GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS INC - Quarter Report: 2018 June (Form 10-Q)
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
☑
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2018
or
☐
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
For the Transition Period from _________ to _________
Commission file number: 000-26361
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
New Jersey
|
|
22-3392051
|
(State
or other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or
Organization)
|
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
777 South Flagler Drive, Suite 800 West Tower, West Palm Beach,
FL
|
|
33401
|
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices)
|
|
(Zip
Code)
|
(561) 515-6163
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
N/A
(Former
name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last
report)
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such
shorter period that the registrant was required to file such
reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes ☑ No ☐
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically
and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive
Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405
of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☐ No
☑
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer,
an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a small reporting
company. See the definitions of “large accelerated
filer,” “accelerated filer,” a “smaller
reporting company” and an “emerging growth
company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large
accelerated filer
|
☐
|
Accelerated
filer
|
☐
|
Non-accelerated
filer
|
☐
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Smaller
reporting company
|
☑
|
|
|
Emerging Growth
company
|
☐
|
If an
emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant
has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying
with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided
pursuant to Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act:
☐
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined
in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No
☑
As of
August 14, 2018, there were 559,084,905 shares of the
registrant’s common stock outstanding
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
FORM 10-Q
FOR THE THREE AND SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
Page
|
|
|
PART I. FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
ITEM
1. Financial
Statements
|
3
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2018 (unaudited) and
December 31, 2017
|
3
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Three and Six Months
Ended June 30, 2018 and 2017 (unaudited)
|
4
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Six Months Ended June
30, 2018 and 2017 (unaudited)
|
5
|
|
|
Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited)
|
6
|
|
|
ITEM
2. Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
|
19
|
|
|
ITEM
3. Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
25
|
|
|
ITEM
4. Controls and
Procedures
|
25
|
|
|
PART II. OTHER
INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
ITEM
1. Legal
Proceedings
|
27
|
|
|
ITEM
1A. Risk
Factors
|
30
|
|
|
ITEM
2. Unregistered Sales
of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
31
|
|
|
ITEM
3. Defaults Upon
Senior Securities
|
31
|
|
|
ITEM
4. Mine Safety
Disclosures
|
31
|
|
|
ITEM
5. Other
Information
|
31
|
|
|
ITEM
6. Exhibits
|
32
|
|
|
SIGNATURES
|
35
|
2
PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
|
June
30,
2018
|
December
31,
2017
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Current Assets
|
|
|
Cash
|
$51,000
|
$93,000
|
Prepaid
Expenses
|
-
|
20,000
|
Total
current assets
|
51,000
|
113,000
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
$51,000
|
$113,000
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders' Deficit
|
|
|
Current Liabilities
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
$798,384
|
$656,758
|
Accrued
expenses
|
772,850
|
528,651
|
Convertible
notes payable
|
121,124
|
108,991
|
Notes
Payable, net of debt discount of $163,514 at June 30,
2018
|
1,716,487
|
1,288,000
|
Due
to factor
|
-
|
77,265
|
Due
to officer
|
36,348
|
71,920
|
Financed
insurance policy
|
11,187
|
11,187
|
Derivative
liability
|
178,977
|
382,948
|
Total current liabilities
|
3,635,357
|
3,125,720
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities
|
3,635,357
|
3,125,720
|
|
|
|
Commitments
and Contingencies (Note 7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’ deficit
|
|
|
Preferred
stock, $0.001 par value, 35,000,000 shares authorized, 1,000,000
issued and outstanding
|
$1,000
|
$1,000
|
Common stock,
$0.001 par value, 650,000,000 shares authorized, 559,459,905 and
530,806,571 shares issued and outstanding, as of June 30, 2018 and
December 31, 2017, respectively
|
559,459
|
530,807
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
30,724,112
|
30,282,937
|
Accumulated
deficit
|
(34,868,928)
|
(33,827,464)
|
Total stockholders’ deficit
|
(3,584,357)
|
(3,012,720)
|
Total liabilities and stockholders' deficit
|
$51,000
|
$113,000
|
The
accompanying footnotes are in integral part of these unaudited
condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
|
For the
Three Months Ended
|
For the
Six Months Ended
|
||
|
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
||
|
2018
|
2017
|
2018
|
2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenue
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
344,820
|
203,395
|
1,029,272
|
377,176
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
loss before other (income)expense
|
(344,820)
|
(203,395)
|
(1,029,272)
|
(377,176)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other (income)expense
|
|
|
|
|
Change
in fair value of derivative liability
|
69,928
|
(31,051)
|
(86,117)
|
(438,349)
|
Amortization
of debt discount
|
26,865
|
-
|
26,865
|
-
|
Interest
expense
|
40,306
|
5,454
|
66,710
|
10,908
|
Finance
costs
|
22,000
|
-
|
22,000
|
-
|
Gain
on settlement of debt
|
(17,266)
|
-
|
(17,266)
|
-
|
Total other (income) expense
|
141,833
|
(25,597)
|
12,192
|
(427,441)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income(loss) from operations before provision for income
taxes
|
(486,653)
|
(177,798)
|
(1,041,464)
|
50,265
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
17,090
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
of net operating loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(17,090)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
$(486,653)
|
$(177,798)
|
$(1,041,464)
|
$50,265
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss per common share - basic
|
$(0.00)
|
$(0.00)
|
$(0.00)
|
$(0.00)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
559,459,905
|
530,806,571
|
554,990,572
|
530,806,571
|
The
accompanying footnotes are in integral part of these unaudited
condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
For the
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
June
30,
2018
|
June
30,
2017
|
|
|
|
Operating Activities
|
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
$(1,041,464)
|
$50,265
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash used in
operating activities:
|
|
|
Stock
based compensation
|
289,500
|
-
|
Change
in fair value of derivative liability
|
(86,117)
|
(438,349)
|
Amortization
of debt discount
|
26,865
|
-
|
Finance
costs
|
22,000
|
-
|
Gain
on settlement
|
(17,266)
|
-
|
|
|
|
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
Prepaid
expenses
|
20,000
|
-
|
Accounts
payable
|
141,626
|
89,129
|
Accrued
expenses
|
287,832
|
250,908
|
Due
to Officer
|
(23,476)
|
48,047
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities
|
(380,500)
|
-
|
|
|
|
Financing Activities
|
|
|
Proceeds
from notes payable
|
454,000
|
-
|
Payments
on notes payable
|
(24,000)
|
-
|
Payments
on convertible notes
|
(31,500)
|
-
|
Payments
to factor
|
(60,000)
|
-
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
338,500
|
-
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
(42,000)
|
-
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year
|
93,000
|
-
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$51,000
|
$-
|
|
|
|
Supplementary disclosure of cash flow information
|
|
|
Cash
paid during the year for:
|
|
|
Interest
|
$-
|
$-
|
Taxes
|
$-
|
$-
|
Supplementary disclosure of non-cash investing and financing
activities
|
|
|
Accrued
interest settled with convertible notes payable
|
$43,633
|
$-
|
Debt
discount from warrants
|
$50,378
|
$-
|
Reclass
of derivative liability to equity upon conversions
|
$117,854
|
$-
|
Debt
discount from issuance costs
|
$162,000
|
$-
|
The
accompanying footnotes are in integral part of these unaudited
condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
NOTE 1 – DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS
We were
incorporated in New Jersey as Creative Beauty Supply, Inc.
(“Creative”) in August 1995. In March 2004, Creative
acquired Global Digital Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation
("Global”). The merger was treated as a recapitalization of
Global, and Creative changed its name to Global Digital Solutions,
Inc. (“the Company”, “we”), Global provided
structured cabling design, installation and maintenance for leading
information technology companies, federal, state and local
government, major businesses, educational institutions, and
telecommunication companies. On May 1, 2012, we made the decision
to wind down our operations in the telecommunications area and to
refocus our efforts in cyber arms technology and complementary
security and technology solutions. From August 2012 through
November 2013 we were actively involved in managing Airtronic USA,
Inc., and effective as of September 16, 2014 we acquired North
American Custom Specialty Vehicles (“NACSV”). In July
2014, we announced the formation of GDSI International (f/k/a
Global Digital Solutions, LLC) to spearhead our efforts overseas.
The Company has been dormant since December 31, 2015.
NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Going Concern
The
accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming we
will continue as a going concern, which contemplates the
realization of assets and the liquidation of liabilities in the
normal course of business. We have sustained losses and experienced
negative cash flows from operations since inception, and for the
six months ended June 30, 2018 we incurred a net loss of
approximately $1,041,000. At June 30, 2018, we had $51,000 of cash,
an accumulated deficit of approximately $34,869,000, a working
capital deficit of approximately $3,584,000 and stockholders’
deficit of approximately $3,584,000. We have funded our activities
to date almost exclusively from equity and debt
financings.
Our
cash position is critically deficient, and payments essential to
our ability to operate are not being made in the ordinary course.
Failure to raise capital in the coming days to fund our operations
and failure to generate positive cash flow to fund such operations
in the future will have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition. These factors raise substantial doubt about our ability
to continue as a going concern.
We are
in default under the terms of our loan agreements. We need to raise
additional funds immediately and continue to raise funds until we
begin to generate sufficient cash from operations, and we may not
be able to obtain the necessary financing on acceptable terms, or
at all.
We will
continue to require substantial funds to continue development of
our core business. Management’s plans in order to meet our
operating cash flow requirements include financing activities such
as private placements of common stock, and issuances of debt and
convertible debt instruments, and the establishment of strategic
relationships which we expect will lead to the generation of
additional revenue or acquisition opportunities.
While
we believe that we will be successful in obtaining the necessary
financing to fund our operations, there are no assurances that such
additional funding will be achieved or that we will succeed in our
future operations. On December 22, 2017, the Company entered into a
financing agreement with an accredited investor for $1.2 million,
as further detailed in Note 6.
Our
ability to achieve and maintain profitability and positive cash
flow is dependent upon our ability to successfully execute the
plans to pursue acquisitions and raise the funds necessary to
complete such acquisitions. The outcome of these matters cannot be
predicted at this time. The consolidated financial statements do
not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and
classification of recorded asset amounts or the amounts and
classification of liabilities that might be necessary should we be
unable to continue as a going concern.
6
Principles of Consolidation
The
accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts
of the Company and our wholly owned subsidiaries, NACSV, GDSI
Florida, LLC and Global Digital Solutions, LLC, dba GDSI
International. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been
eliminated in consolidation.
Basis of Presentation
The
accompanying unaudited financial information as of and for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017 has been prepared
in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
U.S. for interim financial information and with the instructions to
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. In
the opinion of management, such financial information includes all
adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments,
unless otherwise indicated) considered necessary for a fair
presentation of our financial position at such date and the
operating results and cash flows for such periods. Operating
results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018 are not
necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the
entire year or for any other subsequent interim
period.
Certain
information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial
statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles have been omitted pursuant to the rules of
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. These
unaudited financial statements and related notes should be read in
conjunction with our audited financial statements for the year
ended December 31, 2017 included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on June 29, 2018.
The
condensed consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2017 has been
derived from the audited financial statements at that date but does
not include all of the information and footnotes required by
generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. for complete
financial statements.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The
carrying value of cash, accounts payable and accrued expenses
approximate their fair values based on the short-term maturity of
these instruments. The carrying amounts of debt were also estimated
to approximate fair value. As defined in ASC 820, "Fair Value
Measurement," fair value is the price that would be received to
sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly
transaction between market participants at the measurement date
(exit price). The Company utilizes market data or assumptions that
market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability,
including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the
inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily
observable, market corroborated, or generally unobservable. ASC 820
establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used
to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to
unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities (level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to
unobservable inputs (level 3 measurement). This fair value
measurement framework applies at both initial and subsequent
measurement.
The
three levels of the fair value hierarchy defined by ASC 820 are as
follows:
●
Level 1 –
Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities
●
Level 2
–Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active
markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or
liabilities in markets that are not active, or other inputs that
are observable, either directly or indirectly.
●
Level 3 –
Significant unobservable inputs that cannot be corroborated by
market data.
Earnings (Loss) Per Share (“EPS”)
Basic
EPS is computed by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted
average number of shares of common stock outstanding. Diluted EPS
includes the effect from potential issuance of common stock, such
as stock issuable pursuant to the exercise of stock options and
warrants and the assumed conversion of convertible
notes.
7
The
following table summarizes the securities that were excluded from
the diluted per share calculation because the effect of including
these potential shares was antidilutive even though the exercise
price could be less than the average market price of the common
shares:
|
Three Months
Ended
|
|
|
June
30,
2018
|
June
30,
2017
|
|
|
|
Convertible notes
and accrued interest
|
33,715,247
|
181,686,974
|
Preferred
stock
|
206,861,415
|
196,398,431
|
Stock
options
|
13,650,002
|
13,650,002
|
Warrants
|
1,500,000
|
1,500,000
|
Potentially
dilutive securities
|
255,726,664
|
393,235,407
|
|
Six Months
Ended
|
|
|
June
30,
2018
|
June
30,
2017
|
|
|
|
Convertible notes
and accrued interest
|
33,715,247
|
181,686,974
|
Preferred
stock
|
206,861,415
|
196,398,431
|
Stock
options
|
13,650,002
|
13,650,002
|
Warrants
|
1,500,000
|
1,500,000
|
Potentially
dilutive securities
|
255,726,664
|
393,235,407
|
The
convertible debentures were considered anti-dilutive in accordance
with ASC 260-10-45-20, as under the “if converted”
method the adjustment to the control number of net income resulted
in a net loss.
Use of Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets, liabilities, equity-based transactions and disclosure of
contingent liabilities at the date of the financial statements and
revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results
could differ from those estimates.
The
Company believes the following critical accounting policies affect
its more significant judgments and estimates used in the
preparation of the financial statements. Significant estimates
include the derivative liability valuation, deferred tax asset and
valuation allowance, and assumptions used in Black-Scholes-Merton,
or BSM, or other valuation methods, such as expected volatility,
risk-free interest rate, and expected dividend rate.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In May
2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update
(“ASU”) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Topic
606, or ASU 2014-09. ASU 2014-09 establishes the principles
for recognizing revenue and develops a common revenue standard for
U.S. GAAP. The standard outlines a single comprehensive model for
entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts
with customers and supersedes most current revenue recognition
guidance, including industry-specific guidance. In applying the new
revenue recognition model to contracts with customers, an entity:
(1) identifies the contract(s) with a customer; (2) identifies the
performance obligations in the contract(s); (3) determines the
transaction price; (4) allocates the transaction price to the
performance obligations in the contract(s); and (5) recognizes
revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation.
The accounting standards update applies to all contracts with
customers except those that are within the scope of other topics in
the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. The accounting
standards update also requires significantly expanded quantitative
and qualitative disclosures regarding the nature, amount, timing
and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts
with customers. The
Company adopted ASU 2014-09 as of January 1, 2018, and as there
have not been any significant revenues to date, the adoption did
not have a material impact on the Company’s financial
position or results of operations, and no transition method was
necessary upon adoption.
8
In
February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases, or ASU 2016-02. The new guidance requires lessees to
recognize the assets and liabilities arising from leases on the
balance sheet. For public companies, ASU 2016-02 is effective for
annual periods, including interim periods within those annual
periods, beginning after December 15, 2018, and early adoption is
permitted. The Company does not expect that the adoption of ASU
2016-02 will have a material impact on its financial
statements.
NOTE 3 – ACCRUED EXPENSES
As of
June 30, 2018, and December 31, 2017, accrued expenses consist of
the following amounts:
|
June
30,
2018
|
December
31,
2017
|
Accrued
compensation to executive officers and employees
|
$405,004
|
$342,919
|
Accrued
professional fees and settlements
|
289,808
|
125,771
|
Accrued
interest
|
78,038
|
59,961
|
|
$772,850
|
$528,651
|
NOTE 4 – FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
The
Company did not have any Level 1 or Level 2 assets and liabilities
at June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017. The Derivative liabilities
are Level 3 fair value measurements.
The
following is a summary of activity of Level 3 liabilities during
the six months ended June 30, 2018 and 2017:
|
2018
|
2017
|
Derivative
liability balance at beginning of period
|
$382,948
|
$672,724
|
Change in fair
value
|
(97,823)
|
(438,349)
|
Reclassification to
equity
|
(106,148)
|
-
|
Balance at end of
period
|
$178,977
|
$234,375
|
At June
30, 2018, the fair value of the derivative liabilities of
convertible notes was estimated using the following
weighted-average inputs: risk free interest rate – 1.93%;
term - .25 years; volatility – 216.69%; dividend rate –
0%.
At June
30, 2017, the fair value of the derivative liabilities of
convertible notes was estimated using the following
weighted-average inputs: risk free interest rate – 1.03%;
term - .25 years; volatility – 293.76%; dividend rate –
0%.
NOTE 5 – CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE
Convertible Notes Payable with Embedded Derivative
Liabilities
On
January 16, 2015 the Company entered into an 8% convertible note
payable for $78,750 with LG Capital Funding, LLC (“LG
Capital”), which matured on January 16, 2016. The note is
convertible at a conversion price equal to a 40% discount to the
lowest closing bid price for 20 prior trading days including the
notice of conversion date. The embedded derivative liability
associated with the conversion option of the note was bifurcated
from the note and recorded at its fair value on the date of
issuance and at each reporting date. Under the terms of the note
the Company is required to maintain a minimum share reserve equal
to four times the potential number of shares of their common stock
issuable upon conversion, $38,829 of the note was converted as of
December 31, 2015.
The
note was not paid by its maturity date and was in default. On
December 12, 2017, LG Capital Funding and the Company entered into
a Convertible Note Redemption Agreement to pay back the balance of
$68,110, which included the principal balance and accrued interest,
per a set payment schedule to be paid in full by April 30, 2018.
Until all redemption payments are fully made the creditor agreed
not to effectuate any conversions. In the event the Company fails
to make timely payments, the creditor shall be able to convert the
balance of the note. The Company made the first required payment of
$6,500 on January 2, 2018, with the remaining scheduled payments
not made by their due dates. $61,610 is remaining outstanding as of
June 30, 2018.
9
The
Company entered into a Convertible note payable for up to $250,000
with JMJ Financial (“JMJ”) of which $82,500 was deemed
funded on January 28, 2015 and $27,500 was deemed funded on April
20, 2015. The principal amount matured 24 months from the date of
each funding, had a one-time 12% interest charge as it was not
repaid within 90 days of the effective date, and is convertible at
any time at the lesser of $0.075 per share or 60% of the average of
the trading price in the 25 trading days prior to conversion., The
embedded derivative liability associated with the conversion option
of the note was bifurcated from the note and recorded at its fair
value on the date of issuance and at each reporting date. Under the
terms of the note, the Company is required to maintain 26,650,000
shares of their common stock in reserve for conversions. $40,930 of
the note was converted as of December 31, 2015.
The
note was not paid by its maturity date and was in default. On
December 13, 2017, JMJ Financial and the Company entered into a
Repayment Agreement to pay back a balance of $84,514, which
included the principal balance and accrued interest, per a set
payment schedule. If the Company fails to pay the scheduled
payments by their due date the agreement is terminated. A total of
$25,000 has been paid through the date of this filing, with the
final two scheduled payments not made by their due date. $72,014 is
remaining outstanding on the note as of June 30, 2018.
NOTE 6 – NOTES PAYABLE
Revenue Based Factoring Agreements
During
the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company entered into two
revenue-based factoring agreements for which the Company did not
make the required payments, and the factor agreements went into
default. On December 21, 2017 the Company entered into a Settlement
agreement with Power Up under which Power Up has agreed to accept
the sum of $90,000 in full satisfaction of outstanding obligation
(Note 6). The settlement was to be paid in three installments of
$30,000. The settlement has been paid in full as of May 15, 2018,
resulting in the recognition of again on settlement of $17,266,
when the debt was extinguished.
Promissory Note Agreement
On
August 31, 2017, Dragon Acquisitions, a related entity owned by
William Delgado, and an individual lender entered into a Promissory
Note agreement for $20,000 as well as $2,000 in interest to accrue
through maturity on August 31, 2018 for a total of $22,000 due on
August 31, 2018. Dragon Acquisition assumed payment of a payable of
the Company and the Company took on the debt. As of June 30, 2018,
the Company has accrued $1,000 of the interest.
Financing Agreement
On
December 22, 2017, the Company entered into a financing agreement
with an accredited investor for $1.2 million. Under the terms of
the agreement, the Company is to receive milestone payments based
on the progress of the Company’s lawsuit for damages against
Grupo Rontan Metalurgica, S.A (the “Lawsuit”). Such
milestone payments consist of (i) an initial purchase price payment
of $300,000, which the Company received on December 22, 2017, (ii)
$150,000 within 30 days of the Lawsuit surviving a motion to
dismiss on the primary claims, (iii) $100,000 within 30 days of the
close of all discovery in the Lawsuit and (iv) $650,000 within 30
days of the Lawsuit surviving a motion for summary judgment and
challenges on the primary claims. As part of the agreement, the
Company shall pay the investor an investment return of 100% of the
litigation proceeds to recoup all money invested, plus 27.5% of the
total litigation proceeds received by the Company. Through June 30,
2018, $300,000 has been received.
Demand Promissory Note Agreements
On
December 23, 2017 (the “effective date”), the Company
entered into a $485,000, 7% interest rate, Demand Promissory Note
with Vox Business Trust, LLC (the “Purchaser”.) The
note was in settlement of the amounts accrued under a consulting
agreement (Note 6), consisting of $200,000 owed for retainer
payments through December 2017, as well as $285,000 owed to the
Purchaser when the Resolution Progress Funding was met on December
22, 2017. As part of the agreement, the Purchaser may not demand
payment prior to the date of the Resolution Funding Date. The
Company also agreed to grant 5,000,000 shares within 90 days of the
Resolution Progress Funding Date and 10,000,000 shares within 90
days of the Resolution Funding Date. The 5,000,000 shares were
issued on March 13, 2018. The Company shall make mandatory
prepayment in the following amounts and at the following
times:
10
● $1,000 on the
effective date.
● $50,000 on the date
on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or
decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to
dismiss.
● $50,000 on the date
on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
● $100,000 on the
date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling
or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary
judgement on the claims.
On
December 26, 2017, the Company entered into a $485,000, 7% interest
rate, Demand Promissory Note with RLT Consulting, Inc (the
“Purchaser”.) The note was in settlement of the amounts
accrued under a consulting agreement (Note 6), consisting of
$200,000 owed for retainer payments through December 2017, as well
as $285,000 owed to the Purchaser when the Resolution Progress
Funding was met on December 22, 2017. As part of the agreement, the
Purchaser may not demand payment prior to the date of the
Resolution Funding Date. The Company also agreed to grant 5,000,000
shares within 90 days of the Resolution Progress Funding Date and
10,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Funding Date.
The 5,000,000 shares were issued on March 13, 2018 (as well as an
additional 4,000,000 for further services). The Company shall make
mandatory prepayment in the following amounts and at the following
times:
● $1,000 on the
effective date.
● $50,000 on the date
on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or
decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to
dismiss.
● $50,000 on the date
on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
● $100,000 on the
date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling
or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary
judgement on the claims.
Investment Return Purchase Agreements
On
April 3, 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return
Purchase Agreement with an accredited investor (the
“Purchaser”) for proceeds of $50,000 (the
“Investment Agreement”). Under the terms of the
Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Purchaser the
$50,000 proceeds plus a 50% return, or $25,000 (the
“Investment Return”) within seven (7) months from the
date of the Investment Agreement. The Investment Return is being
recognized as interest expense over the seven months. In addition,
the Company agreed to issue to the Purchaser 1,000,000 warrants to
purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01
per share, exercisable for a period of five (5) years. The warrants
were valued using the Black Scholes Merton model, resulting in a
fair value of $9,000. The key valuation assumptions used consist,
in part, of the price of the Company’s common stock of $0.009
at issuance date; a risk-free interest rate of 2.60% and expected
volatility of the Company’s common stock, of 234.58%. Due to
the short term nature of the Investment Agreement and the
insignificant amount, the warrant fair value was immediately
expensed as a financing cost.
On May
15, 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return Purchase
Agreement with an accredited investor (the “Purchaser”)
for proceeds of $200,000 (the “Investment Agreement”).
Under the terms of the Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to
pay the Purchaser the $200,000 proceeds plus a 10% return, or
$20,000 (the “Investment Return”) within three (3)
months from the date of the Investment Agreement. The Investment
Return is being recognized as interest expense over the three
months. Such Investment Return shall be paid earlier if the Company
secures funding totaling $500,000 within 90 days from the date of
the Investment Agreement. In addition, the Company agreed to issue
to the Purchaser 2,000,000 warrants to purchase common stock of the
Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, exercisable for a
period of three (3) years. The warrants were valued using the Black
Scholes Merton model, resulting in a fair value of $13,000. The key
valuation assumptions used consist, in part, of the price of the
Company’s common stock of $0.007 at issuance date; a
risk-free interest rate of 2.75% and expected volatility of the
Company’s common stock, of 274.39%, Due to the short term
nature of the Investment Agreement, the warrant fair value was
immediately expensed as a financing cost.
11
Notes Payable
On May
1, 2018 the Company entered into a $36,000 promissory note with an
individual with $5,000 original issue discount for net proceeds of
$31,000.
On June
1, 2018, the Company entered into a $300,000 non-convertible note
with an accredited investor with $150,000 original issue discount
(“OID”) for net proceeds of $150,000. As part of the
note agreement, the Company also agreed to issue the investor
5,000,000 warrants at an exercise price of $0.01, exercisable for a
period of three (3) years. The warrants were valued using the Black
Scholes Merton model, resulting in a relative fair value after
allocation of $28,378. The key valuation assumptions used consist,
in part, of the price of the Company’s common stock of $0.007
at issuance date; a risk-free interest rate of 2.62% and expected
volatility of the Company’s common stock, of 275.26%, The
relative fair value of the warrants as well as the OID have been
classified as a debt discount to be amortized over the life of the
note using the effective interest method.
The
note bears a personal guarantee by William Delgado, the Chief
Executive Officer of the Company. As further security for the note,
Mr. Delgado has also pledged the 1,000,000 Convertible Preferred
Shares of the Company that he owns, as well as 5,000,000 common
shares of another public company in which Mr. Delgado is a director
and Chief Financial Officer.
NOTE 7 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Legal Proceedings
We may
be involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of our
business, and our management cannot predict the ultimate outcome of
these legal proceedings with certainty. The Company is plaintiff or
defendant in the following actions:
Global Digital Solutions, Inc. et. al. v. Communications
Laboratories, Inc., et. al.
On
January 19, 2015, the Company and NACSV filed suit against
Communications Laboratories, Inc., ComLabs Global, LLC, Roland
Lussier, Brian Dekle, John Ramsay and Wallace Bailey for conversion
and breach of contract in a dispute over the payment of a $300,000
account receivable that ComLabs owed to NACSV but sent payment
directly to Brian Dekle. The case was filed in the Eighteenth
Judicial Circuit in and for Brevard County Florida, case no.
05-2015-CA-012250. On February 18, 2015 (i) defendants
Communications Laboratories, Inc., ComLabs Global, LLC and Roland
Lussier and (ii) defendant Wallace Bailey filed their respective
motions to dismiss seeking, among other things, dismissal for
failure to state valid causes of action, lumping and failure to
post a non-resident bond. On February 26, 2015, defendants Dekle
and Ramsay filed their motion to dismiss, or stay action, based on
already existing litigation between the parties. NACSV filed its
required bond on March 2, 2015.
PowerUp Lending Group, LTD., v. North American Custom Specialty
Vehicle, Inc. et.al
On
September 13, 2017 Power Up received a default judgment against the
Company in the amount of $109,302.00. The Company negotiated a
settlement agreement on December 21, 2017 with Power Up to pay
$90,000 in three installments of $30,000. As of May 15, 2018, the
Company has paid the entire amount.
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Global Digital Solutions,
Inc., Richard J. Sullivan and David A. Loppert United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No.
9:16-cv-81413-RLR
On
August 11, 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”) filed suit in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida against Global Digital
Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”), Richard J. Sullivan
(“Sullivan”) and David A. Loppert
(“Loppert”) to enjoin GDSI; Sullivan, GDSI’s
former Chairman and CEO; and Loppert, GDSI’s former CFO from
alleged further violations of the anti-fraud and reporting
provisions of the federal securities laws, and against Sullivan and
Loppert from alleged further violations of the certification
provisions of the federal securities laws.
12
On
October 12, 2016, Defendant GDSI filed its First Answer to the
Complaint. On November 9, 2016, Defendant Sullivan filed a Letter
with the Court denying all allegations regarding the case. On
December 15, 2016, the SEC filed a Motion for Judgment and Notice
of Filing of Consent of Defendant Loppert to entry of Final
Judgment by the SEC. On December 19, 2016, the Court entered an
order granting the SEC’s Motion for Judgment as to Defendant
Loppert. On December 21, 2016, the SEC filed a Notice of Settlement
as entered into by it and Defendants GDSI and Sullivan. On December
23, 2016, the Court entered an Order staying the case and directing
the Clerk of the Court to close the case for statistical purposes
per the December 21, 2016 Notice of Settlement. On March 7, 2017,
the SEC moved for a Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other
Relief and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant GDSI to Entry of
Judgment by the SEC. On March 13, 2017, the Judge signed the
Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was entered on the
Court’s docket. On April 6, 2017, the SEC moved for a final
Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief and Notice of
Filing Consent of Defendant Sullivan. On April 10, 2017, the Judge
signed the final Judgment as to Defendant Sullivan and it was
entered on the Court’s docket. On December 21, 2017, the SEC
moved for a final Judgment and Notice of Filing Consent of
Defendant GDSI to Entry of Final Judgment. On January 2, 2018, the
Judge signed the Final Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was
entered on the Court’s docket.
Adrian Lopez, Derivatively and on behalf of Global Digital
Solutions, Inc. v. William J. Delgado, Richard J. Sullivan, David
A. Loppert, Jerome J. Gomolski, Stephanie C. Sullivan, Arthur F.
Noterman, and Stephen L. Norris United States District Court for
the District of New Jersey, Case No.
3:17-cv-03468-PGS-LHG
On
September 19, 2016, Adrian Lopez, derivatively, and on behalf of
Global Digital Solutions, Inc., filed an action in New Jersey
Superior Court sitting Mercer County, General Equity Division. That
action was administratively dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Plaintiff Lopez, through his counsel, filed a motion to reinstate
the matter on the general equity calendar on or about February 10,
2017. The Court granted the motion unopposed on or about April 16,
2017. On May 15, 2017, Defendant William Delgado
(“Delgado”) filed a Notice of Removal of Case No.
C-70-16 from the Mercer County Superior Court of New Jersey to the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. On May
19, 2017, Defendant Delgado filed a First Motion to Dismiss for
Lack of Jurisdiction. On May 20, 2017, Defendant David A. Loppert
(“Loppert”) filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of
(Personal) Jurisdiction. On June 14, 2017, Plaintiff Adrian Lopez
(“Lopez”) filed a First Motion to Remand the Action
back to State Court. On June 29, 2017, Defendant Delgado filed a
Memorandum of Law in Response and Reply to the Memorandum of Law in
Support of Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand and in Response to
Defendants’ Delgado’s and Loppert’s Motions to
Dismiss. On January 1, 16, 2018, a Memorandum and Order granting
Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand the case back to the Mercer
County Superior Court of New Jersey was signed by the Judge and
entered on the Docket. Defendants Delgado and Loppert’s
Motions to Dismiss were denied as moot. On February 2, 2018,
Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On February 20,
2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Consolidate Cases. On March 21,
2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss the Complaint. On March 23, 2018, Defendants filed a Brief
in Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’
Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The Court held a hearing on the
motions to dismiss and consolidate. Jurisdictional discovery was
ordered. As of this date, the Court has not issued a decision and
Order regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the
Complaint.
Adrian Lopez v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and William J.
Delgado Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Mercer
County, Equity Part, Docket No. MER-L-002126-17
On
September 28, 2017, Plaintiff Adrian Lopez (“Lopez”)
brought an action against Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”) and William J. Delgado (“Delgado”)
to compel a meeting of the stockholders of Global Digital
Solutions, Inc. pursuant to Section 2.02 of GDSI’s Bylaws and
New Jersey Revised Statute § 14A:5-2. On October 27, 2017,
Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Motion to Stay the Proceeding.
On November 24, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Objection to
Defendants’ Motion to Stay the Proceeding. On January 19,
2018, Defendants’ Motion to Stay the Proceeding was denied.
On February 2, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the
Complaint. On February 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion to
Consolidate Cases. On March 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition
to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On March 23,
2018, Defendants filed a Brief in Reply to Plaintiff’s
Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On
or about July 23, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Supplemental Memorandum
of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for
Lack of Personal Jurisdiction. On or about July 26, 2018 Defendant
Delgado filed a Memorandum of Law in Reply to Plaintiff’s
Supplemental Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant
Delgado’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal
Jurisdiction. On or about July 27, 2018 Defendant Loppert filed a
Supplemental Reply Memorandum of Law in Further Support of
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Verified Shareholder
Derivative Complaint. As of this date, the Court has not issued a
decision and Order regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
the Complaint.
13
Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Richard J. Sullivan,
David A. Loppert, William J. Delgado, Arthur F. Noterman and
Stephanie C. Sullivan United States District Court, District of New
Jersey (Trenton), Case No. 3:16-cv-05153-FLW-TJB
On
August 24, 2016, Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All
Others Similarly Situated (“Hull”) filed suit in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against
Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”), Richard J.
Sullivan (“Sullivan”), David A. Loppert
(“Loppert”), William J. Delgado
(“Delgado”), Arthur F. Noterman
(“Noterman”) and Stephanie C. Sullivan
(“Stephanie Sullivan”) seeking to recover compensable
damages caused by Defendants’ alleged violations of federal
securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. On January 18, 2018, pursuant to the
Court’s December 19, 2017 Order granting Plaintiff Hull leave
to file an amended Complaint, Plaintiff Hull filed a Second Amended
Complaint against Defendants. On February 8, 2018, Defendants GDSI
and Delgado filed a Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On
February 8, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Motion for Extension of
Time to File an Answer. On February 13, 2018, Defendant Loppert
filed a Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for Lack of
(personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. On
February 20, 2018, Plaintiff Michael Perry (“Perry”)
filed a Brief in Opposition to Defendants GDSI and Delgado’s
Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint and to Defendant
Loppert’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for
Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim.
On February 26, 2018, Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Reply
Brief to Plaintiff Michael Perry’s Brief in Opposition to
their Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. On February
26, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Response in Support of
Defendants GDSI and Delgado’s Second Motion to Dismiss the
Complaint. On March 12, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Reply Brief
to Plaintiff Perry’s Brief in Opposition to Defendant
Loppert’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for
Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim.
To date, the Court has not issued a decision as to aforementioned
Motions. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and William J. Delgado
intend to continue to vigorously defend against the claims asserted
by Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated.
In the Matter of Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Administrative
Proceeding File No. 3-18325. Administrative Proceeding Before the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
On
December 26, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission
instituted public administrative proceedings pursuant to Section
12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange
Act”) against the Respondent Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
On January 8, 2018, Respondent Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”) filed its answer to the allegations contained
in the Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings and Notice of
Hearing Pursuant to Section 12U) of the Exchange Act. A briefing
schedule was entered into and on February 15, 2018, the Securities
and Exchange Commission filed a motion for an order of summary
disposition against Respondent GDSI on the grounds that there is no
genuine issue with regard to any material fact, the Division was
entitled as a matter of law to an order revoking each class of
GDSI's securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange
Act. Respondent GDSI opposed the Securities and Exchange
Commission’s motion on the grounds that there were material
issues of fact. The Securities and Exchange Commission replied and
a hearing was held on April 9, 2018. The Administrative Law Judge
ordered supplemental evidence and briefing on the issues of
material fact. On June 1, 2018, GDSI filed various Affidavits
providing supplemental evidence and briefing on the issues of
material fact. On June 21, 2018, the Securities and Exchange
Commission issued an order immediately staying all administrative
proceedings pending before its administrative law judges in light
of the Supreme Court’s decision in Lucia v. SEC, No. 17-130 (U.S. June 21,
2018). Pending Admin.
Proc., Securities Act of 1933 Release No. 10510,
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/opinions/2018/33-10510.pdf. On July
20, 2018, the SEC extended the stay until August 22, 2018, or
further order of the Commission
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Global Digital Solutions,
Inc., Richard J. Sullivan and David A. Loppert United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No.
9:16-cv-81413-RLR
On
August 11, 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”) filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida against Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”), Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”)
and David A. Loppert (“Loppert”) to enjoin GDSI;
Sullivan, GDSI’s former Chairman and CEO; and Loppert,
GDSI’s former CFO from alleged further violations of the
anti-fraud and reporting provisions of the federal securities laws,
and against Sullivan and Loppert from alleged further violations of
the certification provisions of the federal securities
laws.
14
On
October 12, 2016, Defendant GDSI filed its First Answer to the
Complaint. On November 9, 2016, Defendant Sullivan filed a Letter
with the Court denying all allegations regarding the case. On
December 15, 2016, the SEC filed a Motion for Judgment and Notice
of Filing of Consent of Defendant Loppert to entry of Final
Judgment by the SEC. On December 19, 2016, the Court entered an
order granting the SEC’s Motion for Judgment as to Defendant
Loppert. On December 21, 2016, the SEC filed a Notice of Settlement
as entered into by it and Defendants GDSI and Sullivan. On December
23, 2016, the Court entered an Order staying the case and directing
the Clerk of the Court to close the case for statistical purposes
per the December 21, 2016 Notice of Settlement. On March 7, 2017,
the SEC moved for a Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other
Relief and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant GDSI to Entry of
Judgment by the SEC. On March 13, 2017, the Judge signed the
Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was entered on the
Court’s docket. On April 6, 2017, the SEC moved for a final
Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief and Notice of
Filing Consent of Defendant Sullivan. On April 10, 2017, the Judge
signed the final Judgment as to Defendant Sullivan and it was
entered on the Court’s docket. On December 21, 2017, the SEC
moved for a final Judgment and Notice of Filing Consent of
Defendant GDSI to Entry of Final Judgment. On January 2, 2018, the
Judge signed the Final Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was
entered on the Court’s docket. The amount of the judgement is
One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) plus interest.
PMB Helin Donovan, LLP vs. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. in the
Circuit Court for the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County, Florida, Docket No.:
50-2017-CA-011937-XXXX-MB
On
October 31, 2017, PMB Helin Donovan, LLP filed an action for
account stated in Palm Beach County. Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”) settled the matter for Forty Thousand Dollars
($40,000) of which the first payment of Ten Thousand Dollars
($10,000) has been paid.
Jennifer Carroll vs. Global Digital Solutions, Inc., North American
Custom Specialty Vehicles, Inc., in the Circuit Court for the
15th
Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, Case No.:
50-2015-CC-012942-XXXX-MB
On
October 27, 2017, Plaintiff Jennifer Carroll moved the court for a
default judgment against Defendant Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”) and its subsidiary North American Custom
Specialty Vehicles Inc. The amount of the judgement is Fifteen
Thousand Dollars ($15,000) plus fees of Thirteen Thousand Three
Hundred Fifty-Three Dollars ($13,353) and costs of Six Hundred
Twenty-Four Dollars ($624).
Consulting agreements
The
Company entered into two consulting agreements in May 2016, for
services to be provided in connection towards the resolution of the
Rontan lawsuit. The consulting agreements include a monthly
retainer payment of $10,000 to each consultant. The agreement also
includes consideration of 5,000,000 shares of restricted common
stock of the Company, plus a 5% cash consideration of the
Resolution Progress Funding, (defined as upon the retention of
legal counsel and receipt of funding for the litigation), as of the
Resolution Progress Funding date and 10,000,000 shares of
restricted common stock of the Company and a 5% cash consideration
of the Resolution Funding amount (defined as a settlement or
judgement in favor of the Company by Rotan), at the Resolution
Funding date. The Resolution Progress funding was met on December
22, 2017, as more fully discussed in the financing agreement in
Note 6.
Share Purchase and Sale Agreement for Acquisition of Grupo Rontan
Electro Metalurgica, S.A.
Effective October
13, 2015, the Company (as “Purchaser”) entered into the
SPSA dated October 8, 2015 with Joao Alberto Bolzan and Jose Carlos
Bolzan, both Brazilian residents (collectively, the
“Sellers”) and Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A.,
a limited liability company duly organized and existing under the
laws of Federative Republic of Brazil (“Rontan”)
(collectively, the “Parties”), pursuant to which the
Sellers agreed to sell 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of
Rontan to the Purchaser on the closing date.
The
purchase price shall consist of a cash amount, a stock amount and
an earn-out amount as follows: (i) Brazilian Real (“R”)
$100 million (approximately US$26 million) to be paid by the
Purchaser in equal monthly installments over a period of forty
eight (48) months following the closing date; (ii) an aggregate of
R$100 million (approximately US$26 million) in shares of the
Purchaser’s common stock, valued at US$1.00 per share; and
(iii) an earn-out payable within ten business days following
receipt by the Purchaser of Rontan’s audited financial
statements for the 12-months ended December 31, 2017, 2018 and
2019. The earn-out shall be equal to the product of (i)
Rontan’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and
amortization (“EBITDA”) for the last 12 months, and
(ii) twenty percent and is contingent upon Rontan’s EBITDA
results for any earn-out period being at least 125% of
Rontan’s EBITDA for the 12-months ended December 31, 2015. It
is the intention of the parties that the stock amount will be used
by Rontan to repay institutional debt outstanding as of the closing
date.
15
Under
the terms of a Finders Fees Agreement dated April 14, 2014, we have
agreed to pay RLT Consulting Inc., a fee of 2% (two percent) of the
Transaction Value, as defined in the agreement, of Rontan upon
closing. The fee is payable one-half in cash and one-half in shares
of our common stock.
Specific conditions
to closing consist of:
a) Purchaser’s
receipt of written limited assurance of an unqualified opinion with
respect to Rontan’s audited financial statements for the
years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014 (the
“Opinion”);
b) The commitment of
sufficient investment by General American Capital Partners LLC (the
“Institutional Investor”), in the Purchaser following
receipt of the Opinion;
c) The accuracy of
each Parties’ representations and warranties contained in the
SPSA;
d) The continued
operation of Rontan’s business in the ordinary
course;
e) The maintenance of
all of Rontan’s bank credit lines in the maximum amount of
R$200 million (approximately US$52 million) under the same terms
and conditions originally agreed with any such financial
institutions, and the maintenance of all other types of funding
arrangements. As of the date of the SPSA, Rontan’s financial
institution debt consists of not more than R$200 million
(approximately US$52 million), trade debt of not more than R$50
million (approximately US$13 million) and other fiscal
contingencies of not more that R$95 million (approximately US$24.7
million);
f) Rontan shall enter
into employment or consulting service agreements with key employees
and advisors identified by the Purchaser, including Rontan’s
Chief Executive Officer; and
g) The Sellers
continued guarantee of Rontan’s bank debt for a period of 90
days following issuance of the Opinion, among other
items.
The
Institutional Investor has committed to invest sufficient capital
to facilitate the transaction, subject to receipt of the Opinion,
as well as the ability to acquire 100% of the outstanding stock of
Rontan at a price of $200 million BR, and the Company can acquire
100% of all real estate held by Rontan.
Subject
to satisfaction or waiver of the conditions precedent provided for
in the SPSA, the closing date of the transaction shall take place
within 10 business days from the date of issuance of the
Opinion.
Rontan
is engaged in the manufacture and distribution of specialty
vehicles and acoustic/visual signaling equipment for the industrial
and automotive markets.
Subsequent to
December 31, 2015, on April 1, 2016, we believed that we had
satisfied or otherwise waived the conditions to closing (as
disclosed under the SPSA, the closing was subject to specific
conditions to closing, which were waivable by us,) and advised the
Sellers of our intention to close the SPSA and demanded delivery of
the Rontan Securities. The Sellers, however, notified us that they
intend to terminate the SPSA. We believe that the Sellers had no
right to terminate the SPSA and that notice of termination by the
Sellers was not permitted under the terms of the SPSA.
On
January 31, 2018, we announced that we initiated a lawsuit for
damages against Grupo Rontan Metalurgica, S. A,
(“Rontan”) and that company’s controlling
shareholders, Joao Alberto Bolzan and Jose Carlos Bolzan. The
action has been filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida. The complaint alleges that Rontan is
wholly-owned by Joao Bolzan and Jose Bolzan. In the complaint, we
further allege that Rontan and its shareholders improperly
terminated a Share Purchase and Sale Agreement (the
“SPA”) by which we were to acquire whole ownership of
Rontan.
On
February 5, 2018, United States District Court Southern District of
Florida filed a Pretrial Scheduling Order and Order Referring Case
to Mediation dated February 5, 2018 for the Company’s lawsuit
against Grupo Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A., et al. The Case No.
is 18-80106-Civ-Middlebrooks/Brannon. The court has issued a
schedule outlining various documents and responses that are to be
delivered by the parties as part of the discovery
plan.
16
On
April 25, 2018, the Note of Filing Proposed Summons was completed
by the Company. On April 26, 2018, a summons was issued to Grupo
Rontan Electro Metalurgica, S.A. Also, on May 15, 2018 the Company
filed a motion for Issuance of Letters Rogatory.
NOTE 8 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Accounts Payable
At June
30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, included in accounts payable was
compensation owed to related parties as seen below -
|
June
30,
2018
|
December
31,
2017
|
Jerry
Gomolski
|
$25,000
|
$25,000
|
Charter
804CS
|
20,099
|
20,099
|
Gary
Gray
|
12,000
|
12,000
|
Total
|
$57,099
|
$57,099
|
Accrued Compensation
At June
30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, the Company had $415,000 and
$310,000 payable to William J. Delgado and $35,004 and $20,835 to
Jerry Gomolski, respectively.
NOTE 9 – STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
On
April 3, 2018, in connection with the Investment Agreement for
proceeds of $50,000 (Note 6) the Company issued 1,000,000 warrants
to purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of
$0.01 per share, exercisable for a period of five (5) years. The
warrants were valued at $9,000, which was recognized as a financing
cost in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of
operations.
On May
15, 2018, in connection with the Investment Agreement for proceeds
of $200,000 (Note 6) the Company issued 2,000,000 warrants to
purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01
per share, exercisable for a period of three (3) years. The
warrants were valued at $13,500, which was recognized as a
financing cost in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement
of operations.
On June
1, 2018, in connection with the $300,000 non-convertible note (Note
6) the Company issued 5,000,000 warrants to purchase common stock
of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, exercisable
for a period of three (3) years. The warrants were valued using the
Black Scholes Morton model, resulting in a relative fair value
after allocation of $28,378. The relative fair value of the
warrants has been classified as a debt discount to be amortized
over the life of the note using the effective interest
method.
On
March 13, 2018, in connection with the two $485,000 demand notes
(Note 6), the Company issued 14,000,000 shares of their common
stock as consideration for consulting services. The common stock
was valued at $168,000, based on the market price of $0.0120 of the
common stock on the date of issuance.
On
March 13, 2018, in connection with the $20,000 promissory note
(Note 6), the Company issued 5,000,000 shares of their common
stock. The common stock was valued at $60,000, based on the market
price of $0.0120 of the common stock on the date of issuance which
was recognized as a financing cost in the accompanying condensed
consolidated statement of operations.
On
February 21, 2018, in connection with a $36,000 promissory note
that was entered into on May 1, 2018 (Note 6) the Company issued
5,000,000 shares of their common stock. The common stock was valued
at $57,500, based on the market price of $0.0115 of the common
stock on the date of issuance, which was recognized as a financing
cost in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of
operations.
17
On
February 9, 2018, the Company issued 333,334 of their common shares
to a consultant, as consideration for $4,000 of consulting
services.
On
February 9, 2018, the Company sold 4,320,000 of their common shares
to an unrelated party, at $0.0028 per share, for a total purchase
price of $12,096.
NOTE 10 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
We have completed an evaluation of all subsequent events after the
balance sheet date of June 30, 2018 through the date this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q was submitted to the SEC, to ensure that this
filing includes appropriate disclosure of events both recognized in
the financial statements as of June 30, 2018, and events which
occurred subsequently but were not recognized in the financial
statements. We have concluded that no subsequent events have
occurred that require recognition or disclosure, except as
disclosed within these financial statements.
18
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
includes a number of forward-looking statements that reflect
management's current views with respect to future events and
financial performance. Forward-looking statements are
projections in respect of future events or our future financial
performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking
statements by terminology such as “may,”
“should,” “expects,” “plans,”
“anticipates,” “believes,”
“estimates,” “predicts,”
“potential” or “continue” or the negative
of these terms or other comparable terminology. These statements include statements
regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of us and
members of our management team, as well as the assumptions on which
such statements are based. Prospective investors are cautioned that
any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future
performance and involve risk and uncertainties, and that actual
results may differ materially from those contemplated by such
forward-looking statements. These statements are only
predictions and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and
other factors, including the risks set forth in the section
entitled “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, as filed with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on
June 29, 2018, any of which may cause our company’s or our
industry’s actual results, levels of activity, performance or
achievements to be materially different from any future results,
levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or
implied in our forward-looking statements. These risks and factors
include, by way of example and without limitation:
●
our ability
to successfully commercialize and our products and services on a
large enough scale to generate profitable operations;
●
our ability
to maintain and develop relationships with customers and
suppliers;
●
our ability
to successfully integrate acquired businesses or new
brands;
●
the impact of
competitive products and pricing;
●
supply
constraints or difficulties;
●
the retention
and availability of key personnel;
●
general
economic and business conditions;
●
substantial
doubt about our ability to continue as a going
concern;
●
our need to
raise additional funds in the future;
●
our ability
to successfully recruit and retain qualified personnel in order to
continue our operations;
●
our ability
to successfully implement our business plan;
●
our ability
to successfully acquire, develop or commercialize new products and
equipment;
●
intellectual
property claims brought by third parties; and
●
the impact of
any industry regulation.
Although we believe
that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements
are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of
activity, or performance. Except as required by applicable law,
including the securities laws of the United States, we do not
intend to update any of the forward-looking statements to conform
these statements to actual results.
Readers
are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures
made by us in this report and in our other reports filed with the
SEC. We undertake no obligation to update or revise forward-looking
statements to reflect changed assumptions, the occurrence of
unanticipated events or changes in the future operating results
over time except as required by law. We believe that our
assumptions are based upon reasonable data derived from and known
about our business and operations. No assurances are made that
actual results of operations or the results of our future
activities will not differ materially from our
assumptions.
As used
in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and unless otherwise
indicated, the terms “GDSI,” “Company,”
“we,” “us,” and “our” refer to
Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and our wholly-owned subsidiaries
GDSI Florida, LLC and North American Custom Specialty Vehicles,
Inc. Unless otherwise specified, all dollar amounts are expressed
in United States dollars.
19
Corporate History and Overview
We were
incorporated in New Jersey as Creative Beauty Supply, Inc.
(“Creative”) in August 1995. In March 2004, Creative
acquired Global Digital Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation.
The merger was treated as a recapitalization of Global Digital
Solutions, Inc., and Creative changed its name to Global Digital
Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”). We are focused in the area of
cyber arms technology and complementary security and technology
solutions. On October 22, 2012, we entered into an Agreement of
Merger and Plan of Reorganization to acquire 70% of Airtronic USA,
Inc. (“Airtronic”), a then debtor in possession under
chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, after Airtronic successfully
reorganized and emerged from bankruptcy (the “Merger”).
During the period from October 2012 through November 2013, we were
actively involved in the day to day management of Airtronic pending
the completion of the Merger. The Merger did not occur and we
ceased involvement with the Airtronic. In December 2012 we
incorporated GDSI Florida LLC (“GDSI FL”), a Florida
limited liability company. Except for the payment of administrative
expenses on behalf of the Company, GDSI FL has no business
operations. In January 2013 we incorporated Global Digital
Solutions, LLC, a Florida limited liability company. In November
2013, we incorporated GDSI Acquisition Corporation, a Delaware
corporation. On June 16, 2014, we acquired North American Custom
Specialty Vehicles, LLC into GDSI Acquisition Corporation, and
changed the latter’s name to North American Custom Specialty
Vehicles, Inc. (“NACSV”). In July 2014, we announced
the formation of GDSI International (f/k/a Global Digital
Solutions, LLC) to spearhead our efforts overseas.
We are
positioning ourselves as a leader in providing comprehensive
security and technology solutions. Since May 1, 2012, we have been
focusing on acquisitions of defense and defense-related entities
both in the United States and abroad. On June 16, 2014 GDSI
completed its acquisition of North American Custom Specialty
Vehicles (“NACSV”). NACSV’s mobile emergency
operations centers (MEOC) can be tailored to the needs of Police,
Fire, EMS, Military, Homeland Security, National Guard, FBI, Air
National Guard Coast Guard, Chemical/Petrochemical, Humanitarian
Aid, Non-Governmental Organizations, Drug Enforcement, Immigration
& Customs, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives,
Water Management, Wildlife Management, D.O.T. Engineering &
Maintenance, Air & Water Quality Management (EPA),
Meteorological Seismic/Oil & Gas Exploration, IS/Mapping Power
Generation (Nuclear & Conventional), Power Transmission and
Strategic Infrastructure Security. We see many opportunities to
improve NACSV and its products and services through the integration
of additional software, hardware and firmware
technologies.
Results of Operations
Comparison of the Three Months Ended June 30, 2018 and June 30,
2017
Revenue
There
were no revenues for the three months ending June 30, 2018 or
2017.
Expenses
Our
expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2018 are summarized as
follows, in comparison to our expenses for the three months ended
June 30, 2017:
|
Three Months
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
2018
|
2017
|
Salaries and
related expenses
|
$96,668
|
$60,000
|
Rent
|
3,229
|
-
|
Professional
fees
|
153,066
|
71,901
|
Consulting
services
|
85,000
|
62,200
|
Other general and
administrative expenses
|
6,857
|
9,294
|
Total
|
$344,820
|
$203,395
|
Operating expenses
for the three months ended June 30, 2018 were $344,820,
representing an increase of 70% compared to operating expenses of
$203,395 for the same period in 2017. The primary reason for the
change is an increase in professional fees resulting from
approximately $90,000 in accounting and auditing fees that the
Company had not incurred in the three months ended June 30, 2017.
Additionally, salaries increased approximately $37,000 due to the
salary for the new CFO in 2018.
20
Comparison of the Six Months Ended June 30, 2018 and June 30,
2017
Revenue
There
were no revenues for the three months ending June 30, 2018 or
2017.
Expenses
Our
expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2018 are summarized as
follows, in comparison to our expenses for the six months ended
June 30, 2017:
|
Six Months Ended
June 30,
|
|
|
2018
|
2017
|
Salaries and
related expenses
|
$171,169
|
$120,000
|
Rent
|
7,364
|
-
|
Professional
fees
|
313,946
|
110,364
|
Consulting
services
|
471,758
|
127,700
|
Other general and
administrative expenses
|
65,035
|
19,112
|
Total
|
$1,029,272
|
$377,176
|
Operating expenses
for the six months ended June 30, 2018 were $1,029,272,
representing an increase of 63% compared to operating expenses of
$377,176 for the same period in 2017. The overall increase is
comprised of an increase in professional fees, which includes
approximately $290,000 of stock based compensation issued to
consultants, the salary for the new CFO, and an increase in
professional fees of which approximately $210,000 is for accounting
and auditing fees that the Company did not incur in the six months
ended June 30, 2017. Additonally, there was approximately $44,000
in legal settlements that are included in other general and
administrative expenses.
Liquidity, Financial Condition and Capital Resources
As of
June 30, 2018, we had cash on hand of $51,000 and a working capital
deficit of approximately $3,584,000 as compared to cash on hand of
$93,000 and a working capital deficit of approximately $3,013,000
as of December 31, 2017. The increase in working capital deficit is
mainly due to the additional $616,000 in notes payable net of the
debt discount, and an increase of approximately $386,000 in
accounts payable and accrued expenses, offset by an approximately
$204,000 decrease in the fair value of the derivative
liability.
Going Concern
The
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contained in
this quarterly report on Form 10-Q have been prepared assuming that
the Company will continue as a going concern. The Company has
accumulated losses from inception through the period ended June 30,
2018 of approximately $35 million, as well as negative cash flows
from operating activities. As of the balance sheet date, the
Company did not have sufficient cash resources to meet its plans
through June 30, 2019.
The
consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments
that may be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as a
going concern. The Company’s continuation as a going concern
is dependent on its ability to obtain additional financing as may
be required and ultimately to attain profitability. If the Company
raises additional funds through the issuance of equity, the
percentage ownership of current shareholders could be reduced, and
such securities might have rights, preferences or privileges senior
to the rights, preferences and privileges of the Company’s
common stock. Additional financing may not be available upon
acceptable terms, or at all. If adequate funds are not available or
are not available on acceptable terms, the Company may not be able
to take advantage of prospective business endeavors or
opportunities, which could significantly and materially restrict
its future plans for developing its business and achieving
commercial revenues. If the Company is unable to obtain the
necessary capital, the Company may have to cease
operations.
21
Working Capital Deficiency
|
Periods
Ended
|
|
|
June
30,
2018
|
December
31,
2017
|
Current
Assets
|
$51,000
|
$93,000
|
Current
Liabilities
|
3,635,357
|
3,125,720
|
Working
capital
|
$(3,584,357)
|
$(3,012,720)
|
Current
assets decreased from December 31, 2017 to June 30, 2018 due to the
decrease in cash based on the cash receipts on new notes payable
offset by the payment of notes payable and convertible notes and
other payables, and the amortization of prepaid expenses. The
increase in current liabilities is mainly due to an increase in
accounts payable, accrued expenses and new notes payable, offset by
decreases in due to factor and the fair value of the derivative
liability.
Cash Flows
|
Periods
Ended
|
|
|
June
30,
2018
|
June
30,
2017
|
Net cash used in
operating activities
|
$(542,500)
|
$-
|
Net cash used in
investing activities
|
-
|
-
|
Net cash used in
financing activities
|
(500,500)
|
268,000
|
Increase (decrease)
in cash
|
$(42,000)
|
$93,000
|
Operating Activities
Net
cash used by operating activities during the six months ended June
30, 2018 was $542,500. Cash used during the period was primarily
due to a net loss of $1,041,464, offset by non-cash transactions of
stock based compensation for shares issued to consultants of
$289,500, the change in the fair value of derivative liability of
$86,117 (including the reduction due to payments made on the
related convertible debentures), finance costs arising from
warrants issued in connection with new notes payable, the new debt
discount of $162,000 and the amortization of the debt discount
related to the new notes payable, and a gain on settlement of
$17,266 from the settlement of the factoring agreement. Cash
transactions decreasing the cash used in operations included the
increases in accounts payable of $161,626 and accrued expenses or
$287,832.
Net
cash used by operating activities was $0 for the six months ended
March 31,2017, reflecting the net income of $50,265 offset by
change in fair value of derivative liability, and an increase in
accounts payable, accrued expenses and due to officer.
Investing Activities
There
was no cash used for, or provided by, investing activities during
the six months ended June 30, 2108 nor June 30, 2017.
Financing Activities
During
the six months ended June 30, 2018, cash used in financing
activities of $500,500 consisted of payments on convertible notes
payable of $24,000, convertible notes of $31,500 and to the factor
of $60,000, offset by proceeds from notes payable of $616,000.
There was no cash used for, or provided by, financing activities
during the six months ended June 30, 2017.
Convertible Notes Payable
On
January 26, 2015, the Company agreed to a $250,000 principal (and a
$25,000 original discount amount) Convertible Note with JMJ
Financial (“JMJ”.) The Note matured on January 26,
2017, unless earlier converted pursuant to the terms of the
Convertible Note. The Note bears interest at 0% if repaid in the
first 90 days and then a one-time interest charge of 12% applied on
the principal sum. The outstanding principal and interest under the
Note, solely upon an Event of Default (as defined in the Note), is
convertible at the option of the Holder of the Note into shares of
the Company’s common stock as set forth in the Note. On
December 13, 2017, the Company entered into a repayment agreement
with JMJ Financial to repay the outstanding balance of $84,514. As
of June 30, 2018, the Company has paid $25,000 of this balance,
leaving an outstanding balance of $72,014.
22
On
January 16, 2015, the Company agreed to a $78,750 principal
Convertible Redeemable Note with LG Capital Funding, LLC (“LG
Capital”.) The Note matured on January 16, 2016 unless
earlier converted pursuant to terms of the Convertible Note. The
Note bears interest at 8% per annum. The outstanding principal and
interest under the Note, solely upon an Event of Default (as
defined in the Note), is convertible at the option of the Holder of
the Note into shares of the Company’s common stock as set
forth in the Note. On December 12, 2017, the Company entered into a
redemption agreement with LG Capital Funding, LLC to repay the
outstanding balance of $68,110. As of June 30, 2018, the Company
has paid $6,500 of this balance, leaving an outstanding balance of
$61,610.
Factoring Agreements
During
the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company entered into two
revenue-based factoring agreements for which the Company did not
make the required payments, and the factor agreements went into
default. On December 21, 2017 the Company entered into a Settlement
agreement with Power Up under which Power Up has agreed to accept
the sum of $90,000 in full satisfaction of outstanding obligation.
The settlement is to be paid in three installments of $30,000. The
settlement has been paid in full as of May 15, 2018, with a gain on
settlement of $17,266 recognized when the debt was
extinguished.
Promissory Note Agreement
On
August 31, 2017, Dragon Acquisitions, a related entity owned by
William Delgado, and an individual lender entered into a promissory
note agreement for $20,000 as well as $2,000 in interest to accrue
through maturity on August 31, 2018 for a total of $22,000 due on
August 31, 2018. Dragon Acquisition assumed payment of a payable of
the Company and the Company took on the debt. As of June 30, 2018,
the Company has accrued $1,000 of the interest.
Financing Agreement
On
December 22, 2017, the Company entered into a financing agreement
with an accredited investor for $1.2 million. Under the terms of
the agreement, the Company is to receive milestone payments based
on the progress of the Company’s lawsuit for damages against
Grupo Rontan Metalurgica, S.A (the “Lawsuit”). Such
milestone payments consist of (i) an initial purchase price payment
of $300,000, which the Company received on December 22, 2017, (ii)
$150,000 within 30 days of the Lawsuit surviving a motion to
dismiss on the primary claims, (iii) $100,000 within 30 days of the
close of all discovery in the Lawsuit and (iv) $650,000 within 30
days of the Lawsuit surviving a motion for summary judgment and
challenges on the primary claims. As part of the agreement, the
Company shall pay the investor an investment return of 100% of the
litigation proceeds to recoup all money invested, plus 27.5% of the
total litigation proceeds received by the Company. Through June 30,
2018, $300,000 has been received.
Demand Promissory Note Agreements
On
December 23, 2017 (the “effective date”), the Company
entered into a $485,000, 7% interest rate, Demand Promissory Note
with Vox Business Trust, LLC (the “Purchaser”.) The
note was in settlement of the amounts accrued under a consulting
agreement, consisting of $200,000 owed for retainer payments
through December 2017, as well as $285,000 owed to the Purchaser
when the Resolution Progress Funding was met on December 22, 2017.
As part of the agreement, the Purchaser may not demand payment
prior to the date of the Resolution Funding Date. The Company also
agreed to grant 5,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution
Progress Funding Date and 10,000,000 shares within 90 days of the
Resolution Funding Date. The 5,000,000 shares were issued on March
13, 2018. The Company shall make mandatory prepayment in the
following amounts and at the following times:
●
$1,000 on the
effective date.
●
$50,000 on the date
on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or
decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to
dismiss.
●
$50,000 on the date
on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
●
$100,000 on the
date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling
or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary
judgement on the claims.
23
On
December 26, 2017, the Company entered into a $485,000, 7% interest
rate, Demand Promissory Note with RLT Consulting, Inc. (the
“Purchaser”.) The note was in settlement of the amounts
accrued under a consulting agreement (Note 6), consisting of
$200,000 owed for retainer payments through December 2017, as well
as $285,000 owed to the Purchaser when the Resolution Progress
Funding was met on December 22, 2017. As part of the agreement, the
Purchaser may not demand payment prior to the date of the
Resolution Funding Date. The Company also agreed to grant 5,000,000
shares within 90 days of the Resolution Progress Funding Date and
10,000,000 shares within 90 days of the Resolution Funding Date.
The 5,000,000 shares were issued on March 13, 2018 (as well as an
additional 4,000,000 for further services). The Company shall make
mandatory prepayment in the following amounts and at the following
times:
●
$1,000 on the
effective date.
●
$50,000 on the date
on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling or
decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion to
dismiss.
●
$50,000 on the date
on which discovery closes with respect to the lawsuit.
●
$100,000 on the
date on which the judge presiding over the lawsuit issues a ruling
or decision in which the lawsuit survives a motion for summary
judgement on the claims.
Investment Return Purchase Agreements
On
April 3, 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return
Purchase Agreement with an accredited investor (the
“Purchaser”) for proceeds of $50,000 (the
“Investment Agreement”). Under the terms of the
Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Purchaser the
$50,000 proceeds plus a 25% return, or $25,000 (the
“Investment Return”) within seven (7) months from the
date of the Investment Agreement. The Investment Return is being
recognized as interest expense over the seven months. In addition,
the Company agreed to issue to the Purchaser 1,000,000 warrants to
purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01
per share, exercisable for a period of five (5) years.
On May
15, 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return Purchase
Agreement with an accredited investor (the “Purchaser”)
for proceeds of $200,000 (the “Investment Agreement”).
Under the terms of the Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to
pay the Purchaser a 10% return, or $20,000 (the “Investment
Return”) within three (3) months from the date of the
Investment Agreement. Such Investment Return shall be paid earlier
if the Company secures funding totaling $500,000 within 90 days
from the date of the Investment Agreement. In addition, the Company
agreed to issue to the Purchaser 2,000,000 warrants to purchase
common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per
share, exercisable for a period of three (3) years.
Notes Payable
On May
1, 2018, the Company entered into a $36,000 promissory note with an
individual with $5,000 original issue discount for net proceeds of
$31,000.
On June
4, 2018, the Company agreed to a $300,000 principal amount (and a
$150,000 original issue discount amount) convertible note issued to
GS Capital Partners. As part of the note agreement, the Company
also agreed to issue the investor 5,000,000 warrants at an exercise
price of $0.01, exercisable for a period of three (3)
years.
Future Financing
We will
require additional funds to implement our growth strategy for our
business. In addition, while we have received capital from various
private placements of equity and convertible debt that have enabled
us to fund our operations, additional funds will be needed for
further business development.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have
no off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably
likely to have a current or future effect on our financial
condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses,
results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital
resources that is material to stockholders.
24
Effects of Inflation
We do
not believe that inflation has had a material impact on our
business, revenues or operating results during the periods
presented.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our
significant accounting policies are more fully described in the
notes to our financial statements included in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017. We believe that the
accounting policies below are critical for one to fully understand
and evaluate our financial condition and results of
operations.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In May
2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update
(“ASU”) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Topic
606, or ASU 2014-09. ASU 2014-09 establishes the principles
for recognizing revenue and develops a common revenue standard for
U.S. GAAP. The standard outlines a single comprehensive model for
entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts
with customers and supersedes most current revenue recognition
guidance, including industry-specific guidance. In applying the new
revenue recognition model to contracts with customers, an entity:
(1) identifies the contract(s) with a customer; (2) identifies the
performance obligations in the contract(s); (3) determines the
transaction price; (4) allocates the transaction price to the
performance obligations in the contract(s); and (5) recognizes
revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation.
The accounting standards update applies to all contracts with
customers except those that are within the scope of other topics in
the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. The accounting
standards update also requires significantly expanded quantitative
and qualitative disclosures regarding the nature, amount, timing
and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts
with customers. The
Company adopted ASU 2014-09 as of January 1, 2018, and as there
have not been any significant revenues to date, the adoption did
not have a material impact on the Company’s financial
position or results of operations, and no transition method was
necessary upon adoption.
In
February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases, or ASU 2016-02. The new guidance requires lessees to
recognize the assets and liabilities arising from leases on the
balance sheet. For public companies, ASU 2016-02 is effective for
annual periods, including interim periods within those annual
periods, beginning after December 15, 2018, and early adoption is
permitted. The Company does not expect that the adoption of ASU
2016-02 will have a material impact on its financial
statements.
In
June 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-07 (Topic
718) Improvements to Nonemployee
Share-Based Payment Accounting (“ASU
2018-07”), which
expands the scope of ASC Topic 718 to include all share-based
payment arrangements related to the acquisition of goods and
services from both nonemployees and employees. An entity
should apply the requirements of Topic 718 to nonemployee awards
except for certain exemptions specified in the amendment. ASU
2018-07 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2018, including interim periods within that
fiscal year. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact that the adoption of this amendment will have
on its condensed consolidated financial statements.
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
Not
Applicable. As a smaller reporting company, we are not required to
provide the information required by this Item.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We
carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer (who is our Principal Executive Officer) and our Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer (who is our Principal Financial
Officer and Principal Accounting Officer), of the effectiveness of
the design of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined by
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e)) as of June 30, 2018
pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-15. Based upon that evaluation,
our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not
effective as of June 30, 2018 in ensuring that information required
to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the
Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported
within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and
forms. This conclusion is based on findings that constituted
material weaknesses. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a
combination of control deficiencies, in internal control over
financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility
that a material misstatement of the Company’s interim
financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely
basis.
25
In
performing the above-referenced assessment, management identified
the following deficiencies in the design or operation of our
internal controls and procedures, which management considers to be
material weaknesses:
(i) Lack of Formal Policies and Procedures.
We utilize a third party independent contractor for the preparation
of our financial statements. Although the financial statements and
footnotes are reviewed by our management, we do not have a formal
policy to review significant accounting transactions and the
accounting treatment of such transactions. The third party
independent contractor is not involved in the day to day operations
of the Company and may not be provided information from management
on a timely basis to allow for adequate reporting/consideration of
certain transactions.
(ii) Audit
Committee and Financial Expert. We do not have a formal
audit committee with a financial expert, and thus we lack the board
oversight role within the financial reporting process.
(iii) Insufficient
Resources. We have insufficient quantity of dedicated
resources and experienced personnel involved in reviewing and
designing internal controls. As a result, a material misstatement
of the interim and annual financial statements could occur and not
be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
(iv) Entity
Level Risk Assessment. We did not perform an entity level
risk assessment to evaluate the implication of relevant risks on
financial reporting, including the impact of potential fraud
related risks and the risks related to non-routine transactions, if
any, on internal control over financial reporting. Lack of an
entity-level risk assessment constituted an internal control design
deficiency which resulted in more than a remote likelihood that a
material error would not have been prevented or detected, and
constituted a material weakness.
Our
management feels the weaknesses identified above have not had any
material effect on our financial results. However, we are currently
reviewing our disclosure controls and procedures related to these
material weaknesses, and expect to implement changes in the near
term, as resources permit, in order to address these material
weaknesses. Our management will continue to monitor and evaluate
the effectiveness of our internal controls and procedures and our
internal controls over financial reporting on an ongoing basis, and
is committed to taking further action and implementing additional
enhancements or improvements, as necessary and as funds
permit.
Because
of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial
reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of
any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to
the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or
procedures may deteriorate. All internal control systems, no matter
how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those
systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable
assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and
presentation.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There
were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting
during the quarter ended June 30, 2018 that have materially
affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our
internal control over financial reporting.
26
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
We may
be involved in legal proceedings in the ordinary course of our
business, and our management cannot predict the ultimate outcome of
these legal proceedings with certainty. The Company is plaintiff or
defendant in the following actions:
Dekle, et. al. v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. et.
al.
Brian
A. Dekle and John Ramsay filed suit against the Company and its
wholly owned subsidiary, North American Custom Specialty Vehicles,
Inc. (“NACSV”), in the Circuit Court of Baldwin
Alabama, on January 14, 2015, case no. 05-CV-2015-9000050.00,
relating to our acquisition of NACSV (the ''Dekle Action"). Prior
to instituting the Dekle Action, in June 2014, the Company had
entered into an equity purchase agreement with Dekle and Ramsay to
purchase their membership interest in North American Custom
Specialty Vehicles, LLC. The Dekle Action originally sought payment
for $300,000 in post-closing consideration Dekle and Ramsay allege
they are owed pursuant to the equity purchase
agreement.
On February 9, 2015, the Company
and NACSV removed the Dekle Action to federal court in the United
States District Court in and for the Southern District of Alabama,
case no. 1:15-CV-00069. The Company and NACSV subsequently moved to
dismiss the complaint for (1) failing to state a cause of action,
and (2) lack of personal jurisdiction. Alternatively, the Company
and NACSV sought a transfer of the case to the United States
District Court in and for Middle District of Florida.
In
response to the Company’s and NACSV's motion to dismiss,
Dekle and Ramsay filed an amended complaint on March 2, 2015
seeking specific performance and alleging breach of contract,
violations of Security and Exchange Commission (“SEC”)
Rule 10b-5, and violations of the Alabama Securities Act. The
amended complaint also names the Company’s Chairman,
President, and CEO, Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”),
as a defendant. On March 17, 2015, the Company, NACSV and Sullivan
filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint seeking dismissal
for failure to state valid causes of action, for lack of personal
jurisdiction, or alternatively to transfer the case to the United
States District Court in and for the Middle District of Florida.
Dekle and Ramsay responded on March 31, 2015, and the Company filed
its response thereto on April 7, 2015.
On June
2, 2015, Dekle passed away. On June 5, 2015, the Court
denied the Company’s motion to transfer the case to
Florida. On June 10, 2015, the Company filed a motion
to reconsider the Court’s denial of its motion to transfer
the case to Florida. On September 30, 2105, the Court granted
the Company’s Renewed Motion to Transfer Venue. The case was
transferred to the Middle District of Florida, where it is
currently pending.
On June
15, 2015, Ramsay filed a second amended complaint. On June 25,
2015, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the second amended
complaint. The Company’s Motion to Dismiss was
denied.
On July
27, 2017, the Company and Dekle and Ramsay came to a Settlement
Agreement. The Company and the plaintiff came to the following
agreements:
i.
Judgment is due to
be entered against the Company in the amount of $300,000 if the sum
of $20,000 as noted in iv below is not paid.
ii.
The Company grants
the plaintiffs vehicles and trailers in connection to this
proceeding.
iii.
The Company will
assist the plaintiffs in obtaining possession of the said
vehicles.
iv.
The Company will
pay the plaintiffs the sum of $20,000.
v.
The $20,000
settlement was paid in August 2017.
27
Global Digital Solutions, Inc. et. al. v. Communications
Laboratories, Inc., et. al.
On
January 19, 2015 the Company and NACSV filed suit against
Communications Laboratories, Inc., ComLabs Global, LLC, Roland
Lussier, Brian Dekle, John Ramsay and Wallace Bailey for conversion
and breach of contract in a dispute over the payment of a $300,000
account receivable that ComLabs owed to NACSV but sent payment
directly to Brian Dekle. The case was filed in the Eighteenth
Judicial Circuit in and for Brevard County Florida, case no.
05-2015-CA-012250. On February 18, 2015 (i) defendants
Communications Laboratories, Inc., ComLabs Global, LLC and Roland
Lussier and (ii) defendant Wallace Bailey filed their respective
motions to dismiss seeking, among other things, dismissal for
failure to state valid causes of action, lumping and failure to
post a non-resident bond. On February 26, 2015, defendants Dekle
and Ramsay filed their motion to dismiss, or stay action, based on
already existing litigation between the parties. NACSV filed its
required bond on March 2, 2015.
PowerUp Lending Group, LTD., v. North American Custom Specialty
Vehicle, Inc. et.al
On
September 13, 2017 Power Up received a default judgment against the
Company in the amount of $109,302.00. The Company negotiated a
settlement agreement on December 21, 2017 with Power Up to pay
$90,000 in three installments of $30,000. As of May 15, 2018, the
company has paid the entire amount.
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Global Digital Solutions,
Inc., Richard J. Sullivan and David A. Loppert United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No.
9:16-cv-81413-RLR
On
August 11, 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”) filed suit in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida against Global Digital
Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”), Richard J. Sullivan
(“Sullivan”) and David A. Loppert
(“Loppert”) to enjoin GDSI; Sullivan, GDSI’s
former Chairman and CEO; and Loppert, GDSI’s former CFO from
alleged further violations of the anti-fraud and reporting
provisions of the federal securities laws, and against Sullivan and
Loppert from alleged further violations of the certification
provisions of the federal securities laws.
On
October 12, 2016, Defendant GDSI filed its First Answer to the
Complaint. On November 9, 2016, Defendant Sullivan filed a Letter
with the Court denying all allegations regarding the case. On
December 15, 2016, the SEC filed a Motion for Judgment and Notice
of Filing of Consent of Defendant Loppert to entry of Final
Judgment by the SEC. On December 19, 2016, the Court entered an
order granting the SEC’s Motion for Judgment as to Defendant
Loppert. On December 21, 2016, the SEC filed a Notice of Settlement
as entered into by it and Defendants GDSI and Sullivan. On December
23, 2016, the Court entered an Order staying the case and directing
the Clerk of the Court to close the case for statistical purposes
per the December 21, 2016 Notice of Settlement. On March 7, 2017,
the SEC moved for a Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other
Relief and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant GDSI to Entry of
Judgment by the SEC. On March 13, 2017, the Judge signed the
Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was entered on the
Court’s docket. On April 6, 2017, the SEC moved for a final
Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief and Notice of
Filing Consent of Defendant Sullivan. On April 10, 2017, the Judge
signed the final Judgment as to Defendant Sullivan and it was
entered on the Court’s docket. On December 21, 2017, the SEC
moved for a final Judgment and Notice of Filing Consent of
Defendant GDSI to Entry of Final Judgment. On January 2, 2018, the
Judge signed the Final Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was
entered on the Court’s docket.
Adrian Lopez, Derivatively and on behalf of Global Digital
Solutions, Inc. v. William J. Delgado, Richard J. Sullivan, David
A. Loppert, Jerome J. Gomolski, Stephanie C. Sullivan, Arthur F.
Noterman, and Stephen L. Norris United States District Court for
the District of New Jersey, Case No.
3:17-cv-03468-PGS-LHG
On
September 19, 2016, Adrian Lopez, derivatively, and on behalf of
Global Digital Solutions, Inc., filed an action in New Jersey
Superior Court sitting Mercer County, General Equity Division. That
action was administratively dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Plaintiff Lopez, through his counsel, filed a motion to reinstate
the matter on the general equity calendar on or about February 10,
2017. The Court granted the motion unopposed on or about April 16,
2017. On May 15, 2017, Defendant William Delgado
(“Delgado”) filed a Notice of Removal of Case No.
C-70-16 from the Mercer County Superior Court of New Jersey to the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. On May
19, 2017, Defendant Delgado filed a First Motion to Dismiss for
Lack of Jurisdiction. On May 20, 2017, Defendant David A. Loppert
(“Loppert”) filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of
(Personal) Jurisdiction. On June 14, 2017, Plaintiff Adrian Lopez
(“Lopez”) filed a First Motion to Remand the Action
back to State Court. On June 29, 2017, Defendant Delgado filed a
Memorandum of Law in Response and Reply to the Memorandum of Law in
Support of Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand and in Response to
Defendants’ Delgado’s and Loppert’s Motions to
Dismiss. On January 1, 16, 2018, a Memorandum and Order granting
Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand the case back to the Mercer
County Superior Court of New Jersey was signed by the Judge and
entered on the Docket. Defendants Delgado and Loppert’s
Motions to Dismiss were denied as moot. On February 2, 2018,
Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On February 20,
2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Consolidate Cases. On March 21,
2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss the Complaint. On March 23, 2018, Defendants filed a Brief
in Reply to Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’
Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The Court held a hearing on the
motions to dismiss and consolidate. Jurisdictional discovery was
ordered. As of this date, the Court has not issued a decision and
Order regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the
Complaint.
28
Adrian Lopez v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and William J.
Delgado Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Mercer
County, Equity Part, Docket No. MER-L-002126-17
On
September 28, 2017, Plaintiff Adrian Lopez (“Lopez”)
brought an action against Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”) and William J. Delgado (“Delgado”)
to compel a meeting of the stockholders of Global Digital
Solutions, Inc. pursuant to Section 2.02 of GDSI’s Bylaws and
New Jersey Revised Statute § 14A:5-2. On October 27, 2017,
Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Motion to Stay the Proceeding.
On November 24, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Objection to
Defendants’ Motion to Stay the Proceeding. On January 19,
2018, Defendants’ Motion to Stay the Proceeding was denied.
On February 2, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the
Complaint. On February 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion to
Consolidate Cases. On March 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition
to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On March 23,
2018, Defendants filed a Brief in Reply to Plaintiff’s
Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On
or about July 23, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Supplemental Memorandum
of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for
Lack of Personal Jurisdiction. On or about July 26, 2018 Defendant
Delgado filed a Memorandum of Law in Reply to Plaintiff’s
Supplemental Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant
Delgado’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal
Jurisdiction. On or about July 27, 2018 Defendant Loppert filed a
Supplemental Reply Memorandum of Law in Further Support of
Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Verified Shareholder
Derivative Complaint. As of this date, the Court has not issued a
decision and Order regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
the Complaint.
Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Richard J. Sullivan,
David A. Loppert, William J. Delgado, Arthur F. Noterman and
Stephanie C. Sullivan United States District Court, District of New
Jersey (Trenton), Case No. 3:16-cv-05153-FLW-TJB
On
August 24, 2016, Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All
Others Similarly Situated (“Hull”) filed suit in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against
Global Digital Solutions, Inc. (“GDSI”), Richard J.
Sullivan (“Sullivan”), David A. Loppert
(“Loppert”), William J. Delgado
(“Delgado”), Arthur F. Noterman
(“Noterman”) and Stephanie C. Sullivan
(“Stephanie Sullivan”) seeking to recover compensable
damages caused by Defendants’ alleged violations of federal
securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. On January 18, 2018, pursuant to the
Court’s December 19, 2017 Order granting Plaintiff Hull leave
to file an amended Complaint, Plaintiff Hull filed a Second Amended
Complaint against Defendants. On February 8, 2018, Defendants GDSI
and Delgado filed a Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. On
February 8, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Motion for Extension of
Time to File an Answer. On February 13, 2018, Defendant Loppert
filed a Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for Lack of
(personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim. On
February 20, 2018, Plaintiff Michael Perry (“Perry”)
filed a Brief in Opposition to Defendants GDSI and Delgado’s
Second Motion to Dismiss the Complaint and to Defendant
Loppert’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for
Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim.
On February 26, 2018, Defendants GDSI and Delgado filed a Reply
Brief to Plaintiff Michael Perry’s Brief in Opposition to
their Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. On February
26, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Response in Support of
Defendants GDSI and Delgado’s Second Motion to Dismiss the
Complaint. On March 12, 2018, Defendant Loppert filed a Reply Brief
to Plaintiff Perry’s Brief in Opposition to Defendant
Loppert’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for
Lack of (personal) Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim.
To date, the Court has not issued a decision as to aforementioned
Motions. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. and William J. Delgado
intend to continue to vigorously defend against the claims asserted
by Jeff Hull, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated.
In the Matter of Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Administrative
Proceeding File No. 3-18325. Administrative Proceeding Before the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
On
December 26, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission
instituted public administrative proceedings pursuant to Section
12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange
Act”) against the Respondent Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
On January 8, 2018, Respondent Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”) filed its answer to the allegations contained
in the Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings and Notice of
Hearing Pursuant to Section 12U) of the Exchange Act. A briefing
schedule was entered into and on February 15, 2018, the Securities
and Exchange Commission filed a motion for an order of summary
disposition against Respondent GDSI on the grounds that there is no
genuine issue with regard to any material fact, the Division was
entitled as a matter of law to an order revoking each class of
GDSI's securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange
Act. Respondent GDSI opposed the Securities and Exchange
Commission’s motion on the grounds that there were material
issues of fact. The Securities and Exchange Commission replied and
a hearing was held on April 9, 2018. The Administrative Law Judge
ordered supplemental evidence and briefing on the issues of
material fact. On June 1, 2018, GDSI filed various Affidavits
providing supplemental evidence and briefing on the issues of
material fact. On June 21, 2018, the Securities and Exchange
Commission issued an order immediately staying all administrative
proceedings pending before its administrative law judges in light
of the Supreme Court’s decision in Lucia v. SEC, No. 17-130 (U.S. June 21,
2018). Pending Admin.
Proc., Securities Act of 1933 Release No. 10510,
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/opinions/2018/33-10510.pdf. On July
20, 2018, the SEC extended the stay until August 22, 2018, or
further order of the Commission.
29
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Global Digital Solutions,
Inc., Richard J. Sullivan and David A. Loppert United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No.
9:16-cv-81413-RLR
On
August 11, 2016, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”) filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida against Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”), Richard J. Sullivan (“Sullivan”)
and David A. Loppert (“Loppert”) to enjoin GDSI;
Sullivan, GDSI’s former Chairman and CEO; and Loppert,
GDSI’s former CFO from alleged further violations of the
anti-fraud and reporting provisions of the federal securities laws,
and against Sullivan and Loppert from alleged further violations of
the certification provisions of the federal securities
laws.
On
October 12, 2016, Defendant GDSI filed its First Answer to the
Complaint. On November 9, 2016, Defendant Sullivan filed a Letter
with the Court denying all allegations regarding the case. On
December 15, 2016, the SEC filed a Motion for Judgment and Notice
of Filing of Consent of Defendant Loppert to entry of Final
Judgment by the SEC. On December 19, 2016, the Court entered an
order granting the SEC’s Motion for Judgment as to Defendant
Loppert. On December 21, 2016, the SEC filed a Notice of Settlement
as entered into by it and Defendants GDSI and Sullivan. On December
23, 2016, the Court entered an Order staying the case and directing
the Clerk of the Court to close the case for statistical purposes
per the December 21, 2016 Notice of Settlement. On March 7, 2017,
the SEC moved for a Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other
Relief and Notice of Filing Consent of Defendant GDSI to Entry of
Judgment by the SEC. On March 13, 2017, the Judge signed the
Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was entered on the
Court’s docket. On April 6, 2017, the SEC moved for a final
Judgment of Permanent Injunction and Other Relief and Notice of
Filing Consent of Defendant Sullivan. On April 10, 2017, the Judge
signed the final Judgment as to Defendant Sullivan and it was
entered on the Court’s docket. On December 21, 2017, the SEC
moved for a final Judgment and Notice of Filing Consent of
Defendant GDSI to Entry of Final Judgment. On January 2, 2018, the
Judge signed the Final Judgment as to Defendant GDSI and it was
entered on the Court’s docket. The amount of the judgement is
One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) plus interest.
PMB Helin Donovan, LLP vs. Global Digital Solutions, Inc. in the
Circuit Court for the 15th Judicial Circuit in
and for Palm Beach County, Florida, Docket No.:
50-2017-CA-011937-XXXX-MB
On
October 31, 2017, PMB Helin Donovan, LLP filed an action for
account stated in Palm Beach County. Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”) settled the matter for Forty Thousand Dollars
($40,000) of which the first payment of Ten Thousand Dollars
($10,000) has been paid.
Jennifer Carroll vs. Global Digital Solutions, Inc., North American
Custom Specialty Vehicles, Inc., in the Circuit Court for the
15th
Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, Case No.:
50-2015-CC-012942-XXXX-MB
On
October 27, 2017, Plaintiff Jennifer Carroll moved the court for a
default judgment against Defendant Global Digital Solutions, Inc.
(“GDSI”) and its subsidiary North American Custom
Specialty Vehicles Inc. The amount of the judgement is Fifteen
Thousand Dollars ($15,000) plus fees of Thirteen Thousand Three
Hundred Fifty-Three Dollars ($13,353) and costs of Six Hundred
Twenty-Four Dollars ($624).
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
As a
smaller reporting company, we are not required to provide the
information required by this Item. We note, however, that an
investment in our common stock involves a number of very
significant risks. Investors should carefully consider the risk
factors included in the “Risk Factors” section of our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for our fiscal year ended December 31,
2017, as filed with SEC on June 27, 2018, in addition to other
information contained in such Annual Report and in this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q, in evaluating the Company and our business
before purchasing shares of our common stock. The Company’s
business, operating results and financial condition could be
adversely affected due to any of those risks.
30
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF
PROCEEDS
Investment Return Purchase Agreements
On
April 3, 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return
Purchase Agreement with an accredited investor (the
“Purchaser”) for proceeds of $50,000 (the
“Investment Agreement”). Under the terms of the
Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Purchaser the
$50,000 proceeds plus a 25% return, or $25,000 (the
“Investment Return”) within seven (7) months from the
date of the Investment Agreement. The Investment Return is being
recognized as interest expense over the seven months. In addition,
the Company agreed to issue to the Purchaser 1,000,000 warrants to
purchase common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $0.01
per share, exercisable for a period of five (5) years.
On May
15, 2018, the Company entered into an Investment Return Purchase
Agreement with an accredited investor (the “Purchaser”)
for proceeds of $200,000 (the “Investment Agreement”).
Under the terms of the Investment Agreement, the Company agreed to
pay the Purchaser the $200,000 proceeds plus a 10% return, or
$20,000 (the “Investment Return”) within three (3)
months from the date of the Investment Agreement. The Investment
Return is being recognized as interest expense over the three
months. Such Investment Return shall be paid earlier if the Company
secures funding totaling $500,000 within 90 days from the date of
the Investment Agreement. In addition, the Company agreed to issue
to the Purchaser 2,000,000 warrants to purchase common stock of the
Company at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, exercisable for a
period of three (3) years.
Notes Payable
On May
1, 2018 the Company entered into a $36,000 promissory note with an
individual with $5,000 original issue discount for net proceeds of
$31,000.
On June
1, 2018, the Company entered into a $300,000 non-convertible note
with an accredited investor with $150,000 original issue discount
(“OID”) for net proceeds of $150,000. As part of the
note agreement, the Company also agreed to issue the investor
5,000,000 warrants at an exercise price of $0.01, exercisable for a
period of three (3) years. The note bears a personal guarantee by
William Delgado, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. As
further security for the note, Mr. Delgado has also pledged the
1,000,000 Convertible Preferred Shares of the Company that he owns,
as well as 5,000,000 common shares of another public company in
which Mr. Delgado is a director and Chief Financial
Officer.
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
None.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not
Applicable.
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
31
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
Exhibit
Number
|
Description
|
(2)
|
Plan
of acquisition, reorganization, arrangement, liquidation or
succession
|
Purchase Agreement
with Bronco Communications, LLC dated January 1, 2012 (incorporated
by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Amendment to
Purchase Agreement with Bronco Communications, LLC dated October
15, 2012 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August
8, 2013)
|
|
Agreement of Merger
and Plan of Reorganization with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated October
2012 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8,
2013)
|
|
First Amendment to
Agreement of Merger and Plan of Reorganization with Airtronic, USA,
Inc. dated August 5, 2013 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10
filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Equity Purchase
Agreement with Brian A. Dekle, John Ramsey, GDSI Acquisition
Corporation, Global Digital Solutions, Inc., and North American
Custom Specialty Vehicle, LLC dated June 16, 2014 (incorporated by
reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 19,
2014)
|
|
Share Purchase and
Sale Agreement with Global Digital Solutions, Inc., Grupo Rontan
Electro Metalurgica, S.A., Joao Alberto Bolzan and Jose Carlos
Bolzan dated October 8, 2015 (incorporated by reference to our
Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 19, 2015)
|
|
(3)
|
(i)
Articles of Incorporation; and (ii) Bylaws
|
Certificate of
Incorporation dated August 28, 1995 (incorporated by reference to
our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Articles of Merger
dated March 18, 2004 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10
filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Certificate of
Amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation dated August 06, 2013
(incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8,
2013)
|
|
Bylaws dated August
28, 1995 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August
8, 2013)
|
|
Certificate of
Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation dated July 7, 2014
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on July 30, 2014)
|
|
Certificate of
Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation dated May 18, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on May 20, 2015)
|
|
(10)
|
Material
Agreements
|
Debtor in
Possession Note Purchase Agreement with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated
October 22, 2012 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on
August 8, 2013)
|
|
Secured Promissory
Note with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated October 22, 2012 (incorporated
by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Security Agreement
with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated October 22, 2012 (incorporated by
reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Bridge Loan
Modification and Ratification Agreement with Airtronic USA, Inc.
dated March, 2013 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed
on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Second Bridge Loan
Modification and Ratification Agreement with Airtronic USA, Inc.
dated August 5, 2013 (incorporated by reference to our Form 10
filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Secured Promissory
Note with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated August 5, 2013 (incorporated by
reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Intellectual
Property Security Agreement with an individual dated August 5, 2013
(incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8,
2013)
|
|
Promissory Note
Purchase Agreement with Bay Acquisition, LLC dated December 2012
(incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8,
2013)
|
|
Secured Promissory
Note with an individual dated December 2012 (incorporated by
reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
32
Security Agreement
with Bay Acquisition, LLC dated December, 2012 (incorporated by
reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase
Common Stock with an individual dated December 2012 (incorporated
by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Amendment to
Promissory Note Agreement with an individual dated May 6, 2013
(incorporated by reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8,
2013)
|
|
Subscription
Agreement and Securities Purchase Agreement (incorporated by
reference to our Form 10 filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Form of
Indemnification Agreement (incorporated by reference to our Form 10
filed on August 8, 2013)
|
|
Secured Promissory
Note with Airtronic USA, Inc. dated October 10, 2013 (incorporated
by reference to our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on March 28,
2014)
|
|
Third Bridge Loan
Modification and Ratification Agreement with Airtronic USA, Inc.
dated October 10, 2013 (incorporated by reference to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed on March 28, 2014)
|
|
Investment Banking
Agreement with Midtown Partners & Co, LLC dated October 16,
2013 (incorporated by reference to our Annual Report on Form 10-K
filed on March 28, 2014)
|
|
10.18
|
Addendum to
Investment Bank Agreement with Midtown Partners & Co, LLC dated
October 16, 2013 (incorporated by reference to our registration
statement on Form S-1 filed on August 5, 2014)
|
2014 Equity
Incentive Plan dated May 19, 2014 (incorporated by reference to our
registration statement on Form S-1 filed on August 5,
2014)
|
|
Online Virtual
Office Agreement dated August 19, 2013 (incorporated by reference
to our registration statement on Form S-1 filed on August 5,
2014)
|
|
Restricted Stock
Unit Agreement with Stephen L. Norris dated August 25, 2014
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K/A
filed on August 25, 2014)
|
|
Securities Purchase
Agreement with Charter 804CS Solutions, Inc dated December 8, 2014
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on December 12, 2014)
|
|
Convertible
Redeemable Note with Charter 804CS Solutions, Inc dated December 8,
2014 (incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on December 12, 2014)
|
|
First Amendment to
Convertible Redeemable Note with Charter 804CS Solutions, Inc dated
February 4, 2015 (incorporated by reference to our Current Report
on Form 8-K filed on February 9, 2015)
|
|
Securities Purchase
Agreement with an individual dated December 8, 2014 (incorporated
by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December
12, 2014)
|
|
Convertible
Redeemable Note with an individual dated December 8, 2014
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on December 12, 2014)
|
|
10.27
|
First Amendment to
Convertible Redeemable Note dated February 4, 2015 (incorporated by
reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on February 4,
2014)
|
Securities Purchase
Agreement with LG Capital Funding, LLC dated January 16, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on January 20, 2015)
|
|
10.29
|
Convertible
Redeemable Note with LG Capital Funding, LLC dated January 16, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on January 20, 2015)
|
Convertible Note
with JSJ Investments Inc. dated January 26, 2015 (incorporated by
reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 30,
2015)
|
|
Securities Purchase
Agreement with Adar Bays, LLC dated January 26, 2015 (incorporated
by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 30,
2015)
|
|
Convertible
Redeemable Note with Adar Bays dated January 26, 2015 (incorporated
by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 30,
2015)
|
|
Convertible Note
with JMJ Financial dated January 26, 2015 (incorporated by
reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on January 30,
2015)
|
|
Convertible Note
with Vista Capital Investments, LLC dated February 4, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on February 9, 2015)
|
|
Securities Purchase
Agreement with KBM Worldwide, Inc dated February 17, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on February 24, 2015)
|
|
Convertible
Promissory Note with KBM Worldwide, Inc dated February 17, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on February 24, 2015)
|
33
Securities Purchase
Agreement with EMA Financial, LLC dated February 19, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on February 24, 2015)
|
|
Convertible Note
with EMA Financial, LLC dated February 19, 2015 (incorporated by
reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on February 24,
2015)
|
|
Note Purchase
Agreement with Tangiers Investment Group, LLC dated March 8, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on March 13, 2015)
|
|
Convertible
Promissory Note with Tangiers Investment Group, LLC dated March 8,
2015 (incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K
filed on March 13, 2015)
|
|
Non-Exclusive
Agreement with Carter, Terry & Company dated December 18, 2014
(incorporated by reference to our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
on March 30, 2015)
|
|
10.42
|
Securities Purchase
Agreement with VIS Vires Group, Inc. dated April 3, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
filed on May 14, 2015)
|
10.43
|
Convertible
Promissory Note with VIS Vires Group, Inc. dated April 3, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
filed on May 14, 2015)
|
Revenue Based
Factoring Agreement with Power Up dated October 1, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on October 5, 2015)
|
|
Security Agreement
and Guarantee with Power Up dated October 1, 2015 (incorporated by
reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 5,
2015)
|
|
Revenue Based
Factoring Agreement with Power Up dated October 23, 2015
(incorporated by reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on November 5, 2015)
|
|
Security Agreement
and Guarantee with Power Up dated October 23, 2015 (incorporated by
reference to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on November 5,
2015)
|
|
Settlement
Agreement with an individual dated July 27, 2017 (incorporated by
reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Settlement
Agreement with Power Up Lending Group, Ltd. dated December 21, 2017
(incorporated by reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual Report
on Form 10-K filed on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Repayment Agreement
with JMJ Financial dated December 13, 2017 (incorporated by
reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Convertible Note
Redemption Agreement dated December 12, 2017 (incorporated by
reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Exchange/Conversion
Agreement with an individual dated August 15, 2016 (incorporated by
reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Promissory Note
with Dragon Acquisitions dated August 31, 2017 (incorporated by
reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Stock Purchase
Agreement with Empire Relations Group, Inc. dated August 16, 2017
(incorporated by reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual Report
on Form 10-K filed on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Prepaid Forward
Purchase Agreement with Boies Schiller Flexner LLP dated December
22, 2017 (incorporated by reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Demand Promissory
Note with Vox Business Trust, LLC dated December 19, 2017
(incorporated by reference to our December 31, 2015 Annual Report
on Form 10-K filed on May 31, 2018)
|
|
Demand Promissory
Note with RLT Consulting, Inc. dated December 26, 2017
(incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
filed on June 13, 2018)
|
|
Promissory Note
with an individual dated May 1, 2018 (incorporated by reference to
our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed on June 13,
2018)
|
|
Investment Return
Purchase Agreement with an individual dated May 15, 2018
(incorporated by reference to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
filed on June 13, 2018)
|
|
Investment Return
Purchase Agreement with an individual dated March 28,
2018
|
|
Personal Guaranty
of Securities Purchase Agreement dated June 4,
2018
|
|
Secured Original
Issue Discount Promissory Note with GS Capital Partners, LLC dated
June 4, 2018
|
|
Promissory Note
with Riptide Capital, LLC dated April 24, 2018
|
|
Stock Pledge
Agreement with GS Capital Partners, LLC dated June 3,
2018
|
|
(31)
|
Rule
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certifications
|
31.1*
|
Section 302
Certification under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 of the Principal
Executive Officer
|
31.2*
|
Section 302
Certification under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 of the Principal
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
|
(32)
|
Section
1350 Certifications
|
32.1*
|
Section 906
Certification under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 of the Chief
Executive Officer
|
32.2*
|
Section 906
Certification under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 of the Principal
Accounting Officer
|
(101)*
|
Interactive
Data Files
|
101.INS
|
XBRL
Instance Document
|
101.SCH
|
XBRL Taxonomy
Extension Schema Document
|
101.CAL
|
XBRL Taxonomy
Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
|
101.DEF
|
XBRL Taxonomy
Extension Definition Linkbase Document
|
101.LAB
|
XBRL Taxonomy
Extension Label Linkbase Document
|
101.PRE
|
XBRL Taxonomy
Extension Presentation Linkbase Document
|
*
Filed herewith.
‡
Employment
Agreement.
34
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant
has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
GLOBAL DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
By: /s/ William
Delgado
William
Delgado
Chief
Executive Officer
(Principal
Executive Officer)
Date:
August 14, 2018
By: /s/ Jerome J.
Gomolski
Jerome
J. Gomolski
Chief
Financial Officer
(Principal
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
Date:
August 14, 2018
35