GSE SYSTEMS INC - Annual Report: 2009 (Form 10-K)
Conformed
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
(Mark
One)
|
|
[ X ]
|
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008
|
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 001-14785
GSE
Systems, Inc.
|
||
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
Delaware
|
52-1868008
|
|
(State
of incorporation)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification Number)
|
|
1332
Londontown Blvd, Suite 200, Sykesville MD
|
21784
|
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
Code)
|
Registrant's
telephone number, including area code: (410) 970-7800
SECURITIES
REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT:
Title
of each class
|
Name
of each exchange on which registered
|
|
Common
Stock, $.01 par value
|
American
Stock Exchange
|
SECURITIES
REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT: NONE
Indicate by check mark if the
registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the
Securities Act. Yes
[ ] No [X]
Indicate by check mark if the
registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Act. Yes [ ] No [X]
Indicate by check mark whether the
registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and
(2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes [ X ]
No [ ]
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of
delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained
herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III
of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.
[ ]
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting
company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”,
“accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large
accelerated filer [ ]
|
Accelerated
filer [ X ]
|
Non-accelerated
filer [ ]
|
Smaller
reporting company [ ]
|
(Do
not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in rule
12(b)-2 of the Exchange
Act). Yes [ ] No
[X]
The aggregate market value of Common
Stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was $134,757,843 on June 30,
2008, the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second
fiscal quarter, based on the closing price of such stock on that date of
$8.91.
The
number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common Stock as of March 13,
2009 was 15,978,122 shares.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the registrant's Proxy
Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed pursuant to
Regulation 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, are
incorporated by reference into Part III.
1
GSE
SYSTEMS, INC.
FORM
10-K
For
the Year Ended December 31, 2008
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
PART
I
|
Page
|
|
Item
1.
|
Business
|
4
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
18
|
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
23
|
Item
2.
|
Properties
|
23
|
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
23
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
23
|
PART
II
|
||
Item
5.
|
Market
for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related
Stockholder
Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
24
|
Item
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
28
|
Item
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and
Results of Operations
|
29
|
Item
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
48
|
Item
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
50
|
Item
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants
on
Accounting and Financial Disclosure
|
51
|
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
51
|
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information
|
52
|
PART
III
|
||
Item
10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance*
|
53
|
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation*
|
53
|
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
and
Management and Related Stockholder Matters*
|
53
|
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence*
|
53
|
Item
14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services*
|
53
|
PART
IV
|
||
Item
15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules.
|
55
|
SIGNATURES
|
56
|
|
Exhibits
Index
|
57
|
|
*
|
to
be incorporated by reference from the Proxy Statement for the registrant’s
2009 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
|
2
CAUTIONARY
STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS.
This
report and the documents incorporated by reference herein contain
“forward-looking” statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities
Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act that are based on
management’s assumptions, expectations and projections about us, and the
industry within which we operate, that have been made pursuant to the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 which reflect our expectations
regarding our future growth, results of operations, performance and business
prospects and opportunities. Wherever possible, words such as
“anticipate”, “believe”, “continue”, “estimate”, “intend”, “may”, “plan”,
“potential”, “predict”, “expect”, “should”, “will” and similar expressions, or
the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology, have been used to
identify these forward-looking statements. These forward-looking
statements may also use different
phrases. These statements regarding our expectations
reflect our
current beliefs and are based on information currently available to
us. Accordingly, these statements by their nature are subject to
risks and uncertainties, including those listed under Item 1A Risk Factors,
which could cause our actual growth, results, performance and business prospects
and opportunities to differ from those expressed in, or implied by, these
statements. We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or
expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements and you should not
place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Actual results or events
could differ materially from the plans, intentions and expectations disclosed in
the forward-looking statements we make. Except as otherwise required
by federal securities law, we
are not obligated to update or revise these
forward-looking statements to reflect new events or circumstances. We
caution you that a variety of factors, including but not limited to the factors
described below under Item 1A Risk Factors and the following, could cause our
business conditions and results to differ materially from what is contained in
forward-looking statements:
-
|
changes
in the rate of economic growth in the United States and other
major
|
international
economies;
-
|
changes
in investment by the nuclear and fossil electric utility industry, the
chemical and petrochemical industries and the U.S.
military;
|
-
|
changes
in the financial condition of our
customers;
|
-
|
changes
in regulatory environment;
|
-
|
changes
in project design or schedules;
|
-
|
contract
cancellations;
|
-
|
changes
in our estimates of costs to complete
projects;
|
-
|
changes
in trade, monetary and fiscal policies
worldwide;
|
-
|
currency
fluctuations;
|
-
|
war
and/or terrorist attacks on facilities either owned or where equipment or
services are or may be provided;
|
-
|
outcomes
of future litigation;
|
-
|
protection
and validity of our trademarks and other intellectual property
rights;
|
-
|
increasing
competition by foreign and domestic
companies;
|
-
|
compliance
with our debt covenants;
|
-
|
recoverability
of claims against our customers and others;
and
|
-
|
changes
in estimates used in our critical accounting
policies.
|
Other factors and assumptions not
identified above were also involved in the formation of these forward-looking
statements and the failure of such other assumptions to be realized, as well as
other factors, may also cause actual results to differ materially from those
projected. Most of these factors are difficult to predict accurately and are
generally beyond our control. You should consider the areas of risk described
above in connection with any forward-looking statements that may be made by
us. You should not
place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. New factors emerge from
time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict which factors will
arise.
3
We undertake no obligation to publicly
update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information,
future events or otherwise. You are advised, however, to consult any additional
disclosures we make in proxy statements, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and
current reports on Form 8-K filed with the SEC.
PART
I
ITEM
1.
|
BUSINESS.
|
GSE Systems, Inc. (“GSE Systems”,
“GSE”, the “Company”, “our”, “we” or “us”), a Delaware corporation organized in
March 1994, is a world leader in real-time, high fidelity
simulation. The Company provides simulation and educational solutions
and services to the nuclear and fossil electric utility industry and the
chemical and petrochemical industries. In addition, the Company provides plant
monitoring, signal analysis monitoring and optimization software primarily to
the power industry. GSE is the parent company of GSE Power Systems,
Inc., a Delaware corporation; GSE Power Systems, AB, a Swedish corporation; GSE
Engineering Systems (Beijing) Co. Ltd., a Chinese limited liability company; GSE
Systems Ltd., a British limited liability company; and has a 10% minority
interest in Emirates Simulation Academy, LLC, a United Arab Emirates limited
liability company.
The Company’s annual report on
Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on
Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant
to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d) will
be made available free of charge through the Investor Relations section of the
Company’s Internet website (http://www.gses.com) as soon as practicable after
such material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the
SEC. In addition, the public may read and copy any materials we file
with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the
Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC
maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information
statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically
with the SEC at http://www.sec.gov.
Recent
Developments.
On March 28, 2008, the Company
entered into two separate revolving line of credit agreements for two-year
revolving lines of credit with Bank of America, N.A. (“BOA”), in an aggregate
amount of up to $5.0 million. The Company and its subsidiary, GSE
Power Systems, Inc., are jointly and severally liable as
co-borrowers. The credit facilities are collateralized by
substantially all of the Company’s assets and enable the Company to borrow funds
to support working capital needs and standby letters of credit. The
first line of credit in the principal amount of up to $3.5 million enables the
Company to borrow funds up to 90% of eligible foreign accounts receivable, plus
75% of eligible unbilled foreign receivables and 100% of the cash collateral
pledged to BOA on outstanding warranty standby letters of credit. This line of
credit is 90% guaranteed by the Export-Import Bank of the United
States. The interest rate on this line of credit is based on the
daily LIBOR rate plus 150 basis points, with interest only payments due
monthly. The second line of credit in the principal amount of up to
$1.5 million enables the Company to borrow funds up to 80% of domestic accounts
receivable and 30% of domestic unbilled receivables. The interest
rate on this line of credit is based on the daily LIBOR rate plus 225 basis
points, with interest only payments due monthly. The credit
facilities require the Company to comply with certain financial ratios and
preclude the Company from making acquisitions beyond certain limits without the
bank’s consent. At December 31, 2008, the Company was in default on
two of its financial covenants; however, it has received a written waiver from
BOA. The Company’s available borrowing base under the two lines of credit was
$3.2 million at December 31, 2008, of which $105,000 had been utilized to
collateralize a standby letter of credit.
4
The
nuclear power industry has been largely dormant for the last thirty years with
few opportunities to provide new full scope simulators. The Company’s
nuclear simulation business has concentrated mainly on providing services to the
installed base of nuclear simulators worldwide. These services are
primarily related to upgrading antiquated simulation software and hardware
systems, providing new and improved plant and system simulation models, and
modifying the simulator to reflect changes in the physical
plant. However, over the last several years, the nuclear power
industry has experienced a dramatic change, and most energy experts believe the
industry is on the verge of a “renaissance”, driven by the gap between the
energy that the world is projected to need versus the current capacity, the
instability in the cost of oil, and growing environmental concerns over the
usage of fossil fuels. Government and industry sources and trade journals report
that up to 240 new nuclear plants could be built worldwide over the next 20
years. In the U.S. alone, applications for accelerated
construction and operating licenses have been or are expected to be submitted
for 35 new nuclear plants. Each new plant will be required to have a
full scope simulator ready for operator training and certification about two
years prior to plant operation. Similar nuclear plant construction
programs are underway or planned in China, Russia, Ukraine, Japan and Central
Europe to meet growing energy demands. In addition, most U.S. nuclear
electric utilities have applied for license extensions and/or power
upgrades. These license extensions will lead to significant upgrades
to the physical equipment and control room technology which will result in the
need to modify or replace the existing plant control room simulators. The
Company, having what it believes is the largest installed base of existing
simulators, over 60% on a global basis, is well positioned to capture a large
portion of this business, although no assurance can be given that it will be
successful in doing so. The Company logged approximately $26.5
million, $21.5 million and $12.2 million in nuclear simulation orders in the
years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
In 2005,
the Company completed an agreement with Westinghouse Electric Company LLC
(“Westinghouse”) to become their preferred vendor for the development of
simulators for their AP1000 reactor design. As a result of this
agreement, GSE is working closely with Westinghouse to cooperate in the
development of simulators for the AP1000 design and assist Westinghouse in the
verification and validation of the AP1000 Human Machine
Interface. The Company’s simulation models have been used to help
Westinghouse successfully complete several phases of Human Machine Interface
testing with U.S. regulators. Westinghouse and its consortium
partners received definitive multi-million dollar contracts to provide four
AP1000 nuclear power plants in China. The four plants are to be
constructed in pairs on China’s eastern coast at Sanmen in Zhejiang province and
Haiyang in Shandong province. In September 2007, GSE received an initial
contract from Westinghouse to begin work on the Sanmen simulator project in
China. In February 2008, the Company received the balance of its
multi-million dollar order for the Sanmen project. In April 2008, GSE
received a contract from Westinghouse to begin work on the Haiyang simulator
project. The Company expects to receive the balance of the Haiyang
contract from Westinghouse in 2009. The Westinghouse agreement is not
exclusive and does not prevent the Company from working with other nuclear
vendors anywhere in the world.
5
In
November 2008, the Company was awarded a contract from NuScale Power, Inc. to
develop simulation models for its novel, first-of-a-kind nuclear power
plant. NuScale Power, Inc. through work performed at Oregon State
University and the Department of Energy’s Idaho National Engineering laboratory,
has designed a small, scalable light water nuclear reactor design for multiple
purposes from electricity generation to producing steam needed for industrial
applications. GSE’s simulation models will be used in NuScale’s
design certification process, including design analysis, and control system
strategy and plant procedure development. Eventually the simulation
models would form the basis for a full scope operator training system to license
the operators of these new plants.
The
Company’s fossil fueled power simulation business has been growing rapidly over
the past three years. The Company logged approximately $13.6 million,
$11.2 million, and $4.8 million of fossil fueled simulation orders for the years
ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The
transition from obsolete analog control systems to modern digital control
systems and the new requirements for complex emission control systems are
contributing to the growth the Company is experiencing in this business, coupled
with the fact that GSE’s high-fidelity simulation models can be used to validate
control schemes and logics for new designs before the control systems are
deployed to the field. GSE builds the plant models based upon design
specifications supplied by its customers, and the models then drive the actual
digital control systems in the factory. This testing can uncover
numerous control system discrepancies. By correcting these problems
at the factory versus in the field, GSE’s customers can save millions in reduced
down time and reduced commissioning time.
GSE’s
process industries simulation business customers include primarily oil and gas
production facilities, oil refining plants, chemical plants and petro-chemical
facilities. As in the power industry, there is increasing focus on
regular, periodic and systematic training of plant operator personnel which may
reduce the risk of operator errors and potentially catastrophic environment
disasters and/or loss of life. The Company logged approximately
$1.2 million, $3.4 million, and $1.5 million of process industry simulation
orders for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
In 2008,
the Company completed its $16.9 million order from the Emirates Simulation
Academy in the UAE to supply five simulators and an integrated training program
except for the final warranty coverage. The Academy had its formal
opening on January 14, 2009. The Company continues to develop its concept of
integrating simulation with broader training programs and educational
initiatives giving customers a turnkey alternative to traditional on-site
operator and maintenance training. In the fourth quarter 2008, the
Company was awarded a nuclear power plant operator training program contract
with one of the largest U.S. nuclear utilities. The scope of the
award includes the development of course materials for a licensed operator
preparation course which includes modules on nuclear plant fundamentals,
introduction to nuclear plant systems, human performance principles and team
building, and an introduction to integrated nuclear plant
operations. The classroom training, which GSE personnel will conduct
at a Georgia technical college, is scheduled to commence in mid
2009.
The
global recession and financial credit crisis has not currently had a significant
effect on the Company’s business. Specifically, the Company has seen
no delays or cancellations to the projects it is currently working on, and is
unaware of any delays or cancellations to projects that the Company expects to
secure in 2009.
6
Background.
GSE Systems was formed on March 30,
1994 to consolidate the simulation and related businesses of S3 Technologies,
General Physics International Engineering & Simulation and EuroSim, each
separately owned and operated by ManTech International Corporation, GP
Strategies Corporation and Vattenfall AB, respectively.
In December 1997, the Company acquired
100% of the outstanding common stock of J.L. Ryan, Inc. (“Ryan”), a provider of
engineering modifications and upgrade services to the power plant simulation
market. The combination of the Company’s pre-existing technology with
the technical staff of the acquired Ryan business positioned the Company to be
more competitive for modifications and upgrade service projects within the
nuclear simulation market.
In October 2002, GSE purchased the
stock of ManTech Automation Systems (Beijing) Company Ltd, from ManTech
International Corp. The Chinese company, which has fourteen
employees, was renamed GSE Systems Engineering (Beijing) Company Ltd. This
acquisition gave the Company a base in China to pursue and implement simulation
projects in that emerging market.
In 2007, the Company formed a
subsidiary, GSE Systems Ltd., in the United Kingdom. The British
subsidiary was established to provide training solutions to the nuclear power
industry. The Company has an agreement with the University of Strathclyde to
provide training services at the University using an on-site training simulator
provided by GSE.
Simulation
Business.
I. Nuclear and Fossil Fuel
Power Simulation.
Industry History
The real-time simulation industry grew
from the need to train people on complex and potentially dangerous operations,
without placing life or capital assets at risk. Real-time simulation
has been used for the training of plant operators for the power industry,
including both nuclear power plants and conventional fossil fuel power plants
(i.e., coal, oil, and natural gas), since the early 1970s. Real-time
simulation usage has traditionally centered on initial training of operators and
follow-on training of operators in emergency conditions that can best be
achieved through simulation replicating actual plant operations.
In the nuclear power industry, use of a
simulator that accurately reflects the current actual plant design is mandated
by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This mandate resulted from
the investigation of the accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in
1979, which was attributed, at least in part, to operator error. The
NRC requires nuclear plant operators to earn their licenses through simulator
testing. Each nuclear plant simulator must pass a certification
program to ensure that the initial plant design and all subsequent changes made
to the actual plant control room or plant operations are accurately reflected in
the simulator. Plant operating licenses are tied to simulator
certification.
Full scope power plant simulators are a
physical representation of the entire plant control room. For older
plants, the control panels are connected to an input/output (I/O) system, which
converts analog electrical signals to digital signals understood by the
simulation computer. For newer plants, the control rooms consist
mainly of digital control systems and a series of computer screens used by the
operator to control the plant. The simulation computer houses the
mathematical models, which simulate the physical performance of the power
plant’s systems such as the reactor core, steam boiler, cooling water, steam
turbine, electrical generator, plant system controls and electrical distribution
systems. Partial scope simulators can be viewed as a subset of a full
scope simulator. Instead of simulating the entire performance of the
power plant, a partial scope simulator might represent one or two critical
systems such as the steam turbine and/or electrical generator
operation.
7
In the past, training simulators had to
strike a delicate balance between providing an accurate engineering
representation of the plant, while still operating in “real-time” in order to
provide effective training. As computing power has increased, so too
has the capacity of simulators to provide more accurate plant representations in
real-time based upon simulation models developed from engineering design
codes. The more sophisticated and accurate engineering codes allows
customers to use the simulator to help validate plant design, control system
strategies, control system displays, and develop plant operating procedures and
training material.
Simulation also is used to validate
proposed plant equipment changes and to confirm the results of such changes,
prior to making the change in the plant, which can save time and money, as well
as reduce the risk of unsafe designs, for the utility.
The importance of nuclear power to the
U.S. energy supply is resulting in the extension of the useful lives of U.S.
nuclear power plants. Any service life extension of a nuclear power
plant is likely to require major upgrades to the plant's equipment and
technology, including its simulator.
Fossil fuel plant simulators are not
required by law or regulation, but are justified as a cost-effective approach to
train operators on new digital control systems being implemented at many fossil
fuel power plants. The size, complexity and price of a fossil plant
simulator are much lower than for simulators used for nuclear
plants. Fossil plant simulators have traditionally used lower
fidelity (less sophisticated) mathematical models to provide an approximate
representation of plant performance. The demand for highly accurate
models did not exist in the early market for fossil simulators since the main
use of the simulator was to train operators on the functionality of distributed
control systems for plant start-up activities.
The deregulation of the power industry
has forced utilities to view their assets differently. Power plants
must now be profit centers, and gaining the maximum efficiency from the plant to
become, or remain, competitive is a paramount issue. The mindset of
the operator has shifted, as plant operators now must perform within narrower
and narrower performance margins while still maintaining safe
operations. GSE believes its fossil fuel plant customers are now
recognizing the benefits of high fidelity simulation models that provide highly
accurate representations of plant operations to help plant operators and
management determine optimal performance conditions.
Beyond traditional operator training
uses, the Company sees a significant shift in the use of its simulators to test
plant automation systems before they are deployed in the actual
plant. Control strategies and equipment set points are validated on
the simulator prior to plant start up to ensure the control schemes work
properly and the expected plant performance is achieved. Performing
these tests on a high fidelity simulator saves days or weeks in the plant start
up, thereby reducing cost and ensuring quicker revenue generation by the
utility.
Industry Future
The Company sees a renaissance in
nuclear power generation both domestically and internationally that will provide
significant opportunities for expansion of the Company’s
business. China has announced plans to build 40 new nuclear plants by
the year 2020. Russia has also announced plans for 40 new plants by
2030. New plants are on the drawing board or under construction in
Finland, Slovakia, and Bulgaria. Domestically, numerous utilities are
preparing applications for Construction and Operating Licenses under the
Department of Energy 2010 incentive program, a joint government/industry
cost-shared effort to identify sites for new nuclear power plants, develop
advanced nuclear plant technologies, and demonstrate new regulatory processes
leading to a private sector decision to order new nuclear power plants for
deployment in the United States in the 2010 timeframe. Beyond new
construction, numerous U.S. utilities are extending the useful life of their
current assets.
8
These license extension processes in
the nuclear industry will result in significant changes in plant equipment and
control room technology. Based upon U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
regulations, each training simulator is required to reflect all changes that are
made in the actual plant, thus when changes in plant equipment and control room
technology are made, the nuclear power plants must either upgrade existing
simulators or purchase brand new simulators.
The second phenomena affecting the
industry is the aging of the nuclear and fossil plant operator workforce which
will result in the need for simulation to train the next generation of plant
operators. The industry is faced with an aging workforce at the same
time new capacity is needed, thereby placing significant pressure on the
industry to find and train the next generation of operations and maintenance
personnel. According to the Energy Central Research and Analysis
Division white paper entitled The High Cost of Losing Intellectual
Capital, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts that 30% or more of
the existing workforce will be eligible for retirement in the next five years,
and it is believed that by 2012 there will be nearly 10,000 more utility
industry jobs then workers to fill them.
Therefore, the Company believes that
these trends, if they come to fruition in whole or even in part, represent a
market opportunity for its real-time simulation, plant optimization, asset
management and condition monitoring products and services.
GSE’s Solution
The Company’s Power Simulation
business is a leader in the development, marketing and support of high fidelity,
real-time, dynamic simulation software for the electric utility
industry. The Company has built or modified about 65 of the
approximately 75 full-scope simulators serving about 103 operating nuclear power
plants in the United States. Outside the United States, GSE has built
or modified about 73 of the approximately 167 full-scope simulators serving
approximately 329 operating nuclear power plants.
The Company has developed integrated
training solutions which combine the power of the Company’s simulation
technology with training content to provide turn-key training for the power and
process industries. These training centers will help industry bridge
the gap between college and university level training and real world experience
through simulation.
In addition to operator training, the
Company’s simulation products and services permit plant owners and operators to
simulate the effects of changes in plant configuration and performance
conditions to optimize plant operation. These features allow the
Company’s customers to understand the cost implications of replacing a piece of
equipment, installing new technology or holding out-of-service
assets. GSE has also developed a suite of tools based on
sophisticated signal analysis and simulation techniques to help its customers
manage their assets by determining equipment degradation before it severely
impacts plant performance.
9
The Company has also focused on
upgrading older technology used in power plants to new technology upgrades for
plant process computers and safety parameter display systems. As
nuclear plants in the U.S. continue to age, the Company will seek more business
in this upgrade market.
GSE provides both turn-key solutions,
including simulated hardware and proprietary software, to match a specific
plant, and discrete simulation technology for specific uses throughout a
plant. Its substantial investment in simulation technology has led to
the development of proprietary software tools. These tools
significantly reduce the cost and time to implement simulation solutions and
support long-term maintenance. The Company’s high fidelity, real-time
simulation technology for power plant fluid, logic and control, electrical
systems and associated real-time support software, JADE, is available for use
primarily on UNIX, Linux and Windows computer platforms. The
Company’s Xtreme tools were designed for the Windows
environment. Both technologies were specifically designed to provide
user friendly graphic interfaces to the Company’s high fidelity
simulator.
In addition to the simulator market,
the Company offers products aimed at improving performance of existing plants by
reducing the number of unplanned outages due to equipment
failure. Using advanced signal analysis techniques, the Company’s
tools can predict when certain plant equipment needs to be
replaced. Replacement of critical equipment prior to failure permits
effective planning and efficient use of maintenance time during scheduled
off-line periods.
Products of the Power Simulation
business include:
¨
|
Java Applications &
Development Environment (JADE™), a Java-based application that
provides a window into the simulation instructor station and takes
advantage of the web capabilities of Java, allowing customers to access
the simulator and run simulation scenarios from anywhere they have access
to the web. JADE includes the following software modeling
tools:
|
¨
|
JFlow™, a modeling tool
that generates dynamic models for flow and pressure
networks.
|
¨
|
JControl™, a modeling
tool that generates control logic models from logic
diagrams.
|
¨
|
JLogic™, a modeling
tool that generates control logic models from schematic diagrams.
|
¨
|
JElectric™, a modeling
tool that generates electric system models from schematic and one-line
diagrams.
|
¨
|
JTopmeret™, a modeling
tool that generates two phase network dynamic models.
|
¨
|
JDesigner™, a JADE
based intuitive graphic editor for all JADE tools.
|
¨ | JStation™, a JADE based web-enabled Instructor Station. |
¨
|
Xtreme Tools™,
a suite of software modeling tools
developled under the Microsoft Windows environment. It
includes:
|
¨
|
Xtreme Flow™, a modeling tool
that generates dynamic models for flow and pressure
networks.
|
¨
|
Xtreme Control™, a modeling tool
that generates control logic models from logic
diagrams.
|
¨
|
Xtreme Logic™, a
modeling tool that generates control logic models from schematic
diagrams.
|
¨ | Xtreme Electric™, a modeling tool that generates electric system models from schematic and one-line diagrams. |
¨
|
RELAP5 R/T HD™, a
real-time version of the safety analysis code RELAP5 developed by the
Idaho National Laboratory. The Company’s HD (High Definition)
version of RELAP5 R/T enables the engineers to understand and control all
of the internal functions of RELAP5, making this solution unique in the
market.
|
10
¨
|
SimExec® and OpenSim®, real-time
simulation executive systems that control all real-time simulation
activities and allow for an off-line software development environment in
parallel with the training environment. OpenSim is targeted for
users of Microsoft Windows operating systems, while SimExec is targeted for
users of Microsoft Windows, UNIX and Linux operating
systems.
|
¨
|
SmartTutor®,
complementary software for instructor stations. It provides new
capabilities to help improve training methodologies and
productivity. Using Microsoft Smart Tag technology, SmartTutor
allows the control of the simulator software directly from Microsoft
Office products. The user can run training scenarios directly
from a Microsoft Word document, or he can plot and show transients live
within a Microsoft PowerPoint
slide.
|
¨
|
Xtreme I/S™, a
Microsoft Windows based Instructor Station that allows the use of
Microsoft Word and PowerPoint to control the real-time simulation
environment. Xtreme I/S is a user-friendly tool for classroom training and
electronic report generation. It provides real-time plant
performance directly from the simulator during classroom training, which
drastically increases learning
efficiency.
|
¨
|
Pegasus Surveillance and
Diagnosis System™, a software package for semi-automatic plant
surveillance and diagnostics, incorporates sophisticated signal processing
and simulation techniques to help operators evaluate the condition and
performance of plant components. Pegasus permits plant
management to identify degraded performance and replace components before
they fail.
|
¨
|
SIMON™, a computer
workstation system used for monitoring stability of boiling water reactor
plants. SIMON assists the operator in determining potential instability
events, enabling corrective action to be taken to prevent unnecessary
plant shutdowns.
|
The Simulation business also provides
consulting and engineering services to help users plan, design, implement, and
manage/support simulation and control systems. Services include application
engineering, project management, training, site services, maintenance contracts
and repair.
Strategy
The goal of the Power Simulation
business is to expand its business on three fronts:
¨
|
Continue
serving its traditional customer
base.
|
¨
|
Combine
its simulation capability with training content to provide totally
integrated training solutions.
|
¨
|
Expand
the use of high fidelity simulatoin beyond trining to help validate plant
design.
|
Traditional Simulation
Market. Nuclear power currently accounts for about 20% of the
electrical power grid capacity in the United States and this percentage will
likely remain the same even as total capacity increases. Any new
nuclear power plants will likely be of the advanced reactor designs created by
Westinghouse, General Electric and Areva. These new designs require
new simulators and training programs, as they are different from the nuclear
power plant designs currently in operation. In addition to new power plants,
existing nuclear power plants will likely be required to remain on-line for a
longer period than originally expected. In order to stay in
operation, many plants will require life extension
modifications. Since all existing U.S. nuclear power plants went
on-line before 1979, their designs and technology can also benefit from the
substantial advances in plant design and technology developed over the past 30
years. For example, several of the Company’s U.S. utility customers
are considering replacing their existing hard panel control rooms with modern
distributed control systems (DCS) as are common in fossil fuel plants, and which
have been implemented in Europe for several years. Significant
changes to control room instrumentation and overall control strategy from hard
panel to DCS generally require modification or replacement of the plant
simulator. With the largest installed base of nuclear plant simulators in the
world, the Company believes it is uniquely positioned to serve this market
segment with new simulation products and services. GSE has received
several projects in the last few years for implementing digital turbine control
systems in U.S. plants.
11
As plants extend their useful life,
many plan to “up-rate” the existing capacity to increase electrical
yield. By changing the capacity of certain equipment in a plant, the
utility can gain upwards of a 10%-15% increase in output. Again, any
such changes must be reflected in the control room simulator, and operators must
be trained on the new equipment before implementation.
In addition to the United States
markets, several emerging regions of the world are expanding their electrical
capacity with both nuclear and fossil fuel power plants. This is particularly
the case in China and the Gulf Region of the Middle East. In 2006,
the Company received its first contract for a fully integrated training academy
in the United Arab Emirates. The Emirates Simulation Academy, LLC is
using five simulators developed by the Company for gas turbine plants, combined
cycle power plants, oil refineries, oil platforms and desalination
plants. In addition, the Company has provided the training content
for both classroom and simulator training. The Company sees other
opportunities for similar academies in other regions of the world.
Classroom
Simulation. In recent years the Company has upgraded numerous
training simulators to utilize standard PC technology. As an
extension of the PC-based simulator technology, the Company has developed tools
which will allow the training simulator to be used in a classroom setting,
replacing the actual control room panels with “soft-panel”
graphics.
Increased training requirements and
demands for performance improvement have resulted in simulator training time
becoming scarce. By providing the actual training simulator models in
a classroom setting, the value of the simulator is increased by allowing more
personnel the training advantages of interactive, dynamic real-time
simulation.
The Company pioneered the technology to
run a simulator on a PC several years ago. However, the technology
remains complex, which prevented wide deployment of the simulator in
classrooms. The Company has developed unique software which allows
simulator-based training lessons to be easily developed and deployed in a
classroom setting.
Simulation Beyond
Training. In addition to operator training, the Company’s
simulation products can meet this increased need for efficiency by assisting
plant operators in understanding the cost implications of replacing equipment,
installing new technology and maintaining out-of-service assets. In
order to exploit this potential, the Company has increased the fidelity of its
simulation products and is marketing its services to increase the fidelity of
simulators that are already in operation.
As computing power and networking
technologies improve, several of the Company’s customers have started to migrate
simulation technology from the training organization to the engineering
organization. The same full scope simulation software that drives the
simulated control room panels in a simulator can be used with graphical
representations of the panels so engineers can test design changes and see how
the balance of the plant will react to such changes. GSE has developed a
Java-based application to allow customers easier access to, and use of, the
simulation capabilities across the organization through network
communication.
12
Optimize Existing Engineering
Resources. GSE’s Power domestic service organization focuses
on simulator upgrades and retrofits. In addition to domestic
resources, GSE has developed a network of trained engineers in Russia, Ukraine,
Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and China. These foreign resources provide
low cost engineering and software development capabilities and are readily
available to supplement the United States engineering staff as
necessary.
Strategic Alliances
Power’s
strategic alliances have enabled the Company to penetrate regions outside the
United States by combining the Company’s technological expertise with the
regional presence and knowledge of local market participants. These
strategic alliances have also permitted the reduction of research and
development and marketing costs by sharing such costs with other
companies.
In recent
years, a significant amount of the Company’s international business has come
from contracts in Eastern Europe, including the republics of the former Soviet
Union, and the Pacific Rim. In order to acquire and perform these
contracts, the Company entered into strategic alliances with various entities
including All Russian Research Institute for Nuclear Power Plant Operation
(Russia); Kurchatov Institute (Russia); Risk Engineering Ltd. (Bulgaria);
Samsung Electronics (Korea); Sinopec Ningbo Engineering Company (China); Toyo
Engineering Corporation (Japan); and Westinghouse Electric Company LLC
(U.S.). In March 2006, GSE completed a strategic alliance with the
University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, UK to develop a simulation training and
plant diagnostics center to serve the UK.
Competition
The Power
Simulation business encounters intense competition. In the nuclear
simulation market, GSE competes directly with larger firms primarily from Canada
and Germany, such as MAPPS Inc., a subsidiary of L-3 Communications, and
Rheinmetal Defense Electronics (RDE). The fossil simulation market is
represented by smaller companies in the U.S. and overseas. Several of
the Company’s competitors have greater capital and other resources than it has,
including, among other advantages, more personnel and greater marketing,
financial, technical and research and development
capabilities. Customer purchasing decisions are generally based upon
price, the quality of the technology, experience in related projects, and the
financial stability of the supplier.
Customers
The Power
Simulation business has provided approximately 200 simulation systems to an
installed base of over 75 customers worldwide. In 2008, approximately
63% of the Company’s revenue was generated from end users outside the United
States. Customers include, among others, ABB Inc., American
Electric Power, Bernische Kraftwerke AG (Switzerland), British Energy Generation
Ltd. (UK), Comission Federal De Electricidad (Mexico), Emerson Process
Management, Emirates Simulation Academy, LLC (UAE), Kapar Energy
Ventures SDN BHD (Malaysia), Karnkraftsakerhet och Utbildning AB (Sweden),
Kraftwerks Simulator Gesellschaft mbH (Germany), Battelle’s Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory, Nuclear Engineering Ltd. (Japan), Pebble Bed Modular
Reactor (Pty) Ltd. (South Africa), PSEG Nuclear, Inc., and Rosenergoatom Federal
State Owned Enterprise (Russia).
For the
year ended December 31, 2008, Emerson Process Management provided 16% of the
Company’s consolidated revenue (8% in 2007 and 10% in 2006) and American
Electric Power provided 11% of the Company's consolidated revenue (0% in 2007
and 1% in 2006).
13
Sales and Marketing
The Company markets its Power
Simulation products and services through a network of direct sales staff, agents
and representatives, systems integrators and strategic alliance partners.
Market-oriented business and customer development teams define and implement
specific campaigns to pursue opportunities in the power
marketplace.
The Company’s ability to support its
multi-facility, international and/or multinational Power Simulation clients is
facilitated by its network of offices and strategic partners in the U.S. and
overseas. Power Simulation offices are maintained in Maryland and Georgia, and
outside the U.S., in Sweden and China. In addition to the offices
located overseas, the Company’s ability to conduct international business is
enhanced by its multilingual and multicultural work force. GSE has strategic
relationships with systems integrators and agents representing its interests in
the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Germany, Japan, Mexico, People’s Republic of
China, South Africa, Spain, South Korea, Taiwan, Ukraine and the United
Kingdom.
II. Process Industries
Simulation.
Industry
Throughout the process industries there
is continuing competitive pressure, reduction of technical resources, and an
aging workforce which is forcing process manufacturers to turn to advanced
technologies for real-time optimization, training, and advanced process
control. Operational efficiency is vital for companies to remain
competitive where many of the manufacturing industries operate on very thin
margins. There are only one or two advanced technology companies that offer
services fully across this spectrum, and GSE offers dynamic real-time simulation
capabilities for operator training and plant design validation and verification
into this segment.
GSE’s Solution
The
SimSuite Pro™ product
was developed by GSE specifically for dynamic real-time simulation for operator
training and validating the plant design logic and control. The GSE culture and
expertise is one of customized project execution and delivery. This
marketplace places a high value on experience, both company-wide and for the
individuals on the project teams, so GSE promotes its long history in training
simulators, while also seeking new applications. The SimSuite Pro package
continues to be enhanced with features applicable not just to the execution of
professional training techniques and design validation, but also to the
recording and validating of process operator performance for potential
certification.
Strategy
GSE is
uniquely positioned in the process simulation market to provide total training
solutions which combine the development of the plant simulator with the training
infrastructure and course material to enable the customer to truly benefit from
the simulator investment. The core concepts of process simulation
make the technology a basis for other potential process improvement activities,
such as Advanced Process Control and Process Optimization, which is where some
of the major GSE competition has more business focus than for operator training.
GSE will continue to emphasize its operator training focus and strengths, as
well as the application of the process simulator for change management, where
changes in the process, control strategy, or operating procedures can be
evaluated in real time before they are applied to the actual process units.
On-stream time is an important economic factor, and there is recognizable value
in avoiding the risk of unplanned process disturbances from invalidated
changes.
14
An
emerging energy market is developing for Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle
(“IGCC”) power plants. These new plants produce electricity more
efficiently than traditional power plants by first converting existing refinery
waste materials into synthetic gas that is used to power a gas
turbine. The gas is then burned to create steam to turn a steam
turbine. The unique nature of these plants requires expertise both in
chemical process simulation and power simulation. GSE is one of the
few simulator companies in the world with expertise in both areas.
In 2007,
GSE was awarded a contract from Sinopec Ningbo Engineering Company (“SNEC”) to
build an IGCC simulation platform for design verification and validation of the
Fujian IGCC plant in China. GSE also formed a strategic alliance with
SNEC to build simulators for the SNEC designed refineries and IGCC plants
throughout China.
Customers
Hydrocarbon and chemical process
customers include numerous large oil refineries and chemical plants such as
Statoil ASA of Norway, Bayernoil of Germany, Saudi Basic Industries Corporation
of Saudi Arabia, Sinopec Ningbo Engineering Company of China, and Savannah River
Nuclear Solutions, LLC of the U.S.
Competition
GSE’s
process simulation competitors are a varied group. There are major corporations
offering a wide range of products and services that include operator training
simulators. There are also companies focused on Process Technology
and manufacturing enhancement, such as Invensys and Honeywell who are
Distributed Control System (“DCS”) distributors to the refining industry and
provide operator simulation as part of their DCS
offering. There is a collection of companies with specific
industry niches that enables them to compete in operator training simulation,
such as Invensys and RSI Simcon. There are also the smaller training companies
that compete at the lower cost levels of Computer Based Training (“CBT”) or
simple simulations close to CBT.
The GSE focus on dynamic simulation for
training and design validation is a business strength, and its vendor
independence, with the ability to integrate to different vendor’s process
control systems, is also a value which is appreciated by customers. GSE can be
seen as a best-of-breed type of supplier because it is not tied to a major
control system, nor is
it providing
simulation software for engineering and business management with high annual
license fees.
Sales and Marketing
The Company will market its Process
Simulation technologies through a combination of techniques including its
existing direct sales channel, sales agents, and strategic alliance
partners.
15
Competitive
Advantages.
The Company believes that it is in a
strong position to compete in the Simulation markets based upon the following
strengths:
¨
|
Technical and Applications
Expertise. GSE is a leading innovator and developer of
real-time software with more than 30 years of experience producing high
fidelity real-time simulators. As a result, the Company has
acquired substantial applications expertise in the energy and industrial
process industries. The Company employs a highly educated and
experienced multinational workforce of 178 employees, including
approximately 130 engineers and scientists. Approximately 48%
these engineers and scientists have advanced science and technical degrees
in fields such as chemical, mechanical and electrical engineering, applied
mathematics and computer sciences.
|
¨
|
Proprietary Software
Tools. GSE has developed a library of proprietary
software tools including auto-code generators and system models that
substantially facilitate and expedite the design, production and
integration, testing and modification of software and
systems. These tools are used to automatically generate the
computer code and systems models required for specific functions commonly
used in simulation applications, thereby enabling it or its customers to
develop high fidelity real-time software quickly, accurately and at lower
costs.
|
¨
|
Open System
Architecture. GSE’s software products and tools are
executed on standard operating systems with third-party off-the-shelf
hardware. The hardware and operating system independence of its
software enhances the value of its products by permitting customers to
acquire less expensive hardware and operating systems. The
Company’s products work in the increasingly popular Microsoft operating
environment, allowing full utilization and integration of numerous
off-the-shelf products for improved
performance.
|
¨
|
Training
Curricula. The Company has developed detailed
course material in engineering fundamentals and specific industrial
applications.
|
¨
|
International
Strengths. Approximately 63% of the Company’s 2008
revenue was derived from international sales of its products and
services. GSE has a multinational sales force with offices
located in Beijing, China, and Nyköping, Sweden and agents,
representatives and partners in 20 other countries. To capitalize on
international opportunities and penetrate foreign markets, the Company has
established strategic alliances and partnerships with several foreign
entities and universities.
|
Intellectual Property.
The
Company depends upon its intellectual property rights in its proprietary
technology and information. GSE maintains a portfolio of trademarks
(both registered and unregistered), copyrights (both registered and
unregistered), and licenses. While such trademarks, copyrights and
licenses as a group are of material importance to the Company, it does not
consider any one trademark, copyright, or license to be of such importance that
the loss or expiration thereof would materially affect the
Company. The Company relies upon a combination of trade
secrets, copyright, and trademark law, contractual arrangements and technical
means to protect its intellectual property rights. GSE distributes
its software products under software license agreements that grant customers
nonexclusive licenses for the use of its products, which are
nontransferable. Use of the licensed software is restricted to
designated computers at specified sites, unless the customer obtains a site
license of its use of the software. Software and hardware security
measures are also employed to prevent unauthorized use of the Company’s
software, and the licensed software is subject to terms and conditions
prohibiting unauthorized reproduction of the software.
16
The
Company does not own any patents. The Company believes that all of
the Company’s trademarks (especially those that use the phrase "GSE Systems")
are valid and will have an unlimited duration as long as they are adequately
protected and sufficiently used. The Company’s licenses are perpetual
in nature and will have an unlimited duration as long as they are adequately
protected and the parties adhere to the material terms and
conditions.
GSE has
eleven registered U.S. trademarks: RETACT®, GSE Systems®, THOR®,
OpenSim®, SmartTutor®, SimSuite Pro®, ESmart®, GAARDS®, Openexec®,
REMITS-Real-Time Emergency Management Interactive Training System® and
SimExec® Some of these trademarks have also been registered in
foreign countries. The Company also claims trademark rights to
GFLOW+™, GLOGIC+™, GCONTROL+™, GPower+™, SimSuite Power™, Xtreme I/S™, RACS™,
PEGASUS Plant Surveillance and Diagnosis System™, SIMON™, BRUS™, Sens Base™,
Vista PIN™, and Java Application and Development Enviroment
(JADE)™.
In
addition, the Company maintains federal statutory copyright protection with
respect to its software programs and products, has registered copyrights for
some of the documentation and manuals related to these programs, and maintains
trade secret protection on its software products.
Despite
these protections, the Company cannot be sure that it has protected or will be
able to protect its intellectual property adequately, that the unauthorized
disclosure or use of its intellectual property will be prevented, that others
have not or will not develop similar technology independently, or, to the extent
it owns any patents in the future, that others have not or will not be able to
design around those patents. Furthermore, the laws of certain
countries in which the Company’s products are sold do not protect its products
and intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United
States.
Industries
Served.
The following chart illustrates the
approximate percentage of the Company's 2008, 2007, and 2006 consolidated
revenue by industries served:
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|||||||||||
Nuclear
power industry
|
54 | % | 45 | % | 60 | % | |||||||
Fossil
fuel power industry
|
31 | % | 20 | % | 18 | % | |||||||
Training
and education industry
|
6 | % | 31 | % | 21 | % | |||||||
Other
|
9 | % | 4 | % | 1 | % | |||||||
Total
|
100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % |
17
Contract
Backlog.
The Company does not reflect an order
in backlog until it has received a contract that specifies the terms and
milestone delivery dates. As of December 31, 2008, the Company’s aggregate
contract backlog totaled approximately $38.1 million of which approximately
$20.1 million or 53% is expected to be converted to revenue by December 31,
2009. As of
December 31, 2007, the Company’s aggregate contract backlog totaled
approximately $24.6 million.
Employees.
As of December 31, 2008, the Company
had 178 employees as compared to 153 employees at December 31,
2007.
ITEM
1A. RISK
FACTORS.
The
following discussion of risk factors contains “forward-looking statements,” as
discussed on pages 3 and 4 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These
risk factors may be important to understanding any statement in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K or elsewhere. The Company believes that the
following risk factors may cause the market price for its common stock to
fluctuate, perhaps significantly. In addition, in recent years the stock market
in general, and the shares of technology companies in particular, have
experienced extreme price fluctuations. The Company’s common stock
has also experienced a relatively low trading volume, making it further
susceptible to extreme price fluctuations. The following information should be
read in conjunction with Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations and the consolidated financial
statements and related notes under Item 8, Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
We routinely encounter and address
risks, some of which may cause our future results to be different, sometimes
materially, than we presently anticipate. Discussion about important
operational risks that we encounter can be found in Item 1, Business and Item 7,
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations. We have described certain important strategic risks
below. Our reactions as well as our competitors’ reactions to
material future developments may affect our future results.
The
Company’s global growth is subject to a number of economic and political
risks.
The Company conducts its operations in
North America, Europe, Asia and the Middle East. Global economic
developments affect businesses such as GSE, and the Company’s operations are
subject to the effects of global competition. The Company’s global business is
affected by local economic environments, including inflation, recession and
currency volatility. Political changes, some of which may be
disruptive, can interfere with the Company’s supply chain, its customers and all
of its activities in a particular location. While some of these risks can be
hedged using derivatives or other financial instruments and some are insurable,
such attempts to mitigate these risks are costly and not always
successful. The current global recession has not yet had a
material impact on the Company’s business. The Company’s backlog as
of December 31, 2008 totaled $38.1 million, a 54.9% increase over the Company’s
backlog at December 31, 2007. The Company has seen no significant delays or
cancellations to the projects it is currently working on and is unaware of any
significant delays or cancellations to projects that the Company expects to
secure in 2009. However, as the recession continues, we may see a
significant impact on the Company’s operations.
18
The Company’s expense levels are
based upon its expectations as to future revenue, so it may be unable to adjust
spending to compensate for a revenue shortfall. Accordingly, any
revenue shortfall would likely have a disproportionate effect on the Company’s
operating results.
The
Company’s revenue was $29.0 million, $31.9 million, and $27.5 million for the
years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The
Company’s operating income (loss) was $(12,000), $2.2 million and $2.1 million
for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006,
respectively. The Company’s operating results have fluctuated in the
past and may fluctuate significantly in the future as a result of a variety of
factors, including purchasing patterns, timing of new products and enhancements
by the Company and its competitors, and fluctuating global economic
conditions. Since the Company’s expense levels are based in part on
its expectations as to future revenue and includes certain fixed costs, the
Company may be unable to adjust spending in a timely manner to compensate for
any revenue shortfall and such revenue shortfalls would likely have a
disproportionate adverse effect on operating results.
Risk
of International Sales and Operations.
Sales of
products and services to end users outside the United States accounted for
approximately 63% of the Company’s consolidated revenue in 2008, 71% of
consolidated revenue in 2007, and 74% of consolidated revenue in
2006. The Company anticipates that international sales and services
will continue to account for a significant portion of its revenue in the
foreseeable future. As a result, the Company may be subject to
certain risks, including risks associated with the application and imposition of
protective legislation and regulations relating to import or export (including
export of high technology products) or otherwise resulting from trade or foreign
policy and risks associated with exchange rate
fluctuations. Additional risks include potentially adverse tax
consequences, tariffs, quotas and other barriers, potential difficulties
involving the Company’s strategic alliances and managing foreign sales agents or
representatives and potential difficulties in accounts receivable
collection. The Company currently sells products and provides
services to customers in emerging market economies. The following
emerging markets have provided more than 10% of the Company’s revenue for the
indicated period:
Year
Ended December 31,
|
|||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
|
Peoples'
Republic of China
|
15%
|
4%
|
0%
|
Russian
Federation
|
4%
|
9%
|
12%
|
United
Arab Emirates
|
4%
|
31%
|
12%
|
The
Company has taken steps designed to reduce the additional risks associated with
doing business in these countries, but the Company believes that such risks may
still exist and include, among others, general political and economic
instability, lack of currency convertibility, as well as uncertainty with
respect to the efficacy of applicable legal systems. There can be no
assurance that these and other factors will not have a material adverse effect
on the Company’s business, financial condition or results of
operations.
The
Company’s business is largely dependent on sales to the nuclear power
industry. Any disruption in this industry would have a material
adverse effect upon the Company’s revenue.
19
In 2008, 54% of GSE’s revenue was from
customers in the nuclear power industry (45% in 2007 and 60% in
2006). The Company expects to derive a significant portion of its
revenue from customers in the nuclear power industry for the foreseeable
future. The Company’s ability to supply nuclear power plant
simulators and related products and services is dependent on the continued
operation of nuclear power plants and, to a lesser extent, on the construction
of new nuclear power plants. A wide range of factors affect the
continued operation and construction of nuclear power plants, including the
political and regulatory environment, the availability and cost of alternative
means of power generation, the occurrence of future nuclear incidents, and
general economic conditions.
The
Company’s line of credit agreement imposes operating and financial restrictions
on the Company which may prevent it from capitalizing on business
opportunities.
GSE’s
line of credit agreement with Bank of America (BOA) imposes operating and
financial restrictions. These restrictions affect, and in certain cases limit,
among other things, the Company’s ability to:
¨
|
incur
additional indebtedness and liens;
|
¨
|
make
investments and acquisitions;
|
¨
|
consolidate,
merge or sell all or substantially all of its
assets.
|
There can
be no assurance that these restrictions will not adversely affect the Company’s
ability to finance its future operations or capital needs or to engage in other
business activities that may be in the interest of stockholders. At
December 31, 2008, the Company was in default on two of its financial covenants;
however, it has received a written waiver from BOA. The Company’s
available borrowing base under the two lines of credit was $3.2 million at
December 31, 2008, of which $105,000 had been utilized to collateralize a
standby letter of credit.
The
Company is dependent on product innovation and research and development, which
costs are incurred prior to revenue for new products and
improvements.
The Company believes that its success
will depend in large part on its ability to maintain and enhance its current
product line, develop new products, maintain technological competitiveness and
meet an expanding range of customer needs. The Company's product
development activities are aimed at the development and expansion of its library
of software modeling tools, the improvement of its display systems and
workstation technologies, and the advancement and upgrading of its simulation
technology. The life cycles for software modeling tools, graphical user
interfaces, and simulation technology are variable and largely determined by
competitive pressures. Consequently, the Company will need to continue to make
significant investments in research and development to enhance and expand its
capabilities in these areas and to maintain its competitive
advantage.
The
Company relies upon its intellectual property rights for the success of its
business; however, the steps it has taken to protect its intellectual property
may be inadequate.
Although the Company believes that
factors such as the technological and creative skills of its personnel, new
product developments, frequent product enhancements and reliable product
maintenance are important to establishing and maintaining a technological
leadership position, the Company's business depends, in part, on its
intellectual property rights in its proprietary technology and
information. The Company relies upon a combination of trade secret,
copyright, and trademark law, contractual arrangements and technical means to
protect its intellectual property rights. The Company enters into
confidentiality agreements with its employees, consultants, joint venture and
alliance partners, customers and other third parties that are granted access to
its proprietary information, and limits access to and distribution of its
proprietary information. There can be no assurance, however, that the
Company has protected or will be able to protect its proprietary technology and
information adequately, that the unauthorized disclosure or use of the Company's
proprietary information will be prevented, that others have not or will not
develop similar technology or information independently, or, to the extent the
Company owns any patents in the future, that others have not or will not be able
to design around those future patents. Furthermore, the laws of certain
countries in which the Company's products are sold do not protect the Company's
products and intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the
United States.
20
The
industries in which GSE operates are highly competitive. This
competition may prevent the Company from raising prices at the same pace as its
costs increase.
The Company's businesses operate in
highly competitive environments with both domestic and foreign competitors, many
of whom have substantially greater financial, marketing and other resources than
the Company. The principal factors affecting competition include price,
technological proficiency, ease of system configuration, product reliability,
applications expertise, engineering support, local presence and financial
stability. The Company believes that competition in the simulation fields may
further intensify in the future as a result of advances in technology,
consolidations and/or strategic alliances among competitors, increased costs
required to develop new technology and the increasing importance of software
content in systems and products. As the Company’s business has a
significant international component, changes in the value of the dollar could
adversely affect the Company's ability to compete internationally.
GSE
may pursue new acquisitions and joint ventures, and any of these transactions
could adversely affect its operating results or result in increased costs or
related issues.
The Company intends to pursue new
acquisitions and joint ventures, a pursuit which could consume substantial time
and resources. Identifying appropriate acquisition candidates and negotiating
and consummating acquisitions can be a lengthy and costly process. The Company
may also encounter substantial unanticipated costs or other related issues such
as compliance with new regulations and regulatory schemes, additional oversight,
elimination of redundancy, and increased employee benefit costs associated with
the acquired businesses. The risks inherent in this strategy could have an
adverse impact on the Company’s results of operation or financial
condition.
The
nuclear power industry, the Company’s largest customer group, is associated with
a number of hazards which could create significant liabilities for the
Company.
The Company’s business could expose it
to third party claims with respect to product, environmental and other similar
liabilities. Although the Company has sought to protect itself from these
potential liabilities through a variety of legal and contractual provisions as
well as through liability insurance, the effectiveness of such protections has
not been fully tested. Certain of the Company’s products and services are used
by the nuclear power industry primarily in operator
training. Although the Company’s contracts for such products and
services typically contain provisions designed to protect the Company from
potential liabilities associated with such use, there can be no assurance that
the Company would not be materially adversely affected by claims or actions
which may potentially arise.
The
use of derivative instruments by the Company in the normal course of business
could result in financial losses that negatively impact the Company’s net
income.
21
GSE
periodically enters into forward foreign exchange contracts to manage market
risks associated with the fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates on
foreign-denominated trade receivables. The Company could recognize financial
losses as a result of volatility in the market values of these contracts or if a
counterparty fails to perform. The Company minimizes credit exposure
by limiting counterparties to internationally recognized financial
institutions.
The Company, as a 10% owner of ESA,
has provided a partial guarantee totaling $1.2 million for the credit facility
that Union National
Bank has extended
to ESA. ESA is a start-up entity; if it is unable to generate sufficient cash
flow from operations and defaults on its credit facility, GSE may have to
provide up to $1.2 million to Union National Bank to cover ESA’s
obligations.
In May
2007, the Company deposited $1.2 million into a restricted, interest-bearing
account at Union National Bank (“UNB”) in the United Arab Emirates as a partial
guarantee for the $11.8 million credit facility that UNB has extended to ESA.
The guarantee will be in place until the expiration of the ESA credit facility
on December 31, 2014 or earlier if ESA pays down and terminates the facility.
Both of the other two owners of ESA, Al Qudra Holding PJSC and the Centre of
Excellence for Applied Research and Training, both located in the United Arab
Emirates, have each provided to UNB a bank guarantee for 100% of the $11.8
million ESA credit facility. In the event that ESA should default upon their UNB
loan, UNB can utilize all or a portion of the guarantees that the three owners
have provided to cover ESA’s outstanding borrowings against the credit facility
and accrued interest payable. Thus, if such a default were to occur, GSE may
incur a loss of up to $1.2 million.
In January 2006, the Company received
a $15.1 million contract from ESA to supply five simulators and an integrated
training program. The Company received
change orders totaling $1.8 million from ESA which increased
the total order value to $16.9 million. Under the terms of the contract, the
Company provided a $2.1 million performance bond to ESA that will remain
outstanding until September 30, 2009, the end of the
contract warranty period.
The
Company has provided a cash-collateralized standby letter of credit to ESA which
can be drawn upon by ESA in the event the Company fails to cure a material
breach of the contract within 30 days of receiving written notice from ESA
regarding the nature of the breach. The project is currently in
the one-year warranty period which ends on September 30, 2009, and the
Company expects no such material breach, however, if ESA were to draw upon the
standby letter of credit, GSE would incur a loss of up to $2.1
million.
The
Company accounts for its investment in ESA using the equity
method. Accordingly, the Company will record 10% of ESA’s net income
(loss) as an adjustment of its investment.
As ESA is
a start-up entity (it had its formal opening on January 14, 2009), it is likely
that it will incur net losses for some period of time. Under the
equity method, the Company is required to record 10% of such losses as a charge
to other income (expense) and as a reduction of its investment in ESA; in 2008
and 2007 the Company recorded an equity loss of $213,000 and $54,000,
respectively. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company’s investment
in ESA totaled $718,000 and $445,000. Depending on ESA’s future
performance, the Company may be required to impair a portion or all of this
investment.
The
Company is subject to a wide variety of laws and regulations.
22
The Company’s businesses are subject to
regulation by U.S. federal and state laws and foreign laws, regulations and
policies. Changes to laws or regulations may require the Company to modify its
business objectives if existing practices become more restricted, subject to
escalating costs or prohibited outright. Particular risks include regulatory
risks arising from federal laws, such as laws regarding export of sensitive
technologies or technical information. The Company’s business and the
industries in which it operates are also at times being reviewed or investigated
by regulators, which could lead to enforcement actions, fines and penalties or
the assertion of private litigation claims and damages.
ITEM
1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF
COMMENTS.
None.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES.
The Company is headquartered in a
facility in Eldersburg, Maryland (approximately 36,000 square feet). The lease
for this facility expires on June 30, 2018.
In addition, the Company leases office
space domestically in St. Marys and Atlanta, Georgia and Tarrytown, New York and
internationally in Beijing, China and Nyköping, Sweden. The Company
leases these facilities for terms ending between 2009 and 2011.
ITEM
3.
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS.
The Company and its subsidiaries are
from time to time involved in ordinary routine litigation incidental to the
conduct of its business. The Company and its subsidiaries are not a party to,
and its property is not the subject of, any material pending legal proceedings
that, in the opinion of management, are likely to have a material adverse effect
on the Company’s business, financial condition or results of
operations.
ITEM
4.
SUBMISSION OF MATTERS
TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
No matter was submitted to a vote of
security holders during the quarter ended December 31, 2008.
23
PART
II
ITEM
5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S
COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDERMATTERS, AND ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.
The Company’s common stock is listed on
the American Stock Exchange, where it trades under the symbol
“GVP”. The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the
high and low sale prices for the Company’s common stock reported by the American
Stock Exchange for each full quarterly period within the two most recent fiscal
years:
2008
|
||||||||
Quarter
|
High
|
Low
|
||||||
First
|
$ | 10.75 | $ | 7.66 | ||||
Second
|
$ | 9.22 | $ | 7.08 | ||||
Third
|
$ | 9.20 | $ | 6.90 | ||||
Fourth
|
$ | 6.99 | $ | 4.71 | ||||
2007
|
||||||||
Quarter
|
High
|
Low
|
||||||
First
|
$ | 8.42 | $ | 5.82 | ||||
Second
|
$ | 7.55 | $ | 6.17 | ||||
Third
|
$ | 7.41 | $ | 6.15 | ||||
Fourth
|
$ | 12.00 | $ | 6.75 | ||||
The following table sets forth the
equity compensation plan information for the year ended December 31,
2008:
24
Number
of Securities
|
|||
Number
of Securities to
|
Weighted
Average
|
Remaining
Available for
|
|
be
Issued Upon Exercise
|
Exercise
Price of
|
Future
Issuance Under Equity
|
|
of
Outstanding Options,
|
Outstanding
Options,
|
Compensation
Plans (Excluding
|
|
Warrants
and Rights
|
Warrants
and Rights
|
Securities
Reflected in Column (a)
|
|
Plan
category
|
(a)
|
(b)
|
(c)
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by security holders
|
1,705,967
|
$4.25
|
604,888
|
Equity
compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
--
|
$
--
|
--
|
Total
|
1,705,967
|
$4.25
|
604,888
|
There
were approximately 79 holders of record of the common stock as of December 31,
2008. The Company has never declared or paid a cash dividend on its common
stock. The Company currently intends to retain future earnings to
finance the growth and development of its business and, therefore, does not
anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future on its common
stock.
At a
special shareholder’s meeting on December 13, 2007, the Company’s shareholders
approved an amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation increasing GSE’s
authorized common stock by 12 million shares to a total of 30 million
shares.
The Company believes factors such as
quarterly fluctuations in results of operations and announcements of new
products by the Company or by its competitors may cause the market price of the
common stock to fluctuate, perhaps significantly. In addition, in
recent years the stock market in general, and the shares of technology companies
in particular, have experienced extreme price fluctuations. The
Company’s common stock has also experienced a relatively low trading volume,
making it further susceptible to extreme price fluctuations. These
factors may adversely affect the market price of the Company's common
stock.
On February 28, 2006, the Company
raised $3.9 million, net of associated fees of $395,000, through the sale of
42,500 shares of Series A Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock and Warrants by
means of a private placement to “accredited investors”, as that term is used in
rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
Convertible Preferred Stockholders were entitled to an 8% cumulative dividend,
payable on a semiannual basis every June 30 and December 30. In 2006,
the Company paid dividends totaling $279,000 to the preferred stockholders; in
2007 the Company paid dividends totaling $49,000. At any time after March 1,
2007, the Company had the right to convert the Preferred Stock into shares of
GSE common stock when the average of the current stock price during the twenty
trading days immediately prior to the date of such conversion exceeded 200% of
the Series A Conversion Price. On March 7, 2007, the Company sent
notice to the holders of the remaining 20,000 outstanding shares of its
Preferred Stock that the average current stock price for the prior twenty
trading days had exceeded 200% of the Conversion Price, and that the Company was
converting the outstanding Preferred Stock into common stock. The 20,000 shares
of Preferred Stock converted to 1,129,946 shares of GSE common
stock. Prior to March 7, 2007, the holders of 22,500 shares of
Preferred Stock had already elected to convert their Preferred Stock into a
total of 1,271,187 shares of Common Stock; 8,580 shares of Preferred Stock were
converted in 2006, and 13,920 shares of Preferred Stock were converted
in 2007.
25
On June
22, 2007, the Company raised $9.2 million, net of associated fees of $768,000,
through the sale of 1,666,667 shares (the “Shares”) of its common stock, $.01
par value per share, by means of a private placement to selected institutional
investors. Each investor received a five-year warrant to purchase GSE
common stock (the “Warrant Shares”) equal to 10% of the shares of common stock
that each investor purchased at an exercise price of $6.00 per share (the
“Warrants”). In aggregate, the Company issued Warrants to purchase a
total of 166,667 shares of GSE common stock.
The
Company filed its registration statement on Form S-3 with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) on July 16, 2007 covering the offer and
sale, from time to time, of the Shares, the Warrant Shares and shares of common
stock issuable upon exercise of warrants that may be issued as liquidated
damages under the terms of a certain registration rights agreement entered into
between the Company and the investors (the “Registration Rights Agreement”) in
connection with the private placement. The Registration Statement
became effective on August 8, 2007 and, pursuant to the provisions of the
Registration Rights Agreement, the Company is obligated to use commercially
reasonable efforts to, after the date on which the Registration Statement
becomes effective, cause the Registration Statement to remain continuously
effective as to all Shares and Warrant Shares, other than for an aggregate of
more than 30 consecutive trading days or for more than an aggregate of 60
trading days in any 12-month period. In the event of a default of the foregoing
obligation, the Company will be required to issue to the investors, as
liquidated damages, on the date the foregoing default occurs and each monthly
anniversary thereafter, a number of warrants (on the same terms as the Warrants)
equal to 2% of the number of Shares then held by such investor, not to exceed
10% of the total number of Shares then held by such investor, and thereafter
cash, in an amount equal to 2% of the aggregate purchase price paid by the
investors, not to exceed 30% of the aggregate purchase price paid by the
investors.
At the
date of issuance, the fair value of the Warrants was $510,000 and the fair value
of the Shares was $9.5 million. The fair value of the Warrants
and the Shares was determined by the use of the relative fair value method, in
which the $10.0 million gross proceeds was allocated based upon the fair values
of the Warrants, as determined by using the Black-Scholes Model, and the Shares,
as determined by the closing price of the common stock on the American Stock
Exchange on the date the transaction was closed.
The
Company paid the placement agent for the Shares and Warrants 6% of the gross
proceeds received by the Company from the offering ($600,000). In
addition to the placement agent fee, the Company paid $168,000 of other
transaction fees related to the offering.
The
proceeds were used to pay down the Company’s line of credit and for other
working capital purposes.
26
The
following graph compares the Company’s cumulative total shareholder return since
January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2008 with that of the American Stock
Exchange- US & Foreign Index and a peer group index. The Peer
Group consists of companies selected on a line-of-business basis and includes
Aspen Technology, Inc., L-3 Communications Holdings and Honeywell
International. In previous years, GenSym Corporation was included in
the Peer Group, however, it was acquired by privately held Versata Enterprises,
Inc. on August 10, 2007. Accordingly, we have replaced GenSym
Corporation with L-3 Communications Holdings. The graph assumes an
initial investment of $100 on January 1, 2004 in the Company's common stock and
each index. There were no dividends declared or paid by the Company
during the five year period. The Company has never paid a dividend on
its common stock. The indices are re-weighted daily, using the market
capitalization on the previous tracking day. The comparisons shown in
the graph below are based upon historical data. The stock price
performance shown in the graph below is not necessarily indicative of, or
intended to forecast, the potential future performance of the Company’s common
stock. The graph was prepared for the Company by Morningstar,
Inc.
12/31/2003
|
12/31/2004
|
12/30/2005
|
12/29/2006
|
12/31/2007
|
12/31/2008
|
|
GSE
Systems, Inc.
|
100.00
|
150.00
|
68.89
|
369.50
|
568.89
|
327.78
|
Peer
Group Index
|
100.00
|
112.77
|
120.28
|
146.67
|
201.63
|
115.62
|
Amex
Market Index
|
100.00
|
114.51
|
126.29
|
141.39
|
158.74
|
94.93
|
Sales of
Unregistered Securities
The
Company’s sales of unregistered securities during the past three years are
described in Item 5 above.
27
ITEM
6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.
Historical consolidated results of
operations and balance sheet data presented below have been derived from the
historical financial statements of the Company. This information
should be read in connection with the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
(in
thousands, except per share data)
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||||||||||
Consolidated
Statements of Operations:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Contract
revenue
|
$ | 29,004 | $ | 31,900 | $ | 27,502 | $ | 21,950 | $ | 29,514 | ||||||||||
Cost
of revenue
|
21,187 | 22,217 | 19,602 | 18,603 | 22,715 | |||||||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
7,817 | 9,683 | 7,900 | 3,347 | 6,799 | |||||||||||||||
Operating
expenses:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Selling,
general and administrative
|
7,383 | 7,214 | 4,929 | 6,958 | 5,543 | |||||||||||||||
Administrative
charges from GP Strategies
|
- | - | 685 | 685 | 974 | |||||||||||||||
Depreciation
|
446 | 258 | 186 | 431 | 280 | |||||||||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
7,829 | 7,472 | 5,800 | 8,074 | 6,797 | |||||||||||||||
Operating
income (loss)
|
(12 | ) | 2,211 | 2,100 | (4,727 | ) | 2 | |||||||||||||
Interest
income (expense), net
|
130 | (433 | ) | (764 | ) | (416 | ) | (176 | ) | |||||||||||
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
- | - | (1,428 | ) | - | - | ||||||||||||||
Gain
(loss) on derivative instruments
|
(453 | ) | (11 | ) | (24 | ) | (170 | ) | 203 | |||||||||||
Other
income (expense), net
|
(226 | ) | (555 | ) | (81 | ) | 667 | 113 | ||||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
||||||||||||||||||||
before
income taxes
|
(561 | ) | 1,212 | (197 | ) | (4,646 | ) | 142 | ||||||||||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
129 | 43 | 149 | 149 | 60 | |||||||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
(690 | ) | 1,169 | (346 | ) | (4,795 | ) | 82 | ||||||||||||
Income
on sale of discontinued operations,
|
||||||||||||||||||||
net
of income taxes
|
- | - | - | - | 36 | |||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (690 | ) | $ | 1,169 | $ | (346 | ) | $ | (4,795 | ) | $ | 118 | |||||||
Basic
income (loss) per common share (1)
|
$ | (0.04 | ) | $ | 0.09 | $ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.53 | ) | $ | 0.01 | |||||||
Diluted
income (loss) per common share (1)
|
$ | (0.04 | ) | $ | 0.08 | $ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.53 | ) | $ | 0.01 | |||||||
Weighted
average common shares outstanding:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
-Basic
|
15,747 | 12,927 | 9,539 | 8,999 | 8,950 | |||||||||||||||
-Diluted
|
15,747 | 14,818 | 9,539 | 8,999 | 9,055 | |||||||||||||||
As
of December 31,
|
||||||||||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||||||||||
Balance
Sheet data:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Working
capital (deficit)
|
$ | 13,888 | $ | 14,711 | $ | 1,463 | $ | (925 | ) | $ | 2,175 | |||||||||
Total
assets
|
31,015 | 28,364 | 18,448 | 11,982 | 14,228 | |||||||||||||||
Long-term
liabilities
|
906 | 695 | 251 | 1,567 | 19 | |||||||||||||||
Stockholders'
equity
|
20,700 | 20,365 | 7,361 | 897 | 5,945 | |||||||||||||||
(1) In
2006, $279,000 preferred stock dividends were added to net loss to arrive
at net loss attributed to common shareholders.
|
||||||||||||||||||||
In
2007, $49,000 preferred stock dividends were deducted from net income to
arrive at net income attributed to common shareholders.
|
28
ITEM
7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND
ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS.
On June
21, 2005, the Board of Directors of GP Strategies Corporation (“GP Strategies”)
approved plans to spin-off its 57% interest in GSE through a special dividend to
the GP Strategies’ stockholders. On September 30, 2005, the GP
Strategies’ stockholders received 0.283075 share of GSE common stock for each
share of GP Strategies common stock or Class B stock held on the record date of
September 19, 2005. Following the spin-off, GP Strategies ceased to
have any ownership interest in GSE. GP Strategies continued to
provide corporate support services to GSE, including accounting, finance, human
resources, legal, network support and tax pursuant to a Management Services
Agreement which expired on December 31, 2006.
On March 28, 2008, the Company
entered into two separate revolving line of credit agreements for two-year
revolving lines of credit with Bank of America, N.A. (“BOA”), in an aggregate
amount of up to $5.0 million. The Company and its subsidiary, GSE
Power Systems, Inc., are jointly and severally liable as
co-borrowers. The credit facilities are collateralized by
substantially all of the Company’s assets and enable the Company to borrow funds
to support working capital needs and standby letters of credit. The
first line of credit in the principal amount of up to $3.5 million enables the
Company to borrow funds up to 90% of eligible foreign accounts receivable, plus
75% of eligible unbilled foreign receivables and 100% of the cash collateral
pledged to BOA on outstanding warranty standby letters of credit. This line of
credit is 90% guaranteed by the Export-Import Bank of the United
States. The interest rate on this line of credit is based on the
daily LIBOR rate plus 150 basis points, with interest only payments due
monthly. The second line of credit in the principal amount of up to
$1.5 million enables the Company to borrow funds up to 80% of domestic accounts
receivable and 30% of domestic unbilled receivables. The interest
rate on this line of credit is based on the daily LIBOR rate plus 225 basis
points, with interest only payments due monthly. The credit
facilities require the Company to comply with certain financial ratios and
preclude the Company from making acquisitions beyond certain limits without the
bank’s consent. At December 31, 2008, the Company was in default on two of its
financial covenants; however, it has received a written waiver from
BOA. The Company’s available borrowing base under the two lines of
credit was $3.2 million at December 31, 2008, of which $105,000 had been
utilized as collateral for a standby letter of credit.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates.
As
further discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, in
preparing the Company’s financial statements, management makes several estimates
and assumptions that affect the Company’s reported amounts of assets,
liabilities, revenues and expenses. Those accounting estimates that
have the most significant impact on the Company’s operating results and place
the most significant demands on management's judgment are discussed below. For
all of these policies, management cautions that future events rarely develop
exactly as forecast, and the best estimates may require adjustment.
Revenue Recognition on Long-Term
Contracts. The
majority of the Company’s revenue is derived through the sale of uniquely
designed systems containing hardware, software and other materials under
fixed-price contracts. In accordance with Statement of Position 81-1,
Accounting for Performance of
Construction-Type and Certain Production-Type Contracts, the revenue
under these fixed-price contracts is accounted for on the
percentage-of-completion method. This methodology recognizes revenue and
earnings as work
progresses on the contract and is based on an estimate of the revenue and
earnings earned to date, less amounts recognized in prior
periods. The Company bases its estimate of the degree of completion
of the contract by reviewing the relationship of costs incurred to date to the
expected total costs that will be incurred on the project. Estimated contract
earnings are reviewed and revised periodically as the work progresses, and the
cumulative effect of any change in estimate is recognized in the period in which
the change is identified. Estimated losses are charged against earnings in the
period such losses are identified. The Company recognizes revenue
arising from contract claims either as income or as an offset against a
potential loss only when the amount of the claim can be estimated reliably and
realization is probable and there is a legal basis of the claim. There were no
claims outstanding as of December 31, 2008.
29
Uncertainties
inherent in the performance of contracts include labor availability and
productivity, material costs, change order scope and pricing, software
modification and customer acceptance issues. The reliability of these cost
estimates is critical to the Company’s revenue recognition as a significant
change in the estimates can cause the Company’s revenue and related margins to
change significantly from the amounts estimated in the early stages of the
project.
As the
Company recognizes revenue under the percentage-of-completion method, it
provides an accrual for estimated future warranty costs based on historical and
projected claims experience. The Company’s long-term contracts
generally provide for a one-year warranty on parts, labor and any bug fixes as
it relates to software embedded in the systems.
The
Company’s system design contracts do not normally provide for “post customer
support service” (PCS) in terms of software upgrades, software enhancements or
telephone support. In order to obtain PCS, the customers normally
must purchase a separate contract. Such PCS arrangements are
generally for a one-year period renewable annually and include customer support,
unspecified software upgrades, and maintenance releases. The Company
recognizes revenue from these contracts ratably over the life of the agreements
in accordance with Statement of Position 97-2, Software Revenue
Recognition.
Revenue
from the sale of software licenses which do not require significant
modifications or customization for the Company’s modeling tools are recognized
when the license agreement is signed, the license fee is fixed and determinable,
delivery has occurred, and collection is considered probable.
Revenue
for contracts with multiple elements is recognized in accordance with Emerging
Issues Task Force Issue 00-21, Accounting for Revenue Arrangements
with Multiple Deliverables.
Revenue
from certain consulting or training contracts is recognized on a
time-and-material basis. For time-and-material type contracts,
revenue is recognized based on hours incurred at a contracted labor rate plus
expenses.
Capitalization of Computer Software
Development Costs. In accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 86, Accounting for the Costs of Computer
Software to Be Sold, Leased, or Otherwise Marketed, the Company
capitalizes computer software development costs incurred after technological
feasibility has been established, but prior to the release of the software
product for sale to customers. Once the product is available to
be sold, the Company amortizes the costs, on a straight line method, over the
estimated useful life of the product, which normally ranges from three to five
years. As of December 31, 2008, the Company has net capitalized
software development costs of $1.5 million. On an annual basis, and
more frequently as conditions indicate, the Company assesses the recovery of the
unamortized software computer costs by estimating the net undiscounted cash
flows expected to be generated by the sale of the product. If the undiscounted
cash flows are not sufficient to recover the unamortized software costs the
Company will write-down the investment to its estimated fair value based on
future discounted cash flows. The excess of any unamortized computer software
costs over the related net realizable value is written down and charged to
operations. Significant changes in the sales projections could result
in an impairment with respect to the capitalized software that is reported on
the Company’s consolidated balance sheet.
30
Deferred Income Tax Valuation
Allowance. Deferred income taxes arise from temporary
differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their reported
amounts in the financial statements. As required by SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes,
management makes a regular assessment of the realizability of the Company’s
deferred tax assets. In making this assessment, management considers
whether it is more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets
will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets
is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in
which those temporary differences become deductible. Management
considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities and projected
future taxable income of the Company in making this assessment. A
valuation allowance is recorded to reduce the total deferred income tax asset to
its realizable value. As of December 31, 2008, the Company’s largest
deferred tax asset related to a U.S. net operating loss carryforward of $17.9
million which expires in various amounts between 2017 and 2028. The amount of
U.S. loss carryforward which can be used by the Company each year is limited due
to changes in the Company’s ownership which occurred in 2003. Thus, a
portion of the Company’s loss carryforward may expire unutilized. We believe
that the Company will achieve profitable operations in future years that will
enable the Company to recover the benefit of its net deferred tax
assets. However, other than a portion of the net deferred tax assets
that are related to the Company’s Swedish subsidiary, the recovery of the net
deferred tax asset could not be substantiated by currently available objective
evidence. Accordingly, the Company has established an $8.3 million
valuation allowance for its net deferred tax assets.
Results of Operations.
The following table sets forth the
results of operations for the periods presented expressed in thousands of
dollars and as a percentage of contract revenue.
31
[
($
in thousands)
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
2008
|
%
|
2007
|
%
|
2006
|
%
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Contract
revenue
|
$ | 29,004 | 100.0 | % | $ | 31,900 | 100.0 | % | $ | 27,502 | 100.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Cost
of revenue
|
21,187 | 73.1 | % | 22,217 | 69.6 | % | 19,602 | 71.3 | % | |||||||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
7,817 | 26.9 | % | 9,683 | 30.4 | % | 7,900 | 28.7 | % | |||||||||||||||
Operating
expenses:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Selling,
general and administrative
|
7,383 | 25.4 | % | 7,214 | 22.6 | % | 4,929 | 17.9 | % | |||||||||||||||
Administrative
charges from GP Strategies
|
- | 0.0 | % | - | 0.0 | % | 685 | 2.5 | % | |||||||||||||||
Depreciation
|
446 | 1.5 | % | 258 | 0.8 | % | 186 | 0.7 | % | |||||||||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
7,829 | 26.9 | % | 7,472 | 23.4 | % | 5,800 | 21.1 | % | |||||||||||||||
Operating
income (loss)
|
(12 | ) | (0.0 | )% | 2,211 | 7.0 | % | 2,100 | 7.6 | % | ||||||||||||||
Interest
income (expense), net
|
130 | 0.4 | % | (433 | ) | (1.4 | )% | (764 | ) | (2.8 | )% | |||||||||||||
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
- | 0.0 | % | - | 0.0 | % | (1,428 | ) | (5.2 | )% | ||||||||||||||
Loss
on derivative instruments
|
(453 | ) | (1.6 | )% | (11 | ) | 0.0 | % | (24 | ) | (0.1 | )% | ||||||||||||
Other
expense, net
|
(226 | ) | (0.8 | )% | (555 | ) | (1.8 | )% | (81 | ) | (0.2 | )% | ||||||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
(561 | ) | (2.0 | )% | 1,212 | 3.8 | % | (197 | ) | (0.7 | )% | |||||||||||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
129 | 0.4 | % | 43 | 0.1 | % | 149 | 0.6 | % | |||||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (690 | ) | (2.4 | )% | $ | 1,169 | 3.7 | % | $ | (346 | ) | (1.3 | )% | ||||||||||
Comparison
of the Years Ended December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2007.
Contract
Revenue. Contract revenue for the year ended December 31, 2008
totaled $29.0 million, which was 9.1% lower than the $31.9 million total revenue
for the year ended December 31, 2007. The decrease mainly reflects
the completion of the $16.9 million ESA contract in 2008. For the
year ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company recognized $1.2 million and
$9.9 million, respectively of contract revenue on the ESA project, which
accounted for 4.2% and 31.1%, respectively, of the Company’s consolidated
revenue. The decrease in revenue from the ESA project was partially
offset by an increase in the Company’s fossil fueled power simulation revenue,
which totaled $9.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2008 versus $6.5
million in the year ended December 31, 2007. In the year ended
December 31, 2008, the Company recorded total orders of $44.0 million versus
$37.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2007. At December
31, 2008, the Company’s backlog was $38.1 million, a 54.9% increase from the
Company’s backlog at December 31, 2007.
Gross
Profit. Gross profit totaled $7.8 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008 versus $9.7 million for the year ended December 31,
2007. As a percentage of revenue, gross profit decreased from 30.4%
for the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 to 26.9% for the twelve months
ended December, 31 2008. The decrease in gross margin
reflects the lower revenue generated by the Company’s higher margined ESA
contract and the lower revenue base to recover the Company’s relatively fixed
overhead.
32
Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses. Selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”)
expenses totaled $7.4 million and $7.2 million for the years ended December
31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Fluctuations in the components of
SG&A spending were as follows:
¨
|
Business
development and marketing costs increased from $2.6 million for the year
ended December 31, 2007 to $2.9 million in the year ended December 31,
2008. The spending increase mainly reflects a $120,000 increase
in business development labor and benefit costs, a $115,000 increase in
business development travel expenses, the cost of participating in the
first quarter 2008 Society in Computer Simulation trade show ($27,000) and
the cost of the Company’s September 2008 Simworld user’s conference in
Beijing, China ($75,000). These increases were partially offset
by a $51,000 decrease in bidding and proposal costs, which are the costs
of operations personnel in assisting with the preparation of contract
proposals.
|
¨
|
The
Company’s general and administrative expenses totaled $4.2 million
for the year ended December 31, 2008 versus $4.1 million for the year
ended December 31, 2007. The increase mainly reflects the relocation
expenses incurred in the move of the Company's headquarters to Eldersburg,
Maryland in July 2008 and increased utility costs due to the additional
space in the new headquarters.
|
¨
|
Gross
spending on software product development (“development”) totaled $907,000
in the year ended December 31, 2008 as compared to $1.2 million in the
same period of 2007. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the
Company expensed $316,000 and capitalized $591,000 of its development
spending and expensed $514,000 and capitalized $673,000 of its development
spending in the year ended December 31, 2007. The Company’s
capitalized development expenditures in 2008 were mainly related to the
customization of RELAP5-RT software (which simulates transient fluid
dynamics, neutronics and heat transfer in nuclear power plants) to run on
the Company’s real-time executive software and the enhancement to JCAD to
add the capability to convert AutoCAD Control Logic Diagrams to the
Company’s JControl modeling tool. The Company anticipates
that its total gross development spending in 2009 will approximate
$900,000.
|
Depreciation. Depreciation
expense totaled $446,000 and $258,000 for the years ended December 31, 2008 and
2007, respectively. The higher 2008 depreciation expense reflects the
increase in 2007 capital spending which totaled $778,000, a 320% increase as
compared to the capital spending in 2006. Approximately 50% of
the capital spending in 2007 was for furniture and computer equipment for the
training centers that the Company established at Georgia Tech University and
Strathclyde University; the balance was for computers, printers, servers and
software. Capital spending in the year ended December 31, 2008
totaled $706,000. Of the 2008 capital spending, $355,000
was related to the Company’s move to its new headquarters in Eldersburg,
Maryland.
Operating
Income. The Company had operating loss of $12,000 (0.0% of
revenue) in the year ended December 31, 2008, as compared with operating income
of $2.2 million (7.0% of revenue) for the year ended December 31,
2007. The variances were due to the factors outlined
above.
Interest Income (Expense),
Net. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company’s
interest income, net totaled $130,000 while for the year ended December 31,
2007, the Company had net interest expense of $433,000.
In June 2007, using a portion of the
proceeds from the Company’s June 2007 common stock and warrant transaction, the
Company paid off the outstanding balance of its Laurus Master Fund Ltd. line of
credit and did not borrow against this line of credit in
2008. On March 6, 2008, the Laurus line of credit
expired. The Company incurred interest expense of $0 and $107,000 on
borrowings from the Laurus line of credit in the years ended December 31, 2008
and 2007, respectively.
33
On March 28, 2008, the Company entered
into two separate revolving line of credit agreements for two-year revolving
lines of credit with Bank of America (“BOA”) in an aggregate amount of up to
$5.0 million. One line of credit is in the principal amount of up to
$3.5 million and is guaranteed by the U.S. Export-Import Bank. The
other line of credit is in the principal amount of up to $1.5
million. The Company has not borrowed any funds against either BOA
line of credit since the closing and incurred no interest expense from the
credit facility in 2008. However, at December 31, 2008, $105,000 of
the credit facility was utilized as collateral for a standby letter of
credit.
The deferred financing costs incurred
in conjunction with the Laurus Master Fund line of credit were amortized over
the two-year period of the line of credit, with the final amortization expense
recorded in February 2008. Such amortization expense totaled $89,000
in the year ended December 31, 2008. This compares to amortization expense of
$533,000 in the year ended December 31, 2007. Amortization of the
deferred financing costs incurred in conjunction with the BOA lines of credit
began in April 2008; amortization expense totaled $53,000 in the year ended
December 31, 2008.
Interest
income earned on short-term investments of the Company’s operating cash totaled
$67,000 for the year ended December 31, 2008 versus $96,000 in the year ended
December 31, 2007.
At December 31, 2008, the Company has
approximately $2.9 million of cash in Certificates of Deposit with BOA that are
being used as collateral for four performance bonds. At December 31,
2007, the Company had approximately $2.9 million of cash in Certificates of
Deposit being used as collateral for six performance bonds. The
Company earned approximately $132,000 and $104,000 in interest income on the
Certificates of Deposit in the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
In May 2007, the Company deposited $1.2
million into a restricted, interest-bearing account at the Union National Bank
in the United Arab Emirates as a partial guarantee for the $11.8 million credit
facility that UNB has extended to ESA. GSE recorded approximately
$48,000 and $36,000 interest income in the years ended December 31, 2008 and
2007, respectively.
The Company had other interest income
in the year ended December 31, 2008 of $25,000 and other interest expense of
$29,000 in the year ended December 31, 2007.
Loss on Derivative
Instruments. The Company periodically enters into forward
foreign exchange contracts to manage market risks associated with the
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates on foreign-denominated trade
receivables. As of December 31, 2008, the Company had foreign
exchange contracts for sale of approximately 2 million Pounds Sterling, 4
million Euro, and 68 million Japanese Yen at fixed rates. The contracts expire
on various dates through February 2014. The Company had not
designated the contracts as hedges and has recognized a loss on the change in
the estimated fair value of the contracts of $174,000 for the twelve months
ended December 31, 2008. The estimated fair value of the contracts at
December 31, 2008 was a net liability of $58,000 and was recorded on the balance
sheet as follows:
34
December
31,
|
||||
(in
thousands)
|
2008
|
|||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
$ | 14 | ||
Other
assets
|
537 | |||
Other
current liabilities
|
(426 | ) | ||
Other
liabilities
|
(183 | ) | ||
Net
fair value
|
$ | (58 | ) |
The foreign currency denominated
trade receivables and unbilled receivables that are related to the outstanding
foreign exchange contracts at December 31, 2008 are remeasured at the end of
each period into the functional currency using the current exchange rate at the
end of the period. For the twelve months ended December 31,
2008, the Company incurred a $279,000 loss from the remeasurement of such trade
and unbilled receivables.
At December 31, 2007, the Company had
foreign exchange contracts for the sale of approximately 36 million Japanese Yen
and 125,000 Pounds Sterling at fixed rates. The contracts expired on various
dates through January 2008. The Company had not designated the
contracts as hedges and recognized a loss on the change in the estimated fair
value of the contracts of $11,000 for the twelve months ended December 31,
2007. The estimated fair value of the contracts was $1,000 at
December 31, 2007 and was recorded on the balance sheet under other current
assets.
Other Expense,
Net. For the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, other
expense, net was $226,000 and $555,000, respectively. The major
components of other expense, net include the following items:
The Company accounts for its investment
in ESA using the equity method. In accordance with the equity method,
the Company has eliminated 10% of the profit from this contract as the training
simulators are assets that will be recorded on the books of ESA, and the Company
is thus required to eliminate its proportionate share of the profit included in
the asset value. The profit elimination totaled $28,000 and $444,000
for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
For the years ended December 31, 2008
and 2007, the Company recognized a $213,000 and $54,000 equity loss,
respectively, on its investment in ESA.
The Company had other miscellaneous
income in the year ended December 31, 2008 of $15,000 and other miscellaneous
expense of $57,000 in the year ended December 31, 2007.
Provision for Income
Taxes. In July 2006, the
Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued Interpretation, or FIN,
No. 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes — An Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109,
“Accounting for Income Taxes”. FIN No. 48
clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in the
Company’s financial statements. It also prescribes a recognition threshold and
measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of
tax positions taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. This interpretation
also provides guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties,
accounting in interim periods and expanded disclosure with respect to
uncertainty in income taxes. The Company adopted the guidance of FIN No. 48
effective January 1, 2007. The adoption of this accounting pronouncement
did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of
operations or cash flows. Furthermore, the Company is not aware of any tax
positions for which it is reasonably possible that the total amounts of
unrecognized tax benefits would significantly decrease or increase within the
next twelve months.
35
The
Company files in the United States federal jurisdiction and in several
state and foreign jurisdictions. Because of the net operating loss
carryforwards, the Company is subject to U.S. federal and state income tax
examinations from years 1997 and forward and is subject to foreign tax
examinations by tax authorities for years 2003 and forward. Open tax
years related to state and foreign jurisdictions remain subject to examination
but are not considered material to our financial position, results of operations
or cash flows.
As of
December 31, 2008, there have been no material changes to the liability for
uncertain tax positions.
The
Company’s tax provision in 2008 was $129,000 and consisted of $226,000 foreign
income tax withholding on several non-U.S. contracts, $10,000 state income
taxes, and $19,000 foreign income taxes incurred by the Company’s foreign
subsidiaries. The income tax expense was partially offset by a $126,000 credit
from the reduction of the valuation allowance against the net deferred tax
assets of the Company’s Swedish subsidiary.
The Company has a full valuation
allowance on its net deferred tax assets at December 31, 2008, with the
exception of the net deferred tax assets of its Swedish subsidiary which are
expected to be realized in 2009.
Comparison
of the Years Ended December 31, 2007 to December 31, 2006.
Contract
Revenue. For the year ended December 31, 2007, contract
revenue totaled $31.9 million, a 16.0% increase from the $27.5 million for the
year ended December 31, 2006. The increase is mainly attributable to
the $15.1 million ESA contract received in January 2006. Change
orders totaling $1.8 million were received from ESA increasing the
total order value to $16.9 million. For the twelve months ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Company recognized $9.9 million and $5.7
million, respectively, of contract revenue on this project. Total
orders received in 2007 were $37.8 million versus $33.5 million in
2006. At December 31, 2007, the Company’s backlog was approximately
$24.6 million, of which $1.1 million related to the ESA contract.
Gross
Profit. Gross profit totaled $9.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007 versus $7.9 million for the year ended December 31,
2006. As a percentage of revenue, gross profit increased from 28.7%
for the twelve months ended December 31, 2006 to 30.4% for the twelve months
ended December, 31 2007. The increase in gross profit
percentage mainly reflects the higher proportion of revenue from the ESA project
in 2007.
Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses. Selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”)
expenses increased 46.4% from $4.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2006
to $7.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase
reflects the following spending variances:
¨
|
Business
development and marketing costs increased from $2.1 million for the year
ended December 31, 2006 to $2.6 million in the year ended December 31,
2007. In the latter part of 2006, the Company added additional
business development personnel, plus the Company incurred higher bidding
and proposal costs in 2007.
|
36
¨
|
The
Company’s general and administrative expenses totaled $4.1 million in the
year ended December 31, 2007, which was 76.1% higher than the $2.3 million
incurred in 2006. The increase is due to the
following:
|
o
|
The
Management Services Agreement with GP Strategies was terminated on
December 31, 2006. Under this agreement, General Physics (a GP
Strategies subsidiary) provided corporate support services, including
accounting, finance, human resources, legal, and network
support. In conjunction with the reinstatement of these
corporate services in-house, the Company hired several personnel,
implemented a new financial system and contracted with outside vendors to
provide payroll services and IT support and hosting
services.
|
o
|
In
February 2007, the Board of Directors approved a new director compensation
plan. In 2006, only the Audit Committee members received
compensation; in 2007 all non-employee directors received
compensation. In addition, the independent directors were
awarded 10,000 stock options each on February 6, 2007. The
options were valued using the Black-Scholes method, and the cost is being
amortized over the three year vesting period. Accordingly,
total director compensation expense increased by $202,000 in 2007 as
compared to 2006.
|
o
|
The
Company established a two-man Advisory Committee to the Board of Directors
which met once in the first quarter 2007. The Advisory Committee members
are not affiliated with the Company or any of its subsidiaries. The
Advisory Committee members receive a fee of $7,500 for each meeting that
they attend.
|
o
|
In
May 2006, the Company hired an outside investor relations consulting
firm. The firm received a monthly fee of $3,500 and a total of
50,000 shares of GSE common stock, with 2,778 shares earned as of the last
day of each month during the 18-month consulting period. A
certificate representing all 50,000 shares of GSE common stock was
delivered to the investor relations consulting firm in October
2007. The fair value of the shares earned was determined using
the closing AMEX price as of the last day of each month. In
November 2007, this agreement was extended through April 2009, with a
monthly fee of $5,000 and a total of 25,000 shares of GSE common stock,
with 1,388 shares earned as of the last day of each month during the
18-month consulting period. Total compensation paid to
the investor relations consulting firm, including the value of the earned
shares of common stock, increased by $148,000 in 2007 versus
2006.
|
o
|
In
2007, the Company hired an independent accounting firm to perform a study
to determine whether an even triggering IRS Code Section 382 had
occurred. Section 382 limits the amount of income that may be
offset by net operating losses after an ownership change. The Company
incurred $137,000 of expense related to this study and related costs in
2007.
|
o
|
As
of June 30, 2007, the Company’s market capitalization exceeded $75
million. The Company hired an internal audit manager and hired
its independent registered public accounting firm to perform an audit of
the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting as of December
31, 2007 as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(“SOX”). No such audit of the Company’s internal controls over
financial reporting was required in 2006. The Company incurred
a total of $228,000 of expense related to SOX compliance in
2007.
|
37
¨
|
Gross
spending on software product development (“development”) totaled $1.2
million in the year ended December 31, 2007 as compared to $871,000 in
2006. For the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company
expensed $514,000 and capitalized $673,000 of its development spending
while in the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company expensed $538,000
and capitalized $333,000 of its development spending. The
Company’s capitalized development expenditures in 2007 were related to the
development of a new graphic user interface (“GUI”) for THEATRe, the
replacement of the GUI for SimSuite Pro with JADE Designer, and the
addition of new features to JADE Topmeret and
Opensim.
|
Administrative Charges from GP
Strategies. As noted above, the Company terminated its
Management Services Agreement with GP Strategies on December 31,
2006. The Company was charged $685,000 by GP Strategies in the twelve
months ended December 31, 2006.
Depreciation. For
the year ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, depreciation expense totaled $258,000
and $186,000, respectively. The increase in depreciation expense
reflects an increase in capital spending in the year ended December 31, 2007 as
compared to the year ended December 31, 2006, $778,000 versus $185,000,
respectively. Approximately 50% of the capital spending in 2007 was
for furniture and computer equipment for the training centers that the
Company established at Georgia Tech University and Strathclyde University;
the balance was for computers, printers, servers and software.
Operating
Income. The Company had operating income of $2.2 million and
$2.1 million in the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively. As a percentage of revenue, operating income decreased
from 7.6% of revenue in 2006 to 7.0% in 2007. The decrease in
operating income as a percentage of revenue was due to the factors outlined
above.
Interest Expense,
Net. For the year ended December 31, 2007, net interest
expense totaled $433,000 as compared to net interest expense for the year ended
December 31, 2006 of $764,000.
In June
2007, using the proceeds from the Company’s June 2007 common stock and warrant
transaction, the Company paid off the outstanding balance of its line of credit
and did not borrow against the line of credit for the balance of
2007. For the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, interest
expense on credit facility borrowings totaled $107,000 and $264,000,
respectively.
Amortization
of deferred financing costs related to the Company’s line of credit increased
from $200,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006 to $231,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2007. The Company entered into its $5.0 million
line of credit with Laurus Master Fund, Ltd. in March 2006.
Amortization
of the cost of the warrants issued to Laurus in conjunction with the credit
facility totaled $302,000 in 2007 versus $251,000 in 2006.
For the
year ended December 31, 2006, the Company incurred interest expense of $26,000
on the Dolphin Note and original issue discount accretion related to the Dolphin
Note and GSE Warrant of $58,000. The Company paid off the Dolphin
Note in conjunction with the preferred stock transaction that was completed in
February 2006.
The
Company had approximately $2.9 million of cash in Certificates of Deposit that
were being used as collateral for six performance bonds. The Company
recognized $104,000 of interest income on these Certificates of Deposit in the
year ended December 31, 2007. In the year ended December 31, 2006,
the Company recognized $56,000 of interest income on its Certificates of
Deposit.
38
Interest
income earned on short-term investments of the Company’s operating cash totaled
$96,000 for the year ended December 31, 2007.
The
Company deposited $1.2 million into a restricted, interest-bearing account at
the Union National Bank in the United Arab Emirates as a partial guarantee for
ESA’s credit facility. The Company earned $36,000 of interest income
on this account in 2007.
Interest
expense accrued on the preferred dividends payable to ManTech was $9,000
for the year ended December 31, 2007 and $20,000 for the year ended December 31,
2006.
Other
miscellaneous interest expense, net totaled $20,000 and $1,000 respectively, in
the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006.
Loss on Extinguishment of
Debt. On February 28, 2006, the Company and Dolphin entered
into a Cancellation and Warrant Exchange Agreement (the “Cancellation
Agreement”) under which Dolphin agreed to cancel its Senior Subordinated Secured
Convertible Promissory Note and cancel its outstanding warrant to purchase
380,952 shares of GSE common stock at an exercise price of $2.22 per
share. In exchange for Dolphin’s agreement to enter into the
Cancellation Agreement and for the participation of Dolphin Offshore Partners,
LP in the Preferred Stock transaction, the Company repaid the Dolphin Note and
agreed to issue a new warrant to purchase 900,000 shares of GSE common stock at
an exercise price of $0.67 per share.
In
conjunction with the early payoff of the Dolphin Note and the cancellation of
the 380,952 warrants, the Company wrote off the remaining unamortized Original
Issue Discount of $1.1 million, wrote off the remaining unamortized deferred
financing charges of $185,000; recognized a credit of $698,000 from the
write-off of the liabilities related to the Dolphin Note conversion feature and
the related warrants and took an $868,000 charge for the value of the 900,000
new warrants issued to Dolphin.
Loss on Derivative
Instruments. The Company periodically enters into forward
foreign exchange contracts to manage market risks associated with the
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates on foreign-denominated trade
receivables. At December 31, 2007, the Company had foreign exchange
contracts for the sale of approximately 36 million Japanese Yen and 125,000
Pounds Sterling at fixed rates. The contracts expired on various dates through
January 2008. The Company had not designated the contracts as hedges
and recognized a loss on the change in the estimated fair value of the
contracts of $11,000 for the year ended December 31, 2007. The
estimated fair value of the contracts was $1,000 at December 31, 2007 and was
recorded on the balance sheet under other current assets.
At
December 31, 2006, the Company had foreign exchange contracts for sale of
approximately 142 million Japanese Yen at fixed rates. The contracts expired on
various dates through August 2007. The Company had not designated the
contracts as hedges and recgonized a loss on the change in the
estimated fair value of the contracts of $24,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2006. The estimated fair value of the contracts was
$12,000 at December 31, 2006 and was recorded on the balance sheet under other
current assets.
39
Other Expense,
Net. For the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, other
expense, net was $555,000 and $81,000, respectively. The major
components of other expense, net included the following items:
¨
|
The
Company accounts for its investment in ESA using the equity
method. In accordance with the equity method, the Company has
eliminated 10% of the profit from its ESA contract as the training
simulators are assets that will be recorded on the books of ESA, and the
Company is thus required to eliminate its proportionate share of the
profit included in the asset value. The profit elimination
totaled $444,000 and $251,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and
2006, respectively. In addition, the Company recognized a
$54,000 equity loss on the Company’s investment in ESA in the year ended
December 31, 2007.
|
¨
|
Foreign
currency transaction losses totaled $60,000 for the year ended December
31, 2007 versus foreign currency transaction gains of $128,000 for the
year ended December 31, 2006,
respectively.
|
¨
|
Other
miscellaneous income items totaled $3,000 and $42,000 in the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
|
Provision for Income
Taxes. In July
2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued Interpretation,
or FIN, No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes — An Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109, “Accounting for Income
Taxes”. FIN No. 48 clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes recognized in the Company’s financial statements. It
also prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the
financial statement recognition and measurement of tax positions taken or
expected to be taken in a tax return. This interpretation also provides guidance
on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim
periods and expanded disclosure with respect to uncertainty in income taxes. The
Company adopted the guidance of FIN No. 48 effective January 1, 2007.
The adoption of this accounting pronouncement did not have a material effect on
the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Furthermore, the Company is not aware of any tax positions for which it is
reasonably possible that the total amounts of unrecognized tax benefits would
significantly decrease or increase within the next twelve months.
As of
December 31, 2007, there had been no material changes to the liability for
uncertain tax positions.
The
Company’s tax provision in 2007 was $43,000 and consisted of $147,000 foreign
income tax withholding on several non-U.S. contracts and $7,000 state income
taxes which were partially offset by a federal income tax benefit of $111,000
(the benefit mainly reflects the reversal of the tax benefit from the exercise
of employee stock options recognized in 2006 due to an increase in the Company’s
estimate of the annual amount of net operating loss carryforwards
available).
The
Company’s tax provision in 2006 was $149,000 and consisted of foreign income
taxes of $17,000 and state income taxes of $29,000 and federal income taxes of
$103,000.
The
Company had a full valuation allowance on its deferred tax assets at December
31, 2007.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources.
As of
December 31, 2008, GSE had cash and cash equivalents of $8.3 million versus $8.2
million at December 31, 2007.
40
Cash From Operating
Activities. For the year ended December 31, 2008, net cash
provided by operating activities totaled $2.3 million and increased $385,000 as
compared to 2007. Significant changes in the Company’s assets and
liabilities in 2008 included:
¨
|
A
$527,000 increase in the Company’s contracts
receivable. The Company’s trade receivables increased
from $4.2 million at December 31, 2007 (including $1.0 million due from
ESA) to $7.3 million at December 31, 2008 (including $1.6 million due from
ESA) while the Company’s unbilled receivables decreased by $3.0 million to
$3.6 million at December 31, 2008. At December 31, 2008, trade
receivables outstanding for more than 90 days totaled $2.3 million
(including $1.6 million from ESA) versus $2,000 at December 31,
2007. Despite the increase in overdue receivables, the Company
believes the entire balance will be received and has not increased its bad
debt reserve.
|
¨
|
A
$1.0 million reduction in accounts payable, accrued compensation and
accrued expenses. The decrease mainly reflects a reduction in
outstanding trade payables at December 31, 2008 as compared to the prior
year and a payout in early 2008 of accrued vacation to U.S. employees in
excess of the annual carryover allowance in accordance with the Company’s
vacation policy.
|
¨
|
A
$1.8 million increase in billings in excess of revenue
earned. The increase is due to the timing of contracted billing
milestones of the Company’s current
projects.
|
Net cash
provided by operating activities was $1.9 million for the year ended December
31, 2007 and increased $2.5 million as compared to 2006, reflecting an increase
in net income before non-cash items (such as depreciation, amortization,
stock-based compensation expense, and elimination of profit of the ESA
contract). The most significant change in the Company’s assets and
liabilities in 2007 was a $1.5 million reduction in the Company’s accounts
payable, accrued compensation and accrued expenses. After the
completion of the Company’s June 2007 common stock transaction, the Company paid
$405,000 to ManTech for the preferred stock dividends that had been payable
since 2003 and the related accrued interest. The balance of the
reduction was mainly due to the paydown of the Company’s trade payable
balance.
Net cash
used in operating activities was $594,000 for the year ended December 31,
2006. The loss on early extinguishment of debt of $1.4 million was a
non-cash expense that had no impact on the Company’s operating cash
flow. Significant changes in the Company’s assets and liabilities in
2006 included:
¨
|
A
$3.8 million increase in contracts receivable. An invoice for
$1.7 million was issued to ESA in August 2006 and was still outstanding at
December 31, 2006. The Company received the $1.7 million in May
2007. In addition, the Company had an unbilled receivable of
$1.9 million for the ESA contract at December 31,
2006.
|
¨
|
A
$690,000 increase in billings in excess of revenues earned. The
increase is related to the timing of milestone billings on several
projects.
|
¨
|
A
$536,000 decrease in the amount due to GP Strategies
Corporation. The reduction reflects the utilization of a
portion of the funds received through the Company’s convertible preferred
stock transaction to pay down the balance due to GP Strategies. The
Company paid off the balance due to GP Strategies prior to the termination
of the Management Services Agreement on December 31,
2006.
|
41
Cash Used in Investing
Activities. For the year ended December 31, 2008, net cash
used in investing activities was $2.6 million. The Company made
capital expenditures of $705,000, increased its investment in ESA by $486,000
and capitalized software development costs of $591,000. The Company
also restricted an additional $836,000 of cash as collateral for performance
bonds issued by the Company and backed by standby letters of
credit.
Net cash used in
investing activities was $3.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2007. The Company made capital expenditures of $778,000, capitalized
software development costs of $673,000, and made an additional investment in ESA
of $261,000. The Company deposited $1.2 million into a restricted,
interest-bearing account at the Union National Bank in the United Arab Emirates
as a partial guarantee for the $11.8 million credit facility that the bank
extended to ESA. The Company also restricted $700,000 of cash as
collateral for performance bonds issued by the Company and backed by standby
letters of credit.
For the
year ended December 31, 2006, net cash used in investing activities was $3.1
million consisting of $333,000 of capitalized software development costs,
$185,000 of capital expenditures, and the restriction of $2.3 million of cash as
collateral for five performance bonds issued by the Company and backed by
standby letters of credit. The largest is a $2.1 million performance
bond issued to ESA which expires on September 30, 2009. In addition,
the Company invested $238,000 in ESA.
Cash Provided by Financing
Activities. The
Company generated $483,000 from financing activities in the year ended December
31, 2008. The Company received $571,000 from the issuance of common
stock from the exercise of warrants and employee stock options and spent $88,000
on deferred financing costs in conjunction with the new Bank of America lines of
credit.
In
the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company generated $8.7 million from
financing activities. The Company generated net proceeds of $9.2
million from the issuance of 1,666,667 shares of common stock and warrants which
was used to pay down the Laurus Master Fund, Ltd. line of credit. The
Company generated $2.1 million from the exercise of warrants and employee stock
options. The Company reversed a tax benefit of $115,000 related to
employee stock option exercises that had been recognized in 2006. The
Company paid dividends of $49,000 to the Series A Cumulative Convertible
Preferred stockholders and paid the $316,000 preferred stock dividend that was
due to ManTech since 2003.
The
Company generated $3.4 million from financing activities in the twelve months
ended December 31, 2006. The Company generated net proceeds of $3.9
million from the issuance of 42,500 shares of Series A Cumulative Convertible
Preferred Stock and Warrants which were used to pay off the $2.0 million Dolphin
Note and the outstanding borrowings under the Company’s bank line of credit
($1.2 million).
The
Company entered into a new credit facility with Laurus Master Fund on March 7,
2006 and had outstanding borrowings under the credit facility on December 31,
2006 of $2.2 million. In conjunction with the establishment of the Laurus line
of credit, the Company incurred cash financing costs of $448,000. On
May 18, 2006, Laurus Master Fund agreed to temporarily increase the Company’s
borrowing capability by $2.0 million over and above the funds that were
available to the Company based upon its normal borrowing base
calculation. The over advance was used to collateralize a $2.1
million performance bond that the Company issued to the Emirates Simulation
Academy, LLC in the form of a standby letter of credit. One half of
the increased borrowing capability expired on July 18, 2006, and the balance
expired on April 13, 2007. The Company’s borrowings over and above
the normal borrowing base calculation bore additional interest of 1.5% per month
over and above the normal interest rate on the line of credit.
42
The
Company received $409,000 through the issuance of common stock due to the
exercise of employee stock options, and $730,000 through the issuance of common
stock due to the exercise of warrants. The Company recognized a tax
benefit of $124,000 related to the employee stock option exercises.
In 2006,
the Company paid dividends of $279,000 to the preferred
stockholders.
Credit Facilities
On March 28, 2008, the Company
entered into two separate revolving line of credit agreements for two-year
revolving lines of credit with Bank of America, N.A. (“BOA”), in an aggregate
amount of up to $5.0 million. The Company and its subsidiary, GSE
Power Systems, Inc., are jointly and severally liable as
co-borrowers. The credit facilities are collateralized by
substantially all of the Company’s assets and enable the Company to borrow funds
to support working capital needs and standby letters of credit. The
first line of credit in the principal amount of up to $3.5 million enables the
Company to borrow funds up to 90% of eligible foreign accounts receivable, plus
75% of eligible unbilled foreign receivables and 100% of the cash collateral
pledged to BOA on outstanding warranty standby letters of credit. This line of
credit is 90% guaranteed by the Export-Import Bank of the United
States. The interest rate on this line of credit is based on the
daily LIBOR rate plus 150 basis points, with interest only payments due
monthly. The second line of credit in the principal amount of up to
$1.5 million enables the Company to borrow funds up to 80% of domestic accounts
receivable and 30% of domestic unbilled receivables. The interest
rate on this line of credit is based on the daily LIBOR rate plus 225 basis
points, with interest only payments due monthly. The credit
facilities require the Company to comply with certain financial ratios and
preclude the Company from making acquisitions beyond certain limits without the
bank’s consent. At December 31, 2008, the Company was in default on two of the
financial covenants; however, it has received a written waiver from
BOA. The Company’s available borrowing base under the two lines of
credit was $3.2 million at December 31, 2008, of which $105,000 had been
utilized as collateral for a standby letter of credit.
Common Stock and Warrant
Transaction
On June
22, 2007, the Company raised $9.2 million, net of associated fees of $768,000,
through the sale of 1,666,667 shares (the “Shares”) of its common stock, $.01
par value per share, by means of a private placement to selected institutional
investors. Each investor received a five-year warrant to purchase GSE
common stock (the “Warrant Shares”) equal to 10% of the shares of common stock
that they had purchased at an exercise price of $6.00 per share (the
“Warrants”). In aggregate, the Company issued Warrants to purchase a
total of 166,667 shares of GSE common stock.
The
Company filed its registration statement on Form S-3 (the “Registration
Statement”) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) on
July 16, 2007 covering the offer and sale, from time to time, of the Shares, the
Warrant Shares and shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of warrants
that may be issued as liquidated damages under the terms of a certain
registration rights agreement entered into between the Company and the investors
(the “Registration Rights Agreement”) in connection with the private
placement. The Registration Statement became effective on August 8,
2007 and, pursuant to the provisions of the Registration Rights Agreement, the
Company is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to, after the date
on which the Registration Statement becomes effective, cause the Registration
Statement to remain continuously effective as to all Shares and Warrant Shares,
other than for an aggregate of more than 30 consecutive trading days or for more
than an aggregate of 60 trading days in any 12-month period. In the event of a
default of the foregoing obligation, the Company will be required to issue to
the investors, as liquidated damages, on the date the foregoing default occurs
and each monthly anniversary thereafter, a number of warrants (on the same terms
as the Warrants) equal to 2% of the number of Shares then held by such investor,
not to exceed 10% of the total number of Shares then held by such investor, and
thereafter cash, in an amount equal to 2% of the aggregate purchase price paid
by the investors, not to exceed 30% of the aggregate purchase price paid by the
investors.
43
At the
date of issuance, the fair value of the Warrants was $510,000 and the fair value
of the Shares was $9.5 million. The fair value of the Warrants and
the Shares was determined by the use of the relative fair value method, in which
the $10.0 million gross proceeds was allocated based upon the fair values of the
Warrants, as determined by using the Black-Scholes Model, and the Shares, as
determined by the closing price of the common stock on the American Stock
Exchange on the date the transaction was closed.
The
Company paid the placement agent a fee in the amount of 6% of the gross proceeds
received by the Company from the offering ($600,000). In addition to
the placement agent fee, the Company paid $168,000 of other transaction fees
related to the offering.
The
proceeds were used to pay down the Company’s line of credit and for other
working capital purposes.
Senior Convertible Secured
Subordinated Note Payable
On May 26, 2005, GSE issued and sold
to Dolphin Direct Equity Partners, LP (“Dolphin”) a Senior Subordinated Secured
Convertible Note in the aggregate principal amount of $2,000,000 which was to
mature on March 31, 2009 (the “Dolphin Note”), and a seven-year warrant to
purchase 380,952 shares of GSE common stock at an exercise price of $2.22 per
share (the “GSE Warrant”). The Dolphin Note was convertible into
1,038,961 shares of GSE common stock at an exercise price of $1.925 per share
and accrued interest at 8% payable quarterly. On February 28, 2006,
the Company and Dolphin entered into a Cancellation and Warrant Exchange
Agreement (the “Cancellation Agreement”) under which Dolphin agreed to cancel
its Senior Subordinated Secured Convertible Promissory Note and cancel its
outstanding warrant to purchase 380,952 shares of GSE common stock at an
exercise price of $2.22 per share. In exchange for Dolphin’s
agreement to enter into the Cancellation Agreement, the Company repaid the
Dolphin Note and agreed to issue a new warrant to purchase 900,000 shares of GSE
common stock at an exercise price of $.67 per share (the “Dolphin
Warrant”). At the date of issuance, the fair value of the Dolphin
Warrant was $868,000, as established using the Black-Scholes Model, and was
recorded in paid-in capital with the offset recorded as loss on extinguishment
of debt. In accordance with the terms of the warrant agreement,
Dolphin exercised the Dolphin Warrant on November 8, 2006 upon the Company’s
certification that, among other things, the underlying shares of GSE common
stock were registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31,
2006, that the current stock price was greater than $1.25 per share, and that
the average of the current stock prices for each trading day of the prior 30
calendar day period was not less than $1.25 per share. The Company
received cash proceeds of $603,000.
In
conjunction with the early payoff of the Dolphin Note and the cancellation of
the 380,952 warrants, the Company wrote off the remaining unamortized Original
Issue Discount of $1.1 million, wrote off the remaining unamortized deferred
financing charges of $185,000; recognized a credit of $698,000 from the
write-off of the liabilities related to the Dolphin Note conversion feature and
the related warrants and took an $868,000 charge for the value of the 900,000
new warrants issued to Dolphin. The total loss on extinguishment of
the Dolphin Note and the cancellation of the related warrants totaled $1.4
million.
44
Series A Cumulative Preferred
Stock
On February 28, 2006, the Company
raised $3.9 million, net of associated fees of $395,000, through the sale of
42,500 shares of Series A Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock and Warrants by
means of a private placement to “accredited investors”, as that term is used in
rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
Convertible Preferred Stock was convertible at any time into a total of
2,401,133 shares of GSE common stock at a conversion price of $1.77 per share.
The conversion price was equal to 110% of the closing price of the Company’s
Common Stock on February 28, 2006, the date the sale of the Convertible
Preferred Stock was completed. Each investor received a five-year
warrant to purchase GSE common stock equal to 20% of the shares they would
receive from the conversion of the Convertible Preferred Stock, at an exercise
price of $1.77. In aggregate, the Company issued warrants to purchase
a total of 480,226 shares of GSE common stock. The Convertible
Preferred Stock holders were entitled to an 8% cumulative dividend, payable on a
semiannual basis every June 30 and December 30. In 2006, the Company
paid dividends totaling $279,000 to the preferred stockholders; in the nine
months ended September 30, 2007 the Company paid dividends totaling
$49,000. At the date of issuance, the fair value of the warrants was
$342,000 and the fair value of the preferred stock was $3.9 million. The fair
value of the warrants and the preferred stock was determined by the use of the
relative fair value method, in which the $4.25 million gross proceeds was
allocated based upon the fair values of the warrants, as determined by using the
Black-Scholes Model, and the preferred stock, as determined by an independent
appraisal. At any time after March 1, 2007, the Company had the right
to convert the Preferred Stock into shares of GSE common stock when the average
of the current stock price during the twenty trading days immediately prior to
the date of such conversion exceeded 200% of the Series A Conversion
Price. On March 7, 2007, the Company sent notice to the holders of
the remaining 20,000 outstanding shares of its Preferred Stock that the average
current stock price for the prior twenty trading days had exceeded 200% of the
Conversion Price, and that the Company was converting the outstanding Preferred
Stock into common stock. The 20,000 shares of Preferred Stock
converted to 1,129,946 shares of GSE common stock. Prior to March 7,
2007, the holders of 22,500 shares of Preferred Stock had already elected to
convert their Preferred Stock into a total of 1,271,187 shares of Common Stock;
8,580 shares of Preferred Stock were converted in 2006 and 13,920 shares of
Preferred Stock were converted in 2007.
The Company paid the placement agent
for the Convertible Preferred Stock and Warrants 6% of the gross proceeds
received by the Company from the offering ($255,000) plus five-year warrants to
purchase 150,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of
$1.77 per share. In addition to the placement agent fee, the Company paid
$140,000 of other transaction fees related to the offering. At the
date of issuance, the fair value of the placement agent warrants was $128,000,
as established using the Black-Scholes Model, and was recorded in paid-in
capital, with the offset recognized as a reduction of the preferred stock
proceeds.
Contractual
Cash Commitments
The following
summarizes the Company’s contractual cash obligations as of December 31, 2008,
and the effect
these obligations are expected to have on its liquidity and cash flow in future
periods:
45
Payments
Due by Period
|
||||||||||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Contractual
Cash Obligations
|
Total
|
Less
than 1 year
|
1-3
Years
|
4-5
Years
|
After
5 Years
|
|||||||||||||||
Long
Term Debt
|
$ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | $ | - | ||||||||||
Subcontractor
and Purchase Commitments
|
$ | 3,617 | $ | 2,690 | $ | 927 | $ | - | $ | - | ||||||||||
Net
future minimum lease payments
|
$ | 5,034 | $ | 768 | $ | 1,745 | $ | 874 | $ | 1,647 | ||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 8,651 | $ | 3,458 | $ | 2,672 | $ | 874 | $ | 1,647 |
As of
December 31, 2008, the Company was contingently liable for seven standby letters
of credit totaling $3.7 million. The letters of credit represent
performance bonds on seven contracts. Six of the letters of credit
have been cash collateralized, the seventh letter of credit has been
collateralized using the Company’s line of credit.
The
Company has deposited $1.2 million into a restricted, interest-bearing account
at the Union National Bank (“UNB”) in the United Arab Emirates as a partial
guarantee for the $11.8 million credit facility that UNB has extended to
ESA. The guarantee will be in place until the expiration of the ESA
credit facility on December 31, 2014 or earlier if ESA pays down and
terminates the credit facility.
2009
Liquidity Outlook
At December 31, 2008, the Company had
cash and cash equivalents of $8.3 million and another $3.1 million available
under its line of credit. Although the Company was in default on two of its
financial covenants under its line of credit agreement, the Company has received
a written waiver from its bank. In addition, the
Company’s backlog of project milestone invoices totaled $28 million at
December 31, 2008. The Company anticipates that its normal operations
and the utilization of its credit facility will generate all of the funds
necessary to fund its consolidated operations during the next twelve
months. The Company believes that it will have sufficient liquidity
and working capital without additional financing. However,
notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company may be required to look for
additional capital to fund its operations if the Company is unable to operate
profitably and generate sufficient cash from operations. There can be
no assurance that the Company would be successful in raising such additional
funds.
Foreign
Exchange.
A portion of the Company's
international sales revenue has been and may be received in a currency other
than the currency in which the expenses relating to such revenue are
paid. Accordingly, the Company periodically enters into forward
foreign exchange contracts to manage the market risks associated with the
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates.
46
Off-balance Sheet
Obligations.
The
Company has no off-balance sheet obligations as of December 31, 2008, except for
its operating lease commitments and outstanding letters of
credit. See Contractual Cash Commitments
above.
New
Accounting Standards.
In
December, 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), Business Combinations
(“SFAS 141(R)”), which applies prospectively to business combinations for
which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual
reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008. An entity may not
apply it before that date. SFAS 141(R) establishes principles and
requirements for how the acquirer: i) recognizes and measures in its
financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed
and any noncontrolling interest in the acquiree; ii) recognizes and
measures the goodwill acquired in the business combination or a gain from a
bargain purchase; and iii) determines what information to disclose to
enable users of the financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial
effects of the business combination. The Company does not expect the adoption of
SFAS 141 (R) to have an effect on its results of operations and its
financial condition unless it enters into a business combination after
January 1, 2009.
In
September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued
Statement No. 157, Fair Value Measurements (“SFAS 157”). SFAS 157
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands
disclosure requirements regarding fair value measurements. SFAS 157 does
not require any new fair value measurements. However, on February 12,
2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 157-2, Effective Date of FASB
Statement No. 157 (“FSP FAS 157-2”). FSP FAS 157-2 delays the
effective date of SFAS 157 for all nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial
liabilities until fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008 and interim
periods within those fiscal years. The implementation of
SFAS No. 157 for financial assets and financial liabilities, effective
January 1, 2008, did not have a material impact on the Company’s condensed
consolidated financial statements. The Company is currently assessing the impact
of SFAS No. 157 for nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities
on its consolidated financial statements.
47
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements—an amendment of Accounting Research Bulletin
No. 51 (“SFAS 160”). SFAS 160 establishes accounting and
reporting standards for ownership interests in subsidiaries held by parties
other than the parent, the amount of consolidated net income attributable to the
parent and to the noncontrolling interest, changes in a parent’s ownership
interest and the valuation of retained noncontrolling equity investments when a
subsidiary is deconsolidated. SFAS 160 also establishes disclosure
requirements that clearly identify and distinguish between the interests of the
parent and the interests of the noncontrolling owners. The Company is required
to adopt the provisions of SFAS 160 effective January 1, 2009. The
Company does not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 160 to have a material impact,
if any, on its consolidated financial statements.
In March 2008, the FASB issued SFAS
No. 161, “Disclosures about
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities - an amendment of FASB Statement
No. 133”. SFAS No. 161 is intended to improve financial reporting about
derivative instruments and hedging activities by requiring enhanced disclosures
to enable investors to better understand how and why an entity uses derivative
instruments and their effects on an entity's financial position, financial
performance, and cash flows. SFAS No. 161 is effective for financial
statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after
November 15, 2008.
Other
Matters.
Management believes inflation has not
had a material impact on the Company's operations.
ITEM
7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE
DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.
The Company’s market risk is
principally confined to changes in foreign currency exchange rates. During the
year ended December 31, 2008, 27% of the Company’s revenue was from contracts
which required payments in a currency other than U.S. Dollars, principally
British Pounds Sterling (10%) and Swedish Krona (7%). For the years
ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, 16% and 18%, respectively, of the Company’s
revenue was from contracts which required payments in a currency other than U.S.
Dollars, principally Swedish Krona, British Pounds Sterling and Japanese
Yen.
In
addition, during the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, 14%, 11% and
15%, respectively, of the Company’s expenses were incurred in Swedish
Krona. The Company’s exposure to foreign exchange rate fluctuations
arises in part from inter-company accounts in which costs incurred in one entity
are charged to other entities in different foreign jurisdictions. The
Company is also exposed to foreign exchange rate fluctuations as the financial
results of all foreign subsidiaries are translated into U.S. dollars in
consolidation. As exchange rates vary, those results when translated
may vary from expectations and adversely impact overall expected
profitability.
The
Company utilizes forward foreign currency exchange contracts to manage market
risks associated with the fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates. The
principal currencies for which such forward exchange contracts are entered into
are the Pound Sterling, the Euro and the Japanese Yen. It is the
Company's policy to use such derivative financial instruments to protect against
market risk arising in the normal course of business in order to reduce the
impact of these exposures. The Company minimizes credit exposure by limiting
counterparties to nationally recognized financial institutions.
48
As of December 31, 2008, the Company
had foreign exchange contracts for sale of approximately 2 million Pounds
Sterling, 4 million Euro, and 68 million Japanese Yen at fixed rates. The
contracts expire on various dates through February 2014. The Company
had not designated the contracts as hedges and has recorded a loss on the change
in the estimated fair value of the contracts of $174,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2008. The estimated fair value of the contracts
was a net liability of $58,000 at December 31, 2008. The Company
recognized unrealized losses of approximately $11,000 and $24,000 in 2007 and
2006, respectively, on the changes in fair value of its forward currency
exchange contracts.
The Company is also subject to market
risk related to the interest rate on its two existing lines of
credit. As of December 31, 2008, the interest rate on one line of
credit is based on LIBOR plus 150 basis-points and the interest rate on the
other line or credit is based on LIBOR plus 225 basis-points. The
Company had no outstanding borrowings against either line of credit in
2008.
49
GSE
SYSTEMS, INC.
FORM
10-K
For
the Year Ended December 31, 2008
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.
INDEX
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Page
|
|
GSE
Systems, Inc. and Subsidiaries
|
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm-- Internal Control over
Financial Reporting
|
F-1
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm -- Consolidated Financial
Statements
|
F-3
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2008 and 2007
|
F-4
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2007, and
2006
|
F-5
|
Consolidated
Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2007, and
2006
|
F-6
|
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity for the years
ended
December 31, 2008, 2007, and
2006
|
F-7
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2007, and
2006
|
F-8
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
F-9
|
50
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – Internal Control over
Financial Reporting
The Board
of Directors and Stockholders
GSE
Systems, Inc.:
We have
audited GSE Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries’ (the “Company”) internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008, based on criteria established
in Internal Control – Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company's management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,
included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting Item 9A(b). Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our
audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective
internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over
financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and
testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal
control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such
other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe
that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A
company's internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles. A company's internal control over
financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to
the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2)
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to
permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are
being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of
the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's
assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Because
of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not
prevent or detect misstatements. Also, 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.
A
material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal
control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility
that a material misstatement of the company’s annual or interim financial
statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. A material
weakness related to the Company’s accounting for derivative instruments has been
identified and included in management’s assessment. We also
have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of the Company
as of December 31, 2008 and 2007 and the related consolidated statements of
operations, comprehensive income (loss), changes in stockholders’ equity and
cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
2008. This material weakness was considered in determining the nature, timing,
and extent of audit tests applied in our audit of the 2008 consolidated
financial statements, and this report does not affect our report dated March 16,
2009 which expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial
statements.
F-1
In our
opinion, because of the effect of the aforementioned material weakness on the
achievement of the objectives of the control criteria, the Company has not
maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December
31, 2008, based on the criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission.
/s/ KPMG
LLP
Baltimore,
Maryland
March 16,
2009
F-2
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – Consolidated Financial
Statements
The Board
of Directors and Stockholders
GSE
Systems, Inc.:
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of GSE Systems, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), changes in stockholders’
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2008. These consolidated financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our
audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well
as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We
believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of GSE Systems, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period
ended December 31, 2008 in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
As
discussed in Note 10, the Company adopted FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes – An Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109, on January 1,
2007.
We also
have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2008, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO),
and our report dated March 16, 2009 expressed an adverse opinion on the
effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
/s/ KPMG
LLP
Baltimore,
Maryland
March 16,
2009
F-3
PART
I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
||||||||
Item
1. Financial Statements
|
||||||||
GSE
SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
||||||||
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
||||||||
(in
thousands, except share data)
|
||||||||
December
31,
|
||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||
ASSETS
|
||||||||
Current
assets:
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ | 8,274 | $ | 8,172 | ||||
Restricted
cash
|
2,962 | 2,228 | ||||||
Contract
receivables
|
10,951 | 10,721 | ||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
1,110 | 894 | ||||||
Total
current assets
|
23,297 | 22,015 | ||||||
Equipment
and leasehold improvements, net
|
1,133 | 880 | ||||||
Software
development costs, net
|
1,487 | 1,170 | ||||||
Goodwill
|
1,739 | 1,739 | ||||||
Long-term
restricted cash
|
2,027 | 1,925 | ||||||
Other
assets
|
1,332 | 635 | ||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 31,015 | $ | 28,364 | ||||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
||||||||
Current
liabilities:
|
||||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$ | 1,655 | $ | 1,533 | ||||
Accrued
expenses
|
685 | 1,061 | ||||||
Accrued
compensation and payroll taxes
|
1,234 | 1,613 | ||||||
Billings
in excess of revenue earned
|
4,020 | 2,270 | ||||||
Accrued
warranty
|
1,066 | 724 | ||||||
Other
current liabilities
|
749 | 103 | ||||||
Total
current liabilities
|
9,409 | 7,304 | ||||||
Other
liabilities
|
906 | 695 | ||||||
Total
liabilities
|
10,315 | 7,999 | ||||||
Commitments
and contingencies
|
- | - | ||||||
Stockholders'
equity:
|
||||||||
Preferred stock $.01 par value, 2,000,000 shares
authorized, shares issued and
|
||||||||
outstanding
none in 2008 and none in 2007
|
- | - | ||||||
Common stock $.01 par value, 30,000,000 shares authorized, shares issued
and
|
||||||||
outstanding
15,968,122 in 2008 and 15,508,014 in 2007
|
160 | 155 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
50,572 | 49,225 | ||||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(28,818 | ) | (28,128 | ) | ||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
(1,214 | ) | (887 | ) | ||||
Total
stockholders' equity
|
20,700 | 20,365 | ||||||
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity
|
$ | 31,015 | $ | 28,364 | ||||
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
|
F-4
GSE
SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
||||||||||||
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
||||||||||||
(in
thousands, except per share data)
|
||||||||||||
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Contract
revenue
|
$ | 29,004 | $ | 31,900 | $ | 27,502 | ||||||
Cost
of revenue
|
21,187 | 22,217 | 19,602 | |||||||||
Gross
profit
|
7,817 | 9,683 | 7,900 | |||||||||
Operating
expenses
|
||||||||||||
Selling,
general and administrative
|
7,383 | 7,214 | 4,929 | |||||||||
Administrative
charges from GP Strategies
|
- | - | 685 | |||||||||
Depreciation
|
446 | 258 | 186 | |||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
7,829 | 7,472 | 5,800 | |||||||||
Operating
income (loss)
|
(12 | ) | 2,211 | 2,100 | ||||||||
Interest
income (expense), net
|
130 | (433 | ) | (764 | ) | |||||||
Loss
on extinguishment of debt
|
- | - | (1,428 | ) | ||||||||
Loss
on derivative instruments
|
(453 | ) | (11 | ) | (24 | ) | ||||||
Other
expense, net
|
(226 | ) | (555 | ) | (81 | ) | ||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
(561 | ) | 1,212 | (197 | ) | |||||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
129 | 43 | 149 | |||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
(690 | ) | 1,169 | (346 | ) | |||||||
Preferred
stock dividends
|
- | (49 | ) | (279 | ) | |||||||
Net
income (loss) attributed to common shareholders
|
$ | (690 | ) | $ | 1,120 | $ | (625 | ) | ||||
Basic
income (loss) per common share
|
$ | (0.04 | ) | $ | 0.09 | $ | (0.07 | ) | ||||
Diluted
income (loss) per common share
|
$ | (0.04 | ) | $ | 0.08 | $ | (0.07 | ) | ||||
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
|
F-5
GSE
SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
||||||||||||
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
|
||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||||||
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (690 | ) | $ | 1,169 | $ | (346 | ) | ||||
Foreign
currency translation adjustment
|
(327 | ) | 69 | 201 | ||||||||
Comprehensive
income (loss)
|
$ | (1,017 | ) | $ | 1,238 | $ | (145 | ) | ||||
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
|
F-6