Heritage Global Inc. - Quarter Report: 2006 March (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
x QUARTERLY
REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For
the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006
OR
o TRANSITION
REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For
the transition period from ___________ to
___________
Commission
file number: 0-17973
C2
Global Technologies Inc.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
FLORIDA
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization)
|
59-2291344
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification No.) |
40
King St. West, Suite 3200, Toronto, ON M5H 3Y2
(Address
of principal executive offices)
(416) 866-3000
(Registrant’s
telephone number)
N/A
(Registrant’s
former name)
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 and Exchange Act of 1934
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter time period that the
registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to
such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No
o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule
12b-2).
Large
Accelerated Filer £
Accelerated Filer £ Non-Accelerated
Filer R
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2
of
the Exchange Act. Yes £
No
R
As
of May
4, 2006, there were 19,237,135 shares of common stock, $0.01 par value,
outstanding.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Part I.
|
Financial
Information
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements
|
|
|
Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets
as
of March
31, 2006 and December 31, 2005
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
Three
months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005
|
4
|
Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Changes in Stockholders’
Deficit
Period
ended March 31, 2006
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
Three
months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
7
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
19
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
31
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
31
|
|
|
|
Part II.
|
Other
Information
|
|
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
32
|
Item
1A
|
Risk
Factors
|
33
|
Item
2
|
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
33
|
Item
3
|
Defaults
Upon Senior Securities
|
33
|
Item
4
|
Submission
of Matters for a Vote of Security Holders
|
33
|
Item
5
|
Other
Information
|
33
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
34
|
2
PART
I –
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1 –
Financial Statements.
C2
GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(unaudited)
(In
thousands of dollars, except share and per share
amounts)
|
March
31,
2006
|
December
31,
2005
|
|||||
ASSETS
|
|
||||||
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
76
|
$
|
327
|
|||
Restricted
cash (Note 7)
|
1,065
|
1,506
|
|||||
Non-trade
accounts receivable
|
—
|
172
|
|||||
Other
current assets
|
7
|
13
|
|||||
Total
current assets
|
1,148
|
2,018
|
|||||
Other
assets:
|
|||||||
Intangible
assets, net (Note 5)
|
55
|
60
|
|||||
Goodwill
(Note 5)
|
173
|
173
|
|||||
Investments
(Note 6)
|
1,100
|
1,100
|
|||||
Other
assets
|
120
|
139
|
|||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
2,596
|
$
|
3,490
|
|||
|
|||||||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
|
|||||||
Current
liabilities:
|
|||||||
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities (Note 5)
|
$
|
1,733
|
$
|
2,523
|
|||
Convertible
note payable, net of unamortized discount (Note 7)
|
1,765
|
1,765
|
|||||
Subordinated
notes payable to a related party, net of unamortized discount (Note
7)
|
74,760
|
72,022
|
|||||
Liabilities
of discontinued operations (Note 8)
|
—
|
3,763
|
|||||
Total
current liabilities
|
78,258
|
80,073
|
|||||
Convertible
note payable, less current portion and net of unamortized discount
(Note
7)
|
691
|
1,078
|
|||||
Warrant
to purchase common stock (Note 7)
|
203
|
281
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Total
liabilities
|
79,152
|
81,432
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|||||||
Stockholders’
deficit:
|
|||||||
Preferred
stock, $10.00 par value, authorized 10,000,000 shares, issued and
outstanding 618; liquidation preference of $618
|
6
|
6
|
|||||
Common
stock, $0.01 par value, authorized 300,000,000 shares, issued and
outstanding 19,237,135 at March 31, 2006 and December 31,
2005
|
192
|
192
|
|||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
189,590
|
189,162
|
|||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(266,344
|
)
|
(267,302
|
)
|
|||
|
|||||||
Total
stockholders’ deficit
|
(76,556
|
)
|
(77,942
|
)
|
|||
|
|||||||
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ deficit
|
$
|
2,596
|
$
|
3,490
|
|||
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
C2
GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(unaudited)
Three
Months Ended
March
31,
|
|||||||
(In
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
||||
Revenue
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
|||
Operating
costs and expenses:
|
|||||||
Selling,
general and administrative
|
397
|
837
|
|||||
Research
and development
|
—
|
150
|
|||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
5
|
9
|
|||||
Total
operating costs and expenses
|
402
|
996
|
|||||
Operating
loss
|
(402
|
)
|
(996
|
)
|
|||
Other
income (expense):
|
|||||||
Interest
expense - related party (Note 7)
|
(2,260
|
)
|
(2,487
|
)
|
|||
Interest
expense - third party
|
(82
|
)
|
(144
|
)
|
|||
Interest
and other income
|
3
|
—
|
|||||
Total
other expense
|
(2,339
|
)
|
(2,631
|
)
|
|||
Loss
from continuing operations
|
(2,741
|
)
|
(3,627
|
)
|
|||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations (net of $0 tax) (Note
8)
|
3,699
|
(4,481
|
)
|
||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
958
|
$
|
(8,108
|
)
|
||
Basic
and diluted weighted average shares outstanding (in
thousands)
|
19,237
|
19,237
|
|||||
Net
income (loss) per common share - basic and diluted: (Note
2)
|
|||||||
Loss
from continuing operations
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
$
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations
|
0.19
|
(0.23
|
)
|
||||
Net
income (loss) per common share
|
$
|
0.05
|
$
|
(0.42
|
)
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
4
C2
GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
For
the period ended March 31, 2006
(in
thousands of dollars, except share amounts)
(unaudited)
Preferred
stock
|
Common
stock
|
Additional
paid-in
capital
|
Accumulated
deficit
|
||||||||||||||||
Shares
|
|
Amount
|
Shares
|
Amount
|
|||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2004
|
618
|
$
|
6
|
19,237,135
|
$
|
192
|
$
|
186,650
|
$
|
(248,813
|
)
|
||||||||
Beneficial
conversion feature on certain convertible notes payable to related
party
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,511
|
—
|
|||||||||||||
Conferral
of benefit from majority stockholder
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1,000
|
—
|
|||||||||||||
Issuance
of options to purchase common stock to non-employee
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1
|
—
|
|||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
(18,489
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2005
|
618
|
6
|
19,237,135
|
192
|
189,162
|
(267,302
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Beneficial
conversion feature on certain convertible notes payable to related
party
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
399
|
—
|
|||||||||||||
Compensation
cost related to stock options
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
29
|
||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
958
|
|||||||||||||
Balance
at March 31, 2006
|
618
|
$
|
6
|
19,237,135
|
$
|
192
|
$
|
189,590
|
$
|
(266,344
|
)
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
5
C2
GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(unaudited)
|
Three
months ended
March
31,
|
||||||
2006
|
2005
|
||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
958
|
$
|
(8,108
|
)
|
||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
|||||||
Loss
(income) from discontinued operations
|
(3,699
|
)
|
4,481
|
||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
5
|
9
|
|||||
Amortization
of discount and debt issuance costs on subordinated notes payable
to a
related party
|
464
|
1,152
|
|||||
Amortization
of discount on convertible note payable
|
73
|
70
|
|||||
Accrued
interest added to subordinated notes payable to a related
party
|
1,796
|
1,335
|
|||||
Stock
compensation expense
|
29
|
—
|
|||||
Expense
associated with issuance of options to purchase common stock to
non-employee
|
—
|
1
|
|||||
Mark
to market adjustment of warrant to purchase common stock
|
(78
|
)
|
(35
|
)
|
|||
(452
|
)
|
(1,095
|
)
|
||||
Increase
(decrease) in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|||||||
Other
assets
|
178
|
(80
|
)
|
||||
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities
|
(790
|
)
|
160
|
||||
Net
cash used in operating activities by continuing operations
|
(1,064
|
)
|
(1,015
|
)
|
|||
Net
cash used in operating activities by discontinued
operations
|
(64
|
)
|
(4,019
|
)
|
|||
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(1,128
|
)
|
(5,034
|
)
|
|||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|||||||
Purchases
of furniture, fixtures, equipment and software
|
—
|
(20
|
)
|
||||
Net
cash provided by investing activities of continuing
operations
|
—
|
(20
|
)
|
||||
Net
cash used in investing activities of discontinued
operations
|
—
|
(73
|
)
|
||||
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
—
|
(93
|
)
|
||||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of subordinated notes payable to a related
party
|
877
|
7,340
|
|||||
Use
of restricted cash to pay convertible note payable
|
441
|
—
|
|||||
Repayment
of convertible note payable
|
(441
|
)
|
(444
|
)
|
|||
Net
cash provided by financing activities of continuing
operations
|
877
|
6,896
|
|||||
Net
cash used in financing activities of discontinued
operations
|
—
|
(1,811
|
)
|
||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
877
|
5,085
|
|||||
Decrease
in cash and cash equivalents
|
(251
|
)
|
(42
|
)
|
|||
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
327
|
44
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$
|
76
|
$
|
2
|
Supplemental
schedule of non-cash investing and financing
activities:
|
|||||||
Disposition
of telecommunications business in exchange for assumption of
liabilities
|
$
|
3,653
|
$
|
—
|
|||
Discount
in connection with convertible notes payable to related
parties
|
399
|
365
|
|||||
Supplemental
cash flow information:
|
|||||||
Taxes
paid
|
3
|
—
|
|||||
Interest
paid
|
90
|
110
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
6
C2
GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(in
thousands, except share and per share data)
Note
1 –
Description of Business and Principles of Consolidation
The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of C2
Global
Technologies Inc. (formerly Acceris Communications Inc.), and its wholly-owned
subsidiaries I-Link Communications Inc. (“ILC”), and C2 Communications
Technologies Inc. (formerly Acceris Communications Technologies Inc.). These
entities, on a combined basis, are referred to as “C2”, the “Company”, or “we”
in these condensed
consolidated financial statements. Our condensed consolidated financial
statements were prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and include the assets,
liabilities, revenues, and expenses of all majority-owned subsidiaries over
which C2 exercises control.
C2
owns
certain patents, including two foundational patents in voice
over internet protocol (“VoIP”)
technology
-
U.S.
Patent Nos. 6,243,373 and 6,438,124 (together the “VoIP Patent Portfolio”),
which it seeks to license. Subsequent
to the disposition of its Telecommunications business, as discussed in Note
8 to
these condensed consolidated financial statements, licensing
of intellectual property constitutes the primary business of the Company. C2’s
target market consists of carriers, equipment manufacturers, service providers
and end users in the internet protocol (“IP”) telephone market who use
C2’s
patented VoIP technologies by deploying VoIP networks for phone-to-phone
communications. The Company has
engaged,
and
intends to continue to engage,
in
licensing agreements
with
third parties domestically and internationally. At present, no royalties are
being paid to the Company. The Company plans to obtain licensing and royalty
revenue from its target market by enforcing its patents, with the assistance
of
outside counsel, in order to realize value from its intellectual
property.
All
significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated upon
consolidation.
Management
believes that the unaudited interim data includes all adjustments necessary
for
a fair presentation. The December 31, 2005 unaudited condensed consolidated
balance sheet, as included herein, is derived from the audited consolidated
financial statements, but does not include all disclosures required by
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
(“GAAP”). The March 31, 2006 unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s annual report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission.
These
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared
assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern and, accordingly,
do
not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this
uncertainty. The independent registered public accounting firm’s report on the
consolidated financial statements included in the Company’s annual report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 contained an explanatory
paragraph regarding the Company’s ability to continue as a going
concern.
The
results of operations for the three month period ended March 31, 2006 are not
necessarily indicative of those to be expected for the entire year ending
December 31, 2006.
Note
2 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Net
earnings (loss) per share
Basic
earnings (loss) per share is computed based on the weighted average number
of C2
common shares outstanding during the period. Options, warrants, convertible
preferred stock and convertible debt are included in the calculation of diluted
earnings per share, except when their effect would be anti-dilutive. As the
Company has a net loss from continuing operations for the three month periods
ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, basic and diluted loss per share are the same,
even though the Company has net income in the first three months of 2006 due
to
its income from discontinued operations.
7
Potential
common shares that were not included in the computation of diluted earnings
per
share, because they would have been anti-dilutive, are as follows:
March
31,
|
|||||||
2006
|
|
2005
|
|||||
Assumed
conversion of Class N preferred stock
|
24,720
|
24,720
|
|||||
Assumed
conversion of subordinated note payable to a related party
|
3,721,299
|
3,404,382
|
|||||
Assumed
conversion of convertible note payable
|
3,175,134
|
5,180,481
|
|||||
Assumed
exercise of options and warrant to purchase shares of common
stock
|
1,719,529
|
3,388,846
|
|||||
8,640,682
|
11,998,429
|
Investments
Investments
are accounted for under the cost method, as the equity securities or the
underlying common stock are not readily marketable and the Company’s ownership
interests do not allow it to exercise significant influence over the entity.
The
Company monitors these investments for impairment by considering current factors
including economic environment, market conditions, operational performance,
and
other specific factors relating to the business underlying the investment,
and
will record impairments in carrying values if appropriate. The fair values
of
the securities are estimated using the best available information as of the
evaluation date, including the quoted market prices of comparable public
companies, market price of the common stock underlying the preferred stock,
recent financing rounds of the investee, and other investee specific
information. Impairments, dividends and realized gains and losses on equity
securities are included in other income in the condensed consolidated statements
of operations. See Note 6 for further discussion of the Company’s investment in
convertible preferred stock.
Use
of estimates
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management
to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets
and
liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the
date
of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
Significant
estimates include revenue recognition, purchase accounting (including the
ultimate recoverability of intangibles and other long-lived assets), valuation
of deferred tax assets, and contingencies surrounding litigation. These policies
have the potential to have a significant impact on our financial statements,
either because of the significance of the financial statement item to which
they
relate, or because they require judgment and estimation due to the uncertainty
involved in measuring, at a specific point in time, events which are continuous
in nature.
The
Company accounts for intangible assets in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 141, Business
Combinations (“SFAS
141”) and SFAS No. 142, Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets (“SFAS
142”). All business combinations are accounted for using the purchase method.
Goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives are not amortized,
but are tested for impairment at least annually. Intangible assets are recorded
based on estimates of fair value at the time of the acquisition.
The
Company assesses the fair value of goodwill based upon the fair value of the
Company as a whole, with the Company’s valuation being based upon its market
capitalization. If the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the Company’s
estimated fair value, goodwill impairment may be present. The Company measures
the goodwill impairment loss based upon the fair value of the underlying assets
and liabilities, including any unrecognized intangible assets, and estimate
the
implied fair value of goodwill. An impairment loss is recognized to the extent
that the Company’s recorded goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of
goodwill.
Goodwill
is tested for impairment annually, and will be tested for impairment between
annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that more likely than
not would indicate the carrying amount may be impaired. No impairment was
present upon the performance of these tests in 2005 and 2004. We cannot predict
the occurrence of future events that might adversely affect the reported value
of goodwill. Such events may include, but are not limited to, strategic
decisions made in response to economic and competitive conditions, judgments
on
the validity of the Company’s VoIP Patent Portfolio or other factors not known
to management at this time.
8
Regularly,
the Company evaluates whether events or circumstances have occurred that
indicate the carrying value of its other amortizable intangible assets may
not
be recoverable. When factors indicate an asset may not be recoverable, the
Company compares the related future net cash flows to the carrying value of
the
asset to determine if impairment exists. If the expected future net cash flows
are less than carrying value, impairment is recognized to the extent that the
carrying value exceeds the fair value of the asset.
The
Company assesses the value of its deferred tax asset, which has been generated
by a history of net operating losses, at least annually, and determines the
necessity for a valuation allowance. The Company evaluates which portion, if
any, will more likely than not be realized by offsetting future taxable income.
The determination of that allowance includes a projection of the Company’s
future taxable income, as well as consideration of any limitations that may
exist on its use of its net operating loss carryforwards.
The
Company is involved from time to time in various legal matters arising out
of
its operations in the normal course of business. On a case by case basis, the
Company evaluates the likelihood of possible outcomes for this litigation.
Based
on this evaluation, the Company determines whether a liability accrual is
appropriate. If the likelihood of a negative outcome is probable, and the amount
is estimable, the Company accounts for the liability in the current period.
A
change in the circumstances surrounding any current litigation could have a
material impact on the financial statements.
New
Accounting Pronouncements
In
May
2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, Accounting
Changes and Error Corrections
(“SFAS
No. 154”). SFAS No. 154 supersedes APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting
Changes (“APB
No.
20”), and related Interpretations, and is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2005. SFAS No. 154 requires that voluntary changes in
accounting principles be applied retrospectively, with the cumulative effect
of
the change taken into opening retained earnings for the earliest period
presented, and the prior years’ statements restated to reflect the effect of the
new accounting principle. Previously, APB No. 20 required that the cumulative
effect of a change in accounting principle be recognized in net income in the
year of the change. Although SFAS No. 154 now requires that a change in
accounting principle be treated substantially the same as a correction of an
error in prior periods, retrospective application is not required if it is
impracticable to determine the effects on a specific period or the cumulative
effect of the change on all prior periods presented in the financial statements.
SFAS No. 154 does not change the transition provisions of any existing
accounting pronouncements. The Company’s adoption of SFAS No. 154 has not had a
material effect on its financial position, operations or cash flow.
In
2005,
the FASB’s Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) reached consensus on EITF Issue
No. 05-2, The
Meaning of ‘Conventional Convertible Debt Instrument’ in EITF Issue No. 00-19,
‘Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, Potentially Settled
In, a Company’s Own Stock’ ”
(“EITF
No. 05-2”). Under EITF No. 05-2, instruments that provide the holder with an
option to convert into a fixed number of shares (or equivalent amount of cash
at
the discretion of the issuer) for which the ability to exercise the option
is
based on the passage of time or a contingent event should be considered
conventional, and convertible preferred stock with a mandatory redemption date
may qualify as conventional if the economic characteristics indicate the
instrument is more akin to debt than equity. EITF No. 05-2 is effective for
new
instruments entered into and instruments modified in reporting periods beginning
after June 29, 2005. The Company’s adoption of EITF No. 05-2 has not had a
material effect on the Company’s financial position, operations or cash
flow.
Note
3 – Liquidity and Capital Resources.
As
a
result of our substantial operating losses and negative cash flows from
operations, at March 31, 2006 we had a stockholders’ deficit of $76,556
(December 31, 2005 - $77,942) and negative working capital of $77,110 (December
31, 2005 - $78,055). The reduction of the working capital deficit is due
primarily to the disposition of the shares of WXC Corp. (“WXCC”, formerly known
as Acceris Communications Corp.) during the first quarter of 2006, as discussed
in Note 8 of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements, which
reduced accrued liabilities by $3,763. This reduction was partially offset
by
the capitalization of $1,796 of interest on the debt owing to the Company’s
majority stockholder, Counsel Corporation (collectively, with its subsidiaries,
“Counsel”), as well as by advances from Counsel of $877. During the first
quarter of 2006, both continuing and discontinued operations were primarily
financed through these advances.
9
The
Company had gross
third
party debt of $2,997
at
March
31,
2006,
a
reduction from the $3,516
owed at
December 31, 2005.
The
third party debt is held by Laurus Master Fund, Ltd. (“Laurus”), and at March
31, 2006 is comprised of a convertible note payable (the “Note”) in the amount
of $2,794 and a warrant to purchase common stock with a fair value of $203.
In
October 2005, the Company placed $1,800 into a restricted cash account for
the
benefit of Laurus, which may be applied toward scheduled monthly payments of
the
Note. At March 31, 2006, the balance of the restricted cash account was $1,065.
The Note is secured by all assets of the Company and guaranteed by Counsel
through its maturity of October 2007.
Gross
related party debt owing to our 91% common stockholder, Counsel, is $76,319
at
March 31, 2006 compared to $73,646 at December 31, 2005. Interest on the related
party debt is capitalized, at the end of each quarter, and added to the
principal amount outstanding. This related party debt matures on December 31,
2006. It is supplemented by a Keep Well agreement from Counsel, which requires
Counsel to fund, through long-term intercompany advances or equity
contributions, all capital investment, working capital or other operational
cash
requirements through December 31, 2006. The Keep Well is not expected to be
extended beyond its current maturity.
Counsel,
in addition to guaranteeing the Note, has also agreed to subordinate all of
its
debt owed by the Company, and to subrogate all of its related security
interests, in favor of Laurus. Counsel has further agreed to pledge all of
its
shares owned in C2 as security for the Note. In accordance with the Laurus
agreement, C2 cannot repay amounts owing to Counsel while the Note with Laurus
remains outstanding. Additionally, so long as C2’s Note to Laurus remains
outstanding, Counsel may not, without the written consent of Laurus, take any
enforcement action to collect its loans owing by C2. Notwithstanding this,
Counsel is not expected to extend the maturity date of its loans beyond December
31, 2006. In the event that C2’s Note to Laurus is either prepaid in full or
settled by conversion of such Note into shares of C2, Counsel’s subordination
agreement shall be terminated with immediate effect.
The
Company has not realized revenues from continuing operations during the last
two
years, and there is significant doubt about the Company’s ability to obtain
additional financing to support its operations beyond the December 31, 2006
expiration of the Keep Well from Counsel. Additionally,
management
believes that the
Company does not,
at this
time,
have an
ability to obtain additional financing in order to pursue expansion through
acquisition. The Company must therefore realize value from its intellectual
property, as discussed in
Note
1,
in
order to continue as a going concern. There is no certainty that the Company
will be successful in its strategy of generating
revenue by realizing value on its intellectual property.
Note
4 – Stock-Based Compensation
In
December 2004, the FASB issued a revision (“SFAS No. 123(R)”) to SFAS No. 123,
Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation
(“SFAS
No. 123”), and the Company was required to adopt SFAS No. 123(R) in the first
quarter of 2006. SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes Accounting Principles Board Opinion
No. 25, Accounting
for Stock Issued to Employees
(APB No.
25), and related Interpretations, and requires that all stock-based
compensation, including options, be expensed at fair value, as of the grant
date, over the vesting period. Companies are required to use an option pricing
model (e.g.: Black-Scholes or Binomial) to determine compensation expense,
consistent with the model previously used in the already required disclosures
of
SFAS No. 148, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation-Transition and Disclosure.
The
adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) did not have a material effect on the Company’s
financial position, operations or cash flow.
At
March
31, 2006, the Company has several stock-based compensation plans, which are
described more fully in Note 17 to the audited consolidated financial statements
contained in our most recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K. Prior to
January 1, 2006, the Company accounted for these plans under the recognition
and
measurement principles of APB No. 25, under which stock-based employee
compensation cost was not reflected in net loss, as all options granted under
these plans had an exercise price equal to the market value of the underlying
common stock on the date of grant. In accordance with SFAS No. 123, as amended
by SFAS No. 148, the Company provided footnote disclosure of the pro forma
stock-based compensation cost, net loss and net loss per share as if the
fair-value based method of expense recognition and measurement prescribed by
SFAS No. 123 had been applied to all employee options.
10
As
a
result of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006, C2’s net loss for the
quarter ended March 31, 2006 is $29 more than it would have been if the Company
had continued to account for stock-based compensation under APB No. 25. Basic
and diluted net income per share would be unchanged if the Company had not
adopted SFAS No. 123(R). The adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) had no effect on the
Company’s Statement of Cash Flows, as there were no exercises of stock options
in the three months ended March 31, 2006 and therefore no stock option-related
cash flows were generated.
The
table
below illustrates the effect on net loss and loss per share if the Company
had
applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to options granted
under the Company’s stock option plans in the first quarter of
2005:
Three
Months Ended
March
31, 2005
|
||||
Net
loss as reported
|
$
|
(8,108
|
)
|
|
Deduct:
|
||||
Employee
stock-based compensation cost determined under the fair value-based
method
for all awards, net of $0 tax
|
(120
|
)
|
||
|
||||
Pro
forma net loss
|
$
|
(8,228
|
)
|
|
|
||||
Net
loss per share, basic and diluted:
|
||||
As
reported
|
$
|
(0.42
|
)
|
|
Pro
forma
|
$
|
(0.43
|
)
|
The
$29
fair value compensation cost of unvested stock options in the first quarter
of
2006 was determined using historical Black-Scholes input information at grant
dates between 2003 and 2005. These inputs included expected volatility between
79% and 98%, risk-free interest rates between 3.12% and 3.85%, expected terms
of
4.75 years, and an expected dividend yield of zero.
As
of
March 31, 2006, the total unrecognized stock-based compensation expense related
to non-vested stock options was $214, which is expected to be recognized over
a
weighted average period of approximately 23 months.
The
table
below presents information regarding all stock options outstanding at March
31,
2006:
Options
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
|||||
Outstanding
at December 31, 2005
|
727,026
|
$
|
37.50
|
||||
Expired
|
(7,500
|
)
|
$
|
22.50
|
|||
Outstanding
at March 31, 2006
|
719,526
|
$
|
36.07
|
||||
Options
exercisable at March 31, 2006
|
494,151
|
$
|
51.42
|
No
options were granted, forfeited or exercised during the three months ending
March 31, 2006.
As
of
March 31, 2006, the aggregate intrinsic value of options outstanding at March
31, 2006 was $0, based on the Company’s closing stock price of $0.51 as of the
last business day of the period ended March 31, 2006. Intrinsic value is the
amount by which the fair value of the underlying stock exceeds the exercise
price of the options. At March 31, 2006, all of the outstanding options had
exercise prices greater than $0.51.
11
The
table
below presents information regarding non-vested stock options outstanding at
March 31, 2006:
|
Options
|
Weighted
Average
Grant
Date
Fair
Value
|
|||||
Non-vested
at December 31, 2005
|
226,187
|
$
|
1.15
|
||||
Granted
|
—
|
—
|
|||||
Vested
|
(812
|
)
|
$
|
1.43
|
|||
Forfeited
|
—
|
—
|
|||||
Non-vested
at March 31, 2006
|
225,375
|
$
|
1.14
|
The
total
fair value of shares vesting during the three months ending March 31, 2006
was
$1.
Note
5 –
Composition of Certain Financial Statements Captions
Intangible
assets consisted of the following:
|
March
31, 2006
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Amortization
period
|
|
Cost
|
|
Accumulated
amortization
|
|
Net
|
|
||||
Intangible
assets subject to amortization:
|
|||||||||||||
Patent
rights
|
60
months
|
$
|
100
|
$
|
(45
|
)
|
$
|
55
|
December
31, 2005
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
Amortization
period
|
|
Cost
|
|
Accumulated
amortization
|
|
Net
|
|||||
Intangible
assets subject to amortization:
|
|||||||||||||
Patent
rights
|
60
months
|
$
|
100
|
$
|
(40
|
)
|
$
|
60
|
Amortization
expense relating to patent rights was $5 for each of the three month periods
ended March 31, 2006 and 2005.
Goodwill
relates to an investment in a subsidiary company that holds the rights to some
of the Company’s patents.
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities consisted of the following:
March
31, 2006
|
|
December
31, 2005
|
|||||
Regulatory
and legal fees
|
$
|
299
|
$
|
477
|
|||
Accounting,
audit and tax consulting
|
348
|
295
|
|||||
Accrued
restructuring costs
|
94
|
201
|
|||||
Telecommunications
and related costs
|
88
|
295
|
|||||
Obligations
to equipment suppliers
|
524
|
524
|
|||||
Sales
and other taxes
|
101
|
316
|
|||||
Payroll
and benefits
|
8
|
142
|
|||||
Other
|
271
|
273
|
|||||
|
|||||||
Total
accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
$
|
1,733
|
$
|
2,523
|
|||
|
12
Note
6 – Investments
The
Company’s investments as of March 31, 2006 consist of a convertible preferred
stock holding in AccessLine Communications Corporation, a privately-held
corporation. This stock was received as consideration for a licensing agreement
(reflected in technology licensing and related services revenues) in the second
quarter of 2003, the estimated fair value of which was determined to be $1,100.
The fair value of the securities is estimated using the best available
information as of the evaluation date, including the quoted market prices of
comparable public companies, recent financing rounds of the investee, and other
investee specific information.
Note
7 – Debt
The
Company’s outstanding debt, including a related common stock warrant, consists
of the following:
|
March
31, 2006
|
December
31, 2005
|
|||||||||||||||||
Gross
debt
|
Discounts
(1)
|
Reported
debt
|
Gross
debt
|
Discounts
(1)
|
Reported
debt
|
||||||||||||||
Subordinated
notes payable to Counsel, interest at 10.0%
|
$
|
57,638
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
57,638
|
$
|
55,376
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
55,376
|
|||||||
Subordinated
note payable to Counsel, convertible to common stock, interest at
9.0%
|
18,681
|
(1,559
|
)
|
17,122
|
18,270
|
(1,624
|
)
|
16,646
|
|||||||||||
Convertible
note, convertible to common stock, interest at WSJ prime plus 3.0%
(10.75%
at March 31, 2006)
|
2,794
|
(338
|
)
|
2,456
|
3,235
|
(392
|
)
|
2,843
|
|||||||||||
Warrant
to purchase common stock
|
203
|
—
|
203
|
281
|
—
|
281
|
|||||||||||||
79,316
|
(1,897
|
)
|
77,419
|
77,162
|
(2,016
|
)
|
75,146
|
||||||||||||
Less
current portion
|
78,084
|
(1,559
|
)
|
76,525
|
75,411
|
(1,624
|
)
|
73,787
|
|||||||||||
Long-term
debt, less current portion
|
$
|
1,232
|
$
|
(338
|
)
|
$
|
894
|
$
|
1,751
|
$
|
(392
|
)
|
$
|
1,359
|
(1)
Beneficial conversion feature, detachable warrant, imputed interest and costs
associated with raising debt facilities are added to the gross debt balances
over the applicable amortization periods.
Payment
due by period
|
||||||||||||||||
Contractual
obligations:
|
Total
|
|
Less
than 1
year
|
|
1-3
years
|
|
3-5
years
|
|
More
than
5
years
|
|||||||
Subordinated
notes payable to a related party
|
$
|
76,319
|
$
|
76,319
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Convertible
note payable to a third party
|
2,794
|
1,765
|
1,029
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||
Warrant
to purchase common
stock1
|
203
|
—
|
—
|
203
|
—
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
79,316
|
$
|
78,084
|
$
|
1,029
|
$
|
203
|
$
|
—
|
1
The
warrant is reported at fair value, as determined at the end of each
quarter.
Counsel
is the controlling stockholder of the Company and is also the major debt holder
of the Company, owning 96% of the Company’s debt as at March 31, 2006. The
convertible note payable (the “Note”) and the warrant to purchase common stock
are held by Laurus. Counsel has guaranteed the Note through its maturity in
October 2007. Counsel has also subordinated its debt position and pledged its
ownership interest in C2 in favor of Laurus.
Subordinated
notes payable to a related party
The
related party subordinated notes payable to Counsel mature on December 31,
2006.
They are subject to acceleration in certain circumstances including certain
events of default. Interest on related party debt accrues to principal
quarterly, and accordingly the Company has no cash payment obligations to
Counsel prior to the debt’s maturity. During the first quarter of 2006, Counsel
advanced $877 and accrued interest added to principal was $1,796. Counsel,
via a
“Keep Well” agreement, has agreed to fund the cash requirements of C2 until
December 31, 2006. At this time, the Company does not expect this guarantee
will
be extended past that date.
13
In
accordance with the Laurus agreement, C2 cannot repay amounts owing to Counsel
while the Note with Laurus remains outstanding. Additionally, in accordance
with
Counsel’s subordination agreement with Laurus, so long as C2’s Note to Laurus
remains outstanding, Counsel may not, without the written consent of Laurus,
take any enforcement action to collect its loans owing by C2. Notwithstanding
this, Counsel is not expected to extend the maturity date of its loans beyond
December 31, 2006. In the event that C2’s Note to Laurus is either prepaid in
full or settled by conversion of such Note into shares of C2, Counsel’s
subordination agreement shall be terminated with immediate effect.
For
further discussion of the subordinated notes payable and other transactions
with
Counsel, see Note 3, above, and Note 10, below.
Convertible
note payable to a third party
On
October 14, 2004, the Company issued
the
Note with
a
detachable
warrant to Laurus, in the principal amount of $5,000, due October 14, 2007.
The
Note provides that the principal amount outstanding bears interest at the prime
rate as published in the Wall Street Journal plus 3% (but not less than 7%
per
annum) decreasing by 2% (but not less than 0%) for every 25% increase in the
Market Price (as defined therein) above the fixed conversion price following
the
effective date of the registration statement covering the common stock issuable
upon conversion of the Note. Interest is payable monthly in arrears. Principal
is payable at the rate of approximately $147 per month, in cash or,
in
certain circumstances, in
registered common stock. In the event the monthly payment must be paid in cash,
then the Company pays
102% of
the amount due. The Company has the right to prepay the Note at any time by
paying 120% of the outstanding principal amount. Laurus
may
convert the Note, in whole or in part, into shares of common stock at any time.
The Note is convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock at a fixed
conversion price of $0.88 per share of common stock,
not to
exceed, however, 4.99% of the outstanding shares of common stock of the Company.
Laurus may revoke the 4.99% ownership restriction upon 75 days prior notice
to
the Company. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No.
133, Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
(“SFAS
133”) and Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 00-19, Accounting
for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in,
a
Company’s Own Stock (“EITF
00-19”), the Company analyzed the various embedded derivative elements of the
debt at inception of the Note and concluded that all of the individual elements
should be characterized as debt for accounting purposes and that the embedded
derivative elements had nominal value. The value of the embedded derivative
elements of the debt is reassessed on a quarterly basis on a mark-to-market
basis. At March
31,
2006, and on all prior assessment dates,
the
Company concluded that the value of the embedded derivatives remained
nominal.
At March
31, 2006, the Note was convertible into 3,175,134 shares of the common stock
of
the Company.
In
connection with the Note, the Company recorded a debt discount of $656,
comprising $430 relating to the warrant allocation and $226 of financing costs
to Laurus, which was deducted from the amount advanced on closing. The debt
discount is being amortized over the term of the debt using the effective
interest method through a charge to the statement of operations. At March 31,
2006, the amount of the debt discount was $338.
Pursuant
to a Master Security Agreement, as amended, entered into in connection with
the
issuance of the Note, the Company granted a blanket lien on all its property
and
that of certain of its subsidiaries to secure repayment of the obligation.
On
September 30, 2005, the Company, in conjunction with the completion of the
sale
of the Telecommunications business, described in Note 8 of these consolidated
financial statements, agreed to modifications to the security interest in the
Company held by the Note holder as follows: (a) release of the security interest
in the assets being disposed of in the sale of the Telecommunications assets;
(b) conversion of the security interest of the Note to the senior debt position;
(c) payment of $1,800 into a restricted cash account for the benefit of the
Note
holder, which may be applied toward scheduled monthly payments of the Note.
As
at March 31, 2006, the balance of the restricted cash account was
$1,065.
14
Warrant
to purchase common stock
In
addition
to the
Note,
the
Company issued a common stock purchase warrant (the “Warrant”) to Laurus,
entitling Laurus
to
purchase up to one million shares of common stock, subject to adjustment. The
Warrant entitles the holder
to
purchase the stock through the earlier of (i) October 13, 2009 or
(ii) the date on which the average closing price for any consecutive ten
trading dates shall equal or exceed 15 times the Exercise Price. The Exercise
Price shall equal $1.00 per share as to the first 250,000 shares, $1.08 per
share for the next 250,000 shares and $1.20 per share for the remaining 500,000
shares. The value of the Warrant is reassessed on a quarterly basis on a
mark-to-market basis. The Company adjusted the value of the Warrant to
$281
at
December
31,
2005
and to
$203
at
March
31,
2006,
and
recorded $41
and
$78,
respectively, as
a
credit to interest expense.
Note
8 – Discontinued Operations
Disposition
of the Telecommunications Business
Commencing
in 2001, the Company entered the Telecommunications segment, acquiring certain
assets from the estate of WorldxChange Communications Inc. from bankruptcy.
In
2002, the Company also acquired certain assets of the estate of RSL.COM USA
Inc.
from bankruptcy and in 2003 the Company acquired Local Telcom Holdings, LLC.
Together, these assets made up the Telecommunications segment of the Company’s
business, which was owned through the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Acceris
Communications Corp. (name changed to WXC Corp. (“WXCC”) in October
2005).
The
Company entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of May 19, 2005,
to
sell substantially all of the assets and to transfer certain liabilities of
WXCC
to Acceris Management and Acquisition LLC (“AMA”), an arm’s length Minnesota
limited liability company and wholly-owned subsidiary of North Central Equity
LLC. In addition, on May 19, 2005, the parties executed a Management Services
Agreement (“MSA”), Security Agreement, Note, Proxy and Guaranty. Upon receipt of
the requisite approvals, including shareholder approval, the transaction was
completed on September 30, 2005.
The
sale
resulted in a gain on disposition of $6,387, net of disposition and business
exit costs. In accordance with GAAP, this gain, as well as the
Telecommunications operations for the year ended December 31, 2005, have been
reported in discontinued operations in the Company’s consolidated financial
statements in its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the
SEC.
On
September 30, 2005, in conjunction with the closing of the asset sale
transaction and the expiration of the MSA, referenced above, the Company and
AMA
entered into a second Management Services Agreement (“MSA2”) under which the
Company agreed to continue to provide services in certain states where the
Buyer, at closing, had not obtained authorization to provide telecommunications
services. At December 31, 2005, AMA had obtained authorization to provide
telecommunications services in all states except Hawaii. The authorization
to
provide services in Hawaii was subsequently obtained on April 5, 2006. For
the
period October 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006, the Company was charged a management
fee by the Buyer that was equal to the revenue earned from providing these
services. Both the revenue and the management fee were recorded in discontinued
operations. The above is a summary description of the MSA2 and by its nature
is
incomplete.
On
February 28, 2006, the Company entered into a stock purchase agreement with
a
third party, which agreed to acquire all the shares of WXCC from the Company,
subject to Laurus’s release of its security interest in the shares and to
certain other closing requirements. As a result of all closing requirements
being completed and Laurus consenting to the release of its security interest
on
March 28, 2006, the Company was relieved of $3,763 of obligations that had
previously been classified as liabilities of discontinued operations. The
Company recognized a gain of $3,645 on the sale, net of closing costs of $118,
which is included in income from discontinued operations in the condensed
consolidated statement of operations for the quarter ended March 31,
2006.
Note
9 – Income Taxes
The
Company recognized no income tax expense from the net income generated in the
three months ended March 31, 2006 because of the realization of an equivalent
offsetting income tax credit arising from the reduction in the deferred tax
valuation allowance of the Company. The Company recognized no income tax benefit
from the net losses generated in the three months ended March 31, 2005 because
of the uncertainty surrounding the realization of the related deferred tax
asset.
15
Restrictions
in net operating loss carryforwards occurred in 2001 as a result of the
acquisition of the Company by Counsel. Further restrictions may have occurred
as
a result of subsequent changes in the share ownership and capital structure
of
the Company and Counsel, and disposition of business interests by the Company.
Pursuant to Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code, annual usage of the
Company’s net operating loss carryforwards, prior to the sale of the Company’s
Telecommunications business, was limited to approximately $6,700 per annum
until
2008 and $1,700 per annum thereafter as a result of previous cumulative changes
of ownership resulting in a change of control of the Company. After the
completion of the sale of the Company’s Telecommunications business, the annual
usage of the Company’s net operating loss carryforwards is limited to
approximately $2,500 per annum until 2008 and $1,700 per annum thereafter.
There
is no certainty that the application of these “change in ownership” rules may
not reoccur resulting in further restrictions on the Company’s income tax loss
carry forwards existing at a particular time. In addition, further restrictions
or reductions in net operating loss carryforwards may occur through future
merger, acquisition and/or disposition transactions. Any such additional
limitations could require the Company to pay income taxes in the future and
record an income tax expense to the extent of such liability despite the
existence of net operating loss carryforwards.
In
the first quarter of 2006, as discussed in Note 4, the Company adopted SFAS
No.
123(R). The adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) had no immediate impact from an income
tax perspective, since SFAS No. 123(R) specifically prohibits the recognition
of
any windfall tax benefits that have not been realized in cash or in the form
of
a reduction of income taxes payable.
Note
10 – Related Party Transactions
During
the three months ended March 31, 2006, Counsel advanced $877 and converted
$1,796 of interest payable to principal. All loans from Counsel mature on
December 31, 2006 and accrue interest at rates ranging from 9% to 10%, with
interest compounding quarterly. Some of the loans are subject to an accelerated
maturity in certain circumstances. At September 30, 2005, the closing of the
sale of the Telecommunications business, which is discussed in more detail
in
Note 8 to these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements, invoked
the accelerated provisions of these loans. Counsel, in conjunction with the
sale, waived the acceleration rights invoked by virtue of the sale and continues
to retain its acceleration rights related to future events. The loans to Counsel
are supplemented by Counsel’s Keep Well agreement, which matures December 31,
2006. The Keep Well requires Counsel to fund, through long-term intercompany
advances or equity contributions, all capital investment, working capital or
other operational cash requirements.
Allan
Silber, the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of C2, is an employee of Counsel. As
CEO of C2, he is entitled to an annual salary of $138, plus a discretionary
bonus of 100% of the base salary. No bonus was payable for the year ended
December 31, 2005. Such compensation is expensed and paid by C2.
In
December 2004, C2 entered into a Management Services Agreement (the “Agreement”)
with Counsel. Under the terms of the Agreement, the Company agreed to make
payment to Counsel for the past and future services to be provided to the
Company by certain Counsel personnel for the calendar years of 2004 and 2005.
The basis for such services charged was an allocation, on a cost basis, based
on
time incurred, of the base compensation paid by Counsel to those employees
providing services to the Company. In December 2005, C2 entered into a similar
agreement with Counsel for services to be provided by Counsel in 2006, with
the
allocation determined on the same basis as the Agreement. For the first three
months of 2006, the cost was $56, as compared to $113 for the first three months
of 2005. In accordance with the terms of the Laurus Note, described above,
amounts owing to Counsel cannot be repaid while amounts remain owing under
the
Note. The amounts due under the Agreement are payable within 30 days following
the respective year end, subject to applicable restrictions. Any unpaid fee
amounts bear interest at 10% per annum commencing on the day after such year
end. In the event of a change of control, merger or similar event of the
Company, all amounts owing, including fees incurred up to the date of the event,
will become due and payable immediately upon the occurrence of such
event.
16
Note
11 – Commitments and Contingencies
Legal
Proceedings
On
April 16, 2004, certain stockholders of the Company (the “Plaintiffs”)
filed a putative derivative complaint in the Superior Court of the State of
California in and for the County of San Diego, (the “Complaint”) against the
Company, WorldxChange Corporation (sic), Counsel Communications LLC, and Counsel
Corporation as well as four present and former officers and directors of the
Company, some of whom also are or were directors and/or officers of the other
corporate defendants (collectively, the “Defendants”). The Complaint alleges,
among other things, that the Defendants, in their respective roles as
controlling stockholder and directors and officers of the Company committed
breaches of the fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and good faith and were
unjustly enriched, and that the individual Defendants committed waste of
corporate assets, abuse of control and gross mismanagement. The Plaintiffs
seek
compensatory damages, restitution, disgorgement of allegedly unlawful profits,
benefits and other compensation, attorneys’ fees and expenses in connection with
the Complaint. The Company believes that these claims are without merit and
intends to continue to vigorously defend this action. There is no assurance
that
this matter will be resolved in the Company’s favor and an unfavorable outcome
of this matter could have a material adverse impact on its business, results
of
operations, financial position or liquidity.
The
Company, Counsel Communications LLC, Counsel Corporation and four of its current
and former executives and board members were named in a securities action filed
in the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of San
Diego (the “Court”) on April 16, 2004, in which the plaintiffs made claims
nearly identical to those set forth in the Complaint in the derivative suit
described above. The Company believes that these claims are without merit and
intends to vigorously defend this action. There is no assurance that this matter
will be resolved in the Company’s favor and an unfavorable outcome of this
matter could have a material adverse impact on its business, results of
operations, financial position or liquidity. In February 2006, the plaintiffs
in
both this action and the derivative action described above changed attorneys.
Consequently, the trial date set for June 16, 2006 has been vacated; a new
date
has not yet been set.
At
our
Adjourned Meeting of Stockholders held on December 30, 2003, our
stockholders, among other things, approved an amendment to our Articles of
Incorporation, deleting Article VI thereof (regarding liquidations,
reorganizations, mergers and the like). Stockholders who were entitled to vote
at the meeting and advised us in writing, prior to the vote on the amendment,
that they dissented and intended to demand payment for their shares if the
amendment was effectuated, were entitled to exercise their appraisal rights
and
obtain payment in cash for their shares under Sections 607.1301 - 607.1333
of the Florida Business Corporation Act (the “Florida Act”), provided their
shares were not voted in favor of the amendment.
In
January 2004, we sent appraisal notices in compliance with Florida
corporate statutes to all stockholders who had advised us of their intention
to
exercise their appraisal rights. The appraisal notices included our estimate
of
fair value of our shares, at $4.00 per share on a post-split basis. These
stockholders had until February 29, 2004 to return their completed
appraisal notices along with certificates for the shares for which they were
exercising their appraisal rights. Approximately 33 stockholders holding
approximately 74,000 shares of our stock returned completed appraisal notices
by
February 29, 2004. A stockholder of 20 shares notified us of his acceptance
of our offer of $4.00 per share, while the stockholders of the remaining shares
did not accept our offer. Subject to the qualification that, in accordance
with
the Florida Act, we may not make any payment to a stockholder seeking appraisal
rights if, at the time of payment, our total assets are less than our total
liabilities, stockholders who accepted our offer to purchase their shares at
the
estimated fair value will be paid for their shares within 90 days of our
receipt of a duly executed appraisal notice. If we should be required to make
any payments to dissenting stockholders, Counsel will fund any such amounts
through advances to C2. Stockholders who did not accept our offer were required
to indicate their own estimate of fair value, and if we do not agree with such
estimates, the parties are required to go to court for an appraisal proceeding
on an individual basis, in order to establish fair value. Because we did not
agree with the estimates submitted by most of the dissenting stockholders,
we
have sought a judicial determination of the fair value of the common stock
held
by the dissenting stockholders. On June 24, 2004, we filed suit against the
dissenting stockholders seeking a declaratory judgment, appraisal and other
relief in the Circuit Court for the 17th
Judicial
District in Broward County, Florida. On February 4, 2005, the declaratory
judgment action was stayed pending the resolution of the direct and derivative
lawsuits filed in California. This decision was made by the judge in the Florida
declaratory judgment action due to the similar nature of certain allegations
brought by the defendants in the declaratory judgment matter and the California
lawsuits described above. On March 7, 2005, the dissenting shareholders appealed
the decision of the District Court judge to the Fourth District Court of Appeals
for the State of Florida, which denied the appeal on June 21, 2005. When the
declaratory judgment matter resumes, there is no assurance that this matter
will
be resolved in our favor and an unfavorable outcome of this matter could have
a
material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial
position or liquidity.
17
The
Company is involved in various other legal matters arising out of its operations
in the normal course of business, none of which are expected, individually
or in
the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on the Company.
18
Item 2.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with the information
contained in the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of the
Company and the related notes thereto, appearing elsewhere herein, and in
conjunction with the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations set forth in the Company’s Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2005, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”). All amounts are in thousands of dollars except for share and per share
data.
Forward
Looking Information
This
report contains certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of
the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which are based on management’s exercise
of business judgment as well as assumptions made by, and information currently
available to, management. When used in this document, the words “may”,
"will”,
“anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend” and words of similar
import, are intended to identify any forward-looking statements. You should
not
place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. These statements
reflect our current view of future events and are subject to certain risks
and
uncertainties as noted in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with
the SEC, and as noted below. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties
materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual
results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking
statements. We undertake no obligation, and do not intend, to update, revise
or
otherwise publicly release any revisions to these forward-looking statements
to
reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof, or to reflect the
occurrence of any unanticipated events. Although we believe that our
expectations are based on reasonable assumptions, we can give no assurance
that
our expectations will materialize.
Overview
and Recent Developments
C2
Global
Technologies Inc. (“C2” or the “Company”) was incorporated in the State of
Florida in 1983 under the name “MedCross, Inc.” which was changed to “I-Link
Incorporated” in 1997 and to “Acceris Communications Inc.” in 2003. Subsequent
to the receipt of shareholder approval of the proposed name change at the 2005
Annual Shareholder Meeting held on August 5, 2005, the Company amended its
Articles of Incorporation to effect the name change from “Acceris Communications
Inc.” to “C2 Global Technologies Inc.” The new name reflects a change in the
strategic direction of the Company in light of the disposition of its
Telecommunications business in the third quarter of 2005, as discussed below.
C2
owns
certain patents,
detailed
below under “History and Development of the Business” and “Intellectual
Property”,
including two foundational patents in
voice
over internet protocol (“VoIP”) technology
- U.S.
Patent
Nos. 6,243,373 and 6,438,124 (together the “VoIP Patent Portfolio”), which it
seeks to license. Subsequent
to the disposition of its Telecommunications business, licensing
of intellectual property constitutes the primary business of the Company. C2’s
target market consists of carriers, equipment manufacturers, service providers
and end users in the internet protocol (“IP”) telephone market who are using
C2’s patented VoIP technologies by deploying VoIP networks for phone-to-phone
communications. The Company
has
engaged, and intends to
engage,
in
licensing agreements
with
third parties domestically and internationally. At present, no royalties are
being paid to the Company. The Company plans to obtain licensing and royalty
revenue from its target market by enforcing its patents, with the assistance
of
outside counsel, in order to realize value from its intellectual property.
In
this regard, in
the
third quarter of 2005, the
Company retained
legal counsel
with
expertise in the enforcement of intellectual property rights.
On
March
17, 2006, ongoing litigation between C2 and ITXC Corp. (“ITXC”) was terminated
as a result of the Court approving a Consent Order whereby all claims and
counterclaims were dismissed with prejudice as a result of C2’s covenanting not
to sue ITXC. The Consent Order was not based on the determination of the merits
of any issue in the lawsuits. The litigation, which is discussed in more detail
in Part II - Item 1, below, had commenced in April 2004. The termination of
the
litigation will allow C2 to pursue other options to realize value from its
intellectual property.
19
Company
History
In
1994,
we began operating as an Internet service provider and quickly identified that
the emerging IP environment was a promising basis for enhanced service delivery.
We soon turned to designing and building an IP telecommunications platform
consisting of proprietary software, hardware and leased telecommunications
lines. The goal was to create a platform with the quality and reliability
necessary for voice transmission.
In
1997,
we began offering enhanced services over a mixed IP-and-circuit-switched network
platform. These services offered a blend of traditional and enhanced
communication services and combined the inherent cost advantages of an IP-based
network with the reliability of the existing Public Switched Telephone Network
(“PSTN”).
In
August 1997, we acquired MiBridge, Inc. (“MiBridge”), a communications
technology company engaged in the design, development, integration and marketing
of a range of software telecommunications products that support multimedia
communications over the PSTN, local area networks (“LANs”) and IP networks. The
acquisition of MiBridge permitted us to accelerate the development and
deployment of IP technology across our network platform.
In
1998,
we first deployed our real-time IP communications network platform. With this
new platform, all core operating functions such as switching, routing and media
control became software-driven. This new platform represented the first
nationwide, commercially viable VoIP platform of its kind. Following the launch
of our software-defined VoIP platform in 1998, we continued to refine and
enhance the platform to make it even more efficient and capable for our partners
and customers.
In
2002,
the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a patent (No. 6,438,124, the “C2
Patent”) for the Company’s Voice Internet Transmission System. Filed in 1996,
the C2 Patent reflects foundational thinking, application, and practice in
the
VoIP Services market. The C2 Patent encompasses the technology that allows
two
parties to converse phone-to-phone, regardless of the distance, by transmitting
voice/sound via the Internet. No special telephone or computer is required
at
either end of the call. The apparatus that makes this technically possible
is a
system of Internet access nodes, or Voice Engines (VoIP Gateways). These local
Internet Voice Engines provide digitized, compressed, and encrypted duplex
or
simplex Internet voice/sound. The end result is a high-quality calling
experience whereby the Internet serves only as the transport medium and as
such,
can lead to reduced toll charges. Shortly after the issuance of our core C2
Patent, we disposed of our domestic U.S. VoIP network in a transaction with
Buyers United, Inc. (“BUI”), which closed on May 1, 2003. The sale included
the physical assets required to operate our nationwide network using our
patented VoIP technology (constituting the core business of the I-Link
Communications Inc. (“ILC”) business) and included a fully paid non-exclusive
perpetual license to our proprietary software-based network convergence solution
for voice and data. The sale of the ILC business removed essentially all
operations that did not pertain to our proprietary software-based convergence
solution for voice and data. As part of the sale, we retained all of our
intellectual and property rights and patents.
In
2003,
we added to our VoIP patent holdings when we acquired U.S. Patent No. 6,243,373
(the “VoIP Patent”), which included a corresponding foreign patent and related
international patent applications. The VoIP Patent, together with the existing
C2 Patent and its related international patent applications, form our
international VoIP Patent Portfolio that covers the basic process and technology
that enables VoIP communication as it is used in the market today.
Telecommunications companies that enable their customers to originate a phone
call on a traditional handset, transmit any part of that call via IP, and then
terminate the call over the traditional telephone network, are utilizing C2’s
patented technology.
The
comprehensive nature of the VoIP Patent, which is titled “Method
and Apparatus for Implementing a Computer Network/Internet Telephone
System”,
is
summarized in the patent’s abstract, which, in pertinent part, describes the
technology as follows: “A
method and apparatus are provided for communicating audio information over
a
computer network. A standard telephone connected to the PSTN may be used to
communicate with any other PSTN-connected telephone, where a computer network,
such as the Internet, is the transmission facility instead of conventional
telephone transmission facilities.”
As part
of the consideration for the acquisition of the VoIP Patent, we agreed to give
the vendor 35% of the net earnings from our VoIP Patent Portfolio.
20
Revenue
and contributions from Technologies operations up to December 31, 2004 were
based on the sales and deployment of our VoIP solutions, which we ceased
directly marketing in 2005, rather than on the receipt of licensing fees and
royalties. We expect to generate licensing and royalty revenue in this business
as we gain recognition of the underlying value in our VoIP Patent Portfolio
through the enforcement of our intellectual property rights.
The
Company has conducted its own research and development activities related to
its
patents, investing $442 and $389 in 2004 and 2005, respectively. The Company
ceased its investment in research and development in the third quarter of 2005
in conjunction with its decision to focus all business efforts on the
realization of licensing fees associated with its intellectual
property.
At
the
end of September 2005, C2 entered into a 12 year royalty agreement with a
company controlled by an employee, in exchange for a loan of $140, with
repayment contingent upon future royalties. Additionally, in the third quarter
of 2005, C2 contracted for continued consulting services from the employee
until
April 30, 2006. As of the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, no
royalties have been received by the Company. At the end of September 2005,
due
to the absence of certainty pertaining to any future economic benefits, the
Company expensed the loan.
Intellectual
property
In
the
fourth quarter of 2005, the Company was awarded patents for the VoIP Patent
from
the People’s Republic of China and in Canada, and also received a Notice of
Allowance in Canada for the C2 Patent. In
addition to the C2 and VoIP Patents, which cover the foundation of any VoIP
system, our patent portfolio includes:
Private
IP Communication Network Architecture (Pending) - A
disclosed Internet Linked Network Architecture delivers telecommunication type
services across a network utilizing digital technology. The unique breadth
and
flexibility of telecommunication services offered by the Internet Linked Network
Architecture flow directly from the network over which they are delivered and
the underlying design principles and architectural decisions employed during
its
creation.
C2
also
owns intellectual property that solves teleconferencing
problems:
Delay
Synchronization in Compressed Audio Systems
- This
invention eliminates popping and clicking when switching between parties in
a
communications conferencing system employing signal compression techniques
to
reduce bandwidth requirements.
Volume
Control Arrangement for Compressed Information Signals
- This
invention allows for modifying amplitude, frequency or phase characteristics
of
an audio or video signal in a compressed signal system without altering the
encoder or decoder employed by each conferee in a
conferencing
setting,
so that individuals on the conference call can each adjust their own gain levels
without signal degradation.
21
Below
is
a summary of the Company’s issued and pending patents:
Type
|
Title
|
Number
|
Status
|
VoIP
Architecture
|
Computer
Network/Internet Telephone System
(VoIP
Patent)
|
U.S.
No. 6,243,373
Australia
No. 716096
People’s
Republic of China ZL96199457.6
Canada
No. 2,238,867
|
Issued:
June 5, 2001
Expires:
November 1, 2015
Issued:
June 1, 2000
Expires:
October 29, 2016
Issued:
December 14, 2005
Expires:
October 29, 2016
Issued:
October 18, 2005
Expires:
October 29, 2016
|
Internet
Transmission System
(C2
Patent)
|
U.S.
No. 6,438,124
People’s
Republic of China No. ZL97192954.8
Canada
|
Issued:
August 20, 2002
Expires:
July 22, 2018
Issued:
May 21, 2004
Expires:
February 5, 2017
Notice
of Allowance received December 2005
|
|
Private
IP Communication
Network
Architecture
|
Confidential
|
Pending
|
|
Conferencing
|
Delay
Synchronization in Compressed Audio System
|
U.S.
No. 5,754,534
|
Issued:
May 19, 1998
Expires:
May 6, 2016
|
Volume
Control Arrangement for Compressed Information Signal
Delays
|
U.S.
No. 5,898,675
|
Issued:
April 27, 1999
Expires:
April 29, 2016
|
|
Fax
|
Facsimile
Transmission System
|
Confidential
|
Pending
|
Disposition
of the Telecommunications Business
Commencing
in 2001, the Company entered the Telecommunications segment, acquiring certain
assets from the estate of WorldxChange Communications Inc. from bankruptcy.
In
2002, the Company also acquired certain assets of the estate of RSL.COM USA
Inc.
from bankruptcy and in 2003 the Company acquired Local Telcom Holdings, LLC.
Together, these assets made up the Telecommunications segment of the Company’s
business, which was owned through the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Acceris
Communications Corp. (name changed to WXC Corp. (“WXCC”) in October
2005).
The
Company entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of May 19, 2005,
to
sell substantially all of the assets and to transfer certain liabilities of
WXCC
to Acceris Management and Acquisition LLC (“AMA”), an arm’s length Minnesota
limited liability company and wholly-owned subsidiary of North Central Equity
LLC. In addition, on May 19, 2005, the parties executed a Management Services
Agreement (“MSA”), Security Agreement, Note, Proxy and Guaranty. Upon receipt of
the requisite approvals, including shareholder approval, the transaction was
completed on September 30, 2005.
The
sale
resulted in a gain on disposition of $6,387, net of disposition and business
exit costs. In accordance with GAAP, this gain, as well as the
Telecommunications operations for the year ended December 31, 2005, have been
reported in discontinued operations in the Company’s consolidated financial
statements in its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the
SEC.
22
On
September 30, 2005, in conjunction with the closing of the asset sale
transaction and the expiration of the MSA, referenced above, the Company and
AMA
entered into a second Management Services Agreement (“MSA2”) under which the
Company agreed to continue to provide services in certain states where the
Buyer, at closing, had not obtained authorization to provide telecommunications
services. At December 31, 2005, AMA had obtained authorization to provide
telecommunications services in all states except Hawaii. The authorization
to
provide services in Hawaii was subsequently obtained on April 5, 2006. For
the
period October 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006, the Company was charged a management
fee by the Buyer that was equal to the revenue earned from providing these
services. Both the revenue and the management fee were recorded in discontinued
operations. The above is a summary description of the MSA2 and by its nature
is
incomplete.
On
February 28, 2006, the Company entered into a stock purchase agreement with
a
third party, which agreed to acquire all the shares of WXCC from the Company,
subject to Laurus Master Fund, Ltd.’s (“Laurus”) release of its security
interest in the shares and to certain other closing requirements. As a result
of
all closing requirements being completed and Laurus consenting to the release
of
its security interest on March 28, 2006, the Company was relieved of $3,763
of
obligations that had previously been classified as liabilities of discontinued
operations. The Company recognized a gain of $3,645 on the sale, net of closing
costs of $118, which is included in income from discontinued operations in
the
Company’s condensed consolidated statement of operations for the quarter ended
March 31, 2006.
Industry
Historically,
the communications services industry has transmitted voice and data over
separate networks using different technologies. Traditional carriers have
typically built telephone networks based on circuit switching technology, which
establishes and maintains a dedicated path for each telephone call until the
call is terminated.
The
communications services industry continues to evolve, both domestically and
internationally, providing significant opportunities and risks to the
participants in these markets. Factors that have been driving this change
include:
·
|
entry
of new competitors and investment of substantial capital in existing
and
new services, resulting in significant price
competition
|
|||
·
|
|
technological
advances resulting in a proliferation of new services and products
and
rapid increases in network capacity
|
||
·
|
|
The
Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended (“1996 Act”);
and
|
||
·
|
|
growing
deregulation of communications services markets in the United States
and
in selected countries around the world
|
VoIP
is a
technology that can replace the traditional telephone network. This type of
data
network is more efficient than a dedicated circuit network because the data
network is not restricted by the one-call, one-line limitation of a traditional
telephone network. This improved efficiency creates cost savings that can be
either passed on to the consumer in the form of lower rates or retained by
the
VoIP provider. In addition, VoIP technology enables the provision of enhanced
services such as unified messaging.
Competition
We
are
seeking to have telecommunications service providers (“TSPs”) and equipment
suppliers (“ESs”) and end users license our patents. In this regard, our
competition is existing technology, outside the scope of our patents, which
allows TSPs and ESs to deliver communication services to their
customers.
VoIP
is
becoming a widespread and accepted telecommunications technology, with a variety
of applications in the telecommunications and other industries. While we and
many others believe that we will see the proliferation of this technology in
the
coming years, and while we believe that this proliferation will occur within
the
context of our patents, there is no certainty that this will occur and that
it
will occur in a manner that requires organizations to license our
patents.
23
Government
Regulation
As
a
result of, and subsequent to, the disposition of our Telecommunications
business, we are no longer subject to various regulatory requirements, at the
federal, state and local levels, which were applicable to our operations in
prior years. However, the following remain relevant to our
operations:
VoIP
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
In
February 2004, the Federal
Communications Commission (“FCC”)
issued
the VoIP Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (the “VoIP NPRM”) to solicit comments on
many aspects of the regulatory treatment of VoIP services. The FCC continues
to
consider the possibility of regulating access to IP-based services, but has
not
yet decided on the appropriate level of regulatory intervention for IP-based
service applications. It has, through several decisions, sought to exercise
its
pre-emptive authority to designate VoIP as an interstate service, thus
pre-empting state regulation of VoIP and placing the FCC as the sole regulator
of the service - a position that has been challenged by several state public
utility commissions. The FCC has also subjected interconnected VoIP services
to
911/E911 obligations and to Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act
(“CALEA”) obligations. Further, action on the VoIP NPRM will likely address the
applicability of access charges to VoIP services, although the FCC could address
this issue separately pursuant to petitions filed by various parties seeking
to
impose access charges on certain IP services. Access charges provide
compensation to local exchange carriers for traffic that originates or
terminates on their networks. Certain Local Exchange Carriers (“LECs”) have
argued that certain types of VoIP carriers provide the same basic functionality
as traditional telephone service carriers, in that they carry a customer’s call
from an origination point to a termination destination. Any ruling or decision
from the FCC requiring VoIP carriers to pay access charges to Incumbent Local
Exchange Carriers (“ILECs”) for local loop use may adversely affect our
ability
to license our VoIP
technology
to TSPs, ESs and end users, as described above.
Other
Legislation
Recent
legislation in the United States including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has
increased regulatory and compliance costs as well as the scope and cost of
work
provided to us by our independent registered public accountants and legal
advisors. Based on the current timetable, the Company will be subject to Section
404 reporting in 2007. As implementation guidelines continue to evolve, we
expect to incur costs, which may or may not be material, in order to comply
with
legislative requirements or rules, pronouncements and guidelines by regulatory
bodies, thereby reducing profitability.
Critical
Accounting Estimates
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
discusses our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements, which
have
been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in
the
United States (“GAAP”). The preparation of these financial statements requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts
of
assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the reporting period. Management bases its estimates and
judgments on historical experience and various other factors that are believed
to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis
for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that
are
not readily apparent from other sources. On an on-going basis, management
evaluates its estimates and judgments, including those related to intangible
assets, contingencies, collectibility of receivables and litigation. Actual
results may differ from these estimates.
The
critical accounting estimates used in the preparation of our unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements are discussed in our Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005. To aid in the understanding of our
financial reporting, a summary of significant accounting policies are described
in Note 2 of the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements included
in Item 1 of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. These policies have the
potential to have a significant impact on our financial statements, either
because of the significance of the financial statement item to which they
relate, or because they require judgment and estimation due to the uncertainty
involved in measuring, at a specific point in time, events which are continuous
in nature.
24
Stock-Based
Compensation
In
December 2004, the FASB issued a revision (“SFAS No. 123(R)”) to SFAS No. 123,
Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation
(“SFAS
No. 123”), and the Company was required to adopt SFAS No. 123(R) in the first
quarter of 2006. SFAS No. 123(R) supersedes Accounting Principles Board Opinion
No. 25, Accounting
for Stock Issued to Employees
(APB No.
25), and related Interpretations, and requires that all stock-based
compensation, including options, be expensed at fair value, as of the grant
date, over the vesting period. Companies are required to use an option pricing
model (e.g.: Black-Scholes or Binomial) to determine compensation expense,
consistent with the model previously used in the already required disclosures
of
SFAS No. 148, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation-Transition and Disclosure.
The
adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) did not have a material effect on the Company’s
financial position, operations or cash flow.
At
March
31, 2006, the Company has several stock-based compensation plans, which are
described more fully in Note 17 to the audited consolidated financial statements
contained in our most recently filed Annual Report on Form 10-K. Prior to
January 1, 2006, the Company accounted for these plans under the recognition
and
measurement principles of APB No. 25, under which stock-based employee
compensation cost was not reflected in net loss, as all options granted under
these plans had an exercise price equal to the market value of the underlying
common stock on the date of grant. In accordance with SFAS No. 123, as amended
by SFAS No. 148, the Company provided footnote disclosure of the pro forma
stock-based compensation cost, net loss and net loss per share as if the
fair-value based method of expense recognition and measurement prescribed by
SFAS No. 123 had been applied to all employee options.
As
a
result of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006, C2’s net loss for the
quarter ended March 31, 2006 is $29 more than it would have been if the Company
had continued to account for stock-based compensation under APB No. 25. Basic
and diluted net income per share would be unchanged if the Company had not
adopted SFAS No. 123(R). The adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) had no effect on the
Company’s Statement of Cash Flows, as there were no exercises of stock options
in the three months ended March 31, 2006 and therefore no stock option-related
cash flows were generated.
Contractual
Obligations
We
have no contractual commitments other than our debt. The following table
summarizes our contractual obligations, including estimated interest payable,
as
of March 31, 2006:
Payment
due by period
|
||||||||||||||||
Contractual
obligations:
|
Total
|
|
Less
than 1
year
|
|
1-3
years
|
|
3-5
years
|
|
More
than
5years
|
|||||||
Subordinated
notes payable to a related party
|
$
|
82,040
|
$
|
82,040
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
$
|
—
|
||||||
Convertible
note payable to a third party
|
3,100
|
2,026
|
1,074
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||||||
Warrant
to purchase common
stock1
|
203
|
—
|
—
|
203
|
—
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
85,343
|
$
|
84,066
|
$
|
1,074
|
$
|
203
|
$
|
—
|
1
The
warrant is reported at fair value, as determined at the end of each
quarter.
Counsel
Corporation (collectively, with its subsidiaries “Counsel”) is the controlling
stockholder of the Company and is also the major debt holder of the Company,
owning 96% of the Company’s debt as at March 31, 2006. The convertible note
payable (the “Note”) and the warrant to purchase common stock are held by
Laurus. Counsel has guaranteed the Note through its maturity in October 2007.
Counsel has also subordinated its debt position and pledged its ownership
interest in C2 in favor of Laurus.
25
Management’s
Discussion of Financial Condition
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
As
a
result of our substantial operating losses and negative cash flows from
operations, at March 31, 2006 we had a stockholders’ deficit of $76,556
(December 31, 2005 - $77,942) and negative working capital of $77,110 (December
31, 2005 - $78,055). The reduction of the working capital deficit is due
primarily to the disposition of the shares of WXC Corp. (“WXCC”, formerly known
as Acceris Communications Corp.) during the first quarter of 2006, as discussed
in Note 8 of the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements, which reduced accrued liabilities by $3,763. This reduction was
partially offset by the capitalization of $1,796 of interest on the debt owing
to Counsel, as well as by advances from Counsel of $877. During the first
quarter of 2006, both continuing and discontinued operations were primarily
financed through these advances.
The
Company had gross
third
party debt of $2,997
at
March
31,
2006,
a
reduction from the $3,516
owed at
December 31, 2005.
The
third party debt is held by Laurus, and at March 31, 2006 is comprised of a
convertible note payable (the “Note”) in the amount of $2,794 and a warrant to
purchase common stock with a fair value of $203. In October 2005, the Company
placed $1,800 into a restricted cash account for the benefit of Laurus, which
may be applied toward scheduled monthly payments of the Note. At March 31,
2006,
the balance of the restricted cash account was $1,065. The Note is secured
by
all assets of the Company and guaranteed by Counsel through its maturity of
October 2007.
Gross
related party debt owing to our 91% common stockholder, Counsel, is $76,319
at
March 31, 2006 compared to $73,646 at December 31, 2005. Interest on the related
party debt is capitalized, at the end of each quarter, and added to the
principal amount outstanding. This related party debt matures on December 31,
2006. It is supplemented by a Keep Well agreement from Counsel, which requires
Counsel to fund, through long-term intercompany advances or equity
contributions, all capital investment, working capital or other operational
cash
requirements through December 31, 2006. The Keep Well is not expected to be
extended beyond its current maturity.
Counsel,
in addition to guaranteeing the Note, has also agreed to subordinate all of
its
debt owed by the Company, and to subrogate all of its related security
interests, in favor of Laurus. Counsel has further agreed to pledge all of
its
shares owned in C2 as security for the Note. In accordance with the Laurus
agreement, C2 cannot repay amounts owing to Counsel while the Note with Laurus
remains outstanding. Additionally, so long as C2’s Note to Laurus remains
outstanding, Counsel may not, without the written consent of Laurus, take any
enforcement action to collect its loans owing by C2. Notwithstanding this,
Counsel is not expected to extend the maturity date of its loans beyond December
31, 2006. In the event that C2’s Note to Laurus is either prepaid in full or
settled by conversion of such Note into shares of C2, Counsel’s subordination
agreement shall be terminated immediately upon occurrence of such
event.
The
Company has not realized revenues from continuing operations during the last
two
years, and there is significant doubt about the Company’s ability to obtain
additional financing to support its operations beyond the December 31, 2006
expiration of the Keep Well from Counsel. Additionally,
management
believes that the
Company does not,
at this
time,
have an
ability to obtain additional financing in order to pursue expansion through
acquisition. The Company must therefore realize value from its intellectual
property, as discussed above, in order to continue as a going concern. There
is
no certainty that the Company will be successful in its strategy of generating
revenue by realizing value on its intellectual property.
26
A
summary
of the Company’s outstanding debt, including a related common stock warrant, is
as follows:
March
31, 2006
|
December
31, 2005
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Maturity
Date
|
Gross
debt
|
Discounts
(1)
|
Reported
debt
|
Gross
debt
|
Discounts
(1)
|
Reported
debt
|
||||||||||||||||
Convertible
note payable
|
October
14, 2007
|
$
|
2,794
|
$
|
(338
|
)
|
$
|
2,456
|
$
|
3,235
|
$
|
(392
|
)
|
$
|
2,843
|
|||||||
Subordinated
notes payable to a related party
|
December
31, 2006
|
76,319
|
(1,559
|
)
|
74,760
|
73,646
|
(1,624
|
)
|
72,022
|
|||||||||||||
Warrant
to purchase common stock
|
October
13, 2009
|
203
|
—
|
203
|
281
|
—
|
281
|
|||||||||||||||
Total
outstanding debt
|
$
|
79,316
|
$
|
(1,897
|
)
|
$
|
77,419
|
$
|
77,162
|
$
|
(2,016
|
)
|
$
|
75,146
|
(1)
Beneficial conversion feature, detachable warrant, imputed interest and costs
associated with raising debt facilities are added to the gross debt balances
over the applicable amortization periods.
Working
Capital
Cash,
cash equivalents and restricted cash as of March 31, 2006 were $1,141 compared
to $1,833 at December 31, 2005.
Our
working capital deficit decreased $945 to $77,110 as of March 31, 2006, from
$78,055 as of December 31, 2005. The disposition of the WXCC stock reduced
discontinued liabilities by $3,763, as discussed above. However, advances from
Counsel of $877 and the capitalization of $1,796 interest on debt owing to
Counsel largely offset this decrease. As well, the balance of the restricted
cash account decreased by $441 due to principal payments on the debt owing
to
Laurus. The Company’s capital resources (due to the Counsel Keep Well) are
adequate to finance our operations until December 31, 2006. However, the
Company’s long-term viability is dependent upon successful pursuit of licensing
arrangements and/or the ability to raise additional funds to meet its business
objectives.
Cash
flows from operating activities
Cash
used
in operating activities (excluding discontinued operations) during the three
months ended March 31, 2006 was $1,064, as compared to cash used of $1,015
during the same period in 2005. The Company’s loss from continuing operations
was $2,741 in 2006 compared to $3,627 in 2005, a decrease of $886. The reduction
is primarily due to a reduction in the scale of the operations of the
business.
An
increase of $461 in interest added to related party debt was offset by a
reduction of $688 in amortization of debt discounts. Accounts payable decreased
by $790 in the first three months of 2006, but increased by $160 during the
first three months of 2005. The use of cash to reduce accounts payable was
primarily to pay legal and accounting accruals, as well as sales tax accruals
related to the disposition of the Telecommunications business in September
2005.
Cash
flows from investing activities
No
net
cash was used by investing activities of continuing or discontinued operations
during the three months ended March 31, 2006, compared to net cash of $20 used
by continuing operations for the same period in 2005.
27
Cash
flows from financing activities
Financing
activities (excluding discontinued operations) provided net cash of $877 during
the three months ended March 31, 2006, as compared to $6,896 for the same period
in 2005. The decrease is due to Counsel having to advance only $877 in the
first
quarter of 2006, compared to $7,340 in the first quarter of 2005. Following
the
disposition of the Telecommunications business in September 2005, the Company’s
cash requirements have substantially decreased.
Payment
of third party notes payable during the three months ended March 31, 2006 was
$441 compared to $444 in the same period in 2005. In the third quarter of 2005,
the Company placed $1,800 into a restricted account in favor of the convertible
note holder, as replacement security for the security released in conjunction
with the disposition of the Telecommunication operations. The convertible note
holder is applying these restricted funds to the monthly principal payments
due
on the convertible note.
28
Management’s
Discussion of Results of Operations
Three-Month
Period Ended March 31, 2006 Compared to Three-Month Period Ended March 31,
2005
In
order
to more fully understand the comparison of the results of continuing operations
for the first quarter of 2006 as compared to the first quarter of 2005, it
is
important to note the significant change that occurred in 2005. On
May
19, 2005, we entered into an agreement to sell substantially all of the assets,
and to transfer certain liabilities, of WXCC
to
Acceris Management and Acquisition LLC, an unrelated third party. The sale
closed on September 30, 2005. In accordance with GAAP, the operational results
related to WXCC
were
reclassified as discontinued operations in 2005 and prior years, and accordingly
are not included in the following analysis of continuing
operations.
Technologies
revenue
is
derived from licensing and related services revenue. Prior to 2005, revenue
and
contributions from this business to date were based on the sales and deployments
of our VoIP solutions,
which we
are no longer directly marketing,
rather
than on the receipt of licensing
fees and royalties.
The
timing and sizing of various projects resulted
in a
continued pattern of fluctuating financial results.
We
expect
to generate licensing and royalty revenue in this business as we gain
recognition of the underlying value in our VoIP Patent Portfolio
through
the enforcement of our intellectual property rights.
Our
VoIP Patent Portfolio is an international patent portfolio covering the basic
process and technology that enables VoIP communications.
At
present, no royalties are being paid to the Company. The Company plans to obtain
licensing and royalty revenue from its target market by enforcing its patents,
with the assistance of outside counsel, in order to realize value from its
intellectual property. In this regard, in
the
third quarter of 2005, the
Company retained
legal counsel
with
expertise in the enforcement of intellectual property rights.
In
connection with the 2003 acquisition of U.S. Patent No. 6,243,373, the Company
agreed to remit, to the former owner of the patent, 35% of the net proceeds
from
future revenue derived from the licensing of the VoIP Patent Portfolio, composed
of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,243,373 and 6,438,124. Net proceeds are defined as revenue
from licensing the VoIP Patent Portfolio less costs necessary to obtain the
licensing arrangement. To
date,
no payments have been made to the former owner of the patent. As
we
earn patent licensing revenues, we
expect
to incur the associated costs.
Selling,
general, administrative and other expense
was $397
during the first quarter of 2006 as compared to $837 for the first quarter
of
2005. The significant changes included:
· |
Compensation
expense was $13 in the first quarter of 2006, as compared to $69
in the
first quarter of 2005. The quarterly salary earned by the CEO of
C2 was
reduced from $69 to $34, effective July 1, 2005, reflecting the reduced
complexity of the Company’s operations following the sale of the
Telecommunications business in the third quarter of 2005. In the
first
quarter of 2006, the Company reversed $69 of bonus expense that was
accrued during 2005, but was subsequently determined not to be warranted.
Salary expense for the Company’s technologies employees was $19 in the
first quarter of 2006. The corresponding compensation expense in
the first
quarter of 2005 was included in research and development expense.
In the
first quarter of 2006, the Company adopted SFAS No. 123(R), as discussed
above, which resulted in an additional $29 of compensation
expense.
|
· |
Legal
expenses in the first quarter of 2006 were $95, as compared to
$305 in the
first quarter of 2005. The decrease was primarily related to a
lower level
of activity in the Company’s litigation with ITXC for patent infringement,
which litigation was terminated on March 17, 2006. Also, there
was less
activity associated with the direct and derivative actions against
the
Company.
|
· |
Accounting
and tax consulting expenses were $108 in the first quarter of 2006
compared to $69 in the first quarter of 2005.
|
29
· |
Fees
paid to the members of our Board of Directors were $26 in the first
quarter of 2006 compared to $83 in the first quarter of 2005. The
Board
was reduced from eight members to four members at the end of the
first
quarter of 2005. As well, there were fewer meetings held in the first
quarter of 2006 as compared to the first quarter of
2005.
|
· |
Directors
and officers insurance expense was $38 in the first quarter of 2006
compared to $100 in the first quarter of 2005. The decrease reflects
the
reduced complexity of the business following the disposition of the
Telecommunications business in the third quarter of
2005.
|
· |
Management
fees charged by our controlling stockholder, Counsel, were $56 in
the
first quarter of 2006, compared to $113 in the first quarter of 2005.
The
decrease reflects the reduced requirement for services of Counsel
personnel following the disposition of the Telecommunications business
in
the third quarter of 2005.
|
Research
and development costs
- The
Company ceased its investment in research and development in the third quarter
of 2005 in conjunction with its decision to focus all business efforts on the
realization of licensing fees associated with its intellectual property, and
consequently incurred no related costs in the first quarter of 2006. Research
and development expenses in the first quarter of 2005 were $150.
Depreciation
and amortization
- This
expense was $5 in the first quarter of 2006, as compared to $9 during the first
quarter of 2005. Amortization of the Company’s patent rights was $5 in both 2006
and 2005. The additional $4 expense in 2005 relates to depreciation on fixed
assets that were disposed of in the third quarter of 2005.
The
changes in other
income (expense)
are
primarily related to the following:
· |
Interest
expense
-
Related party interest expense totaled $2,260 in the first quarter
of
2006, as compared to $2,487 in the first quarter of 2005. The decrease
of
$227 is the net effect of two factors. Interest expense increased
by $461
due to increases in the debt due to Counsel. This increase was offset
by a
decrease of $688 in the quarterly amortization of the beneficial
conversion feature (“BCF”) related to the related party’s ability to
convert its debt to equity. Included in related party interest expense
in
the first quarter of 2006 is $464 of amortization of the BCF, on
$18,681
of debt convertible at $5.02 per share. In the first quarter of 2005,
amortization of the BCF was $1,152 on $17,090 of debt convertible
at $5.02
per share.
|
Third
party interest expense totaled $82 in the first quarter of 2006, as compared
to
$144 in the first quarter of 2005. All of the expense is related to the
convertible note payable to Laurus Master Fund, Ltd. In 2006, the combined
interest expense and discount amortization were $160, offset by a mark to market
adjustment of $78 on the related warrant to purchase common stock. In 2005,
the
interest expense and discount amortization totaled $179, offset by a mark to
market adjustment of $35.
· |
Other
income
-
In the first quarter of 2006, other income totaled $3, as compared
to $0
during the first quarter of 2005. Other income in 2006 primarily
consisted
of interest earned on cash
deposits.
|
Discontinued
operations
- In the
first quarter of 2006, the Company reported a $3,699 gain from discontinued
operations (net of tax of $0), as compared to a loss of $4,481 (net of tax
of
$0) reported in the first quarter of 2005. The 2006 gain consists of $54 of
income related to Telecommunications operations for the quarter, and the $3,645
gain recognized on the sale of the shares of WXCC, as discussed above. The
2005
loss consists solely of the operations of the Telecommunications segment during
the first quarter of 2005.
Inflation.
Inflation did not have a significant impact on our results during the last
fiscal quarter.
Off-Balance
Sheet Transactions.
The
Company does not engage in material off-balance sheet transactions.
30
Item 3.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk.
Our
exposure to market risk is limited to interest rate sensitivity, which is
affected by changes in the general level of United States interest rates. Due
to
the minimal amount of cash and cash equivalents, we believe that we are not
subject to any material interest rate risk as it relates to interest income.
As
to interest expense, we have one debt instrument that has a variable interest
rate. Our variable interest rate convertible note provides that the principal
amount outstanding bears interest at the prime rate as published in the Wall
St.
Journal (“WSJ interest rate”, 7.75% at March 31, 2006) plus 3% (but not less
than 7.0% in total), decreasing by 2% (but not less than 0%) for every 25%
increase in the Market Price (as defined therein) above the fixed conversion
price of $0.88 following the effective date (January 18, 2005) of the
registration statement covering the common stock issuable upon conversion.
Assuming the debt amount on the variable interest rate convertible note at
March
31, 2006 was constant during the next twelve-month period, the impact of a
one
percent increase in the interest rate would be an increase in interest expense
of approximately $28 for
that
twelve-month period. In respect of the variable interest rate convertible note,
should the price of the Company’s common stock increase and maintain a price
equal to 125% of $0.88 for a twelve month period, the Company would benefit
from
a reduced interest rate of 2%, resulting in lower interest costs of up to
approximately $56 for that twelve-month period. We do not believe that we are
subject to material market risk on our fixed rate debt with Counsel in the
near
term.
We
did
not have any foreign currency hedges or other derivative financial instruments
as of March 31, 2006. We do not enter into financial instruments for trading
or
speculative purposes and do not currently utilize derivative financial
instruments. Our operations are conducted primarily in the United States and
as
such are not subject to material foreign currency exchange rate
risk.
Item 4.
Controls and Procedures.
As
of the
end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report, the Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Company (the “Certifying Officers”) conducted
evaluations of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. As defined
under Sections 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended (the “Exchange Act”), the term “disclosure controls and procedures”
means controls and other procedures of an issuer that are designed to ensure
that information required to be disclosed by the issuer in the reports that
it
files or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized
and
reported, within the time periods specified in the Commission’s rules and forms.
Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and
procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by
an
issuer in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is
accumulated and communicated to the issuer’s management, including the
Certifying Officers, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Based on this evaluation, the Certifying Officers have concluded that the
Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
Further,
there were no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting
during the first fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably
likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting.
31
PART
II - OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1.
Legal Proceedings
On
April 16, 2004, certain stockholders of the Company (the “Plaintiffs”)
filed a putative derivative complaint in the Superior Court of the State of
California in and for the County of San Diego, (the “Complaint”), against the
Company, WorldxChange Corporation (sic), Counsel Communications LLC, and Counsel
Corporation as well as four present and former officers and directors of the
Company, some of whom also are or were directors and/or officers of the other
corporate defendants (collectively, the “Defendants”). The Complaint alleges,
among other things, that the Defendants, in their respective roles as
controlling stockholder and directors and officers of the Company committed
breaches of the fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and good faith and were
unjustly enriched, and that the individual Defendants committed waste of
corporate assets, abuse of control and gross mismanagement. The Plaintiffs
seek
compensatory damages, restitution, disgorgement of allegedly unlawful profits,
benefits and other compensation, attorneys’ fees and expenses in connection with
the Complaint. The Company believes that these claims are without merit and
intends to continue to vigorously defend this action. There is no assurance
that
this matter will be resolved in the Company’s favor and an unfavorable outcome
of this matter could have a material adverse impact on its business, results
of
operations, financial position or liquidity.
The
Company, Counsel Communications LLC, Counsel Corporation and four of its current
and former executives and board members were named in a securities action filed
in the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of San
Diego (the “Court”) on April 16, 2004, in which the plaintiffs made claims
nearly identical to those set forth in the Complaint in the derivative suit
described above. The Company believes that these claims are without merit and
intends to vigorously defend this action. There is no assurance that this matter
will be resolved in the Company’s favor and an unfavorable outcome of this
matter could have a material adverse impact on its business, results of
operations, financial position or liquidity. In February 2006, the plaintiffs
in
both this action and the derivative action described above changed attorneys.
Consequently, the trial date set for June 16, 2006 has been vacated; a new
date
has not yet been set.
In
connection with the Company’s efforts to enforce its patent rights, C2
Communications Technologies Inc., our wholly owned subsidiary, filed a patent
infringement lawsuit against ITXC Corp. (“ITXC”) in the United States District
Court of the District of New Jersey on April 14, 2004. The complaint
alleged that ITXC’s VoIP services and systems infringed the Company’s U.S.
Patent No. 6,243,373, entitled “Method
and Apparatus for Implementing a Computer Network/Internet Telephone
System.”
On
May 7, 2004, ITXC filed a lawsuit against C2 Communications Technologies
Inc., and the Company, in the United States District Court for the District
of
New Jersey for infringement of five ITXC patents relating to VoIP technology,
directed generally to the transmission of telephone calls over the Internet
and
the completion of telephone calls by switching them off the Internet and onto
a
public switched telephone network. On March 17, 2006, the litigation between
C2
and ITXC was terminated as a result of the Court approving a Consent Order
whereby all claims and counterclaims were dismissed with prejudice as a result
of C2’s covenanting not to sue ITXC. The Consent Order was not based on the
determination of the merits of any issue in the lawsuits. C2 concluded, based
upon information suggesting that the nature and magnitude of the business being
conducted through the network at issue do not justify the litigation from an
economic standpoint, that it would not be fiscally prudent or beneficial to
continue this litigation. The termination of this litigation will allow C2
to
pursue other options to realize value from its intellectual
property.
At
our
Adjourned Meeting of Stockholders held on December 30, 2003, our
stockholders, among other things, approved an amendment to our Articles of
Incorporation, deleting Article VI thereof (regarding liquidations,
reorganizations, mergers and the like). Stockholders who were entitled to vote
at the meeting and advised us in writing, prior to the vote on the amendment,
that they dissented and intended to demand payment for their shares if the
amendment was effectuated, were entitled to exercise their appraisal rights
and
obtain payment in cash for their shares under Sections 607.1301 - 607.1333
of the Florida Business Corporation Act (the “Florida Act”), provided their
shares were not voted in favor of the amendment.
32
In
January 2004, we sent appraisal notices in compliance with Florida
corporate statutes to all stockholders who had advised us of their intention
to
exercise their appraisal rights. The appraisal notices included our estimate
of
fair value of our shares, at $4.00 per share on a post-split basis. These
stockholders had until February 29, 2004 to return their completed
appraisal notices along with certificates for the shares for which they were
exercising their appraisal rights. Approximately 33 stockholders holding
approximately 74,000 shares of our stock returned completed appraisal notices
by
February 29, 2004. A stockholder of 20 shares notified us of his acceptance
of our offer of $4.00 per share, while the stockholders of the remaining shares
did not accept our offer. Subject to the qualification that, in accordance
with
the Florida Act, we may not make any payment to a stockholder seeking appraisal
rights if, at the time of payment, our total assets are less than our total
liabilities, stockholders who accepted our offer to purchase their shares at
the
estimated fair value will be paid for their shares within 90 days of our
receipt of a duly executed appraisal notice. If we should be required to make
any payments to dissenting stockholders, Counsel will fund any such amounts
through advances to C2. Stockholders who did not accept our offer were required
to indicate their own estimate of fair value, and if we do not agree with such
estimates, the parties are required to go to court for an appraisal proceeding
on an individual basis, in order to establish fair value. Because we did not
agree with the estimates submitted by most of the dissenting stockholders,
we
have sought a judicial determination of the fair value of the common stock
held
by the dissenting stockholders. On June 24, 2004, we filed suit against the
dissenting stockholders seeking a declaratory judgment, appraisal and other
relief in the Circuit Court for the 17th
Judicial
District in Broward County, Florida. On February 4, 2005, the declaratory
judgment action was stayed pending the resolution of the direct and derivative
lawsuits filed in California. This decision was made by the judge in the Florida
declaratory judgment action due to the similar nature of certain allegations
brought by the defendants in the declaratory judgment matter and the California
lawsuits described above. On March 7, 2005, the dissenting shareholders appealed
the decision of the District Court judge to the Fourth District Court of Appeals
for the State of Florida, which denied the appeal on June 21, 2005. When the
declaratory judgment matter resumes, there is no assurance that this matter
will
be resolved in our favor and an unfavorable outcome of this matter could have
a
material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial
position or liquidity.
The
Company is involved in various other legal matters arising out of its operations
in the normal course of business, none of which are expected, individually
or in
the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on the Company.
Item
1A. Risk Factors.
There
have been no significant changes to the risk factors discussed in our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the
SEC.
None.
Item
3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities.
None.
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security
Holders.
None.
Item
5. Other Information.
None.
33
Item 6. –
Exhibits.
(a) Exhibits
Exhibit
No.
|
Identification
of Exhibit
|
|||
10.1
|
Promissory
Note for $776,125.00 dated March 31, 2006 between C2 Global Technologies
Inc. and Counsel Corporation
|
|||
10.2
|
Promissory
Note for $56,250.00 dated March 31, 2006 between C2 Global Technologies
Inc. and Counsel Corporation
|
|||
10.3
|
Promissory
Note for $44,927.84 dated March 31, 2006 between C2 Global Technologies
Inc. and Counsel Corporation
|
|||
31.1
|
Certification
pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) required under
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|||
31.2
|
Certification
pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) required under
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|||
32.1
|
Certification
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|||
32.2
|
Certification
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
34
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant
has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunder
duly authorized.
C2
Global Technologies Inc.
|
||
|
|
|
Date: May 12, 2006 | By: | /s/ Allan C. Silber |
Allan C. Silber Chairman
of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|
||
|
|
|
By: | /s/ Stephen A. Weintraub | |
Stephen A. Weintraub Chief
Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary
|
||
35