Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. - Quarter Report: 2015 July (Form 10-Q)

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the Quarterly Period Ended July 31, 2015

Or

For the Transition Period From                      to                     

Commission file number: 001-33417

OCEAN POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

1590 REED ROAD, PENNINGTON, NJ 08534

(Address of Principal Executive Offices, Including Zip Code)

(609) 730-0400

(Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☑ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☑ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☑

As of August 31, 2015, the number of outstanding shares of common stock of the registrant was 18,345,437

OCEAN POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
INDEX TO FORM 10-Q
FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JULY 31, 2015

PowerBuoy^® is a registered trademark of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and the Ocean Power Technologies logo is a trademark of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. All other trademarks appearing in this report are the property of their respective holders.

Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

We have made statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q that are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements convey our current expectations or forecasts of future events. Forward-looking statements include statements regarding our future financial position, business strategy, pending, threatened, and current litigation, liquidity, budgets, projected costs, plans and objectives of management for future operations. The words "may," "continue," "estimate," "intend," "plan," "will," "believe," "project," "expect," "anticipate", “goal” and similar expressions may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not necessarily mean that a statement is not forward-looking.

Any or all of our forward-looking statements in this report may turn out to be inaccurate. We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, business strategy and financial needs. They may be affected by inaccurate assumptions we might make or unknown risks and uncertainties, including the risks, uncertainties and assumptions described in Item 1A "Risk Factors" of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended April 30, 2015 and elsewhere in this report. In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events and circumstances discussed in this report may not occur as contemplated and actual results could differ materially from those anticipated or implied by the forward-looking statements.

You should not unduly rely on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this filing. Unless required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect new information or future events or otherwise.

PART I — FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Balance Sheets

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements (unaudited).

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Statements of Operations

(Unaudited)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements (unaudited).

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss

(Unaudited) 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements (unaudited). 

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity

(Unaudited)

 See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements (unaudited). 

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(Unaudited) 

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements (unaudited).

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)

Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Some of the information contained in this management’s discussion and analysis or set forth elsewhere in this Form 10-Q, including information with respect to our plans and strategy for our business, pending and threatened litigation and our liquidity includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. You should review the "Risk Factors" section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal 2015 for a discussion of important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results described in or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in the following discussion and analysis. References to a fiscal year in this Form 10-Q refer to the year ended April 30 of that year (e.g., fiscal 2015 refers to the year ended April 30, 2015).

Overview

We are developing and are seeking to commercialize proprietary systems that generate electricity by harnessing the renewable energy of ocean waves. Our PowerBuoy® systems use proprietary technologies to convert the mechanical energy created by the rising and falling of ocean waves into electricity. Since fiscal 2002, government agencies have accounted for a significant portion of our revenues, which were largely for the support of our product development efforts. Our goal is that an increased portion of our revenues will be from the sale of products and maintenance services, as compared to revenue from grants to support our product development efforts. As we continue to advance our proprietary technologies, we expect to have a net use of cash in operating activities unless or until we achieve positive cash flow from the planned commercialization of products and services.

We plan to market our autonomous PowerBuoy, which is designed to generate power for use independent of the power grid, to customers that require electricity in remote locations. We believe there are a variety of potential applications for our autonomous PowerBuoy, including ocean observing, offshore wind, defense and security, oil and gas, communications and ocean aquaculture.

The development of our technology has been funded by capital we raised and by development engineering contracts we received starting in fiscal 1995. In fiscal 1996, we received the first of several research contracts with the US Navy to study the feasibility of wave energy. As a result of those research contracts, we entered into our first development and construction contract with the US Navy in fiscal 2002 under a project for the development and testing of our wave power systems at the US Marine Corps Base in Oahu, Hawaii. This project included the grid-connection of one of our utility-grade PowerBuoys at the Marine Corps Base. We generated our first revenue relating to our autonomous PowerBuoy from contracts with Lockheed Martin Corporation (“Lockheed Martin”), in fiscal 2003, and in fiscal 2004 we entered into our first development and construction contract with Lockheed Martin for the development and construction of a prototype autonomous PowerBuoy. Subsequently, we received a contract from the US Navy to test our autonomous PowerBuoy as an alternate power source for the Navy’s Deep Water Active Detection System (“DWADS”). In fiscal 2012, an autonomous PowerBuoy was deployed for ocean trials off the coast of New Jersey under a contract from the US Navy under its Littoral Expeditionary Autonomous PowerBuoy (“LEAP”) contract. The LEAP PowerBuoy, or APB350, incorporates a unique power take-off and on-board storage system, and is significantly smaller and more compact than those of our previous PowerBuoy designs. It is designed to provide persistent, grid-independent clean energy in remote ocean locations for a wide variety of maritime security, monitoring and other commercial applications. Also, in fiscal 2012, ocean trials of our PB150B1 PowerBuoy were conducted off the northeast coast of Scotland. Our larger-scale PB150B1 PowerBuoy structure and mooring system achieved independent certification from Lloyd’s Register in December 2010. This certification confirms that the PB150B1 PowerBuoy design complies with the requirements of Lloyd’s 1999 Rules and Regulations for the Classification of Floating Offshore Installations at Fixed Locations.

During fiscal 2012 through fiscal 2015, we worked on projects with partners including Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding (“MES”) and the US Department of Energy, as well as on our WavePort project in Spain and a project in Oregon. We also continued development of our PowerBuoy technology as well as our next generation PowerBuoy technology. We are continuing to develop, test and refine our technology and our products and we do not yet have a commercial product offering.

During the three months ended July 31, 2015, we continued work under our contract with the US Department of Energy (“DOE”) and continued to seek to implement the strategic pivot in our business plan initiated in fiscal 2015, focusing on the autonomous applications markets. We also deployed the PB40 PowerBuoy off the coast of New Jersey in late July 2015 and subsequently retrieved it approximately three weeks later. We were permitted to operate the PB40 at this location for a period of up to one year. Although the PB40 produced power throughout its deployment period, it began reporting unexpected performance data. This performance data indicated likely failures of components associated with the float braking system which would be activated during severe storm periods in order to prevent damage to the float. As a result, we decided to proactively retrieve the PB40 earlier than anticipated in order to avoid potential physical damage to the buoy structure in the event of a severe storm. During the limited deployment period, we were able to obtain performance data, which we will use to further understand the PB40’s system performance and power generation in varying wave states. In addition, we were also able to use the deployment and retrieval of the PB40, 30 miles off of the coast of New Jersey, to validate our logistical processes associated with permitting, stage, towing and installation of the PB40 at its moored location. Because the PB40 is a legacy prototype device, it is not considered to be a critical part of our strategic pivot initiated in fiscal 2015 focusing on the autonomous applications market. Based on the limited information, we currently believe that the failed components are unique to the PB40, and therefore, we do not believe that their causes will materially impact the functionality of any of our other autonomous PowerBuoys currently under development. Costs associated with the retrieval of the PB40 will be reflected in our product development expenses in our quarterly results for the quarter ending October 31, 2015. We do not have current plans to redeploy the PB40, however, we do plan to investigate, analyze and assess the component failures of the PB40.

Our contract with the DOE is for development efforts that focus on further optimization of our modular PTO technology. In March 2015, we successfully completed a stage gate review which included project deliverables with the DOE. The DOE reviewed advancements related to Power Take Off design aspects such as reliability, cost take out, manufacturability and scalability. As a result we received an all “green” project status assessment from DOE reflecting their satisfaction with our overall project deliverables. Having met expectations as defined for said stage-gate review, we are currently executing the next stage of the contract. We also are continuing to develop solutions seeking to improve our products’ durability, reliability and reduce costs. For example, the original APB350 utilized a rack and pinion power takeoff (“PTO”) and successfully powered a US Navy radar and sonar system off the coast of New Jersey for nearly three months. The redesigned APB350 leverages our knowledge base from that design to incorporate new design features which we believe will improve its reliability and efficiency, including a redesigned PTO and a higher efficiency high voltage energy storage system (“ESS”). Subsequent to the end of the quarter, we deployed an iteration of this redesigned PowerBuoy APB350 at the end of August 2015. In addition, we are also designing the next generation APB350, which will be designed to permit the buoy to fit into a standard 40-foot shipping container, thereby reducing fabrication, transportation and deployment costs. We are also developing our newest PowerBuoy, the PB10. We currently expect that this buoy will be capable of delivering up to twenty times more power than the APB350 with a relatively small weight increase and similar transportability, but we are continuing to test its commercial viability and use testing data to refine our product offering. We believe this PowerBuoy would be attractive in applications where more power is needed, such as with oil and gas, defense and security, and micro-grid applications.

In January 2013, we filed a shelf registration statement on Form S-3 (the “S-3” or the “S-3 Shelf”). The S-3 Shelf was declared effective in February 2013. Under the S-3 Shelf we established an ATM Facility with Ascendiant Capital Markets, LLC (“Ascendiant”) via an ATM Agreement in June 2013. Under the ATM Agreement, we offered and sold shares of our common stock from time to time through the Ascendiant, acting as sales agent, in ordinary brokerage transactions at prevailing market prices. Under the ATM Facility, during fiscal 2014, we issued 3,306,334 shares of our common stock at an average price to the public of $3.02 per share, receiving net proceeds from the ATM Facility of approximately $9,698,000.

Also in fiscal 2014, we entered into an Underwriting Agreement with Roth Capital Partners, LLC on April 4, 2014, with respect to the issuance and sale in an underwritten public offering of an aggregate of 3,800,000 shares of our common stock at a price of $3.10 per share (the “public offering”) The Underwriting Agreement contained customary representations, warranties and agreements by us, customary conditions to closing, indemnification obligations, and a 90 day lock-up period that limited transactions in our common stock by us. Net proceeds from the Public Offering, which was completed in early April 2014, were approximately $10,828,000.

Form S-3 limits the aggregate market value of securities that we are permitted to offer in any 12-month period under our S-3 Shelf, whether under the ATM Agreement, the Underwriting Agreement or otherwise, to one third of our public float. In 2014, we fully utilized our available transaction capacity to sell securities using the S-3 Shelf in the ATM offering. However, we regained the ability to utilize Form S-3 as we entered fiscal 2016. Of the $40 million of securities registered under the S-3 Shelf, approximately $18.2 million remains available for issuance and sale under the S-3 Shelf. However, based on our market capitalization of $9.9 million at July 31, 2015, we would be further limited in our ability to sell securities under the S-3 Shelf during any 12-month period to approximately $3.3 million. During fiscal 2015 and the three months ended July 31, 2015, we did not sell any securities under or receive proceeds from the sale of securities under the S-3 Shelf.

The sale of additional equity or convertible securities could result in dilution to our stockholders. If additional funds are raised through the issuance of debt securities or preferred stock, these securities could have rights senior to those associated with our common stock and could contain covenants that would restrict our operations. We do not have any committed sources of debt or equity financing and we cannot assure you that financing will be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us when needed, or at all. If we are unable to obtain required financing when needed, we may be required to reduce the scope of our current projects, planned product development and marketing efforts, which could harm our financial condition and operating results.

At July 31, 2015, our total negotiated backlog was $0.8 million compared with $0.9 million at April 30, 2015. Some of our backlog at July 31, 2015 and April 30, 2015 consisted of cost-sharing contracts as described in the Financial Operations Overview section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Our backlog can include both funded amounts, which are unfilled firm orders for our products and services for which funding has been both authorized and appropriated by the customer (Congress, in the case of US Government agencies), and unfunded amounts, which are unfilled firm orders from the DOE for which funding has not been appropriated. If any of our contracts were to be terminated, our backlog would be reduced by the expected value of the remaining terms of such contracts. Currently we expect that our backlog will continue to decline in the near term; however, we continue to focus on obtaining new contracts and customers to further our technology and are exploring potential partnerships and strategic alliances. Our backlog was fully funded at July 31, 2015 and April 30, 2015.

Not included in our backlog is a $1.0 million grant that we received from Ente Vasco de la Energia (“EVE”) a Basque regional energy agency that would have provided partial funding for the deployment of the PB40 PowerBuoy off the coast of Spain. This grant expires on December 31, 2015 and will likely not be utilized as we have no planned deployment in Spain at this time. The PB40 PowerBuoy was deployed off the coast of New Jersey, but has been retrieved, as discussed above.

Currently, our contract with Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding (MES) is undergoing a stage-gate review process and activity has been suspended until we receive further notification from MES. Stage-gate reviews are used in product development to gather key information needed to advance the project to the next gate or decision point. This process has been utilized by other customers such as the Department of Energy. MES has indicated that work under this contract could resume upon passing the stage-gate review. We billed and have been paid for all eligible costs incurred under the contract in fiscal 2015. Our revenues recorded reflect the total amount paid on the contract. In addition, depending on the outcome of the stage-gate review, the scope of the project may be decreased or increased and other terms, including schedule, of the project may change. A significant reduction in the remaining scope of the project could have a material adverse effect on our future revenue and backlog.

For the three months ended July 31, 2015, we generated revenues of $0.1 million and incurred a net loss attributable to Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. of $4.2 million, and for the three months ended July 31, 2014, we generated revenues of $1.5 million and incurred a net loss attributable to Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. of $3.3 million. As of July 31, 2015, our accumulated deficit was $168.9 million. We have not been profitable since inception, and we do not know whether or when we will become profitable because of the significant uncertainties with respect to our ability to successfully commercialize our PowerBuoys in the emerging renewable energy market.  

The timing, scope and size of new government programs for renewable energy are uncertain, and there can be no assurances that we or our customers will be successful in obtaining any additional government funding or that projects will be profitable even with available funding.

As part of our strategic pivot in business operations initiated in fiscal 2015, we are focused on developing the PowerBuoy technology for use in the autonomous applications markets. Such applications require open ocean power sources that operate independently of the utility grid by supplying electric power to payloads that are integrated directly in the PowerBuoy and/or located in its vicinity. Based on market research and available public data, we believe considerable business opportunity exists in six markets that could have a direct need for our autonomous PowerBuoys: ocean observing, offshore wind, defense and security, oil and gas, communications, and ocean aquaculture. Based on power needs, sensor types and other considerations, we believe our APB350 could have the ability to satisfy several application requirements within these six markets. It is designed to offer a substantial amount of persistent power while also providing a simple and stable integration platform that is deployable using readily available vessels and skills. The APB350 is currently undergoing a design iteration focusing on improving its commercial viability, its reliability and endurance. Based on our product and technology roadmap, we expect the APB350 will undergo significant in-ocean testing during the next year and we currently expect that by the summer of 2016, it will achieve a maturity level that will allow us to proceed with our commercial launch. We currently intend to perform first product demonstrations with early adopters and launch customers of the APB350 within approximately the same timeframe. We anticipate that the APB350 will have sufficient power to address application needs in all six markets such as metrological data collection, wind and environmental data collection for offshore wind, and sensors and communications for homeland defense. With additional power available, we believe new applications will be enabled through the development of new sensors and hardware that were not feasible or financially viable with incumbent power sources such as generators, solar, wind and battery based sources.

The amount of contract backlog is not necessarily indicative of future revenue because modifications to or terminations of present contracts and production delays can provide additional revenue or reduce anticipated revenue. A substantial portion of our revenue has been for the support of our product development efforts. These revenues are recognized using the percentage-of-completion method, and changes in estimates from time to time may have a significant effect on revenue and backlog. Our backlog is also typically subject to large variations from time to time due to the timing of new awards.

Australia

In 2008, we announced a Joint Development Agreement with Leighton Contractors Pty. Ltd. (Leighton) for the development of wave power projects off the coast of Australia. In 2009, Leighton formed Victorian Wave Partners Pty Ltd (“VWP”), a special purpose company for the development of a wave power project off the coast of Victoria, Australia. In 2010, VWP and the Commonwealth of Australia entered into an Energy Demonstration Program Funding Deed (“Funding Deed”), wherein VWP was awarded an A$66.5 million (approximately US$62 million) grant for the wave power project; however, receipt of funds under the grant was subject to certain terms, including achievement of future significant external funding milestones. The grant was expected to be used towards the A$232 million proposed cost of building and deploying a wave power station off the coast of Australia (the “Project”). In March 2012, our Australian subsidiary Ocean Power Technologies (Australasia) Pty. Ltd acquired 100% ownership of VWP from Leighton. In January 2014, VWP signed a Deed of Variation with the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (“ARENA”) that amended the Funding Deed, and, in March 2014, received the initial portion of the grant from ARENA in the amount of approximately A$5.6 million (approximately US$5.2 million) (the “Initial Funding”). The Initial Funding was subject to claw-back provisions if certain contractual requirements, including performance criteria, were not satisfied. In light of the claw-back provisions, the Company determined to classify the Initial Funding as an advance payment, hold the funds as restricted cash and defer recognition of the funds as revenue. In July 2014, the VWP Board of Directors determined that the project contemplated by the Funding Deed was no longer commercially viable and terminated the Funding Deed and returned the Initial Funding to ARENA.

Financial Operations Overview

The following describes certain line items in our statement of operations and some of the factors that affect our operating results.

Revenues

Generally, we recognize revenue using the percentage-of-completion method based on the ratio of costs incurred to total estimated costs at completion. In certain circumstances, revenue under contracts that have specified milestones or other performance criteria may be recognized only when our customer acknowledges that such criteria have been satisfied. In addition, recognition of revenue (and the related costs) may be deferred for fixed-price contracts until contract completion if we are unable to reasonably estimate the total costs of the project prior to completion. Some revenue contracts may contain complex criteria or uncertainty surrounding the terms of performance and customer acceptance. These contracts are subject to interpretation, and management may make a judgment as to the amount of revenue earned and recorded. Because we have a small number of contracts, revisions to the percentage-of-completion determination, management interpretation or delays in meeting performance and contractual criteria or in completing projects may have a significant effect on our revenue for the periods involved. Upon anticipating a loss on a contract, we recognize the full amount of the anticipated loss in the current period.

Generally, our contracts are either cost plus or fixed price contracts. Under cost plus contracts, we bill the customer for actual expenses incurred plus an agreed-upon fee. Revenue is typically recorded using the percentage-of-completion method based on the maximum awarded contract amount. In certain cases, we may choose to incur costs in excess of the maximum awarded contract amounts resulting in a loss on the contract. Currently, we have two types of fixed price contracts, firm fixed price and cost-sharing. Under firm fixed price contracts, we receive an agreed-upon amount for providing product development and services that are specified in the contract. Revenue is typically recorded using the percentage-of-completion method based on the contract amount. Depending on whether actual costs are more or less than the agreed-upon amount, there is a profit or loss on the project. Under cost-sharing contracts, the fixed amount agreed upon with the customer is only intended to fund a portion of the costs on a specific project. We fund the remainder of the costs as part of our product development efforts. Revenue is typically recorded using the percentage-of-completion method based on the amount agreed upon with the customer. An amount corresponding to the revenue is recorded in cost of revenues resulting in gross profit on these contracts of zero. Our share of the costs is recorded as product development expense. Some of our revenue for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014 was from cost-sharing contracts.

The following table provides information regarding the breakdown of our revenues by customer for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014: 

We currently focus our sales and marketing efforts on North America, Europe, Australia and Japan. The following table shows the percentage of our revenues by geographical location of our customers for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014: 

Cost of revenues

Our cost of revenues consists primarily of incurred material, labor and manufacturing overhead expenses, such as engineering expense, equipment depreciation and maintenance and facility related expenses, and includes the cost of PowerBuoy parts and services supplied by third-party suppliers. Cost of revenues also includes PowerBuoy system delivery and deployment expenses and may include anticipated losses at completion on certain contracts.

Some of our revenue recorded for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014 was generated from cost-sharing contracts, which result in zero gross profit. However, in the three months ended July 31, 2014 our firm fixed price contract with MES recorded under the percentage-of-completion method had an increase in estimated total costs of the project. This increase in estimated project costs resulted in a gross loss and we recorded an accrual for the future anticipated loss on the contract.

Our ability to generate a gross profit will depend on the nature of future contracts, our success at increasing sales of our PowerBuoy systems and our ability to manage costs incurred on fixed price commercial contracts.

Product development costs

Our product development costs consist of salaries and other personnel-related costs and the costs of products, materials and outside services used in our product development and unfunded research activities. Our product development costs relate primarily to our efforts to increase the power output and reliability of our utility PowerBuoy system, and to our research and development of new products, product applications and complementary technologies. We expense all of our product development costs as incurred. Over the next several years, it is our intent to fund the majority of our research and development expenses, including cost-sharing arrangements, with sources of external funding. If we are unable to obtain external funding, we may curtail our research and development expenses and scope as necessary.

Selling, general and administrative costs

Our selling, general and administrative costs consist primarily of professional fees, salaries and other personnel-related costs for employees and consultants engaged in sales and marketing and support of our PowerBuoy systems and costs for executive, accounting and administrative personnel, professional fees and other general corporate expenses.

Interest income (expense), net

Interest income consists of interest received on cash and cash equivalents, investments in commercial bank-issued certificates of deposit and US Treasury bills and notes and interest expense paid on certain obligations to third parties. Total cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and marketable securities were $14.7 million as of July 31, 2015, compared to $32.5 million as of July 31, 2014.

We anticipate that our interest income reported in fiscal 2016 will continue to be lower than the comparable periods of the prior fiscal year as a result of the decrease in invested cash.

Foreign exchange gain (loss)

We transact business in various countries and have exposure to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates. Foreign exchange gains and losses arise in the translation of foreign-denominated assets and liabilities, which may result in realized and unrealized gains or losses from exchange rate fluctuations. Since we conduct our business in US dollars and our functional currency is the US dollar, our main foreign exchange exposure, if any, results from changes in the exchange rate between the US dollar and the British pound sterling, the Euro and the Australian dollar. Due to the macroeconomic pressures in certain European countries, foreign exchange rates may become more volatile in the future.

We may invest our foreign cash reserves in certificates of deposit and we maintain cash accounts that are denominated in British pounds sterling, Euros and Australian dollars. These foreign-denominated certificates of deposit and cash accounts had a balance of $1.4 million as of July 31, 2015 and $6.6 million as of July 31, 2014, compared to our total cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and marketable securities balances of $14.7 million as of July 31, 2015 and $32.5 million as of July 31, 2014. These foreign currency balances are translated at each month end to our functional currency, the US dollar, and any resulting gain or loss is recognized in our results of operations.

In addition, a portion of our operations is conducted through our subsidiaries in countries other than the United States, specifically Ocean Power Technologies Ltd. in the United Kingdom, the functional currency of which is the British pound sterling, and Ocean Power Technologies (Australasia) Pty Ltd. in Australia, the functional currency of which is the Australian dollar. Both of these subsidiaries have foreign exchange exposure that results from changes in the exchange rate between their functional currency and other foreign currencies in which they conduct business. All of our international revenues for the three months ended July 31, 2014 were recorded in Euros.

We currently do not hedge our exchange rate exposure. However, we assess the anticipated foreign currency working capital requirements and capital asset acquisitions of our foreign operations and attempt to maintain a portion of our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities denominated in foreign currencies sufficient to satisfy these anticipated requirements. We also assess the need and cost to utilize financial instruments to hedge currency exposures on an ongoing basis and may hedge against exchange rate exposure in the future.

Results of Operations

Three Months Ended July 31, 2015 Compared to Three Months Ended July 31, 2014

The following table contains selected statement of operations information, which serves as the basis of the discussion of our results of operations for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014:

Revenues

Revenues decreased by $1.4 million, or 93%, to $0.1 million in the three months ended July 31, 2015, as compared to $1.5 million in the three months ended July 31, 2014. The decrease in revenue is related to the completion of our WavePort contract with the EU in fiscal 2015 and the decrease in billable work under the current phase of our project with MES which is undergoing a stage-gate review process. This is discussed more fully in the Overview section of the Management Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations (“MD&A”).

Cost of revenues

Cost of revenues decreased by $1.9 million, or 95%, to $0.1 million in the three months ended July 31, 2015, as compared to $2.0 million in the three months ended July 31, 2014. The decrease in cost of revenue is related to the completion of our WavePort contract with the EU in fiscal 2015 and the decrease in billable work under the current phase of our project with MES which is undergoing a stage-gate review process. This is discussed more fully in the Overview section of the MD&A. During the three months ended July 31, 2014, our firm fixed price contract with MES recorded under the percentage-of-completion method had an increase in estimated total costs of the project. This increase in estimated project costs resulted in a gross loss and we recorded an accrual for the future anticipated loss on the contract.

Some of our projects in the three month period ended July 31, 2015 and 2014 were under cost-sharing contracts. Under cost-sharing contracts, we receive a fixed amount agreed upon with the customer that is only intended to fund a portion of the costs on a specific project. We fund the remainder of the costs primarily as part of our product development efforts. Revenue is typically recorded using the percentage-of-completion method applied to the contractual amount agreed upon with the customer. An equal amount corresponding to the revenue is recorded in cost of revenues resulting in gross profit on these contracts of zero. Our share of the costs is considered to be product development expense. Our ability to generate a gross profit will depend on the nature of future contracts, our success at increasing sales of our PowerBuoy systems and on our ability to manage costs incurred on our fixed price contracts.

Product development costs

Product development costs increased by $2.6 million, or (3201)%, to $2.5 million in the three months ended July 31, 2015, as compared to $(0.1) million in the three months ended July 31, 2014. The increase in product development costs was related primarily to increased costs associated with the deployment of our legacy PB40 device off the coast of New Jersey in July and with the redesigned APB350. During the three months ended July 31, 2014, we recovered product development costs from prior periods under our cost-sharing contract with the European Union for our WavePort project in Spain. Over the next several years, it is our intent to fund the majority of our research and development expenses, including cost-sharing arrangements, with sources of external funding. If we are unable to obtain external funding, we may curtail our product development expenses or the scope of our development activities.

Selling, general and administrative costs

Selling, general and administrative costs decreased by approximately $1.2 million, or 39%, to $1.9 million for the three months ended July 31, 2015 as compared to $3.1 million for the three months ended July 31, 2014. The decrease was related primarily to legal fees for outside counsel retained by the Special Committee of the Board of Directors to conduct an internal investigation into the agreement between VWP and ARENA during the three months ended July 31, 2014. In addition, costs decreased related to site development expenses related to our terminated project in Australia, decreased patent costs due to shortening the estimated useful lives for recording amortization expense and third party consultant fees. These decreases were offset by increased employee related costs.

Interest income, (expense) net

Interest income (expense) net increased to $5,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2015, as compared to ($59,000) in the three months ended July 31, 2014. During the three months ended July 31, 2014, we recorded interest expense for the repayment of funds received in March 2014 from ARENA of $5.2 million.

Foreign exchange gain (loss)

Foreign exchange gain was $19,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2015, compared to a foreign exchange loss of $6,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2014. The difference was attributable primarily to the relative change in value of the British pound sterling, Euro and Australian dollar compared to the US dollar during the two periods.

Other income

During the three months ended July 31, 2015, we received a refund of $251,000 related to research and development expenditures in Australia. During the three months ended July 31, 2014, we reached a favorable settlement with a vendor regarding a disputed transaction, which comprises the amount of $185,000.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

We are developing and are seeking to commercialize proprietary systems that generate electricity by harnessing the renewable energy of ocean waves. Our PowerBuoy® systems use proprietary technologies to convert the mechanical energy created by the rising and falling of ocean waves into electricity. Since fiscal 2002, government agencies have accounted for a significant portion of our revenues, which were largely for the support of our product development efforts. Our goal is that an increased portion of our revenues will be from the sale of products and maintenance services, as compared to revenue from grants to support our product development efforts. As we continue to advance our proprietary technologies, we expect to have a net use of cash in operating activities unless or until we achieve positive cash flow from the planned commercialization of products and services.

Since our inception, the cash flows from customer revenues have not been sufficient to fund our operations and provide the capital resources for the planned growth of our business. For the two years ended April 30, 2015, our net losses were $24.4 million and our net cash used in operating activities was $23.7 million.

Cash flows for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014 were as follows: 

Net cash used in operating activities

Net cash used in operating activities was $3.1 million and $3.2 million for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The change was the result of an increase in net loss of $0.8 million offset by a decrease in cash provided by noncash operating items of $0.1 million and the net change in operating assets and liabilities of $0.8 million.

The increase in net loss for the three months ended July 31, 2015 compared to the three months ended July 31, 2014 reflects an increase in product development costs of $2.6 million relating primarily to the deployment of the PB40 off the coast of NJ and the anticipated deployment of the APB350, offset by a decrease in SG&A costs of $1.2 million relating primarily to decreased legal fees to address the shareholder litigation and related matters and decreased site development expenses related to our terminated project in Australia.

The decrease in noncash operating items reflects a decrease in amortization expense for patents of $0.2 million, offset by an increase in equity compensation of $0.1 million.

The increase in operating assets and liabilities reflects a net increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses of $1.1 million and an increase of $0.3 million in other current assets, during the three months ended July 31, 2015.

Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities

Net cash provided by investing activities was $0.1 million for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and net cash used in investing activities was $3.0 million for the three months ended July 31, 2014. The change was primarily the result of a net decrease in maturities of marketable securities during the three months ended July 31, 2014.

Net cash used in financing activities

Net cash used in financing activities was $25,000 and $26,000 for the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The net cash used was primarily for repayment of long-term debt.

Effect of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents

The effect of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents was a decrease of $48,000 and $31,000 in the three months ended July 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The effect of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents results primarily from gains or losses on consolidation of foreign subsidiaries and foreign denominated cash and cash equivalents.

Liquidity Outlook

We expect to devote substantial resources to continue our development efforts for our PowerBuoys and to expand our sales, marketing and manufacturing programs associated with the planned commercialization of the PowerBuoys. Our future capital requirements will depend on a number of factors, including: 

We have incurred negative operating cash flows since our inception. As of July 31, 2015, our cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities balance was approximately $14.2 million. Based upon our cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities balance as of April 30, 2015, we believe that we will be able to finance our capital requirements and operations into the quarter ending October 31, 2016. In addition, as of July 31, 2015, our restricted cash balance was approximately $0.5 million.

On January 14, 2015, we received a deficiency letter from the Listing Qualifications Department (the “Staff”) of The NASDAQ Stock Market notifying us that, for the last 30 consecutive business days, the bid price of our common stock had closed below the minimum $1.00 per share requirement for continued inclusion on The NASDAQ Global Market pursuant to NASDAQ Listing Rule 5450(a) (1) (the “Rule”). In accordance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5810(c) (3) (A), the Company was provided an initial period of 180 calendar days, or until July 13, 2015, to regain compliance with the Rule.

On July 14, 2015, we were granted an additional 180 day, or until January 11, 2016, compliance period and, as required, transferred the listing of our common stock from The NASDAQ Global Market to The NASDAQ Capital Market. If, at any time before January 11, 2016, the bid price of our common stock closes at $1.00 or more for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days as required under Listing Rule 5810(c) (3) (A), the Staff will provide written notification to us that it complies with the Rule, unless the Staff exercises its discretion to extend this 10 day period pursuant to Listing Rule 5810(c) (3) (F).

If our common stock is delisted from NASDAQ, our ability to raise capital through public offerings of our securities could be adversely affected. We also believe that delisting would likely result in decreased liquidity and/or increased volatility in our common stock, and could harm our business and future prospects. In addition, we believe that, if our common stock is delisted, our stockholders would likely find it more difficult to obtain accurate quotations as to the price of the common stock and it may be more difficult for stockholders to buy or sell our common stock at competitive market prices, or at all. Our Board of Directors has approved and we are seeking stockholder approval of a proposed reverse stock split of our common stock in the range of 1:5 to 1:12 (but subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors to effectuate the reverse stock split or not) at our upcoming Annual Meeting of Stockholders, scheduled to be held October 22, 2015, which we believe would permit us to regain compliance with the bid price rule. However, we cannot provide you with any assurance that the proposed reverse stock split will be approved by our stockholders and that we will be able to regain compliance with NASDAQ’s continued listing requirements. If we fail to regain compliance with the minimum bid price rule or otherwise maintain the standards required now or in the future by NASDAQ, our common stock will likely be delisted from NASDAQ.

We continue to make investments in ongoing product development efforts in anticipation of future growth. Our future results of operations involve significant risks and uncertainties. Factors that could affect the Company’s future operating results and cause actual results to vary materially from our expectations include, but are not limited to, risks from insufficiencies of capital, technology development, scalability of technology and production, dependence on skills of key personnel, concentration of customers and suppliers, performance of PowerBuoy, deployment risks and laws, regulations and permitting. In order to complete our future growth strategy, we will require additional equity and/or debt financing. There is no assurance that additional equity and/or debt financing will be available to us as needed. Historically, we have raised proceeds through public capital markets. If sufficient financing is not obtained, we may be required to further curtail or limit certain product development costs, and/or selling, general and administrative activities in order to reduce our cash expenditures.

In January 2013, we filed the Form S-3 Shelf. The S-3 Shelf was declared effective in February 2013. Under the S-3 Shelf in June 2013, we established the ATM Facility with Ascendiant Capital Markets, LLC via the ATM Agreement in June 2013. Under the ATM Agreement, we offered and sold shares of our common stock from time to time through Ascendiant, acting as sales agent, in ordinary brokerage transactions at prevailing market prices. Under the ATM Facility, during fiscal 2014, we issued 3,306,334 shares of our common stock at an average price to the public of $3.02 per share, receiving net proceeds from the ATM Facility of approximately $9,698,000.

Also in fiscal 2014, we entered into an Underwriting Agreement with Roth Capital Partners, LLC on April 4, 2014, with respect to the issuance and sale in an underwritten Public Offering of an aggregate of 3,800,000 shares of our common stock at a price of $3.10 per share. The Underwriting Agreement contained customary representations, warranties and agreements by us, customary conditions to closing, indemnification obligations, and a 90 day lock-up period that limited transactions in our common stock by us. Net proceeds from the Public Offering, which was completed in early April 2014, were approximately $10,828,000.

Form S-3 limits the aggregate market value of securities that we are permitted to offer in any 12-month period under Form S-3, to one third of our public float. In 2014, we fully utilized our available transaction capacity to sell securities using the S-3 Shelf in the ATM offering. However, we regained the ability to utilize Form S-3 as we entered fiscal 2016. Of the $40 million authorized under the S-3 Shelf, approximately $18.2 million remains available for issuance and sale under the S-3 Shelf. However, given our market capitalization of $9.9 million at July 31, 2015, we would be further limited in our ability to sell securities under the S-3 Shelf to approximately $3 million. During fiscal 2015 and the three months ended July 31, 2015, we did not sell any securities under or receive any proceeds from the sale of securities under the S-3 Shelf.

The sale of additional equity or convertible securities could result in dilution to our stockholders. If additional funds are raised through the issuance of debt securities or preferred stock, these securities could have rights senior to those associated with our common stock and could contain covenants that would restrict our operations. Financing may not be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us, or at all. If we are unable to obtain required financing, we may be required to reduce the scope of our current projects, planned product development and marketing efforts, which could harm our financial condition and operating results.

During fiscal 2015, the Company returned the initial grant funding received of A$5,595,723 ($5,179,960) and interest of A$109,051 ($102,061) to ARENA. This was related to the VWP Board of Directors determination that the project contemplated by the grant was no longer commercially viable.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Since inception, we have not engaged in any off-balance sheet financing activities.

Not Applicable.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Management, under the supervision and with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of July 31, 2015 pursuant to Rules 13a-15(b) or 15d-15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) are controls and other procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Based on such evaluation, management concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of July 31, 2015 to ensure that non-financial statement and related disclosure information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

No change in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) occurred during the fiscal quarter ended July 31, 2015 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

PART II — OTHER INFORMATION

Shareholder Litigation: 

The Company and its former Chief Executive Officer Charles Dunleavy are defendants in consolidated securities class action lawsuits pending in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey captioned In Re: Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 14-3799 (FLW) (LHG). The consolidated actions are Roby v. Ocean Power Technologies, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:14-cv-03799-FLW-LHG; Chew, et al. v. Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. et. al., Case No 3:14-cv-03815; Konstantinidis v. Ocean Power Technologies, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:14-cv-04015; and Turner v. Ocean Power Technologies, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:14-cv-04592. On March 17, 2015, the court entered an order appointing Five More Special Situation Fund Ltd. as the lead plaintiff. On May 18, 2015, the lead plaintiff filed an amended class action complaint. The amended class action complaint alleges claims for violations of sections 12(a) (2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and for violations of §10(b) and §20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 arising out of public statements relating to a now terminated agreement between Victorian Wave Partners Pty. Ltd. (VWP) and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) for the development of a wave power station (the "VWP Project").  The amended complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief.  On July 17, 2015, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended class action complaint.  Lead plaintiff filed a response to the motion on August 31, 2015.

On July 10, 2014, the Company received a demand letter ("Demand Letter") from an attorney claiming to represent a shareholder demanding that the Company's Board of Directors establish an independent committee to investigate and remedy alleged breaches of fiduciary duties by the Board of Directors and management relating to the VWP Project. The Company is continuing to evaluate the Demand Letter but also invited the attorney to participate in the Section 220 Demand process discussed below.  On February 6, 2015, the Company produced documents to the attorney pursuant to a confidentiality agreement in connection with the Section 220 Demand process.

The Company also received a letter, dated August 19, 2014, (the "Section 220 Demand") from another attorney claiming to represent a shareholder demanding, pursuant to 8 Del. C. §220, to inspect certain books and records of the Company relating to the VWP Project and the termination of Charles Dunleavy as the Company's Chief Executive Officer.  The Company has received two additional Section 220 Demands relating to the same subject matter from attorneys claiming to represent two different shareholders. The Company has responded in writing to the three Section 220 Demands and on February 6, 2015 produced documents to each of the attorneys pursuant to confidentiality agreements.

The Company and certain of its current and former directors and officers are defendants in a derivative lawsuit filed on March 18, 2015 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey captioned Labare v. Dunleavy, et. al., Case No. 3:15-cv-01980-FLW-LHG. The derivative complaint alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement and unjust enrichment relating to the now terminated agreement between VWP and ARENA referred to above.  The derivative complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief.  On May 18, 2015, the plaintiff and all the defendants agreed to stay the derivative lawsuit pending action in the consolidated class action securities litigation discussed above (namely, a court order denying any motions to dismiss the commencement of discovery, a joint request to lift the stay, or further order of the court).

On July 10, 2015, a second derivative lawsuit, captioned Rywolt v. Dunleavy, et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-05469, was filed by another shareholder against the same defendants in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey alleging similar claims for breach of fiduciary duty, gross mismanagement, abuse of control, and unjust enrichment relating to the now terminated agreement between VWP and ARENA. The Rywolt complaint also seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief.  The case is still in its preliminary stage and defendants have not yet responded to the complaint. On September 2, 2015, the plaintiffs in the Labare and Rywolt derivative lawsuits filed an unopposed motion to consolidate the two actions.  The Court has not yet ruled on that motion.    

Employment Litigation: 

On June 10, 2014, the Company announced that it had terminated Charles Dunleavy as Chief Executive Officer and as an employee of the Company for cause, effective June 9, 2014, and that Mr. Dunleavy had also been removed from his position as Chairman of the Board of Directors. On June 17, 2014, Mr. Dunleavy wrote to the Company stating that he had retained counsel to represent him in connection with an alleged wrongful termination of his employment. On July 28, 2014, Mr. Dunleavy resigned from the Board and the boards of directors of the Company's subsidiaries. The Company and Mr. Dunleavy have agreed to suspend his alleged employment claims pending resolution of the shareholder litigation.

We have not established any provision for losses relating to these claims and pending litigation. Due to the stages of these proceedings, and considering the inherent uncertainty of these claims and litigation, at this time we are not able to predict or reasonably estimate whether we have any possible loss exposure or the ultimate outcome of these claims.

(b) Regulatory Matters:

SEC Subpoena

On February 4, 2015, the Company received a subpoena from the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) requesting information related to the VWP Project. The Company has provided information to the SEC in response to that subpoena and continues to cooperate with the SEC. We are unable to predict what action, if any, might be taken by the SEC or its staff as a result of this investigation or what impact, if any, the cost of responding to the SEC’s investigation or its ultimate outcome might have on our financial position, results of operations or liquidity. We have not established any provision for losses relating to this matter.

The discussion of our business and operations should be read together with the risk factors contained in Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended April 30, 2015. These risk factors describe various risks and uncertainties to which we are or may become subject. These risks and uncertainties have the potential to affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, strategies or prospects in a material and adverse manner. There have been no material changes in our risk factors from those disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on July 6, 2015.

The following table details the Company’s share repurchases during the quarter:

(1) Represents shares delivered back to the Company by employees to pay taxes related to the vesting of restricted shares.

None.

Not Applicable.

None.

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.

EXHIBITS INDEX

35