JONES SODA CO - Quarter Report: 2011 March (Form 10-Q)
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
þ | QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 2011
OR
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Transition Period From
to
Commission File Number 000-28820
Jones Soda Co.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Washington | 52-2336602 | |
(State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S. Employer | |
incorporation or organization) | Identification Number) |
234 Ninth Avenue North | ||
Seattle, Washington | 98109 | |
(Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code) |
(206) 624-3357
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
(Former Name, Former Address and Former Fiscal Year, if Changed Since Last Report)
Indicate by check whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file for such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer o
|
Accelerated filer o | Non-accelerated filer o | Smaller reporting company þ | |||
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
As
of May 6, 2011, there were 31,989,818 shares of the Companys common stock issued and
outstanding.
JONES SODA CO.
FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
Table of Contents
EXPLANATORY NOTE
Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, all references in this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q to we, us, our, Jones, Jones Soda, and the Company are to Jones
Soda Co.®, a Washington corporation, and our wholly-owned subsidiaries Jones Soda Co.
(USA) Inc., Jones Soda (Canada) Inc., myJones.com Inc. and Whoopass USA Inc.
In addition, unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, all references in
this Quarterly Report to Jones Soda refer to our premium soda sold under the trademarked brand
name Jones Soda Co.
CAUTIONARY NOTICE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
We desire to take advantage of the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (Report) contains a number of
forward-looking statements that reflect managements current views and expectations with respect to
our business, strategies, products, future results and events, and financial performance. All
statements made in this Report other than statements of historical fact, including statements that
address operating performance, the economy, events or developments that management expects or
anticipates will or may occur in the future, including statements related to potential strategic
transactions, distributor channels, volume growth, revenues, profitability, new products, adequacy
of funds from operations, cash flows and financing, our ability to continue as a going concern,
statements regarding future operating results and non-historical information, are forward-looking
statements. In particular, the words such as believe, expect, intend, anticipate,
estimate, may, will, can, plan, predict, could, future, variations of such words,
and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements, but are not the exclusive means of
identifying such statements and their absence does not mean that the statement is not
forward-looking.
Readers should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which are based
on managements current expectations and projections about future events, are not guarantees of
future performance, are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions and apply only as of the
date of this Report. Our actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from
historical results as well as the results expressed in, anticipated or implied by these
forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly
update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future
events or otherwise.
In particular, our business, including our financial condition and results of operations and
our ability to continue as a going concern may be impacted by a number of factors, including, but
not limited to, the following:
| Our ability to successfully execute on our 2011 operating plan; | ||
| Our ability to establish and maintain distribution arrangements with independent distributors, retailers, brokers and national retail accounts, most of whom sell and distribute competing products, and whom we rely upon to employ sufficient efforts in managing and selling our products, including re-stocking the retail shelves with our product, on which our business plan and future growth are dependent in part; | ||
| Our ability to successfully launch new products or our failure to achieve case sales goals with respect to existing products; | ||
| Our ability to secure additional financing or to generate sufficient cash flow from operations; | ||
| Our ability to use the net proceeds from future financings to improve our financial condition or market value; | ||
| Dilutive and other adverse effects on our existing shareholders and our stock price arising from future securities issuances; | ||
| Our ability to manage our inventory levels and to predict the timing and amount of our sales; | ||
| Our ability to modify our key sponsorship arrangement in a timely manner to reduce our obligations or make any other changes or to realize the benefits expected from this sponsorship agreement, to which we have dedicated significant resources; | ||
| Our reliance on third-party contract manufacturers of our products, which could make management of our marketing and distribution efforts inefficient or unprofitable; | ||
| Our ability to secure a continuous supply and availability of raw materials, as well as other factors affecting our supply chain; |
3
Table of Contents
| Rising raw material, fuel and freight costs as well as freight capacity issues may have an adverse impact on our results of operations; | ||
| Our ability to source our flavors on acceptable terms from our key flavor suppliers; | ||
| Our ability to maintain brand image and product quality and the risk that we may suffer other product issues such as product recalls; | ||
| Our ability to attract and retain key personnel, which would directly affect our efficiency and results of operations; | ||
| Our inability to protect our trademarks and trade secrets, which may prevent us from successfully marketing our products and competing effectively; | ||
| Litigation or legal proceedings, which could expose us to significant liabilities and damage our reputation; | ||
| Our ability to maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting; | ||
| Our ability to build and sustain proper information technology infrastructure; | ||
| Our inability to maintain compliance with the continued listing requirements of The Nasdaq Capital Market which may adversely affect our market price and liquidity; | ||
| Our ability to create and maintain brand name recognition and acceptance of our products, which are critical to our success in our competitive, brand-conscious industry; | ||
| Our ability to compete successfully against much larger, well-funded, established companies currently operating in the beverage industry; | ||
| Our ability to continue developing new products to satisfy our consumers changing preferences; | ||
| Global economic conditions that may adversely impact our business and results of operations; | ||
| Our ability to comply with the many regulations to which our business is subject. |
For a more detailed discussion of some of the factors that may affect our business, results
and prospects, see Item 1A. Risk Factors in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 21, 2011. Readers are
also urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made by us in this Report and
in our other reports we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our periodic
reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K, and those described from time to time in our
press releases and other communications, which attempt to advise interested parties of the risks
and factors that may affect our business, prospects and results of operations.
4
Table of Contents
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JONES SODA CO.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except share data)
March 31, 2011 | December 31, 2010 | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Current assets: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 5,584 | $ | 5,448 | ||||
Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $238 and $166 |
2,425 | 2,220 | ||||||
Taxes receivable |
5 | 480 | ||||||
Inventory |
2,538 | 2,279 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
483 | 305 | ||||||
Total current assets |
11,035 | 10,732 | ||||||
Fixed assets, net of accumulated depreciation of $3,020 and $2,973 |
411 | 296 | ||||||
Other assets |
423 | 435 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 11,869 | $ | 11,463 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Current liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts payable |
$ | 757 | $ | 853 | ||||
Accrued expenses |
1,386 | 1,592 | ||||||
Taxes payable |
18 | 146 | ||||||
Capital lease obligations, current portion |
21 | | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
2,182 | 2,591 | ||||||
Capital lease obligations |
100 | | ||||||
Long-term liabilities other |
2 | 2 | ||||||
Commitments and contingencies (Note 6) |
||||||||
Shareholders equity: |
||||||||
Common stock, no par value: |
||||||||
Authorized 100,000,000; issued and outstanding shares
31,990,297 and 30,418,301 at March 31, 2011 and December 31,
2010, respectively |
50,088 | 47,917 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital |
6,745 | 6,570 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
489 | 450 | ||||||
Accumulated deficit |
(47,737 | ) | (46,067 | ) | ||||
Total shareholders equity |
9,585 | 8,870 | ||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
$ | 11,869 | $ | 11,463 | ||||
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
Table of Contents
JONES SODA CO.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands, except share data)
Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
Revenue |
$ | 4,087 | $ | 3,893 | ||||
Cost of goods sold |
3,087 | 3,085 | ||||||
Gross profit |
1,000 | 808 | ||||||
Licensing revenue |
5 | 10 | ||||||
Operating expenses: |
||||||||
Promotion and selling |
1,280 | 1,224 | ||||||
General and administrative |
1,480 | 1,684 | ||||||
2,760 | 2,908 | |||||||
Loss from operations |
(1,755 | ) | (2,090 | ) | ||||
Other income (expense), net |
72 | (4 | ) | |||||
Loss before income taxes |
(1,683 | ) | (2,094 | ) | ||||
Income tax benefit (expense), net |
13 | (38 | ) | |||||
Net loss |
$ | (1,670 | ) | $ | (2,132 | ) | ||
Net loss per share |
||||||||
Basic and diluted |
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.08 | ) | ||
Weighted average basic and diluted common shares outstanding |
31,453,016 | 26,427,972 |
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
6
Table of Contents
JONES SODA CO.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(In thousands)
Three months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
||||||||
Net loss |
$ | (1,670 | ) | $ | (2,132 | ) | ||
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: |
||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
46 | 119 | ||||||
Stock-based compensation |
175 | 167 | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
| 2 | ||||||
Change in allowance for doubtful accounts |
72 | (3 | ) | |||||
Other non-cash charges and credits |
| 7 | ||||||
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts receivable |
(260 | ) | (246 | ) | ||||
Taxes receivable |
479 | 5 | ||||||
Inventory |
(249 | ) | (91 | ) | ||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
(206 | ) | 34 | |||||
Other assets |
11 | 11 | ||||||
Accounts payable |
(110 | ) | (72 | ) | ||||
Accrued expenses |
(213 | ) | (356 | ) | ||||
Taxes payable |
(130 | ) | 31 | |||||
Net cash used in operating activities |
(2,055 | ) | (2,524 | ) | ||||
INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
||||||||
Purchase of fixed assets |
(149 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||
Net cash
used in investing activities |
(149 | ) | (10 | ) | ||||
FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net |
2,185 | | ||||||
Proceeds from capital lease obligation |
122 | | ||||||
Proceeds from exercise of stock options |
16 | 1 | ||||||
Payments on capital lease obligations |
(1 | ) | | |||||
Repayment of note payable |
| (32 | ) | |||||
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
2,322 | (31 | ) | |||||
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
118 | (2,565 | ) | |||||
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash |
18 | 21 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
5,448 | 4,975 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
$ | 5,584 | $ | 2,431 | ||||
Supplemental disclosure: |
||||||||
Cash (received) paid during period for: |
||||||||
Interest |
$ | (52 | ) | $ | 3 | |||
Income taxes |
(372 | ) | 13 |
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
7
Table of Contents
JONES SODA CO.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
1. Nature of Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Jones Soda Co. develops, produces, markets and distributes premium beverages, including the
following product lines and extensions:
| Jones Soda®, a premium carbonated soft drink: |
| Jones Zilch, with zero calories (and an extension of the Jones Soda® product line); |
| WhoopAss Energy Drink®, an energy supplement drink; and |
| WhoopAss Zero Energy Drink®, with zero sugar (and an extension of the WhoopAss Energy Drink® product line). |
We are a Washington corporation and have three operating subsidiaries, Jones Soda Co. (USA)
Inc., Jones Soda (Canada) Inc., and myJones.com, Inc., as well as one non-operating subsidiary,
Whoopass USA Inc.
Basis of presentation and consolidation
The accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2010, which has been
derived from audited consolidated financial statements, and the unaudited interim condensed
consolidated financial statements as of March 31, 2011, have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) and the Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules and regulations applicable to interim financial reporting. The
condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions between the Company and its subsidiaries
have been eliminated in consolidation.
In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements contain all material adjustments, consisting only of those of a normal recurring nature,
considered necessary for a fair presentation of our financial position, results of operations and
cash flows at the dates and for the periods presented. The operating results for the interim
periods presented are not necessarily indicative of the results expected for the full year. These
financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes
thereto included in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2010.
Use of estimates
The preparation of the condensed consolidated financial statements requires management to make
a number of estimates and assumptions relating to the reported amounts of assets and liabilities
and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the condensed consolidated
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period.
Significant items subject to such estimates and assumptions include, but are not limited to,
inventory valuation, depreciable lives and valuation of fixed assets, valuation allowances for
receivables, trade promotion liabilities, stock-based compensation expense, valuation allowance
for deferred income tax assets, contingencies, and forecasts supporting the going concern
assumption and related disclosures. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Seasonality
Our sales are seasonal and we experience fluctuations in quarterly results as a result of many
factors. We historically have generated a greater percentage of our revenues during the warm
weather months of April through September. Timing of customer purchases will vary each year and
sales can be expected to shift from one quarter to another. As a result, management believes that
period-to-period comparisons of results of operations are not necessarily meaningful and should not
be relied upon as any indication of future performance or results expected for the fiscal year.
8
Table of Contents
Liquidity
As of March 31, 2011, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $5.6 million and
working capital of $8.9 million. Cash used in operations during the three months ended March 31,
2011 totaled $2.1 million. Our cash flows vary throughout the year based on seasonality. We
traditionally use more cash in the first half of the year as we build inventory to support our
historically seasonally-stronger shipping months of April through September, and expect cash used
by operating activities to decrease in the second half of the year as we collect receivables
generated during our stronger shipping months. We incurred a net loss of $1.7 million during the
three months ended March 31, 2011.
We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents,
which includes net proceeds of approximately $2.2 million received
from our final draw down under the equity line of credit facility on February 1, 2011 (see Note 2),
will be sufficient to meet our
anticipated cash needs at least into the first half of 2012. This will depend, however, on our
ability to successfully execute our 2011 operating plan, which is based on our realigned
higher-margin product portfolio, including our Jones Soda glass bottle business and our newly
re-launched WhoopAss Energy Drink. The introduction of new and re-launched
products involves a number of risks, and there can be no assurance that we will achieve the sales
levels we expect or that justify the additional costs associated with such product introductions. We
also plan to continue our efforts to reinforce and expand our distributor network by partnering
with new distributors and replacing underperforming distributors. It is critical that we meet our
volume projections and continue to increase volume going forward, as our operating plan already
reflects prior significant general and administrative cost containment measures, leaving us little
room for further reductions in such costs.
Our operating plan factors in the use of cash to meet our contractual obligations. A
substantial portion of these contractual obligations consists of obligations to purchase raw
materials, including sugar and glass under our supply agreements. We enter into these supply
agreements in order to fix the cost of these key raw materials, which we expect will be used in the
ordinary course of our business. Our contractual obligations also relate to payments for
sponsorships, but it is our intent to renegotiate key remaining sponsorship arrangements to reduce
our payment obligations. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to modify these
sponsorship arrangements in a timely manner to reduce our payment obligations or make any other
changes to the terms of our sponsorship arrangements.
We intend to continually monitor and adjust our business plan as necessary to respond to
developments in our business, our markets and the broader economy. Our current 2011 operating plan
does not require us to obtain additional financing; however, this will depend on our ability to
meet our sales volume goals and otherwise execute on our operating plan. We believe it is
imperative to meet these objectives and continue to expand our distribution network and increase
sales volume in order to lessen our reliance on external financing in the future. In the event we
require additional financing to support our working capital needs, we believe we have various debt
and equity financing alternatives available to us. However, these alternatives may require
significant cash payments for interest and other costs or could be highly dilutive to our existing
shareholders. We continue to monitor whether credit facilities may be available to us on acceptable
terms. There can be no assurance that any new debt or equity financing arrangement will be
available to us when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. In addition, there can be no assurance
that these financing alternatives would provide us with sufficient funds to meet our long-term
capital requirements. If necessary, we may explore strategic transactions in the best interest of
the Company and our shareholders, which may include, without limitation, public or private
offerings of debt or equity securities, joint ventures with one or more strategic partners,
strategic acquisitions and other strategic alternatives, but there can be no assurance that we will
enter into any agreements or transactions.
The uncertainties relating to our ability to successfully execute our 2011 operating plan,
combined with our inability to implement further meaningful cost containment measures that do not
jeopardize our growth plans and the difficult financing environment,
9
Table of Contents
continue to raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our
financial statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2011 and 2010 were prepared assuming we would
continue as a going concern, which contemplates that we will continue in operation for the
foreseeable future and will be able to realize assets and settle liabilities and commitments in the
normal course of business. These financial statements do not include any adjustments to reflect the
possible future effects on the recoverability and classification of assets or the amounts and
classifications of liabilities that could result should we be unable to continue as a going
concern.
2. Equity Financing
In June 2010, we entered into an equity line of credit arrangement (Equity Line) with
Glengrove Small Cap Value, Ltd (Glengrove), pursuant to which Glengrove committed to purchase, upon
the terms and subject to the conditions of the purchase agreement establishing the facility, up to
$10 million worth of shares of our common stock, subject to a maximum aggregate limit of 5,228,893
common shares. The facility provided that we may, from time to time, over the 24-month term of the
facility and at our sole discretion, present Glengrove with draw down notices to purchase our
common stock at a price equal to the daily volume weighted average price of our common stock on
each date during the draw down period on which shares are purchased, less a discount of 6.0%.
During 2010, we completed draw downs and sales under the facility of an aggregate of 3,632,120
shares for net proceeds of approximately $4.0 million. On February 1, 2011, we completed our final
draw down and sale of 1,596,773 shares for net proceeds of approximately $2.2 million. We sold to
Glengrove a total of 5,228,893 shares, which is the maximum number of shares issuable under the
terms of the Equity Line and the Equity Line by its terms automatically has terminated.
3. Inventory
Inventory consists of the following (in thousands):
March 31, 2011 | December 31, 2010 | |||||||
Finished goods |
$ | 1,810 | $ | 1,695 | ||||
Raw materials |
728 | 584 | ||||||
$ | 2,538 | $ | 2,279 | |||||
Finished goods primarily include product ready for shipment, as well as promotional
merchandise held for sale. Raw materials primarily include ingredients, concentrate and packaging.
4. Capital Lease
In
January 2011, we entered into a capital lease agreements
totaling $122,000 for the lease of
two branded vehicles used for marketing. The debt is payable over a
60-month period at 6.99% interest. Our remaining scheduled lease payments,
which include $22,000 in interest, are $22,000 for 2011, $29,000 for
each of the years 2012 thru 2015, and $5,000 for 2016.
5. Stock-Based Compensation
Under the terms of our 2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan (the Plan), our Board of
Directors may grant options or restricted stock awards to employees, officers, directors and
consultants. Stock Options are granted at the closing price of our stock on the date of grant for
a ten-year term, and generally vest over a period of forty-two months, with the first 1/7th vesting
six months from the grant date and the balance vesting in equal amounts every six months
thereafter. Restricted stock is valued at the grant date market price of the underlying securities.
No monetary payment is required from the employees upon receipt of restricted stock. Restricted
stock awards also generally vest over a period of forty-two months, with the first 1/7th vesting
six months from the grant date and the balance vesting in equal amounts every six months
thereafter. At March 31, 2011, there were 357,851 shares
available for issuance under the Plan.
10
Table of Contents
(a) Stock options:
A summary of our stock option activity is as follows:
Outstanding Options | |||||||||
Weighted Average | |||||||||
Number of | Exercise | ||||||||
Shares | Price | ||||||||
Balance at January 1, 2011 |
1,789,784 | $ | 1.96 | ||||||
Options granted |
290,000 | 1.42 | |||||||
Options exercised |
(22,431 | ) | 0.66 | ||||||
Options cancelled/expired |
(104,425 | ) | 1.16 | ||||||
Balance at March 31, 2011 |
1,952,928 | $ | 1.71 | ||||||
Exercisable, March 31, 2011 |
938,162 | $ | 2.39 | ||||||
Vested and expected to vest |
1,821,963 | $ | 1.75 |
(b) Restricted stock awards:
A summary of our restricted stock activity is as follows:
Weighted Average | |||||||||
Number of | Grant Date | ||||||||
Shares | Fair Value | ||||||||
Non-vested restricted stock at January 1, 2011 |
158,581 | $ | 1.52 | ||||||
Granted |
| | |||||||
Vested |
(106,692 | ) | 1.51 | ||||||
Cancelled/expired |
(47,781 | ) | 1.44 | ||||||
Non-vested restricted stock at March 31, 2011 |
4,108 | $ | 2.87 |
A total of 47,352 shares were withheld by the Company as payment for
withholding taxes due in connection with the vesting of restricted stock awards issued under the
Plan for the three months ended March 31, 2011. The average
price paid per share of $1.32, reflects
the average market value per share of the shares withheld for tax purposes. A total of 907 shares
were repurchased for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and the average price paid per share was
$1.63.
(c) Stock-based compensation expense:
Stock-based compensation expense is recognized using the straight-line attribution method over
the employees requisite service period. We recognize compensation expense for only the portion of
stock options or restricted stock that are expected to vest. Therefore, we apply estimated
forfeiture rates that are derived from historical employee termination behavior. If the actual
number of forfeitures differs from those estimated by management, additional adjustments to
stock-based compensation expense may be required in future periods.
At March 31, 2011, the unrecognized compensation expense related to stock options and
non-vested restricted stock awards was $609,000 and $8,100, respectively, which is to be recognized
over weighted-average periods of 2.3 years and 0.6 years, respectively.
The following table summarizes the stock-based compensation expense (in thousands):
Three months ended March 31, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
Type of awards: |
||||||||
Stock options |
$ | 85 | $ | 135 | ||||
Restricted stock |
90 | 32 | ||||||
$ | 175 | $ | 167 | |||||
11
Table of Contents
Three months ended March 31, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
Income statement account: |
||||||||
Promotion and selling |
$ | 58 | $ | 33 | ||||
General and administrative |
117 | 134 | ||||||
$ | 175 | $ | 167 | |||||
We employ the following key weighted average assumptions in determining the fair value of
stock options, using the Black-Scholes option pricing model (there were no stock option grants
during the quarter ended March 31, 2010):
Three months ended | ||||
March 31, 2011 | ||||
Expected dividend yield |
| |||
Expected stock price volatility |
98.7 | % | ||
Risk-free interest rate |
2.6 | % | ||
Expected term (in years) |
6.0 years | |||
Weighted-average grant date fair-value |
$ | 1.12 |
The aggregate intrinsic value of stock options outstanding at March 31, 2011 and 2010 was
$253,000 and $24,000 and for options exercisable was $278,000 and $16,000, respectively. The
intrinsic value of outstanding and exercisable stock options is calculated as the quoted market
price of the stock at the balance sheet date less the exercise price of the option. The total
intrinsic value of options exercised during the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010 was
$13,000 and $300.
6. Commitments and contingencies
Legal proceedings
On September 4, 2007, a putative class action complaint was filed against us, our then serving
chief executive officer, and our then serving chief financial officer in the U.S. District Court
for the Western District of Washington, alleging claims under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The case was
entitled Saltzman v. Jones Soda Company, et al., Case No. 07-cv-1366-RSL, and purported to be
brought on behalf of a class of purchasers of our common stock during the period March 9, 2007 to
August 2, 2007. Six substantially similar complaints subsequently were filed in the same court,
some of which alleged claims on behalf of a class of purchasers of our common stock during the
period November 1, 2006 to August 2, 2007. Some of the subsequently filed complaints added as
defendants certain current and former directors and another former officer of the Company. The
complaints generally alleged violations of federal securities laws based on, among other things,
false and misleading statements and omissions about our financial results and business prospects.
The complaints sought unspecified damages, interest, attorneys fees, costs, and expenses. On
October 26, 2007, these seven lawsuits were consolidated as a single action entitled In re Jones
Soda Company Securities Litigation, Case No. 07-cv-1366-RSL. On March 5, 2008, the Court appointed
Robert Burrell lead plaintiff in the consolidated securities case. On May 5, 2008, the lead
plaintiff filed a First Amended Consolidated Complaint, which purports to allege claims on behalf
of a class of purchasers of our common stock during the period of January 10, 2007, to May 1, 2008,
against the Company and Peter van Stolk, our former Chief Executive Officer, former Chairman of the
Board, and former director. The First Amended Consolidated Complaint generally alleges violations
of federal securities laws based on, among other things, false and misleading statements and
omissions about our agreements with retailers, allocation of resources, and business prospects.
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on July 7, 2008. After hearing oral
argument on February 3, 2009, the Court granted the motion to dismiss in its entirety on February
9, 2009. Plaintiffs filed their motion for leave to amend their complaint on March 25, 2009. On
June 22, 2009, the Court issued an order denying plaintiffs motion for leave to amend and
dismissed the case with prejudice. On July 7, 2009, the Court entered judgment in favor of the
Company and Mr. van Stolk. On August 5, 2009, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal of the Courts
order dismissing the complaint and denying plaintiffs motion for leave to amend, and the resulting
July 7, 2009 judgment. The parties briefing on the appeal was completed on March 4, 2010, and the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral argument on July 15, 2010. On August 30, 2010, the Ninth
Circuit panel affirmed the denial of plaintiffs motion for leave to amend. On September 20, 2010,
plaintiffs filed a petition for rehearing of their appeal by the full Ninth Circuit. On October 20,
2010, the Ninth Circuit denied plaintiffs petition for rehearing. Plaintiffs did not file a
petition for review by the U.S. Supreme Court, and the time for doing so has passed.
In addition, on September 5, 2007, a shareholder derivative action was filed in the Superior
Court for King County, Washington, allegedly on behalf of and for the benefit of the Company,
against certain of our former officers and current and former directors. The
12
Table of Contents
case is entitled
Cramer v. van Stolk, et al., Case No. 07-2-29187-3 SEA (Cramer Action). The Company also was named
as a nominal defendant. Four other shareholders filed substantially similar derivative cases. Two
of these actions were filed in Superior Court for King County, Washington. One of these two
Superior Court actions has been voluntarily dismissed and the other has been consolidated with the
Cramer Action under the caption In re Jones Soda Co. Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No.
07-2-31254-4 SEA. On April 28, 2008, plaintiffs in the consolidated action filed an amended
complaint based on the same basic allegations of fact as in the federal securities class actions
and alleging, among other things, that certain of our current and former officers and directors
breached their fiduciary duties to the Company and were unjustly enriched in connection with the
public disclosures that are the subject of the federal securities class actions. On May 2, 2008,
the Court signed a stipulation and order staying the proceedings in the consolidated Cramer Action
until all motions to dismiss in the consolidated federal securities class action have been
adjudicated. On July 9, 2010, the Court dismissed the consolidated action without prejudice because
the court has entered a Stay of Proceedings, but no status report on the case has been received.
The two remaining shareholder derivative actions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Washington. On April 10, 2008, the Court presiding over the federal derivative
cases consolidated them under the caption Sexton v. van Stolk, et al., Case No. 07-1782RSL (Sexton
Action), and appointed Bryan P. Sexton lead plaintiff. The Court also established a case schedule,
which, among other things, set the close of fact discovery as January 4, 2009, and set a trial date
of May 4, 2009. The actions comprising the consolidated Sexton Action are based on the same basic
allegations of fact as in the securities class actions filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Washington and the Cramer Action, filed in the Superior Court for King County.
The actions comprising the Sexton Action allege, among other things, that certain of our current
and former directors and former officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Company and were
unjustly enriched in connection with the public disclosures that are the subject of the federal
securities class actions. The complaints seek unspecified damages, restitution, disgorgement of
profits, equitable and injunctive relief, attorneys fees, costs, and expenses. The Court granted
an agreed motion by the parties to stay the Sexton Action until the resolution of the appeal in the
securities class action described above. By order dated February 14, 2011, the Court lifted the
stay and the plaintiffs filed a notice of designation of operative
complaint by the deadline of April 18, 2011. The defendants have until June 2, 2011 to file motions to dismiss, with briefing to be concluded
by August 17, 2011.
The Cramer Action and Sexton Action are derivative in nature and do not seek monetary damages
from the Company. However, the Company may be required, throughout the pendency of the action, to
advance payment of legal fees and costs incurred by the defendants and the litigation may result in
significant obligations for payment of defense costs and indemnification.
We are unable to predict the outcome of the actions described above.
In addition to the matters above, we are or may be involved from time to time in various
claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business, including proceedings
involving product liability claims and other employee claims, and tort and other general liability
claims, for which we carry insurance, as well as trademark, copyright, and related claims and legal
actions. In the opinion of our management, the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have
a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or
liquidity.
7. Comprehensive Loss
Comprehensive loss is comprised of net loss and other adjustments, including items such as
non-U.S. currency translation adjustments. We do not provide income taxes on currency translation
adjustments, as the historical earnings from our Canadian subsidiary are considered to be
indefinitely reinvested.
The following table summarizes our comprehensive loss for the periods presented (in
thousands):
Three months ended March 31, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
Net loss |
$ | (1,670 | ) | $ | (2,132 | ) | ||
Currency translations |
39 | 33 | ||||||
Comprehensive loss |
$ | (1,631 | ) | $ | (2,099 | ) | ||
13
Table of Contents
8. Segment Information
We
have one operating segment with operations primarily in the United
States and Canada. Revenues
are assigned to geographic locations based on the location of customers. Geographic information is
as follows (in thousands):
Three months ended March 31, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
United States |
$ | 3,164 | $ | 2,700 | ||||
Canada |
879 | 1,013 | ||||||
Other countries |
44 | 180 | ||||||
Total revenue |
$ | 4,087 | $ | 3,893 | ||||
During the three months ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, three of our customers represented
approximately 36% and 34%, respectively, of revenue, one of which, A. Lassonde Inc., a Canadian
direct store delivery distributor, represented approximately 21% and 18%, respectively, of revenue.
ITEM 2. | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
You should read the following discussion and analysis in conjunction with our unaudited
condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this Report and
the 2010 audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in our Annual Report
on Form 10-K, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on March 21, 2011.
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and the documents incorporated herein by reference contain
forward-looking statements. These statements relate to future events or our future financial
performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as
believe, expect, intend, anticipate, estimate, may, will, can, plan, predict,
could, future, variations of such words, and similar expressions. These statements are only
predictions. Actual events or results may differ materially. In evaluating these statements, you
should specifically consider various factors, including the risks outlined at the beginning of this
report under Cautionary Notice Regarding Forward-Looking Statements and in Item 1A of our most
recent Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC. These factors may cause our actual results to
differ materially from any forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we undertake no
obligation to publicly release any revisions to these forward-looking statements that may be made
to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of
unanticipated events.
Overview
We develop, produce, market and distribute premium beverages, including the following product
lines and extensions:
| Jones Soda®, a premium carbonated soft drink; |
| Jones Zilch, with zero calories (and an extension of the Jones Soda® product line); |
| WhoopAss Energy Drink®, an energy supplement drink; and |
| WhoopAss Zero Energy Drink®, with zero sugar (and an extension of the WhoopAss Energy Drink® product line). |
We sell and distribute our products primarily throughout the United States (U.S.) and Canada
through our network of independent distributors, which we refer to as our direct store delivery
(DSD) channel, and directly to national retail accounts, which we refer to as our direct to retail
(DTR) channel. Additionally, in limited circumstances we sell concentrate for distribution or
production of our
14
Table of Contents
products, which we refer to as our concentrate soda channel. We do not directly manufacture
our products but instead outsource the manufacturing process to third-party contract manufacturers.
In December 2009, we introduced our new packaging for our core glass bottles, the first time
our packaging had been completely refreshed in almost 12 years. The new look is distinctly Jones
Soda, updated with higher resolution printing designed to provide improved shelf presence for our
brand. We believe the new packaging highlights our portfolio of flavors while also delivering a
cohesive, sustainable brand message to our consumers.
Our products are sold in 50 states in the U.S. and nine provinces in Canada, primarily in
convenience stores, grocery stores, delicatessens, and sandwich shops, as well as through our
national accounts with several large retailers. We also sell various products on-line, which we
refer to as our interactive channel, including soda with customized labels, wearables, candy and
other items. Our distribution landscape is evolving, with the
majority of our core case sales sold
through our DSD channel in recent years. We are strategically building our
international, national and regional retailer network by focusing on the distribution system that
what will provide us the best top-line driver for our products and optimize availability of our
products. We have focused our sales and marketing resources on the expansion and penetration of our
products through our independent distributor network and national and regional retail accounts in
our core markets throughout the U.S. and Canada. In addition, we are expanding our international
business outside of North America and have secured distribution with independent distributors in
Ireland, the United Kingdom and Australia.
During the second quarter of 2010, Walmart authorized us to retail our products in Walmarts
U.S.-based stores. Under the authorization, we have been allocated three shelf facings for a custom
assorted 6-pack of Jones Soda. The 6-pack includes two bottles each of our most popular flavors
Green Apple, Berry Lemonade and Cream Soda. This authorization provides us with the opportunity to
expand our retail outlet distribution, making our core products more accessible to new and existing
consumers. Our existing distribution network provides coverage to approximately 75% of Walmarts
stores, and we are actively working with our distribution partners as well as expanding our
distribution network to make our product available in all of Walmarts stores. As of the date of
this Report, we estimate that we are servicing over 65% of Walmart stores that are within our
distribution network.
Our business strategy is to increase sales by expanding distribution of our products in new
and existing markets (primarily within North America). Our business strategy focuses on:
| expanding points of distribution of Jones Soda throughout the entire U.S. in the grocery, mass and club channels; | ||
| growing our convenience and gas (C&G) distribution behind WhoopAss Energy Drink; | ||
| expanding our stock-keeping unit (SKU) offerings and space in the grocery stores where we are already present; | ||
| developing innovative beverage brands that will allow us to capture share in the growing natural carbonated drink segment; and | ||
| initiating relationships in additional international regions that index high on carbonated soft drink consumption. |
In order to compete effectively in the beverage industry, we believe that we must convince
independent distributors that Jones Soda and WhoopAss Energy Drink are leading brands in the
premium soda and energy drink segments of the sparkling beverage category. We believe our story is
compelling as we perform well compared to our direct competitors in the premium soda segment in
sales per point of distribution. Additionally, as a means of maintaining and expanding our
distribution network, we introduce new products and product extensions, and when warranted, new
brands. Although we believe that we will be able to continue to create competitive and
relevant brands to satisfy consumers changing preferences, there can be no assurance that we will
be able to do so or that other companies will not be more successful in this regard over the long
term.
15
Table of Contents
We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents, which includes
net proceeds of approximately $2.2 million received from our final draw down
under the equity line of credit facility on February 1, 2011 (see
Note 2 to the financial statements), will be sufficient to meet our anticipated
cash needs at least into the first half of 2012. Our current 2011 operating plan does not require
us to obtain additional financing; however, this will depend on our ability to meet our sales
volume goals and otherwise execute on our operating plan. We believe it is imperative to meet these
objectives and continue to expand our distribution network and increase sales volume in order to
lessen our reliance on external financing in the future. In the event we require additional
financing to support our working capital needs, we believe we have various debt and equity
financing alternatives available to us. However, these alternatives may require significant cash
payments for interest and other costs or could be highly dilutive to our existing shareholders. We
continue to monitor whether credit facilities may be available to us on acceptable terms. There can
be no assurance that any new debt or equity financing arrangement will be available to us when
needed on acceptable terms, if at all. In addition, there can be no assurance that these financing
alternatives would provide us with sufficient funds to meet our long-term capital requirements. If
necessary, we may explore strategic transactions in the best interest of the Company and our
shareholders, which may include, without limitation, public or private offerings of debt or equity
securities, joint ventures with one or more strategic partners, strategic acquisitions and other
strategic alternatives, but there can be no assurance that we will enter into any agreements or
transactions
The uncertainties relating to our ability to successfully execute our 2011 operating plan,
combined with our inability to implement further meaningful cost containment measures that do not
jeopardize our growth plans and the difficult financing environment, continue to raise substantial
doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern (see Liquidity and Capital Resources).
Results of Operations
The following selected unaudited financial and operating data are derived from our condensed
consolidated financial statements and should be read in conjunction with Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and our condensed consolidated
financial statements.
Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||||||||||
2011 | % of Revenue | 2010 | % of Revenue | |||||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands, except share data) | ||||||||||||||||
Consolidated statements of operation data: |
||||||||||||||||
Revenue |
$ | 4,087 | 100.0 | $ | 3,893 | 100.0 | ||||||||||
Cost of goods sold |
(3,087 | ) | (75.5 | ) | (3,085 | ) | (79.2 | ) | ||||||||
Gross profit |
1,000 | 24.5 | 808 | 20.8 | ||||||||||||
Licensing revenue |
5 | 0.1 | 10 | 0.3 | ||||||||||||
Promotion and selling expenses |
(1,280 | ) | (31.3 | ) | (1,224 | ) | (31.4 | ) | ||||||||
General and administrative expenses |
(1,480 | ) | (36.2 | ) | (1,684 | ) | (43.3 | ) | ||||||||
Loss from operations |
(1,755 | ) | (42.9 | ) | (2,090 | ) | (53.6 | ) | ||||||||
Other income (expense), net |
72 | 1.7 | (4 | ) | (0.1 | ) | ||||||||||
Loss before income taxes |
(1,683 | ) | (41.2 | ) | (2,094 | ) | (53.7 | ) | ||||||||
Income tax benefit (expense), net |
13 | 0.3 | (38 | ) | (1.0 | ) | ||||||||||
Net loss |
$ | (1,670 | ) | (40.9 | ) | $ | (2,132 | ) | (54.7 | ) | ||||||
Basic and diluted net loss per share |
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.08 | ) |
16
Table of Contents
As of | ||||||||
March 31, 2011 | December 31, 2010 | |||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | ||||||||
Balance sheet data: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents and accounts receivable, net |
$ | 8,009 | $ | 7,668 | ||||
Fixed assets, net |
411 | 296 | ||||||
Total assets |
11,869 | 11,463 | ||||||
Long-term liabilities |
102 | 2 | ||||||
Working capital |
8,853 | 8,141 | ||||||
Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||
2011 | 2010 | |||||||
Case sale data (288-ounce equivalent): |
||||||||
Finished products cases |
302,000 | 310,700 | ||||||
Concentrate cases |
| 26,800 | ||||||
Total cases |
302,000 | 337,500 | ||||||
Quarter Ended March 31, 2011 Compared to Quarter Ended March 31, 2010
Revenue
For the quarter ended March 31, 2011, revenue was approximately $4.1 million, an increase of
$194,000, or 5.0%, from $3.9 million in revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2010. This
increase in revenue is primarily attributable to an increase in sales through our DSD channel of
our core product lines, Jones Soda glass and WhoopAss
Energy Drink, which increased by 28,700 cases,
or 13%. We believe this was the direct result of our efforts, beginning in the latter part of
2010, to reinforce and expand our distributor network by partnering with new distributors and
replacing underperforming distributors, in addition to the transition out of several of our product
lines in the fourth quarter of 2010 as we focus on our core product lines. The increase in case
sales of Jones Soda glass and WhoopAss Energy Drink through our DSD channel was offset by a
decrease of 38,400 cases in discontinued lines, primarily Jones 24C
®, Jones
Naturals®, and Jones Organics
tm. There were no case
sales of concentrate during the first quarter compared to 26,800 cases during the same period of
2010. As part of managements strategic refocus, we intend to continue to emphasize our
higher-margin core products, including our Jones Soda glass bottle business as well as our newly
re-launched WhoopAss Energy Drink, with less emphasis on our concentrate soda channel, which is a
lower margin business for us. However, we believe our efforts with respect to expanding our
distribution network will contribute to sales through our DSD channel in future periods.
For the quarter ended March 31, 2011, promotion allowances and slotting fees, which are a
reduction to revenue, totaled $328,000, a decrease of $80,000, or 19.6%, from $408,000 a year ago.
The decrease in promotion allowances and slotting fees was primarily attributable to a decrease in
promotion allowances in the CSD and DTR channels due to our focus on
core products through our DSD channel. We expect promotional
allowances and slotting fees to be higher in 2011 than in 2010 as the
year continues, as we concentrate on more traditional trade spend
strategies in order to increase sales velocity.
Gross Profit
For the quarter ended March 31, 2011, gross profit increased by approximately $192,000, or
23.8%, to $1.0 million as compared to $808,000 in gross profit for the quarter ended March 31,
2010. This increase was primarily a result of the increase in revenue in the first quarter of 2011
compared to the same period in the prior year for the reasons outlined above under Revenue. Also
contributing to the increase is an improvement in cost of goods sold resulting from our transition
out of underperforming product lines which had a higher cost to
produce. These increases were offset somewhat by higher freight costs
during the quarter as a result of rising fuel prices. For the quarter ended
March 31, 2011, gross profit as a percentage of revenue increased to 24.5% from 20.8% for the first
quarter of 2010.
17
Table of Contents
Promotion and Selling Expenses
Promotion and selling expenses for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 were $1.3 million, an
increase of $56,000, or 4.6%, from $1.2 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2010. Promotion
and selling expenses as a percentage of revenue decreased slightly to 31.3% for the quarter ended
March 31, 2011, from 31.4% in the same period in 2010. The increase in promotion and selling
expenses was primarily due to an increase in selling expenses year over year of $141,000, to
$762,000, or 18.6% of revenue driven by added sales and marketing personnel to support our growth
strategy. This increase to promotion and selling expenses was offset by a reduction in trade
promotion and marketing expenses from $604,000 to $518,000, or 12.7% of revenue for the quarter
ended March 31, 2011, due in part to our reduced sponsorship costs. We anticipate increased
promotion and selling expenses in future quarters due to our hiring of additional sales and
marketing personnel to support our strategy of securing and growing larger distributor and national
retail accounts, as well as our efforts to grow our Jones Soda glass bottle and WhoopAss Energy
Drink core product lines.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 were $1.5 million, a
decrease of $204,000, or 12.1%, compared to $1.7 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2010.
General and administrative expenses as a percentage of revenue decreased to 36.2% for the three
months ended March 31, 2011 from 43.3% in the same period of 2010. The decrease in general and
administrative expenses was primarily due to a decrease in professional fees offset by an increase
in bad debt expense.
Income Tax Benefit (Expense), Net
Provision for income taxes for the quarters ended March 31, 2011 and 2010 was a benefit of
$13,000 and an expense of $38,000, respectively. The tax provision relates primarily to the tax
provision on income from our Canadian operations. No tax benefit is recorded for
the loss in our U.S. operations as we have recorded a full valuation allowance on our U.S. net
deferred tax assets. We expect to continue to record a full valuation allowance on our U.S. net
deferred tax assets until we sustain an appropriate level of taxable income through improved U.S.
operations. Our effective tax rate is based on recurring factors, including the forecasted mix of
income before taxes in various jurisdictions, estimated permanent differences and the recording of
a full valuation allowance on our U.S. net deferred tax assets.
Net Loss
Net loss for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 decreased to $1.7 million from a net loss of
$2.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2010. This was primarily due to a decrease in general
and administrative expenses of $204,000, for the reasons discussed above, combined with an increase
in gross profit of $192,000 due to increased case sales of our core products and the
discontinuation of lower margin, underperforming product lines.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Liquidity
As of March 31, 2011, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $5.6 million and
working capital of $8.9 million. Cash used in operating activities during the three months ended
March 31, 2011 totaled $2.1 million. Our cash flows vary throughout the year based on seasonality.
We traditionally use more cash in the first half of the year as we build inventory to support our
historically seasonally-stronger shipping months of April through September, and expect cash used
by operating activities to decrease in the second half of the year as we collect receivables
generated during our stronger shipping months. Additionally, for the three months ended March 31,
2011, net cash used by investing activities totaled $149,000, due to the purchase of fixed assets
primarily comprised of the purchase of two branded vehicles, while net cash provided by financing
activities totaled $2.3 million due to the proceeds from our final draw down on our equity line,
and to a lesser extent, proceeds from the capital lease obligation for the financing of the
purchased branded vehicles. We incurred a net loss of $1.7 million during the three months ended
March 31, 2011.
18
Table of Contents
We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents, which includes
net proceeds of approximately $2.2 million received from our final draw down under the equity line of credit facility on
February 1, 2011 (see Note 2 to the financial statements), will be sufficient to meet our
anticipated cash needs at least into the first half of 2012. This will depend, however, on our
ability to successfully execute our 2011 operating plan, which is based on our realigned
higher-margin product portfolio, including our Jones Soda glass bottle business and our newly
re-launched WhoopAss Energy Drink. The introduction of new and re-launched
products involves a number of risks, and there can be no assurance that we will achieve the sales
levels we expect or that justify the additional costs associated with such product introductions. We
also plan to continue our efforts to reinforce and expand our distributor network by partnering
with new distributors and replacing underperforming distributors. It is critical that we meet our
volume projections and continue to increase volume going forward, as our operating plan already
reflects prior significant general and administrative cost containment measures, leaving us little
room for further reductions in such costs.
Our operating plan factors in the use of cash to meet our contractual obligations. A
substantial portion of these contractual obligations consists of obligations to purchase raw
materials, including sugar and glass under our supply agreements. We enter into these supply
agreements in order to fix the cost of these key raw materials, which we expect will be used in the
ordinary course of our business. Our contractual obligations also relate to payments for
sponsorships, but it is our intent to renegotiate key remaining sponsorship arrangements to reduce
our payment obligations. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to modify these
sponsorship arrangements in a timely manner to reduce our payment obligations or make any other
changes to the terms of our sponsorship arrangements.
We intend to continually monitor and adjust our business plan as necessary to respond to
developments in our business, our markets and the broader economy. Our current 2011 operating plan
does not require us to obtain additional financing; however, this will depend on our ability to
meet our sales volume goals and otherwise execute on our operating plan. We believe it is
imperative to meet these objectives and continue to expand our distribution network and increase
sales volume in order to lessen our reliance on external financing in the future. In the event we
require additional financing to support our working capital needs, we believe we have various debt
and equity financing alternatives available to us. However, these alternatives may require
significant cash payments for interest and other costs or could be highly dilutive to our existing
shareholders. We continue to monitor whether credit facilities may be available to us on acceptable
terms. There can be no assurance that any new debt or equity financing arrangement will be
available to us when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. In addition, there can be no assurance
that these financing alternatives would provide us with sufficient funds to meet our long-term
capital requirements. If necessary, we may explore strategic transactions in the best interest of
the Company and our shareholders, which may include, without limitation, public or private
offerings of debt or equity securities, joint ventures with one or more strategic partners,
strategic acquisitions and other strategic alternatives, but there can be no assurance that we will
enter into any agreements or transactions.
The uncertainties relating to our ability to successfully execute our 2011 operating plan,
combined with our inability to implement further meaningful cost containment measures that do not
jeopardize our growth plans and the difficult financing environment, continue to raise substantial
doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our financial statements for the quarters
ended March 31, 2011 and 2010 were prepared assuming we would continue as a going concern, which
contemplates that we will continue in operation for the foreseeable future and will be able to
realize assets and settle liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. These
financial statements do not include any adjustments to reflect the possible future effects on the
recoverability and classification of assets or the amounts and classifications of liabilities that
could result should we be unable to continue as a going concern.
Contractual Obligations
There have been no material changes to the Contractual Obligations table included in our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
19
Table of Contents
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have no off-balance sheet arrangements.
Seasonality
Our sales are seasonal and we experience significant fluctuations in quarterly results as a
result of many factors. We historically have generated a greater percentage of our revenues during
the warm weather months of April through September. Timing of customer purchases will vary each
year and sales can be expected to shift from one quarter to another. As a result, management
believes that period-to-period comparisons of results of operations are not necessarily meaningful
and should not be relied upon as any indication of future performance or results expected for the
fiscal year.
Critical Accounting Policies
See the information concerning our critical accounting policies included under Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Critical
Accounting Policies in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 21, 2011. There have been no material
changes in our critical accounting policies during the three months ended March 31, 2011.
ITEM 4. | CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES |
Procedures
(a) Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures
The Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures (as defined under Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). Management, under the supervision
and with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer,
evaluated the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to
Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(b) as of March 31, 2011. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures
were effective as of March 31, 2011.
(b) Changes in internal controls
There were no changes in the Companys internal control over financial reporting during the
three months ended March 31, 2011 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. | LEGAL PROCEEDINGS |
On September 4, 2007, a putative class action complaint was filed against us, our then serving
chief executive officer, and our then serving chief financial officer in the U.S. District Court
for the Western District of Washington, alleging claims under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The case was
entitled Saltzman v. Jones Soda Company, et al., Case No. 07-cv-1366-RSL, and purported to be
brought on behalf of a class of purchasers of our common stock during the period March 9, 2007 to
August 2, 2007. Six substantially similar complaints subsequently were filed in the same court,
some of which alleged claims on behalf of a class of purchasers of our common stock during the
period November 1, 2006 to August 2, 2007. Some of the subsequently filed complaints added as
defendants certain current and former directors and another former officer of the Company. The
complaints generally alleged violations of federal securities laws based on, among other things,
false and misleading statements and omissions about our financial results and business prospects.
The complaints sought unspecified damages, interest, attorneys fees, costs, and expenses. On
October 26, 2007, these seven lawsuits were consolidated as a single action entitled In re Jones
Soda Company Securities Litigation, Case No. 07-cv-1366-RSL. On March 5, 2008, the Court appointed
Robert Burrell lead plaintiff in the consolidated securities case. On May 5, 2008, the lead
plaintiff filed a First Amended Consolidated Complaint, which purports to allege claims on behalf
of a class of purchasers of our common stock during the period of January 10, 2007, to May 1, 2008,
against the Company and Peter van Stolk, our former Chief Executive Officer, former Chairman of the
Board, and former director. The First Amended Consolidated Complaint generally alleges violations
of federal securities laws
20
Table of Contents
based on, among other things, false and misleading statements and omissions about our
agreements with retailers, allocation of resources, and business prospects. Defendants filed a
motion to dismiss the amended complaint on July 7, 2008. After hearing oral argument on February 3,
2009, the Court granted the motion to dismiss in its entirety on February 9, 2009. Plaintiffs filed
a motion for leave to file an amended complaint on March 25, 2009. On June 22, 2009, the Court
issued an order denying plaintiffs motion for leave to amend and dismissed the case with
prejudice. On July 7, 2009, the Court entered judgment in favor of the Company and Mr. van Stolk.
On August 5, 2009, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal of the Courts orders dismissing the
complaint and denying plaintiffs motion for leave to amend, and the resulting July 7, 2009
judgment. The parties briefing on the appeal was completed on March 4, 2010, and the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals heard oral argument on July 15, 2010. On August 30, 2010, the Ninth Circuit panel
affirmed the denial of plaintiffs motion for leave to amend. On September 20, 2010, plaintiffs
filed a petition for rehearing of their appeal by the full Ninth Circuit. On October 20, 2010, the
Ninth Circuit denied plaintiffs petition for rehearing. Plaintiffs did not file a petition for
review by the U.S. Supreme Court, and the time for doing so has passed.
In addition, on September 5, 2007, a shareholder derivative action was filed in the Superior
Court for King County, Washington, allegedly on behalf of and for the benefit of the Company,
against certain of our former officers and current and former directors. The case is entitled
Cramer v. van Stolk, et al., Case No. 07-2-29187-3 SEA (Cramer Action). The Company also was named
as a nominal defendant. Four other shareholders filed substantially similar derivative cases. Two
of these actions were filed in Superior Court for King County, Washington. One of these two
Superior Court actions has been voluntarily dismissed and the other has been consolidated with the
Cramer Action under the caption In re Jones Soda Co. Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No.
07-2-31254-4 SEA. On April 28, 2008, plaintiffs in the consolidated action filed an amended
complaint based on the same basic allegations of fact as in the federal securities class actions
and alleging, among other things, that certain of our current and former officers and directors
breached their fiduciary duties to the Company and were unjustly enriched in connection with the
public disclosures that are the subject of the federal securities class actions. On May 2, 2008,
the Court signed a stipulation and order staying the proceedings in the consolidated Cramer Action
until all motions to dismiss in the consolidated federal securities class action have been
adjudicated. On July 9, 2010, the Court dismissed the consolidated action without prejudice because
the court has entered a Stay of Proceedings, but no status report on the case has been received.
The two remaining shareholder derivative actions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Washington. On April 10, 2008, the Court presiding over the federal derivative
cases consolidated them under the caption Sexton v. van Stolk, et al., Case No. 07-1782RSL (Sexton
Action), and appointed Bryan P. Sexton lead plaintiff. The Court also established a case schedule,
which, among other things, set the close of fact discovery as January 4, 2009, and set a trial date
of May 4, 2009. The actions comprising the consolidated Sexton Action are based on the same basic
allegations of fact as in the securities class actions filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Washington and the Cramer Action, filed in the Superior Court for King County.
The actions comprising the Sexton Action allege, among other things, that certain of our current
and former directors and former officers breached their fiduciary duties to the Company and were
unjustly enriched in connection with the public disclosures that are the subject of the federal
securities class actions. The complaints seek unspecified damages, restitution, disgorgement of
profits, equitable and injunctive relief, attorneys fees, costs, and expenses. The Court granted
an agreed motion by the parties to stay the Sexton Action until the resolution of the appeal in the
securities class action described above. By order dated February 14, 2011, the Court lifted the
stay and the plaintiffs filed a notice of designation of operative
complaint by the deadline of April 18, 2011. The defendants have until June 2, 2011 to file motions to dismiss, with briefing to be concluded
by August 17, 2011.
The Cramer Action and Sexton Action are derivative in nature and do not seek monetary damages
from the Company. However, the Company may be required, throughout the pendency of the action, to
advance payment of legal fees and costs incurred by the defendants and the litigation may result in
significant obligations for payment of defense costs and indemnification.
We are unable to predict the outcome of the actions described above.
In addition to the matters above, we are or may be involved from time to time in various
claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business, including proceedings
involving product liability claims and other employee claims, and tort and other general liability
claims, for which we carry insurance, as well as trademark, copyright, and related claims and legal
actions. In the opinion of our management, the ultimate disposition of these matters will not have
a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or
liquidity.
ITEM 1A. | RISK FACTORS |
In addition to the other information set forth in this report, you should carefully consider
the factors discussed in Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2010 (the Form 10-K), which could materially
21
Table of Contents
affect our business, financial condition or future results. The risks described in our Form
10-K are not the only risks facing our company. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently
known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial also may materially adversely affect our
business, financial condition and/or operating results. However, there have been no material
changes that we are aware of from the risk factors set forth in Part I, Item 1A in our Form 10-K.
ITEM 2. | UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS |
The following table contains information for shares repurchased during the first quarter of
2011.
Total Number of | Approximate Dollar | |||||||||||||||
Shares Purchased | Value of Shares That | |||||||||||||||
as Part of Publicly | May Yet Be Purchased | |||||||||||||||
Total Number of | Average Price | Announced Plans or | Under the Plans or | |||||||||||||
Fiscal Period | Shares Purchased(1) | Paid per Share(1) | Programs | Programs (in $ 000) | ||||||||||||
January 1 to January 31, 2011 |
| | | | ||||||||||||
February 1 to February 28, 2011 |
46,779 | $ | 1.32 | | | |||||||||||
March 1 to March 31, 2011 |
573 | $ | 1.22 | | | |||||||||||
Total |
47,352 | $ | 1.32 | | |
(1) | The number of shares reported above as purchased are attributable to shares withheld by the Company as payment for withholding taxes due in connection with the vesting of restricted stock awards issued under the Jones Soda Co. 2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan. The average price paid per share reflects the average market value per share of the shares withheld for tax purposes. |
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION
Summary of 2011 Executive Bonus Plan
On May 9, 2011, the Board of Directors (the Board) of Jones Soda Co. (the Company), on the
recommendation of the Boards Compensation and Governance Committee (the Committee), adopted the
2011 Executive Bonus Plan (the 2011 Bonus Plan), a cash bonus plan for William Meissner, the
Companys President and Chief Executive Officer, and Michael OBrien, the Companys Chief Financial
Officer. The performance period for the 2011 Bonus Plan is
January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011. The target bonus for each executive is equal to 50% of the executives 2011 base salary, resulting
in a target bonus for Mr. Meissner of $125,000 and a target bonus for Mr. OBrien of $100,000.
The 2011 Bonus Plan consists of the following components, weighted as shown in the following
chart: (1) for each executive, an objective component (the Corporate Performance Component) based
on Company performance measures; (2) for Mr. OBrien, a component based on the achievement of key
performance criteria as developed by the Companys Chief Executive Officer and approved by the
Committee; and (3) for each executive, a discretionary component.
Performance Measure | Weighting for Meissner |
Weighting for OBrien |
||||||
Corporate Performance
Component: |
||||||||
Revenue
Growth |
25 | % | 12.5 | % | ||||
Gross Profit
Growth |
25 | % | 12.5 | % | ||||
Combined
Case Sales of New
Products |
25 | % | 12.5 | % | ||||
Key Performance Criteria |
N/A | 37.5 | % | |||||
Discretionary |
25 | % | 25 | % |
Depending on the level of achievement for each measure under the Corporate Performance
Component, executives may receive between 0% and 150% of applicable target amounts, as follows:
achievement of 100% of the target for a measure under the Corporate Performance Component will
result in 100% payout for that measure; achievement in excess of 100% of the target for a measure
under the Corporate Performance Component will result in a payout equal to the percentage
achievement for that measure, up to a maximum of 150%; and achievement below 100% of the target for
a measure under the Corporate Performance Component will result in a reduction of the payout for
that measure by 2% for each percentage point of underachievement.
Payouts under the key performance criteria component for Mr. OBrien will be determined by the
Board in consultation with the Companys Chief Executive Officer. There is no minimum or maximum
payout applicable to this component.
Payout under the discretionary component for each executive will be at the Boards discretion,
based on any criteria that the Board determines to be appropriate in its sole discretion. There is
no minimum or maximum payout applicable to the discretionary component for either executive.
The 2011 Bonus Plan is administered by the Board. The Board, in its sole discretion,
determines the actual bonus (if any) payable to each participant. In addition, the Board may, in
its sole discretion, make adjustments to the payouts under the 2011 Bonus Plan as a result of
extraordinary events and/or conditions that either positively or negatively impact the Companys
performance.
The description of the 2011 Bonus Plan contained in this report is qualified in its entirety
by reference to the full text of the 2011 Executive Bonus Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit 10.1 and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 6. | EXHIBITS |
10.1*
|
Jones Soda Co. 2011 Executive Bonus Plan (Filed herewith.) | |
31.1
|
Section 302 Certification of CEO William R. Meissner, Chief Executive Officer (Filed herewith.) | |
31.2
|
Section 302 Certification of CFO Michael R. OBrien, Chief Financial Officer (Filed herewith.) | |
32.1
|
Section 906 Certification of CEO William R. Meissner, Chief Executive Officer of Jones Soda Co., pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Filed herewith.) | |
32.2
|
Section 906 Certification of CFO Michael R. OBrien, Chief Financial Officer of Jones Soda Co., pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Filed herewith.) |
* | Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement. |
22
Table of Contents
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
May 13, 2011
JONES SODA CO. |
||||
By: | /s/ WILLIAM R. MEISSNER | |||
William R. Meissner | ||||
President and Chief Executive Officer | ||||
By: | /s/ MICHAEL R. OBRIEN | |||
Michael R. OBrien | ||||
Chief Financial Officer |
23