under SFAS 123R, compensation expense related to
stock
based payments are recorded over the requisite service period based on the
grant
date fair value of the awards.
Prior
to
the adoption of SFAS 123R, the Company accounted for employee stock options
using the intrinsic value method in accordance with APB 25. Accordingly,
no
compensation expense was recognized for stock options issued to employees
as
long as the exercise price was greater than or equal to the market value
of the
Common Stock at the date of grant. In accordance with SFAS 123, the Company
disclosed the summary of pro forma effects to reported net loss as if the
Company had elected to recognize compensation costs based on the fair value
of
the awards at the grant date.
The
Company has adopted the
2004
Employees' Stock Option Plan (the "2004 Plan") to provide for the grant of
options, restricted stock and other forms of equity to employees, including
executive officers, and consultants. A total of 1,200,000 shares of Common
Stock
are authorized to be issued under the 2004 Plan. Under the terms of the 2004
Plan, options granted thereunder may be designated as options which qualify
for
incentive stock option treatment ("ISOs") under Section 422A of the Internal
Revenue Code, or options which do not so qualify ("Non-ISOs"). The
2004
Plan is administered by the Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of
Directors. The Compensation Committee has the discretion to determine the
eligible employees to whom, and the times and the price at which, options
will
be granted; whether such options shall be ISOs or Non-ISOs; the periods during
which each option will be exercisable; and the number of shares subject to
each
option. The Compensation Committee has full authority to interpret the 2004
Plan
and to establish and amend rules and regulations relating thereto.
The
Company also adopted The Non-Executive Director Stock Option Plan (the "Director
Plan"), which provides for options for up to 100,000 shares to non-executive
directors and advisors. Under the terms of the Director Plan, an option to
purchase (a) 5,000 shares of our common stock shall be granted to each
non-executive director upon joining the Board of Directors and (b) 5,000
shares
of our common stock shall be granted to each non-executive director thereafter
on January 2nd
of each
year; provided that any non-executive director who has not served as a director
for the entire year immediately prior to January 2nd shall receive a pro
rata
number of options based on the time the director has served in such capacity
during the previous year.
The exercise price for options granted under the Director Plan is 100% of
the
fair market value of the Common Stock on the date of grant. Until otherwise
provided in the Director Plan, the exercise price of options granted under
the
Director Plan must be paid at the time of exercise, either in cash, by delivery
of shares of the common stock of the Company or by a combination of each.
The
term of each option commences on the date it is granted and unless terminated
sooner as provided in the Director Plan, expires five years from the date
of
grant. Neither the Board nor the Compensation Committee has discretion to
determine which non-executive director or advisory board member will receive
options or the number of shares subject to the option, the term of the option
or
the exercisability of the option. However, the Compensation Committee will
make
all determinations of the interpretation of the Director Plan. Options granted
under the Director Plan are not qualified for incentive stock option
treatment.
F-8
The
compensation cost that has been charged against income for options granted
under
the plans was approximately $21,000 and $63,000 for the three-month and
nine-month periods, respectively, ended September 30, 2006. The impact of
these
expenses to basic and diluted earnings per share was less than $0.01 during
those periods. The adoption of SFAS 123R did not have an impact on cash flows
from operating or financing activities. For stock options issued as non-ISO’s a
tax deduction is not allowed until the options are exercised. The amount
of this
deduction will be the difference between the fair value of the Company’s Common
Stock and the exercise price at the date of exercise. Accordingly, there
is a
deferred tax asset recorded for the tax effect of the financial statement
expense recorded. The tax effect of the income tax deduction in excess of
the
financial statement expense will be recorded as an increase to additional
paid-in capital. Due to the uncertainty of the Company’s ability to generate
sufficient taxable income in the future to utilize the tax benefits of the
options granted, the Company has recorded a valuation allowance to reduce
gross
deferred tax asset to zero. As a result for the periods ended September 30,
2006, there is no income tax expense impact from recording the fair value
of
options granted. No tax deduction is allowed for stock options issued and
exercised as ISO’s.
In
December 2005, the Company approved an
acceleration of all unvested options at that time. Pursuant to this, the
Company recorded stock based compensation expense based on the intrinsic
value
of in-the-money options and our estimate of the benefit of the modification
to
the Company's employees and officers. As of that date, our estimate of
the benefit was $78,000, which was recorded as stock based compensation expense.
As of September 30, 2006, there remained an additional $252,000 of potential
expense that would be recorded if actual forfeiture results differ from
management's estimates.
The
fair
value of each option award is estimated on the date of grant utilizing the
Black
Scholes Option Pricing Model that uses the assumptions noted in the following
table.
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
||||||
|
2006
|
2005
|
|||||
Volatility
|
42.6
|
%
|
55
|
%
|
|||
Expected
option term
|
3
years
|
4
years
|
|||||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
4.4
|
%
|
4.1
|
%
|
|||
Expected
dividend yield
|
0
|
%
|
0
|
%
|
F-9
A
summary
of the status of the options granted under the 2004 Plan and the Director
Plan,
respectively, is presented below:
2004
Employee Plan
|
Non-Executive
Director Plan
|
||||||||||||||||||
Number
of Options
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
Weighted
Average Life Remaining
|
Number
of Options
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
Weighted
Average Life Remaining
|
||||||||||||||
(years)
|
(years)
|
||||||||||||||||||
Outstanding
at December 31, 2005
|
277,000
|
8.05
|
36,250
|
5.47
|
|||||||||||||||
Granted
|
—
|
20,000
|
12.65
|
||||||||||||||||
Exercised
|
—
|
—
|
-
|
||||||||||||||||
Canceled
|
50,000
|
10.19
|
—
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||
Outstanding
at September 30, 2006:
|
227,000
|
7.58
|
56,250
|
8.02
|
|||||||||||||||
Exercisable
at September 30, 2006:
|
217,000
|
7.67
|
36,250
|
5.47
|
|||||||||||||||
Aggregate
Intrinsic Value of outstanding options at September 30, 2006
|
$
|
519,830
|
3.8
|
$
|
159,500
|
3.3
|
|||||||||||||
Aggregate
Intrinsic Value of exercisable options at September 30, 2006
|
$
|
477,400
|
3.9
|
$
|
159,500
|
2.8
|
|||||||||||||
The
weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted during the six-month
period ended September 30, 2006 was $4.24 ($2.99 during the nine-month period
ended September 30, 2005). There were no options exercised during the nine-month
periods ended September 30, 2006 or 2005, respectively.
The
following table summarizes the status of the Company’s non-vested options under
the its stock option plans:
Number of Non-vested |
Weighted-
Average
|
||||||
Shares
|
Grant
Date
|
||||||
Subject
to Options
|
Fair
Value
|
||||||
Non-vested
as of December 31, 2005
|
10,000
|
$
|
3.68
|
||||
Non-vested
granted- nine month period ended September 30, 2006
|
20,000
|
$
|
4.24
|
||||
Vested
- nine month period ended September 30, 2006
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||
Forfeited
- nine month period ended September 30, 2006
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||
Non-vested
as of September 30, 2006
|
30,000
|
$
|
4.05
|
As
of
September 30, 2006, there was approximately $25,000 of total unrecognized
compensation cost related to non-vested options granted under the Non-Executive
Director plan. That cost will be recognized over a weighted average period
of
one year. The total fair value of shares that vested during the nine-month
period ended September 30, 2006 was $0 ($450,000 during the nine-month period
ended September 30, 2005).
F-10
Pro-Forma
Stock Compensation Expense:
For
the
quarterly and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2005, the Company
applied the intrinsic value method of accounting for stock options as prescribed
by APB 25. Since all options granted during the quarterly and nine-month
periods
ended September 30, 2005 had an exercise price equal to the closing market
price of the underlying common stock on the grant date, no compensation expense
was recognized. If compensation expense had been recognized based on the
estimated fair value of each option granted in accordance with the provisions
of
SFAS 123 as amended by Statement of Financial Accounting Standard 148, our
net
loss and net loss per share would have been reduced to the following pro-forma
amounts (in thousands, except per share amounts):
September
30, 2005
|
|||||||||||||
Three
months
|
Nine
months
|
||||||||||||
ended
|
ended
|
||||||||||||
$
Amount
|
$
Per share
|
$
Amount
|
$
Per share
|
||||||||||
Net
loss, as reported
|
$
|
(678,406
|
)
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
$
|
(1,794,594
|
)
|
$
|
(0.15
|
)
|
|
Fair
value method compensation expense, net of tax
|
(224,473
|
)
|
(0.02
|
)
|
(449,693
|
)
|
(0.04
|
)
|
|||||
Net
loss, pro-forma
|
$
|
(902,879
|
)
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
$
|
(2,244,287
|
)
|
$
|
(0.19
|
)
|
Restricted
Stock-
Restricted common stock is issued for services to be rendered and may not
be
sold, transferred or pledged for such period as determined by our Compensation
Committee. Restricted stock compensation cost is measured as the stock’s fair
value based on the market price at the date of grant. The restricted shares
issued reduce the amount available under our stock option plans. We recognize
compensation cost only on restricted shares that will ultimately vest. We
estimate the number of shares that will ultimately vest at each grant date
based
on our historical experience and adjust compensation cost and the carrying
amount of unearned compensation based on changes in those estimates over
time.
Restricted stock compensation cost is recognized ratably over the requisite
service period which approximates the vesting period. An employee may not
sell
or otherwise transfer unvested shares and, in the event that employment is
terminated prior to the end of the vesting period, any unvested shares are
surrendered to us. We have no obligation to repurchase restricted stock.
On
June
26, 2006, the Company granted 65,000 in restricted stock to recently hired
employees, including 50,000 to its new President. The restricted shares vest
over 3 years beginning on the grant date. The company will recognize
compensation costs associated with these restricted shares of approximately
$700,000 over the vesting periods of which $58,000 was recognized during
the
third quarter of 2006.
The
following is a summary with respect to restricted stock outstanding at
September 30, 2006:
Weighted-
average
|
|||||||
grant-date
|
|||||||
Shares
|
fair
value per share
|
||||||
Restricted
shares outstanding, December 31, 2005
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||
Restricted
shares granted
|
65,000
|
10.77
|
|||||
Restricted
shares vested
|
—
|
—
|
|||||
Restricted
shares forfeited
|
—
|
—
|
|||||
Restricted
shares outstanding, September 30, 2006
|
65,000
|
$
|
10.77
|
F-11
6.
Stockholders Equity
Stock
Issued for Acquisition -In
February 2006, the Company issued 18,704 of its Common Stock plus additional
costs related to the acquisition of substantially all of the assets of Plastic
Printing Professionals (See Note 4). The value of the shares of Common Stock
was
determined based upon the average closing price of the shares of the Company’s
Common Stock on the American Stock Exchange on for 10 trading days immediately
prior to February 7, 2006 of $13.36 per share.
Stock
Warrants
-During
the first nine months of 2006, the Company received approximately $900,000
in
proceeds from the exercise of warrants.
On
June
16, 2006, the Company issued to International Barcode Corporation (d/b/a
Barcode
Technology)(“BTI”), a warrant to purchase 500,000 shares of the Company's common
stock, $0.02 par value per share, at a price of $10.00 per share vesting
over
approximately one year and with an expiration date of June 16, 2007. The
fair
value of the warrants amounted to $890,000 utilizing Black Scholes pricing
model. This value is being recognized as the warrants vests. During the three
months and nine months ended September 30, 2006, the Company has recognized
approximately $223,000 and $445,000, respectively, of expense related to
these
warrants. The warrants were issued in conjunction with an agreement that
provides BTI with the exclusive right to market, sell and manufacture DSS
technologies, products and processes for all security-related applications
for
government and commercial use in China.
The
following is a summary with respect to warrants outstanding at
September 30, 2006:
2006
|
|||||||
Weighted
|
|||||||
Average
|
|||||||
Exercise
|
|||||||
Warrants
|
Price
|
||||||
Warrants
outstanding at January 1, 2006
|
296,783
|
$
|
4.12
|
||||
Granted
|
500,000
|
$
|
10.00
|
||||
Exercised
|
204,597
|
$
|
4.49
|
||||
Lapsed
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||
Warrants
outstanding at September 30, 2006
|
592,186
|
$
|
8.96
|
||||
10.6
|
F-12
The
following table summarizes the warrants outstanding
and exercisable as of September 30, 2006:
Warrants
Outstanding
|
Warrants
Exercisable
|
||||||||||||||||||
Range
of Exercise Prices
|
Number
of Shares
|
|
Weighted
Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years)
|
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|
Number
of Shares
|
|
Weighted
Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years)
|
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
||||||||
$2.00-$4.99
|
59,375
|
1.5
|
$
|
2.38
|
59,375
|
1.5
|
$
|
2.38
|
|||||||||||
$5.00-$7.75
|
32,811
|
2.2
|
$
|
5.00
|
32,811
|
2.2
|
$
|
5.00
|
|||||||||||
$7.76-$10.00
|
500,000
|
0.7
|
$
|
10.00
|
250,000
|
0.7
|
$
|
10.00
|
|||||||||||
592,186 | 342,186 | ||||||||||||||||||
7.
Loss per Share
Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing net income by the
weighted-average number of common shares, outstanding for the period. Diluted
earnings per share is computed by including the number of additional shares
that
would have been outstanding if dilutive potential shares had been issued.
In
periods of losses, diluted loss per share is computed on the same basis as
basic
loss per share as the inclusion of any other potential shares outstanding
would
be anti-dilutive. As of September 30, 2006, there were 875,436 (580,969 as
of September 30, 2005) stock options and warrants outstanding with exercise
prices below the average share price for the period that would have been
included in the calculation of diluted earnings per share had the Company
generated net income.
8.
Commitments and Contingencies
On
August
1, 2005, we commenced a suit against the European Central Bank alleging patent
infringement by the European Central Bank and have claimed unspecified damages.
We brought the suit in European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg. We
alleged that all Euro banknotes in circulation infringe our European Patent
455750B1 (the “Patent”), which covers a method of incorporating an
anti-counterfeiting feature into banknotes or similar security documents
to
protect against forgeries by digital scanning and copying devices. On March
24,
2006, we received notice that the ECB has filed a separate claim in the United
Kingdom and Luxembourg patent courts (Luxembourg being the seat of the European
Court of First Instance) seeking the invalidation of the Patent.
Claims to invalidity in each of the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, France,
Spain, Germany and Austria were subsequently served on the Company. The
main basis of the ECB’s claim is the existence of prior art. A second basis is
that the scope of the Patent was extended in prosecution, which in Europe
is a
ground of invalidity. On
October 27, 2006 both parties exchanged Expert Reports in the United Kingdom
proceedings which is expected to go to trial in January 2007.
In
May
2005, the Company made an agreement with its legal counsel in charge of the
Company’s litigation with the European Central Bank (“ECB”) which capped the
fees for all matters associated with that litigation at $500,000 plus expenses,
and a $150,000 contingent payment upon a successful ruling or settlement
on the
Company’s behalf in that litigation. The Company will record the $150,000 in the
period in which the Company has determined that a successful ruling or
settlement is probable. As described above, in March 2006, the Company was
countersued by the ECB in several European national courts seeking revocation
of
the Company’s patents. Through September 30, 2006, the Company has been billed
approximately $500,000 for legal costs associated with these aforementioned
countersuits. It was the Company’s belief that the costs of defending these
countersuits would be fully covered under the litigation cap it had previously
negotiated with its legal counsel, However, given the potentially significant
costs associated with these countersuits, the Company determined that additional
reimbursements to its legal counsel was warranted. As such, on November 14,
2006
the Company entered into an agreement with its legal counsel in which the
Company will issue approximately 47,000 shares of its common stock for payment
of the approximately $500,000 of bills currently residing in accounts payable
relating to the ECB countersuits. In addition, the Company will have the
right
to pay all future legal fees incurred by its lead legal counsel related to
the
countersuits with shares of its common stock. In addition to these payments,
the
Company will be responsible for certain third party fees and expenses associated
with the countersuits. Depending of the duration of these cases and any appeals,
these third party costs may be significant and could be material to the
Company’s financial condition.
F-13
In
addition, if the ECB is successful in its claims of invalidity against the
Company’s patent, it may materially affect the Company’s financial condition,
including the potential requirement to pay all of the ECB’s legal fees
associated with the suit, and the Company’s ability to market certain of its
technology.
On
June
29, 2006, the Company received notice of favorable summary judgment from
the
State of New York Supreme Court in the case of “Frank
LaLoggia v. Document Security Systems, Inc”.
The
Court ruled in favor of the Company and dismissed all claims against the
Company. The Company will continue to pursue its counterclaim against Mr.
LaLoggia which was not dismissed by the Court.
In
addition to the foregoing, we are subject to other legal proceedings that
have
arisen in the ordinary course of business and have not been finally adjudicated.
Although there can be no assurance in this regard, in the opinion of management,
none of the legal proceedings to which we are a party, whether discussed
herein
or otherwise, will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations,
cash flows or our financial condition.
9.
Supplemental Cash Flow Information
During
the nine months ended September 30, 2006, the Company issued 18,704 shares
of
Common Stock valued at $250,000 in conjunction with the acquisition of the
assets of P3 (See Note 4).
10.
Subsequent Event
On
November 14, 2006, the Company entered into an agreement with its legal counsel
regarding the European Central Bank countersuit in which the Company will
issue
approximately 47,000 shares of its common stock for payment of approximately
$500,000 of legal bills currently residing in accounts payable. In addition,
per
the agreement, the Company has the right to pay all future legal fees
incurred by its lead legal counsel related to countersuits initiated by the
European Central Bank with shares of its common stock. Under the agreement,
the
Company will be responsible for third party fees associated with the countersuit
litigation. (See
Note 8)
F-14
11.
Segment Information
The Company's businesses are organized, managed and internally reported as
four
operating segments. Three of these operating segments, Document Security
Systems, Plastic Printing Professionals and Patrick Printing, respectively,
are
engaged in various aspects of developing and applying printing technologies
and
procedures to produce, or allow others to produce, documents with a wide
range
of features, including the Company’s patented technologies and trade secrets.
Consistent with the Company’s strategic initiative to increase its focus on
servicing the end-user of secure documents, the Company has reorganized Patrick
Printing, which was formerly considered a separate reportable segment, to
concentrate its internal printing capabilities for these end-users. While
Patrick Printing continues to offset its costs and utilize its capacity with
retail copying and printing work, the Company determined that it was appropriate
to aggregate this segment with its other document production and security
companies because of the similarities in the nature of their products and
production and sales processes and types of customers. Thus, for the purposes
of
providing segment information, these three operating segments have been
aggregated into one reportable segment in accordance with Financial Accounting
Standards Board (“FASB”) Statement No. 131- “Disclosures
about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information”.
Prior
period amounts have been reclassified to reflect the change in reporting
segments and all inter-company transactions are eliminated. A summary of
the two
segments is as follows:
Document
Security and Production
|
License,
manufacture and sale of document security technologies and secure
printed
products at its Document Security Systems, Plastic Printing Professionals
and Patrick Printing divisions. Also, includes revenues from copying
services and residual royalties from motion picture
operations.
|
Legal
Supplies
|
Sale
of specialty legal supplies to lawyers and law firms located throughout
the United States as
Legalstore.com.
|
Approximate information concerning the operations by reportable segment for
the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2005 is as follows. The
Company relies on intersegment cooperation and management does not represent
that these segments, if operated independently, would report the results
contained herein:
|
|
Document
|
|
||||||||||
Legal
|
Security
&
|
||||||||||||
3
months ended September 30, 2006:
|
Supplies
|
Production
|
Corporate
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Revenues
from external customers
|
$
|
168,000
|
$
|
1,095,000
|
$
|
-
|
1,263,000
|
||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
3,000
|
301,000
|
16,000
|
320,000
|
|||||||||
Segment
profit or (loss)
|
13,000
|
(789,000
|
)
|
(428,000
|
)
|
(1,204,000
|
)
|
||||||
3
months ended September 30, 2005:
|
|||||||||||||
Revenues
from external customers
|
$
|
122,000
|
$
|
251,000
|
$
|
-
|
373,000
|
||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
1,000
|
157,000
|
22,000
|
180,000
|
|||||||||
Segment
profit or (loss)
|
12,000
|
(394,000
|
)
|
(296,000
|
)
|
(678,000
|
)
|
|
|
Document
|
|
||||||||||
|
Legal
|
Security
&
|
|||||||||||
9
months ended September 30,
2006:
|
Supplies
|
Production
|
Corporate
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Revenues
from external customers
|
$
|
484,000
|
$
|
2,952,000
|
$
|
-
|
3,436,000
|
||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
9,000
|
847,000
|
72,000
|
928,000
|
|||||||||
Segment
profit or (loss)
|
(18,000
|
)
|
(1,933,000
|
)
|
(1,455,000
|
)
|
(3,406,000
|
)
|
|||||
9
months ended September 30, 2005:
|
|||||||||||||
Revenues
from external customers
|
$
|
381,000
|
$
|
916,000
|
$
|
-
|
1,297,000
|
||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
4,000
|
335,000
|
66,000
|
405,000
|
|||||||||
Segment
profit or (loss)
|
50,000
|
(789,000
|
)
|
(1,056,000
|
)
|
(1,795,000
|
)
|
||||||
F-15
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
Certain
statements contained herein constitute “forward-looking statements” within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “1995
Reform Act”). Document Security Systems, Inc. desires to avail itself of certain
“safe harbor” provisions of the 1995 Reform Act and is therefore including this
special note to enable us to do so. Except for the historical information
contained herein, this report contains forward-looking statements (identified
by
the words "estimate," "project," "anticipate," "plan," "expect," "intend,"
"believe," "hope," "strategy" and similar expressions), which are based on
our
current expectations and speak only as of the date made. These forward-looking
statements are subject to various risks, uncertainties and factors, including,
without limitation, those contained in our Form 10-KSB for the year ended
December 31, 2005 and those described herein that could cause actual results
to
differ materially from the results anticipated in the forward-looking
statements.
Overview
We
are a supplier of advanced optical anti-scanning, anti-counterfeiting, and
verification technologies and products for all forms of printed media. We
provide document security technology to security printers, corporations and
governments worldwide. Our technology can be used in securing sensitive and
critical documents such as currency, automobile titles, spare parts forms
for
the aerospace industry, psychological examinations, gift certificates, permits,
checks, licenses, receipts, prescription and medical forms, engineering
schematics, ID cards, labels, original music, coupons, homeland security
manuals, consumer product and pharmaceutical packaging, tickets, and school
transcripts. In addition, we sell legal supplies on the Internet at a non-core
division.
Generally,
we generate revenue from our document security and production business in
three
ways. We produce document security products for the end-user market including
pre-packaged security paper. We license our patented technology to security
printers so that they can provide their customers with anti-counterfeiting
capabilities, and finally, we design, produce and consult for customized
anti-counterfeiting solutions for corporate and government customers, including
custom documents printed on paper, plastic or various other materials or
delivered via electronic means.
Security
Paper:
Our
primary product for the end-user market is AuthentiGuard Security Paper.
AuthentiGuard Security Paper is a paper which reveals hidden warning words,
logos or images when a clear plastic viewer is placed over the paper or when
the
paper is faxed, copied, scanned or re-imaged in any form. The hidden words
appear on the duplicate copy or the computer digital file and essentially
prevent important documents from ever being counterfeited. We market and
sell
our Security Paper primarily through two major paper distributors: Boise
White
Paper and PaperlinX Limited. Since 2005, Boise markets our Security Paper
under
its Boise Beware brand name in North America, primarily through its commercial
paper sales group, and in OfficeMax and CopyMax stores. In late 2005, we
entered
into an agreement with PaperlinX to market and sell our Security Paper under
the
name SecurelinX in Europe, Australia and New Zealand. The initial orders
under
this agreement were shipped during the second quarter of 2006. In
addition, our licensee, PyroTech, has the marketing rights to manufacture
and
sell our Security Paper in the continent of Africa. We retain
the rights to sell the same Security Paper direct to end users anywhere in
the
world. Pricing for the Security Paper is determined on mark-up from cost.
1
Currently,
our Security Paper is manufactured and stored for us by a third-party printer
which has sufficient capacity to meet the foreseeable demand for this product.
We
are
seeking to increase profit margins by developing manufacturing capabilities
through strategic mergers and acquisitions that will allow us to service
larger
and a wider range of potential customers while eliminating a layer of costs
by
reducing our reliance on third-party printers.
Technology
Licensing: We
license our anti-counterfeiting technology and trade secrets through licensing
arrangements with security printers. We seek licensees that have a broad
customer base that can benefit from our technologies. Licensees generally
pay on
a usage basis royalties to us based on the revenue of each job in which our
technologies are used.
In
addition, we believe that some of our technologies are being used on an
un-authorized basis. By aggressively defending our intellectual property
rights,
we believe that we will be able to secure a potentially significant amount
of
additional and ongoing revenue by securing licensing agreements with those
persons, companies or governments that we believe are infringing our patents.
We
also anticipate that we may be required to pursue litigation in some cases
and
that we will need to spend a significant amount of money and time on these
matters.
Custom
Document Security Solutions and Production:
Our
technology portfolio allows us to create custom secure documents that are
unique
to the industry. We target end-users such as governments, agencies and
corporations which require anti-counterfeiting and authentication features
in a
wide range of documents and vital records such as driver’s licenses, birth
certificates, receipts, manuals and identification materials and corporations
creating entertainment tickets, coupons, parts tracking forms, as well as
product packaging including pharmaceutical and a wide range of consumer goods.
In
February of 2006, we acquired San Francisco-based Plastic Printing
Professionals, Inc. ("P3"), a privately held, security printer specializing
in
plastic cards containing security technologies. P3's primary focus is
manufacturing composite, laminated and surface printed cards which can include
magnetic stripes, bar codes, holograms, signature panels, invisible ink,
micro
fine printing, guilloche patterns, DNA and a patent pending watermark
technology. P3's products are marketed through an extensive dealer network
that
covers North America, Europe and South America. Its product and client list
includes the Grammy Awards, the Country Music Association awards, Super Bowl
media cards, ID cards for major airports and Latin American driver’s licenses.
During
2006, we expanded our marketing efforts to the end-user of custom secure
documents. Whereas in the past, we typically sought to license our technology
to
the printer of the end-user, we have determined that significant advantages
exist in the market if we are able to own the end-user relationship from
the
design phase through the production phase. Therefore, we have shifted our
focus
to utilize more of our internal printing capabilities towards the custom
security document market.
In
March
2006, we entered into a license with a major international bank to provide
a
technology for the Internet delivery of secure, verifiable documents that
can be
transmitted and printed over the Internet using a customized web-hosting
site
for the securitization process. This is the first application of a covert
method
we developed for producing secure documents, such as financial instruments,
at
multiple locations. The three-year agreement includes implementation and
initial
set-up fees for the bank's website, as well as annual licensing and maintenance
fees and was put into service in August of 2006.
2
Currently,
we primarily outsource the production of our custom security print orders
to
strategic printing vendors. The
acquisition of P3 marked the initial execution of our strategy to expand
our
manufacturing capabilities through acquisitions or strategic alliances in
order
to service our custom security printing business.
Legal
Supplies:
We also
own and operate Legalstore.com, an Internet company which sells legal supplies
and, documents, including security paper and products for the users of legal
documents and supplies, including the legal, medical and educational fields
.
While not a component of our core business strategy, we seek to maximize
the
revenue and profitability of this operation..
Results
of Operations for the Three and Nine Months Ended September
30, 2006
The following discussion and analysis provides information that our management
believes is relevant to an assessment and understanding of our results of
operations and financial condition. The discussion should be read in conjunction
with the financial statements and footnotes in this quarterly report and
in our
annual report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005.
The
following discussion also includes a non-GAAP financial measure which has
been
reconciled to the most comparable GAAP financial measure of net loss. Our
management believes that this performance measure is a relevant indicator
of the
Company’s financial performance.
Summary
Three
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
||||||||||||
$
|
%
change vs. 3 months ended September 30, 2005
|
$ |
%
change vs. 9 months ended September 30, 2005
|
||||||||||
Revenue,
net
|
1,264,000
|
239
|
%
|
3,436,000
|
165
|
%
|
|||||||
Costs
of revenue
|
668,000
|
257
|
%
|
1,933,000
|
188
|
%
|
|||||||
Gross
profit
|
596,000
|
220
|
%
|
1,503,000
|
140
|
%
|
|||||||
Total Operating Expenses
|
1,804,000
|
103
|
%
|
4,946,000
|
101
|
%
|
|||||||
Operating
loss
|
(1,208,000
|
)
|
72
|
%
|
(3,443,000
|
)
|
87
|
%
|
|||||
Other
income (expense):
|
|||||||||||||
Interest income
|
7,000
|
-77
|
%
|
51,000
|
-24
|
%
|
|||||||
Interest expense
|
(3,000
|
)
|
-50
|
%
|
(14,000
|
)
|
-33
|
%
|
|||||
Loss
before income taxes
|
(1,204,000
|
)
|
78
|
%
|
(3,406,000
|
)
|
90
|
%
|
|||||
Income
taxes
|
0
|
-
|
0
|
-
|
|||||||||
Net
loss
|
(1,204,000
|
)
|
78
|
%
|
(3,406,000
|
)
|
90
|
%
|
|||||
3
Revenue
For
the
three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2006, total revenue increased
239% and 165% from the same periods ended September 30, 2005, respectively.
The
increases in total revenue resulted primarily from increases in royalty revenue
from the licensing of the Company’s patented technology, and from increases in
sales of security products and documents from the Company’s acquisition during
the first quarter of 2006 of Plastic Printing Professionals, a manufacturer
of
secure plastic cards and documents.
In
addition, not reflected in the results above are deferred revenues of
approximately $596,000 which represent payments the Company has received
for
technology licenses and certain of its on-demand products for which revenue
recognition is deferred over the terms of the license or service. During
the
third quarter of 2006, the Company received $500,000 from one major technology
licensee as described below.
During
the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2006, the Company continued
its efforts to increase the market for its technologies and products by
developing sales and marketing channels by a combination of expanding its
internal sales and marketing resources and widening its list of partners
and
distributors. The following chart summarizes significant new contracts and
business development agreements entered into by the Company during 2006 that
are
expected to drive revenue growth for the remainder of 2006 and
2007:
·
|
Renewed
and extended the historical licensing agreement with R.R. Donnelley
&
Sons Company, the largest printer in North America. A three-year
contract,
the renewed agreement includes royalties on the usage of DSS's
SecureScan(tm) technology and began producing significant revenue
for the
Company during the third quarter of
2006.
|
·
|
Signed
a letter of agreement with The Ergonomic Group (EGI) for the exclusive,
limited right to use and market DSS's extensive portfolio of security
technologies in the high technology, aerospace, financial and healthcare
industries. The agreement guarantees that the Company will receive
a
minimum of $1,000,000 of which $500,000 was received in the third
quarter
of 2006 and $500,000 is due in the fourth quarter of 2006. Ergonomics
Group is a shareholder of the Company with holdings of less than
5% of the
outstanding shares of the Company.
|
·
|
Agreed
to provide TransTech Systems, Inc. the exclusive distributions
rights of
DSS technology when used for large format event identification
badges and
cards. TransTech is a leading distributor in the ID badge and access
control markets and services a network of over 700 security products
dealers throughout the United
States.
|
·
|
Signed
a licensing contract with Nampak Flexible, a division of Nampak
Limited
("Nampak") who is a leading flexible packaging manufacturer in
South
Africa. The agreement is Company's first licensing agreement with
a
packaging business and is a royalty-based contract for one-year
with
automatic annual renewals for an additional four years.
|
·
|
Signed
an exclusive marketing agreement with Assa Abloy HID Global ("HID")
to
market DSS’s select technologies to enhance the security of HID's
contactless smartcards and proximity cards. Assa Abloy HID, is
owned by
parent ASSA ABLOY (ASZAF.PK) which is headquartered in Stockholm,
Sweden.
ASSA ABLOY is the world's leading manufacturer and supplier of
locking and
security access solutions.
|
4
·
|
Signed
a two-year licensing agreement with Banknote Corporation of America
(BCA),
a major high security printer in the United States for a variety
of secure
documents, such as checks, stamps, identification.
|
·
|
Signed
licensing agreement with The Reynolds and Reynolds Company (NYSE:
REY), a
leading software and services provider for the automotive retailing
market
in the United States and Canada for the protection of checks and
forms.
|
·
|
Signed
an exclusive licensing agreement with Barcode Technology (BTI)
to market
and produce DSS's technology, both independently and in combination
with
BTI's technology in China.
|
·
|
Signed
a two-year agreement with ProdoSafe Security Solutions, Turkey's
largest
supplier of anti-counterfeiting technology. With its recently awarded
contracts, ProdoSafe will apply DSS's technology in two metropolitan
areas
in Turkey.
|
Three
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
||||||||||||
$ |
%
change vs. 3 months ended September 30, 2005
|
$ |
%
change vs. 9 months ended September 30, 2005
|
||||||||||
Revenue,
net
|
|||||||||||||
Security
Products & Printing
|
$
|
849,000
|
282
|
%
|
$
|
2,609,000
|
202
|
%
|
|||||
Royalties
|
247,000
|
782
|
%
|
343,000
|
560
|
%
|
|||||||
Legal
products
|
168,000
|
37
|
%
|
484,000
|
27
|
%
|
|||||||
Total
Revenue
|
1,264,000
|
239
|
%
|
3,436,000
|
165
|
%
|
Security
Products & Printing
For
the
three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2006, Document Security
and
Production sales increased 282% and 200%, respectively compared with the
same
periods of 2005. The increases in revenues in the category of $627,000 and
$1,724,000, respectively for the 2006 periods were primarily due to the
inclusion of $593,000 and $1,665,000, respectively, of sales from the Company’s
P3 division (“P3”), which was acquired on February 7, 2006.
Royalties
During
the third quarter of 2006 and for the nine-months ended September 30, 2006,
the
substantial increase in the Company’s royalty revenue was primarily a result of
its recent license agreements with RR Donnelly and The Ergonomics Group.
In
addition, the Company received approximately $585,000 in license royalty
pre-payments during the third quarter for which revenue recognition is deferred
over the terms of the license or service.
Legal
Products
Revenue from our legal supplies business, Legalstore.com, grew 38% and 27%
during the third quarter and first nine months of 2006, respectively, compared
with those periods of 2005. While we view our legal supplies business segment
as
a non-core part of our company, we have experienced steady growth in its
operations as it continues to expand its product catalog and customer reach
through various keyword advertising campaigns and trade shows..
5
Cost
of Sales and Gross Profit
Three
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
||||||||||||
%
change vs. 3 months ended September 30, 2005
|
%
change vs. 9 months ended September 30, 2005
|
||||||||||||
Costs
of revenue
|
|||||||||||||
Security
Products & Printing
|
$
|
582,000
|
349
|
%
|
$
|
1,667,000
|
251
|
%
|
|||||
Legal
products
|
86,000
|
50
|
%
|
266,000
|
35
|
%
|
|||||||
Total
cost of sales
|
668,000
|
257
|
%
|
1,933,000
|
188
|
%
|
|||||||
Gross
profit
|
|||||||||||||
Security
Products & Printing
|
267,000
|
189
|
%
|
942,000
|
142
|
%
|
|||||||
Royalties
|
247,000
|
782
|
%
|
343,000
|
560
|
%
|
|||||||
Legal
products
|
82,000
|
25
|
%
|
218,000
|
18
|
%
|
|||||||
Total
gross profit
|
596,000
|
220
|
%
|
1,503,000
|
140
|
%
|
Three
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
||||||||||||
%
change vs. 3 months ended September 30, 2005
|
%
change vs. 9 months ended September 30, 2005
|
||||||||||||
Gross
profit percentage:
|
47
|
%
|
-5
|
%
|
44
|
%
|
-9
|
%
|
|||||
Gross
Profit
During
the third quarter of 2006, gross profit increased 220% to $596,000 which
was
primarily the result of increases in both document security & production
profits and royalties profits. The increase in the document security and
production category during the 2006 quarter included $246,000 in gross profit
derived from the Company’s P3 division which was acquired in 2006.
During
the first nine months of 2006, the gross profit increased by 140% as compared
with the first nine months of 2005. The increase of $878,000 in gross profit
included $631,000 from P3.
The
gross
profit percentage decrease during the first nine months of 2006 reflects
the
impact of P3’s gross profit margin of approximately 37% which was consistent
with its historical gross profit margin, but is less than the document security
category’s historical profit margin. However, the gross profit of 47% realized
by the Company during the third quarter of 2006 reflects a 12% increase over
the
year to date through June 30, 2006 gross profit margin of 42% which reflects
the
positive effect of the increase in license royalty revenue earned during
the
third quarter.
6
Operating
expenses
Three
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
||||||||||||
$ |
%
change vs. 3 months ended September 30, 2005
|
$ |
%
change vs. 9 months ended September 30, 2005
|
||||||||||
Selling,
general and administrative
|
|||||||||||||
Compensation
|
$
|
541,000
|
105
|
%
|
$
|
1,434,000
|
105
|
%
|
|||||
Stock
based payments
|
311,000
|
3010
|
%
|
592,000
|
1873
|
%
|
|||||||
Professional
Fees
|
212,000
|
36
|
%
|
945,000
|
77
|
%
|
|||||||
Sales
and marketing
|
128,000
|
2
|
%
|
399,000
|
19
|
%
|
|||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
18,000
|
-18
|
%
|
74,000
|
16
|
%
|
|||||||
Other
|
224,000
|
131
|
%
|
475,000
|
60
|
%
|
|||||||
Research
and development
|
94,000
|
19
|
%
|
263,000
|
10
|
%
|
|||||||
Amortization
of intangibles
|
276,000
|
104
|
%
|
764,000
|
183
|
%
|
|||||||
Total Operating Expenses
|
1,804,000
|
103
|
%
|
4,946,000
|
101
|
%
|
Selling,
General and Administrative
The
Company’s selling, general and administrative costs increases generally reflect
increases to the size of our organization as the result of the Company’s
acquisition of P3 and increases in executive management, sales and operations
personnel integral to the company’s sales growth strategy.
SG&A
Compensation
costs
increases for non-production personnel that the Company has experienced in
2006
to date are primarily due to the addition of executive management, sales,
and
operations personnel, as well as the addition of executive and administrative
personnel at P3. Of the $277,000 and $752,000 increase in compensation expense
during the third quarter and first nine months of 2006, respectively, $147,000
and $344,000 stem from P3 which was acquired in February of 2006. The Company
believes that it has obtained appropriate levels of staffing for its near
term
forecasted business levels and that future staffing additions will be
concentrated on sales, marketing and operations to coincide with expected
revenue growth.
Stock
based payments
during
the first nine months of 2006 include approximately $445,000 of expense
recognized for the issuance of warrants to International Barcode Corporation
(d/b/a Barcode Technology) (“BTI”) in consideration for a cross-marketing
relationship that enables the Company to expedite its entry into the Chinese
market for secure documents, and $63,000 associated with annual option grants
to
the non-executive members of our Board of Directors. The Company will continue
to incur approximately $223,000 in expense per quarter for the next two quarters
associated with the grant of the BTI warrants based on the estimated value
of
the warrants on the grant date using the Black-Scholes option valuation model.
These warrants have an exercise price of $10.00 and do not include a non-cash
exercise provision. Therefore, the exercise of these warrants, if ever, would
result in the receipt of $5,000,000 by the Company.
Professional
fees
include
legal, accounting, shareholder services, investor relations, and consulting
costs. Consulting fees ($74,000 and $215,000 for three and nine month periods
ended September 30, 2006, respectively), are primarily directed towards efforts
to help the Company develop market opportunities with government and large
multinational corporations, and intellectual property management, legal fees
($53,000 and $266,000 for three and nine month periods ended September 30,
2006,
respectively) and accounting fees ($23,000 and $138,000 for three and nine
month
periods ended September 30, 2006, respectively) are generally associated
with
the Company’s corporate governance and reporting compliance requirements. In
addition, legal fees include costs associated with certain legal matters
regarding Adlertech and F. Laloggia, respectively- (See Part
II -Legal Proceedings).
These
legal costs do not include costs associated with the application and defense
of
our patents which the company capitalizes and amortizes over the expected
life
of the patent. (See Part
I -Financial Information -Note 8)
7
Sales
and marketing
expenses
increases in 2006 have been the result of investments in resources to expand
its
sales and marketing efforts in order to increase customer awareness and
understanding of the Company technologies and solutions. The Company expects
to
continue to increase its sales and marketing efforts in correlation with
expected revenue growth.
Other
expenses
are
primarily rent and utilities, office supplies, IT support, and insurance
costs.
Increases in 2006 reflect costs associated with a larger organization including
higher rent and utility costs associated with the addition of P3.
Research
and Development
We
continue to invest in research and development to improve our existing
technologies and develop new technologies that will enhance our position
in the
document security market. Research and development costs consist primarily
of
compensation costs for our four persons who spend all or at least half of
their
time on developing new technologies or developing new uses for our existing
technology. In addition, we incur costs for the use of third party printers’
facilities to test our technologies on equipment that we do not have access
to
internally. We expect that our research and development costs will continue
at
current levels for the foreseeable future.
Amortization
of intangibles
Commencing
in the second quarter of 2005, we began to amortize the costs associated
with
the patents that we acquired in 2005 and the legal costs associated with
the
development and defense of our patents, including the costs associated with
our
suit against the European Central Bank for patent infringement. In addition,
we
amortize our acquired intangibles from business combinations. A significant
portion of these assets were acquired by the issuance of equity in the company.
Our amortizable asset base at September 30, 2006 was approximately $6.5 million
and will generate approximately $900,000 in annual amortization
expense during the next 6 years. The Company reviews these assets for
impairment annually. If an impairment, such as unfavorable ruling in the
Company’s patent infringement lawsuits or an assessment of non-commerciability
of certain of its patents, then the Company would write-off a portion of
these
assets, which could be a significant expense in the period
incurred.
In
addition, the Company has $1,397,000 in goodwill derived from acquisitions.
Goodwill is not amortized, but could become a component of expense if an
impairment is determined.
8
Net
loss and loss per share
Three
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
||||||||||||
$ |
%
change vs. 3 months ended September 30, 2005
|
$ |
%
change vs. 9 months ended September 30, 2005
|
||||||||||
Net
loss
|
(1,204,000
|
)
|
78
|
%
|
(3,406,000
|
)
|
90
|
%
|
|||||
Net
loss per share, basic and diluted
|
(0.09
|
)
|
69
|
%
|
(0.26
|
)
|
75
|
%
|
|||||
Weighted
average common shares outstanding, basic and diluted
|
12,920,315
|
5
|
%
|
12,868,887
|
9
|
%
|
During
the third quarter and first nine months of 2006, the Company continued to
experience net losses. While we have experienced growth in our sales and
gross
profits, these increases have not offset our increases in our operating
expenses, especially significant increases in amortization expense, stock
based
compensation, compensation and professional fees.
Our
basic
and diluted loss per share has increased due to the increased dollar value
of
our loss partially offset by an increase in the weighted average common shares
outstanding in 2006 compared to 2005. Our shares have increased as we have
issued our common shares for warrants exercised, for an acquisition and for
the
purchase of patent assets.
Non-GAAP
Financial Performance Measure
The
following adjusted Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization
and non-cash stock compensation expense (“Adjusted EBITDA”) is presented because
the Company’s management believes it to be a relevant measure of the performance
of the Company. The Adjusted EBITDA is used by the Company’s management to
measure its core operating performance without certain non-cash expenditures.
The reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net loss, the most comparable GAAP
measure is presented below.
Adjusted
EBITDA
Three
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
Nine
Months Ended September 30,2006
|
||||||||||||
$ |
%
change vs. 3 months ended September 30, 2005
|
$ |
%
change vs. 9 months ended September 30, 2005
|
||||||||||
Net
Loss
|
$
|
(1,204,000
|
)
|
78
|
%
|
$
|
(3,405,000
|
)
|
90
|
%
|
|||
Add
back:
|
|||||||||||||
Depreciation
|
45,000
|
0
|
%
|
163,000
|
21
|
%
|
|||||||
Amortization
of Intangibles
|
276,000
|
104
|
%
|
764,000
|
183
|
%
|
|||||||
Stock
based payments
|
311,000
|
3010
|
%
|
592,000
|
1873
|
%
|
|||||||
Interest
Income
|
(7,000
|
)
|
-77
|
%
|
(51,000
|
)
|
-24
|
%
|
|||||
Interest
Expense
|
3,000
|
-50
|
%
|
14,000
|
-33
|
%
|
|||||||
Income
Taxes
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||
Adjusted
EBITDA
|
(576,000
|
)
|
13
|
%
|
(1,923,000
|
)
|
37
|
%
|
As
described above, Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP measurement of financial
performance that the Company believes is relevant to the understanding of
the
Company’s financial results. While net loss increased 78% and 90%, respectively,
during the third quarter and nine months ended September 30, 2006, Adjusted
EBITDA deficits increased only 13% and 37%, respectively, for the same periods.
These results reflect that the increases in sales and gross profits have
outpaced increases in the Company’s core operating expenses, (core operating
expenses are compensation, professional fees, sales and marketing, other
and
research and development costs) which increased 65% and 68%, respectively,
during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2006 compared to 2005
levels.
9
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
The
Company’s cash flows and other key indicators of liquidity are summarized as
follows:
Nine
Months Ended
|
||||||||||
September
30,
|
September
30,
|
|||||||||
2006
|
2005
|
% | ||||||||
(unaudited)
|
(unaudited)
|
Change
|
||||||||
Cash
flows from:
|
||||||||||
Operating
activities
|
$
|
(1,496,000
|
)
|
$
|
(1,217,000
|
)
|
-23
|
%
|
||
Investing
activities
|
(1,833,000
|
)
|
(269,000
|
)
|
-581
|
%
|
||||
Financing
activities
|
896,000
|
2,548,000
|
-65
|
%
|
||||||
Working
capital (a)
|
456,000
|
3,648,000
|
-88
|
%
|
||||||
Current
ratio (a)
|
1.21
|
x
|
5.32
|
x
|
-77
|
%
|
During
the third quarter of 2006, the Company’s significantly reduced its use of cash
for operations to a breakeven level. The significant improvement reflects
the
favorable impact of a $500,000 licensing revenue prepayment received during
the
quarter and also reflects increases in revenue and gross profits that have
outpaced core operating expenses as described above. The Company expects
that
due to recent license agreements and the expected continued revenue growth
that
the Company will continue to experience improvement in it operating cash
flows
during the remainder of 2006 and into 2007.
During
2006, the Company has used significant amount of its cash for the acquisition
of
P3, a producer of plastic printed cards in San Francisco, California and
to
invest in its patent portfolio, including the payment of legal costs associated
with patent applications and the defense of our patents, which includes payments
to cover third party experts fees and other fees associated with the Company’s
case with the European Central Bank.
During
its early stages of development, the Company has benefited by its ability
to use
its common stock to pay for investments in patents and contractual rights
which
we may not have otherwise been able to obtain had we been required to pay
in
cash. The use of equity for investments allowed us to retain cash needed
for
operations during the early stages of our business without sacrificing the
investments needed to secure our competitiveness in the future. As the Company
grows and emerges from the early stages of its development and achieves
consistent cash flows from operations, it expects it will be able to finance
a
larger portion of its investments with its own cash resources.
10
During
2006 and 2005, the Company has partially offset its uses of cash for operations
and investments with cash received from our warrant holders who paid
approximately $900,000 $2,566,000, respectively, from the exercise of warrants.
During the third quarter of 2006, the Company paid off a term loan of $189,000
that released $240,000 of cash that was restricted as collateral for the
loan.
As of September 30, 2006, the Company has approximately 342,000 warrants
outstanding and exercisable that, if exercised, would produce approximately
$2.8
million in cash proceeds to the Company and which would significantly improve
the Company’s cash position.
At
September 30, 2006, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$1,520,000. The Company’s working capital as was approximately $456,000 which
was 88% lower than working capital at September 30, 2005. The Company’s working
capital position is adversely affected by approximately $525,000 in accounts
payable that is related to legal costs associated with the countersuits by
the
European Central Bank in response to our lawsuit with the European Central
Bank.
In November, 2006, the Company agreed to issue shares of its common stock
to pay
for the $525,000. As a result, the Company’s working capital position after
taking into account this transaction would have been approximately $1,000,000
as
of September 30, 2006. (See Item
1- Financial Statements -Note 8).
The
Company’s liquidity could be affected if the Company is not successful in its
infringement lawsuit against the European Central Bank, or the countersuit
for
validity made by the European Central Bank against the Company. As discussed
above (Item
1- Financial Statements -Note 8)
due to
the potential require that the Company pay a significant portion of the ECB’s
legal costs upon a negative ruling. The Company estimates that these costs
could
be substantial and the payment of these amounts could adversely affect the
Company’s financial position and would likely require the Company to raise
additional funds, which may not be on terms favorable to the
Company.
Furthermore,
in order to support our existing and proposed operations, we may need additional
financing. We currently have outstanding, exercisable warrants to purchase
our
common stock with exercise prices below the current market price as of November
1, 2006 that can generate approximately $305,000 in cash financing for the
Company. There is no assurance that all or any of the warrants will be
exercised.
We
mitigate our foreign currency risks principally by contracting primarily
in U.S.
dollars. For the nine months ended September 30, 2006, all of our billings,
were denominated in our functional currency, which is the U.S. dollar.
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures.
Our
management, with the participation of our principal executive officer and
principal accounting officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under
the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)), as of the end
of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Based on that
evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal accounting officer
have concluded that as of that date, our disclosure controls and procedures
were
effective to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be
disclosed in reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded,
processed, summarized and reported with the time periods specified in the
SEC’s
rules and forms, and to provide reasonable assurance that information required
to be disclosed by the Corporation in such reports is accumulated and
communicated to the Corporation’s management, including its principal executive
officer and principal accounting officer, as appropriate to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosure.
11
During
the quarter ended September 30, 2006, the Company implemented an ERP (Enterprise
Reporting Program) system to streamline its accounting and sales reporting
capabilities and to incorporate the daily activities of its newly acquired
P3
division. The program went live on July 1, 2006 and management expects the
system will materially affect the Corporation’s internal controls over financial
reporting, especially in regards to controls related to its newly acquired
P3
division. Specifically, the new system will eliminate redundant controls
due to
the consolidation of subsidiary ledgers and the cash disbursements and cash
receipts processes. There were no other changes in the Corporation’s “internal
control over financial reporting” (as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(f)
under the Exchange Act) that occurred during the quarter ended September
30,
2006, that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting.
OTHER
INFORMATION
There
were no significant developments during the first nine months of 2006 in
connection with our litigation against Adler Technologies and Andrew McTagger.
This litigation is described in our Form 10-KSB Annual Report for the year
ended
December 31, 2005.
On
June
29, 2006, Document Security Systems, Inc. the Supreme Court of the State
of New
York (the “Court”) ruled in favor of DSS’s motion for summary judgment in the
case of “Frank
LaLoggia v. Document Security Systems, Inc”.
In its
ruling, the Court dismissed all of Mr. LaLoggia’s claims against DSS. DSS will
continue to pursue its counterclaim against Mr. LaLoggia. This litigation
is
described in our Form 10-KSB Annual Report for the year ended December 31,
2005.
On
August
1, 2005, we commenced a suit against the European Central Bank alleging patent
infringement by the European Central Bank and have claimed unspecified damages.
We brought the suit in European Court of First Instance in Luxembourg. We
alleged that all Euro banknotes in circulation infringe our European Patent
455750B1, which covers a method of incorporating an anti-counterfeiting feature
into banknotes or similar security documents to protect against forgeries
by
digital scanning and copying devices. We will seek all remedies available
to us
under the law. In November 2005, the European Central Bank filed its answer
to
our complaint asserting mostly procedural and jurisdictional arguments. The
ECB
contended that it could not be sued for patent infringement, but rather each
individual country that comprises the ECB should be sued on an individual
nation-by-nation basis. We responded to the European Central Bank’s answer in
late December 2005. On March 24, 2006, we received notice that the ECB has
filed
a separate claim in the United Kingdom and Luxembourg patent courts (Luxembourg
being the seat of the European Court of First Instance) seeking the
invalidation of the Patent. Claims to invalidity in each of the
Netherlands, Belgium, France, Spain, Germany, and Austria were subsequently
served. The main basis of the ECB’s claim is the existence of prior art. A
second basis is that the scope of the Patent was extended in prosecution
which
in Europe is a ground of invalidity. If
the
ECB is successful, it may materially affect us, our financial condition,
and our
ability to market certain technology. On October 27, 2006 both parties exchanged
Expert Reports in the United Kingdom proceedings which is expected to go
to
trial in January 2007.
12
In
addition to the foregoing, we are subject to other legal proceedings that
have
arisen in the ordinary course of business and have not been finally adjudicated.
Although there can be no assurance in this regard, in the opinion of management,
none of the legal proceedings to which we are a party, whether discussed
herein
or otherwise, will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations,
cash flows or our financial condition.
ITEM
1a - RISK FACTORS
An investment in our securities is subject to numerous risks, including the
Risk
Factors described below. Our business, operating results or financial condition
could be materially adversely affected by any of the following risks. The
risks
described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks we are not
presently aware of or that we currently believe are immaterial may also
materially affect our business. The trading price of our Common Stock could
decline due to any of these risks. In assessing these risks, you should also
refer to the other information contained or incorporated by reference in
this
Form 10-Q, including our financial statements and related notes.
We
have a limited operating history with our business model, which limits the
information available to you to evaluate our
business.
Since
our
inception in 1984, we have accumulated deficits from historical operations
of
approximately $15,800,000 at September 30, 2006. In 2002, we changed our
business model and chose to strategically focus on becoming a developer and
marketer of secure technologies for all forms of print media. We have continued
to incur losses since we began our new business model. Also, we have limited
operating and financial information relating to this new business to evaluate
our performance and future prospects. Due to the change in our business model,
we do not view our historical financials as being a good indication of our
future. We face the risks and difficulties of a company going into a new
business including the uncertainties of market acceptance, competition, cost
increases and delays in achieving business objectives. There can be no assurance
that we will succeed in addressing any or all of these risks, and the failure
to
do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition
and operating results.
Current
litigation may affect our technology rights and plan of
operation.
On
August
1, 2005, we filed a patent infringement suit in the European Court of First
Instance against the European Central Bank (“ECB”) alleging that the Euro
banknotes infringe our European Patent No 0455750B1 (the “Patent”). On
October 20, 2005, the ECB challenged the venue of the lawsuit to which we
formally responded to the court in December, 2005. The ECB contended that
it could not be sued for patent infringement, but rather each individual
country
that comprises the ECB should be sued on an individual nation-by-nation basis.
On March 24, 2006, we received notice that the ECB has filed a separate counter
claim in the United Kingdom and Luxembourg patent courts (Luxembourg being
the
seat of the European Court of First Instance) seeking the invalidation of
the Patent. Claims to invalidity in each of the Netherlands, Belgium,
France, Spain, Germany and Austria were subsequently served. The main
basis of the ECB’s claim is the existence of prior art. A second basis is that
the scope of the Patent was extended in prosecution which in Europe is a
ground
of invalidity. If the ECB is successful, it may materially affect us, our
financial condition, and our ability to market certain technology. For more
information regarding this litigation see Item 1- Legal
Proceedings.
13
On
January 31, 2003, we commenced an action, unrelated to the above ECB litigation,
entitled New
Sky Communications, Inc., As Successor-In-Interest To Thomas M. Wicker, Thomas
M.Wicker Enterprises, Inc. And Document Security Consultants V. Adler
Technologies, Inc. N/K/A Adlertech International, Inc. And Andrew Mctaggert
(United States District Court, Western District Of New York Case
No.03-Cv-6044t(F)) regarding
certain intellectual property in which our company has an interest. We commenced
this action alleging various causes of action against Adler Technologies,
Inc.
and Andrew McTaggert for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith
and fair dealing and various business torts. Adler distributes and supplies
anti-counterfeit currency devices and McTaggert is a principal of, and the
primary contact at, Adler. Adler had entered into several agreements with
Thomas
M. Wicker Enterprises and Document Security Consultants, both of which we
acquired in 2002. These agreements, generally, authorized Adler to manufacture
in Canada our “Checkmate®”
patented system for verifying the authenticity of currency and documents.
Other
agreements were entered into between the parties and Thomas Wicker regarding
other technology owned by Wicker and assigned to us including
“Archangel,” an anti-copy technology, and “Blockade,” which creates a wave
pattern on documents when they are reproduced or scanned. It is our contention
that Adler has breached these agreements, failed to make an appropriate
accounting, and may have exceeded the scope of its license. Adler has denied
the
material allegations of the complaint and has counterclaimed against our
company, claiming Adler owns or co-owns or has a license to use certain
technologies of ours, including several U.S. patents. If Adler is successful,
it
may materially affect us, our financial condition, and our ability to market
certain technology.
In
addition to the foregoing, we are subject to other legal proceedings that
have
arisen in the ordinary course of business and have not been finally adjudicated.
Although there can be no assurance in this regard, in the opinion of management,
none of the legal proceedings to which we are a party, whether discussed
herein
or otherwise, will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations,
cash flows or our financial condition.
If
we lose our current infringement litigation we may be liable for significant
legal costs of our counterparts.
We
have
been able to mitigate the cash outlays that we have been required to make
for
legal costs of our current infringement litigation against the European Central
Bank by negotiating legal fee caps and using shares of our common stock for
payments. However, if we receive an adverse ruling in any of our infringement
or
related cases against the European Central Bank, we will likely be responsible
for a large portion of the legal costs that were expended by the European
Central Bank which would likely be significant. The payment of these amounts
could adversely affect the Company’s financial position and would likely require
the Company to raise additional funds, which may not be on terms favorable
to
the Company.
14
If
we are unable to adequately protect our intellectual property, our competitive
advantage may disappear.
Our
success will be determined in part by our ability to obtain United States
and
foreign patent protection for our technology and to preserve our trade secrets.
Because of the substantial length of time and expense associated with developing
new document security technology, we place considerable importance on patent
and
trade secret protection. Our ability to compete and the ability of our business
to grow could suffer if these rights are not adequately protected. There
can be
no assurance that our patent applications will result in patents being issued
or
that current or additional patents will afford protection against competitors.
We also rely on trade secrets that are not patented. No guarantee can be
given
that others will not independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary
information or techniques, or otherwise gain access to our proprietary
technology.
We
may face intellectual property infringement or other claims against us, our
customers, or our intellectual property rights that could be costly to defend
and result in our loss of significant rights.
Although
we have received U.S. Patents and a European Patent with respect to certain
technologies of ours, there can be no assurance that these patents will afford
us any meaningful protection. We intend to rely primarily on a combination
of
patent protection, trade secrets, technical measures, copyright protection
and
nondisclosure agreements with our employees to establish and protect the
ideas,
concepts and documentation of software and trade secrets developed by us.
Such
methods may not afford complete protection, and there can be no assurance
that
third parties will not independently develop such technology or obtain access
to
the software we have developed. Although we believe that our use of the
technology and products we developed and other trade secrets used in our
operations does not infringe upon the rights of others, our use of the
technology and trade secrets we developed may infringe upon the patents or
intellectual property rights of others. In the event of infringement, we
could,
under certain circumstances, be required to obtain a license or modify aspects
of the technology and trade secrets we developed or refrain from using same.
We
may not have the necessary financial resources to defend any infringement
claim
made against us or be able to successfully terminate any infringement in
a
timely manner, upon acceptable terms and conditions or at all. Failure to
do any
of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on us. Moreover, if
the
patents, technology or trade secrets we developed or use in our business
are
deemed to infringe upon the rights of others, we could, under certain
circumstances, become liable for damages, which could have a material adverse
effect on us. As we continue to market our products, we could encounter patent
barriers that are not known today. A patent search will not disclose
applications that are currently pending in the United States Patent Office;
and
there may be one or more such pending applications that would take precedence
over our applications.
Furthermore,
since the date of invention (and not the date of application) governs under
U.S.
patent law, future applications could be filed by another party, which would
preempt our position. While we have taken and continue to take steps to become
aware of related technical developments, there can be no assurance that we
will
not encounter an unfavorable patent situation. Other parties may assert
intellectual property infringement claims against us or our customers, and
our
products may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties.
Other
parties may also assert that our intellectual property rights are invalid,
which
could result in significant expenditures by us to refute such assertions.
If we
become involved in litigation, we could lose our proprietary rights, be subject
to damages and incur substantial unexpected operating expenses. Intellectual
property litigation is expensive and time-consuming, even if the claims are
subsequently proven unfounded, and could divert management's attention from
our
business. If there is a successful claim of infringement, we may not be able
to
develop non-infringing technology or enter into royalty or license agreements
on
acceptable terms, if at all. If we are unsuccessful in defending claims that
our
intellectual property rights are invalid, we may not be able to enter into
royalty or license agreements on acceptable terms, if at all. This could
prohibit us from providing our products and services to customers.
15
If
our products and services do not achieve market acceptance, we may not achieve
our revenue and net income goals in the time prescribed or at
all.
We
are at
the early stage of introducing our document security technology and products
to
the market. If we are unable to operate our business as contemplated by our
business model or if the assumptions underlying our business model prove
to be
unfounded, we could fail to achieve our revenue and net income goals within
the
time we have projected, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect
on
our business. As a result, the value of your investment could be significantly
reduced or completely lost.
We
cannot
assure you that a sufficient number of such companies will demand our products
or services or other document security products. In addition, we cannot predict
the rate of market's acceptance of our document security solutions. Failure
to
maintain a significant customer base may have a material adverse effect on
our
business.
The
results of our research and development efforts are uncertain and there can
be
no assurance of the commercial success of our products.
We
believe that we will need to continue to incur research and development
expenditures to remain competitive. The products we currently are developing
or
may develop in the future may not be technologically successful. In addition,
the length of our product development cycle may be greater than we originally
expect and we may experience delays in future product development. If our
resulting products are not technologically successful, they may not achieve
market acceptance or compete effectively with our competitors'
products.
Changes
in document security technology and standards could render our applications
and
services obsolete.
The
market for document security products, applications, and services is fast
moving
and evolving. Identification and authentication technology is constantly
changing as we and our competitors introduce new products, applications,
and
services, and retire old ones as customer requirements quickly develop and
change. In addition, the standards for document security are continuing to
evolve. If any segments of our market adopt technologies or standards that
are
inconsistent with our applications and technology, sales to those market
segments could decline.
The
market in which we operate is highly competitive, and we may not be able
to
compete effectively, especially against established industry competitors
with
greater market presence and financial resources.
Our
market is highly competitive and characterized by rapid technological change
and
product innovations. Our competitors may have advantages over us because
of
their longer operating histories, more established products, greater name
recognition, larger customer bases, and greater financial, technical and
marketing resources. As a result, they may be able to adapt more quickly
to new
or emerging technologies and changes in customer requirements, and devote
greater resources to the promotion and sale of their products. Competition
may
also force us to decrease the price of our products and services. We cannot
assure you that we will be successful in developing and introducing new
technology on a timely basis, new products with enhanced features, or that
these
products, if introduced, will enable us to establish selling prices and gross
margins at profitable levels. Although several potential competitors have
expressed an interest to us in forming marketing alliances, there can be
no
assurance that we will undertake such efforts or if undertaken, such efforts
will prove profitable.
16
Our
growth strategy depends, in part, on our acquiring complementary businesses
and
assets and expanding our existing operations to include manufacturing
capabilities, which we may be unable to do.
Our
growth strategy is based, in part, on our ability to acquire businesses and
assets that are complimentary to our existing operations and expanding our
operations to include manufacturing capabilities. We may also seek to acquire
other businesses. The success of this acquisition strategy will depend, in
part,
on our ability to accomplish the following:
·
|
identify
suitable businesses or assets to buy;
|
·
|
complete
the purchase of those businesses on terms acceptable to us;
|
·
|
complete
the acquisition in the time frame we expect;
and
|
·
|
improve
the results of operations of the businesses that we buy and successfully
integrate their operations into our
own.
|
There
can
be no assurance that we will be successful in pursuing any or all of these
steps. Our failure to implement our acquisition strategy could have an adverse
effect on other aspects of our business strategy and our business in general.
We
may not be able to find appropriate acquisition candidates, acquire those
candidates that we find or integrate acquired businesses effectively or
profitably.
Our
acquisition program and strategy may lead us to contemplate acquisitions
of
companies in bankruptcy, which entail additional risks and uncertainties.
Such
risks and uncertainties include, without limitation, that, before assets
may be
acquired, customers may leave in search of more stable providers and vendors
may
terminate key relationships. Also, assets are generally acquired on an “as is”
basis, with no recourse to the seller if the assets are not as valuable as
may
be represented. Finally, while bankrupt companies may be acquired for
comparatively little money, the cost of continuing the operations may
significantly exceed expectations.
We
have
in the past used, and may continue to use, our Common Stock as payment for
all
or a portion of the purchase price for acquisitions. If we issue significant
amounts of our Common Stock for such acquisitions, this could result in
substantial dilution of the equity interests of our stockholders.
If
we fail to retain our key personnel and attract and retain additional qualified
personnel, we might not be able to pursue our growth
strategy.
Our
future success depends upon the continued service of our executive officers
and
other key sales and research personnel who possess longstanding industry
relationships and technical knowledge of our products and operations. The
loss
of any of our key employees, in particular, Patrick White, our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer; Peter Ettinger, our President; Thomas
Wicker, our Vice-President of Research and Development; and David Wicker,
our
Vice-President of Operations, could negatively impact our ability to pursue
our
growth strategy and conduct operations. Although we believe that our
relationship with these individuals is positive, there can be no assurance
that
the services of these individuals will continue to be available to us in
the
future. We have extended our employment agreements with Patrick White to
June
2009. We have also extended our employment agreements with Thomas Wicker
and
David Wicker to June 2007. There can be no assurance that these persons will
continue to agree to be employed by us after such dates. Our employment
agreement with Peter Ettinger has an expiration date of June, 2009.
17
We
intend
to hire a Chief Financial Officer for our company and believe that our ability
to obtain a qualified Chief Financial Officer is material to our future success.
We also must continue to hire other highly qualified individuals. Our failure
to
attract, train and retain management and technical personnel could adversely
affect our company's ability to grow and to develop new products or product
enhancements now and in the future.
If
we do not successfully expand our sales force, we may be unable to increase
our
revenues.
We
must
expand the size of our marketing activities and sales force to increase
revenues. We continue to evaluate various methods of expanding our marketing
activities, including the use of outside marketing consultants and
representatives and expanding our in-house marketing capabilities. Going
forward, we anticipate an increasing percentage of our revenues to come from
the
licensing of our newer technologies, where profit margins are significantly
higher than those provided by Security Paper. If we are unable to hire or
retain
qualified sales personnel, if newly hired personnel fail to develop the
necessary skills to be productive, or if they reach productivity more slowly
than anticipated, our ability to increase our revenues and grow could be
compromised. The challenge of attracting, training and retaining qualified
candidates may make it difficult to meet our sales growth targets. Further,
we
may not generate sufficient sales to offset the increased expense resulting
from
expanding our sales force or we may be unable to manage a larger sales
force.
Future
growth in our business could make it difficult to manage our
resources.
Our
anticipated business expansion could place a significant strain on our
management, administrative and financial resources. Significant growth in
our
business may require us to implement additional operating, product development
and financial controls, improve coordination among marketing, product
development and finance functions, increase capital expenditures and hire
additional personnel. There can be no assurance that we will be able to
successfully manage any substantial expansion of our business, including
attracting and retaining qualified personnel. Any failure to properly manage
our
future growth could negatively impact our business and operating
results.
We
cannot predict our future capital needs and we may not be able to secure
additional financing.
We
may
need to raise additional funds in the future to fund more aggressive expansion
of our business, complete the development, testing and marketing of our
products, or make strategic acquisitions or investments. We may require
additional equity or debt financings, collaborative arrangements with corporate
partners or funds from other sources for these purposes. No assurance can
be
given that these funds will be available for us to finance our development
on
acceptable terms, if at all. Such additional financings may involve substantial
dilution of our stockholders or may require that we relinquish rights to
certain
of our technologies or products. In addition, we may experience operational
difficulties and delays due to working capital restrictions. If adequate
funds
are not available from operations or additional sources of financing, we
may
have to delay or scale back our growth plans.
18
Risks
Related to Our Stock
Provisions
of our certificate of incorporation and agreements could delay or prevent
a
change in control of our company.
Certain
provisions of our certificate of incorporation may discourage, delay, or
prevent
a merger or acquisition that a shareholder may consider favorable. These
provisions include:
·
|
the
authority of the Board of Directors to issue preferred stock;
and
|
·
|
a
prohibition on cumulative voting in the election of directors.
|
We
have a large number of authorized but unissued shares of common stock, which
our
management may issue without further stockholder approval, thereby causing
dilution of your holdings of our common stock.
As
of
September 30, 2006, there are 186,132,575 million shares of authorized but
unissued shares of our common stock. Our management will continue to have
broad
discretion to issue shares of our common stock in a range of transactions,
including capital-raising transactions, mergers, acquisitions, for anti-takeover
purposes, and in other transactions, without obtaining stockholder approval,
unless stockholder approval is required for a particular transaction under
the
rules of the American Stock Exchange, New York law, or other applicable laws.
We
currently have no specific plans to issue shares of our common stock for
any
purpose. However, if our management determines to issue shares of our common
stock from the large pool of such authorized but unissued shares for any
purpose
in the future without obtaining stockholder approval, your ownership position
would be diluted without your further ability to vote on that transaction.
The
exercise of our outstanding options and warrants may depress our stock price.
As
of
September 30, 2006, there were outstanding stock options and warrants to
purchase an aggregate of 875,436 shares of our Common Stock at exercise prices
ranging from $2.00 to $12.65 per share, most of which are immediately
exercisable. To the extent that these securities are exercised, dilution
to our
shareholders will occur. Moreover, the terms upon which we will be able to
obtain additional equity capital may be adversely affected, since the holders
of
these securities can be expected to exercise or convert them at a time when
we
would, in all likelihood, be able to obtain any needed capital on terms more
favorable to us than the exercise and conversion terms provided by those
securities.
Sales
of
these shares in the public market, or the perception that future sales of
these
shares could occur, could have the effect of lowering the market price of
our
common stock below current levels and make it more difficult for us and our
shareholders to sell our equity securities in the future.
Sale
or
the availability for sale of shares of common stock by stockholders could
cause
the market price of our common stock to decline and could impair our ability
to
raise capital through an offering of additional equity securities.
19
We
do not intend to pay cash dividends.
We
do not
intend to declare or pay cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable
future. We anticipate that we will retain any earnings and other cash resources
for investment in our business. The payment of dividends on our common stock
is
subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on our
operations, financial position, financial requirements, general business
conditions, restrictions imposed by financing arrangements, if any, legal
restrictions on the payment of dividends and other factors that our Board
of
Directors deems relevant.
On
February 7, 2006, the Company issued 18,704 shares of the Company’s Common Stock
valued at $250,000 in connection with an acquisition. The shares issued in
the
transaction were not registered under the Securities Act of 1933.
We did not purchase any shares of our common stock during the nine months
ended
September 30, 2006.
None
ITEM
5 - OTHER INFORMATION
None
The
Exhibits listed below designated by an * are incorporated by reference to
the
filings by Document Security Systems, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933
or
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as indicated. All other exhibits
are
filed herewith.
(a) Exhibits
Item 3.1 |
Articles
of Organization, as amended (incorporated by reference to exhibit
3.1 to
the Company's Registration Statements No. 2-98684-NY on Form
S-18).*
|
Item 3.2 |
By-laws,
as amended (incorporation by reference to exhibit 3.2 to the
Company's
Registration Statement No. 2-98684-NY on Form
S-18).*
|
Item 31.1 | Certifications of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act |
Item 31.2 | Certifications of Principal Accounting Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act |
Item 32.1 | Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act |
Item 32.2 | Certification of principal Accounting Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act |
20
In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant caused
this report on Form 10-Q to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
DOCUMENT
SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC.
|
||
|
|
|
November
14, 2006
|
By: | /s/ Patrick White |
Patrick White |
||
President, Chief Executive Officer and | ||
Acting
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
November
14, 2006
|
By: | /s/ Philip Jones |
Philip Jones |
||
Controller/Principal
Accounting Officer
|
22