e10vq
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006
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: 0-26272
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
59-2705336 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
2050 Diplomat Drive |
|
|
Dallas, Texas
|
|
75234 |
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
Registrants telephone number, including area code: (972) 241-4080
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 þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer or
a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated filer in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer o Accelerated filer o Non-Accelerated filer þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Act). Yes o No þ
At November 6, 2006, the number of shares outstanding of the registrants common stock was
8,199,933 shares.
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
September 30, 2006
INDEX
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Certain statements contained in this report constitute forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements included in this report, other than statements of
historical facts, regarding our strategy, future operations, financial position, estimated
revenues, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives are forward-looking statements. When
used in this report, the words believe, anticipate, intend, estimate, expect, project,
could, would, may, plan, predict, pursue, continue, feel and similar expressions
are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements
contain these identifying words.
We cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements, and you
should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Our actual results could differ
materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various
factors, including the risk described in Risk Factors, and elsewhere in this report. Our
forward-looking statements do not reflect the potential impact of any future acquisitions, mergers,
dispositions, joint ventures or strategic investments. In addition, any forward-looking statements
represent our expectation only as of the date of this report and should not be relied on as
representing our expectations as of any subsequent date. While we may elect to update
forward-looking statements at some point in the future, we specifically disclaim any obligation to
do so, even if our expectations change.
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in any of our forward-looking statements
are reasonable, actual results could differ materially from those projected or assumed in any of
our forward-looking statements. Our future financial condition and results of operations, as well
as any forward-looking statements, are subject to change and to inherent risks and uncertainties,
such as those disclosed in this report. Important factors that could cause our actual results,
performance and achievements, or industry results to differ materially from estimates or
projections contained in forward-looking statements include, among others, the following:
|
|
|
our relationship with our distributors; |
|
|
|
|
our need to continually recruit new distributors; |
|
|
|
|
our internal controls and accounting methods may require further modification; |
|
|
|
|
our need to raise additional capital if revenues continue to decline; |
|
|
|
|
risks related to an SEC investigation and securities litigation; |
|
|
|
|
adverse consequences from audit committee investigations or management changes; |
|
|
|
|
regulatory matters governing our products and network marketing system; |
|
|
|
|
regulatory matters pertaining to direct-selling laws, specifically in China; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to recruit and maintain key management and consultants; |
|
|
|
|
adverse publicity associated with our products or direct selling organizations; |
|
|
|
|
product liability claims; |
|
|
|
|
our reliance on outside manufacturers; |
|
|
|
|
risks associated with operating internationally, including foreign exchange risks; |
|
|
|
|
product concentration; |
|
|
|
|
dependence on increased penetration of existing markets; |
|
|
|
|
the competitive nature of our business; and |
|
|
|
|
our ability to generate sufficient cash to operate and expand our business. |
Market data and other statistical information used throughout this report is based on
independent industry publications, government publications, reports by market research firms or
other published independent sources and on our good faith estimates, which are derived from our
review of internal surveys and independent sources. Although we believe that these sources are
reliable, we have not independently verified the information and cannot guarantee its accuracy or
completeness.
Additional factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our
forward-looking statements are set forth in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including under the
heading Risk Factors, Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations and in our financial statements and the related notes.
Forward-looking statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q speak only as of the
date hereof, and forward looking statements in documents attached are incorporated by reference
speak only as of the date of those documents. The Company does not undertake any obligation to
update or release any revisions to any forward-looking statement or to report any events or
circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as
required by law. Unless otherwise noted, the terms we, our, us, Company, refer to Natural
Health Trends Corp. and its subsidiaries.
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In Thousands, Except Share Data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December |
|
|
September |
|
|
|
31, 2005 |
|
|
30, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
18,470 |
|
|
$ |
12,142 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
652 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
Inventories, net |
|
|
12,993 |
|
|
|
9,881 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
4,632 |
|
|
|
4,777 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
37,298 |
|
|
|
27,711 |
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
3,143 |
|
|
|
3,942 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
14,145 |
|
|
|
14,145 |
|
Intangible assets, net |
|
|
4,529 |
|
|
|
3,811 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
4,833 |
|
|
|
5,260 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
63,948 |
|
|
$ |
54,869 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
2,023 |
|
|
$ |
1,023 |
|
Income taxes payable |
|
|
1,308 |
|
|
|
1,528 |
|
Accrued distributor commissions |
|
|
4,001 |
|
|
|
3,363 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
6,827 |
|
|
|
6,133 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
9,897 |
|
|
|
8,113 |
|
Debt |
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
2,537 |
|
|
|
2,999 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
26,702 |
|
|
|
23,159 |
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.001 par value; 5,000,000 shares authorized; none issued and outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized, 7,108,867 and 8,199,933
shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2005 and September 30, 2006, respectively |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
69,417 |
|
|
|
69,902 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(32,668 |
) |
|
|
(39,092 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
849 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
37,169 |
|
|
|
31,667 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
63,948 |
|
|
$ |
54,869 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
1
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
(In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
58,071 |
|
|
$ |
29,945 |
|
|
$ |
150,789 |
|
|
$ |
105,740 |
|
Cost of sales |
|
|
12,984 |
|
|
|
6,646 |
|
|
|
33,590 |
|
|
|
23,220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
45,087 |
|
|
|
23,299 |
|
|
|
117,199 |
|
|
|
82,520 |
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributor commissions |
|
|
29,087 |
|
|
|
15,456 |
|
|
|
77,959 |
|
|
|
54,902 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
15,108 |
|
|
|
10,630 |
|
|
|
36,662 |
|
|
|
34,567 |
|
Recovery of KGC receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(338 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(652 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
44,195 |
|
|
|
25,748 |
|
|
|
114,621 |
|
|
|
88,817 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
892 |
|
|
|
(2,449 |
) |
|
|
2,578 |
|
|
|
(6,297 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
(761 |
) |
|
|
696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
|
|
804 |
|
|
|
(2,140 |
) |
|
|
1,817 |
|
|
|
(5,601 |
) |
Income tax provision |
|
|
(610 |
) |
|
|
(344 |
) |
|
|
(924 |
) |
|
|
(788 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
(75 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(138 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
119 |
|
|
$ |
(2,475 |
) |
|
$ |
755 |
|
|
$ |
(6,424 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average number of shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
6,951 |
|
|
|
8,200 |
|
|
|
6,875 |
|
|
|
8,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
8,418 |
|
|
|
8,200 |
|
|
|
8,267 |
|
|
|
8,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
2
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (UNAUDITED)
(In Thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
755 |
|
|
$ |
(6,424 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash
provided by (used in) operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment |
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
823 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
705 |
|
|
|
718 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
469 |
|
Imputed interest on KGC installment payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(527 |
) |
Recovery of KGC receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(652 |
) |
Imputed compensation |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
(328 |
) |
|
|
56 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
(3,353 |
) |
|
|
3,006 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
(4,423 |
) |
|
|
(515 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
(604 |
) |
|
|
(138 |
) |
Accounts payable |
|
|
1,107 |
|
|
|
(952 |
) |
Income taxes payable |
|
|
579 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
Accrued distributor commissions |
|
|
1,686 |
|
|
|
(603 |
) |
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
2,987 |
|
|
|
(699 |
) |
Deferred revenue |
|
|
4,283 |
|
|
|
(1,787 |
) |
Other current liabilities |
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
|
|
4,496 |
|
|
|
(6,522 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(1,885 |
) |
|
|
(1,622 |
) |
Decrease in restricted cash |
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
Decrease in certificate of deposit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
104 |
|
Proceeds from KGC receivable (see Note 4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
(1,630 |
) |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments on debt |
|
|
(529 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of common stock |
|
|
3,606 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Offering costs |
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
|
|
2,973 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
|
(6,328 |
) |
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period |
|
|
22,324 |
|
|
|
18,470 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period |
|
$ |
28,324 |
|
|
$ |
12,142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
3
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED)
1. NATURE OF OPERATIONS AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Nature of Operations
Natural Health Trends Corp. (the Company) is an international direct-selling organization
headquartered in Dallas, Texas. The Company was originally incorporated as a Florida corporation in
1988. The Company merged into one of its subsidiaries and re-incorporated in the State of Delaware
effective June 29, 2005. Subsidiaries controlled by the Company sell personal care, wellness, and
quality of life products under the NHT Global brand to an independent distributor network that
either uses the products themselves or resells them to consumers. Prior to June 1, 2006, the
Company marketed its NHT Global branded products under the name Lexxus International. As part
of this worldwide name change, the Companys U.S. subsidiary changed its name from Lexxus
International, Inc. to NHT Global, Inc (NHT Global U.S.).
The Companys majority-owned subsidiaries have an active physical presence in the following
markets: North America, which consists of the United States and Canada; Greater China, which
consists of Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan and China; Southeast Asia, which consists of Singapore, the
Philippines and Indonesia; Australia and New Zealand; South Korea; Japan; Latin America, which
primarily consists of Mexico; and Slovenia.
Basis of Presentation
The unaudited interim consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America for interim financial
information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. As a result,
certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States have been condensed
or omitted. In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited interim consolidated
financial statements contain all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments,
considered necessary for a fair statement of the Companys financial information for the interim
periods presented. The results of operations of any interim period are not necessarily indicative
of the results of operations to be expected for the fiscal year. These consolidated financial
statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related
notes included in our 2005 Amended Annual Report on Form 10-K/A filed with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on May 31, 2006.
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and all of its
majority-owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been
eliminated in consolidation.
Effective December 31, 2005, the Company sold its 51% equity interest in its Eastern European
business, KGC Networks Pte Ltd. (KGC). As a result, the results of operations of KGC are not
included in the Companys consolidated statement of operations for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2006. Effective July 1, 2006, the Company sold its equity interests in eKaire.com,
Inc. and other subsidiaries that distribute products under the Kaire brand (collectively, the
Kaire Entities). As a result, the results of operations of the Kaire Entities are not included
in the Companys consolidated statement of operations for the three months ended September 30,
2006. The results of operations of the Kaire Entities for the first six months of 2006 are
included in the Companys consolidated statement of operations for the nine months ended September
30, 2006. See Note 4.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of
revenues and expenses during the reported period. Actual results may differ from these estimates.
The most significant accounting estimates inherent in the preparation of the Companys
financial statements include estimates associated with obsolete inventory and the fair value of
acquired intangible assets and goodwill, as well as those used in the
4
determination of liabilities related to sales returns, distributor commissions, and income
taxes. Various assumptions and other factors prompt the determination of these significant
estimates. The process of determining significant estimates is fact specific and takes into
account historical experience and current and expected economic conditions. Historically, actual
results have not significantly deviated from those determined using the estimates described above.
Reclassification
Certain restricted cash balances have been reclassified in the prior year consolidated balance
sheet to conform to current year presentation.
Revenue Recognition
Product sales are recorded when the products are shipped and title passes to independent
distributors. Product sales to distributors are made pursuant to a distributor agreement that
provides for transfer of both title and risk of loss upon our delivery to the carrier that
completes delivery to the distributors, which is commonly referred to as F.O.B. Shipping Point.
The Company primarily receives payment by credit card at the time distributors place orders.
Amounts received for unshipped product are recorded as deferred revenue. The Companys sales
arrangements do not contain right of inspection or customer acceptance provisions other than
general rights of return.
Actual product returns are recorded as a reduction to net sales. The Company estimates and
accrues a reserve for product returns based on its return policies and historical experience.
During April 2005, the Company launched a new product line, Gourmet Coffee Café, which
consists of coffee machines and the related coffee and tea pods, in the North American market. As
the Gourmet Coffee Café is a very different product than the Companys other products and since
there is no basis to reasonably estimate the Companys sales returns or warranty obligation, the
Company has deferred all revenue generated from the sale of coffee machines and the related coffee
and tea pods until sufficient return and warranty experience on the product can be established.
The deferral totaled approximately $1.7 million and $1.2 million in revenue and related costs,
respectively, for product shipped through September 30, 2006. The deferred costs are recorded in
other current assets as the sales return period for distributors is only valid for one year from
date of shipment. Since the launch, the Company has experienced a high rate of defects and product
returns. As a result, the Company has delayed continued sales of our existing inventory of this
product and approached the manufacturer for resolution. The manufacturer has agreed to repair all
of the machines in our existing inventory and provide discounts on future purchases. The Company
is currently planning to re-launch the sale of the coffee machines in the second half of 2007.
Enrollment package revenue, including any nonrefundable set-up fees, is deferred and
recognized over the term of the arrangement, generally twelve months. Enrollment packages provide
distributors access to both a personalized marketing website and a business management system. No
upfront costs are deferred as the amount is nominal.
Shipping charges billed to distributors are included in net sales. Costs associated with
shipments are included in cost of sales.
Income Per Share
Basic income per share is computed by dividing net income applicable to common stockholders by
the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted income per
share is determined using the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the
period, adjusted for the dilutive effect of common stock equivalents, consisting of shares that
might be issued upon the exercise of outstanding stock options and warrants. In periods where
losses are reported, the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding excludes common stock
equivalents because their inclusion would be anti-dilutive.
The dilutive effect of stock options and warrants is reflected by application of the treasury
stock method. Under the treasury stock method, the amount the employee must pay for exercising
stock options, the amount of compensation cost for future service that the Company has not yet
recognized, and the amount of tax benefit that would be recorded in additional paid-in capital when
the award becomes deductible are assumed to be used to repurchase shares. The potential tax
benefit derived from exercise of non-qualified stock options has been excluded from the treasury
stock calculation as the Company is uncertain that the benefit will be realized.
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
(In Thousands, Except Per Share Data) |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
119 |
|
|
$ |
(2,475 |
) |
|
$ |
755 |
|
|
$ |
(6,424 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic weighted-average number of shares outstanding |
|
|
6,951 |
|
|
|
8,200 |
|
|
|
6,875 |
|
|
|
8,039 |
|
Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants |
|
|
1,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,392 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted weighted-average number of shares outstanding |
|
|
8,418 |
|
|
|
8,200 |
|
|
|
8,267 |
|
|
|
8,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
(0.30 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
Options to purchase 310,000 shares of common stock were outstanding during each of the three
and nine month periods ended September 30, 2005, but were not included in the computation of
diluted income per share because the exercise prices were greater than the average market price of
the common shares.
Options and warrants to purchase 1,932,628 and 3,172,628 shares of common stock were
outstanding during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2006, respectively, but were not
included in the computation of diluted income per share because of the net loss reported for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2006. Options and warrants for 844,624 and 1,080,504
shares of common stock, respectively, were still outstanding at September 30, 2006. Such warrants
expire on October 6, 2009. The options have expirations through June 23, 2014.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In July 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Interpretation No.
48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (FIN
48), which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in tax positions. This Interpretation requires
the Company to recognize in its financial statements the impact of a tax position if that position
is more likely than not of being sustained on audit, based on the technical merits of the position.
The provisions of FIN 48 are effective January 1, 2007, with the cumulative effect, if any, of the
change in accounting principle recorded as an adjustment to beginning-of-year accumulated deficit.
The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting FIN 48 on the consolidated financial
statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements, which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value in generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and expands disclosures about fair value
measurements. SFAS No. 157 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007. The Company is currently evaluating the impact, if any, the adoption of
SFAS No. 157 will have on its consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 108, Considering the
Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial
Statements, which provides interpretive guidance on the consideration of the effects of prior year
misstatements in quantifying current year misstatements for the purpose of a materiality
assessment. SAB No. 108 is effective for fiscal years ending after November 15, 2006. The Company
is currently assessing the impact, if any, the adoption of SAB No. 108 will have on the
consolidated financial statements. The cumulative effect, if any, of applying the provisions of SAB
No. 108 will be reported as an adjustment to beginning-of-year accumulated deficit.
3. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
The Company maintains the 2002 Stock Option Plan (the 2002 Plan) which provides for the
granting of incentive and nonqualified stock options to employees, officers of the Company, members
of the board of directors, or consultants. The terms of any particular grant are determined by the
board of directors or a committee appointed by the board of directors. Historically, the terms
have ranged from five to ten years. Stock options granted to employees and officers of the Company
generally vest over three years, and stock options granted to members of the board of directors
generally vest immediately. In 2005, the Company amended the 2002 Plan to increase the maximum
number of shares available to be issued to 1,550,000 shares of common stock. As of September 30,
2006, 825,376 shares remained available to be granted under the 2002 Plan.
On August 18, 2006, the Compensation Committee of Companys Board of Directors approved,
subject to stockholder approval, the Natural Health Trends Corp. 2007 Equity Incentive Plan (the
2007 Plan). Under the 2007 Plan, the Company may grant
6
(i) incentive stock options, (ii) nonqualified stock options, (iii) restricted stock, (iv)
restricted stock units, (v) stock appreciation rights either in tandem with an option or alone and
unrelated to an option, or SARs, (vi) performance shares, (vii) award shares, or (viii) stock
awards. The 2007 Plan replaces in its entirety the 2002 Plan, which shall be deemed terminated as
of the date the Companys stockholders approve the 2007 Plan. Awards made under the 2002 Plan,
however, shall continue to be subject to the terms of such Plan, except to the extent that either
there is no conflict between the terms of the 2002 Plan and the terms of the 2007 Plan with respect
to such awards or the recipient consents to the applicability of the terms of the 2007 Plan to such
awards. The purpose of the 2007 Plan is to enable the Company to attract and retain employees,
officers, directors, consultants and advisors; to provide an incentive for them to assist in
achieving long-range performance goals; and to enable them to participate in the long-term growth
of the Company. The maximum number of shares available for issuance under the 2007 Plan is
1,550,000 shares of common stock.
From January 2001 through April 2003, the Company granted 1,331,500 stock options outside of
the 2002 Plan. The grant included 570,000 options granted to the LaCore and Woodburn Partnership,
an entity controlled by Mark Woodburn, former President and director of the Company, and Terry
LaCore, former Chief Executive Officer of NHT Global U.S. and former director of the Company;
600,000 options granted to Mr. LaCore; 30,000 options granted to Benchmark Consulting Group (which
was subsequently assigned to the LaCore and Woodburn Partnership); 120,000 options granted to
members of the Companys Board of Directors; 1,500 options granted to an employee; and 10,000
options granted to then unrelated parties.
On February 10, 2006, the Company entered into an Escrow Agreement (the Agreement) with
Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore, the LaCore and Woodburn Partnership, and Krage and Janvey LLP, as
escrow agent (the Agent). Pursuant to the Agreement, (i) the Company issued and deposited with
the Agent stock certificates in the name of the Agent representing an aggregate of 1,081,066 shares
of the Companys common stock (the Escrowed Shares) and (ii) Woodburn and LaCore deposited with
the Agent $1,206,000 in immediately available funds (the Cash Deposit). The Escrowed Shares are
the shares of common stock issued upon the cashless exercise of options issued in 2001 and 2002 to
LaCore and the LaCore and Woodburn Partnership for 1,200,000 shares of common stock exercisable at
$1.00 and $1.10 per share. The number of Escrow Shares is based upon the closing price of the
Companys common stock on February 9, 2006 of $10.14 and the surrender of 118,934 option shares as
payment of the aggregate exercise price of $1,206,000.
The Escrowed Shares were issued pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, to the Agent upon receipt from the Agent of an irrevocable proxy to the Company to vote
the Escrowed Shares on all matters presented at meetings of stockholders or any written consent
executed in lieu thereof. On October 31, 2006, the Company entered into various agreements (the
Settlement Agreements) with Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore in settlement of certain claims and, as a
part of that agreement, agreed that the Escrowed Shares will be reissued to Messrs. Woodburn and
LaCore and then pledged to the Company to secure certain obligations of Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore
to the Company under the Settlement Agreements. See Note 8.
As of September 30, 2006, 120,000 options granted outside of the 2002 Plan remain outstanding.
Adoption of SFAS 123(R) and Transition
Prior to January 1, 2006, the Company accounted for its stock-based compensation plans under
the recognition and measurement provisions of Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related Interpretations, as permitted by SFAS No.
123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. The Company did not recognize compensation cost
related to stock options granted to its employees and non-employee directors that had an exercise
price equal to or above the market value of the underlying common stock on the date of grant.
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS
No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, and related interpretations using the modified-prospective
transition method. The modified-prospective transition method does not allow for restatement of
prior periods and accordingly, the results of operations for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2006 and future periods will not be comparable to our historical results of
operations. Under the modified-prospective transition method, compensation cost recognized in our
results of operations includes (1) compensation cost for all stock-based awards granted prior to,
but not yet vested as of, January 1, 2006 based on the grant date fair value estimated in
accordance with the original provisions of SFAS No. 123, and (2) compensation cost for all
stock-based awards granted on or subsequent to January 1, 2006, based on the grant-date fair value
estimated in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R). Compensation cost is presented in
the same lines as cash compensation paid to the same individuals.
As a result of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006, the Company recognized stock-based
compensation of approximately $167,000 and $469,000 for the three and nine months ended September
30, 2006, respectively, which approximates $0.02 and $0.06 per share, respectively. Because the
Company maintained a full valuation allowance on its deferred tax assets, the Company did not
recognize any tax benefit related to stock-based compensation for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2006.
7
As of September 30, 2006, there was $1.1 million of total unrecognized stock-based
compensation on a pre-tax basis related to non-vested stock options. These costs are expected to
be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.3 years.
Pro Forma Information Under SFAS No. 123(R) for Periods Prior to January 1, 2006
The following table illustrates the effect on net income and income per share if the Company
had applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation, to stock-based employee compensation for the three and nine months ended September
30, 2005 (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, 2005 |
|
|
September 30, 2005 |
|
Net income, as reported |
|
$ |
119 |
|
|
$ |
755 |
|
Add: Stock-based employee
compensation expense included
in reported net income, net of
related tax effects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deduct: Stock-based employee
compensation expense determined
under fair value based method
for all awards, net of related
tax effects |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income |
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
$ |
695 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic income per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
Pro forma |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
Diluted income per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
Pro forma |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
No options were granted during the nine months ended September 30, 2005.
Valuation and Expense Information under SFAS No. 123(R)
The Company continues to use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to estimate fair value of
equity awards, which requires the input of highly subjective assumptions. Due to the plain
vanilla characteristics of the Companys stock options, the simplified method, as permitted by the
guidance provided in Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107, is used to determine expected life.
Expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the Companys common stock computed
over a period generally commensurate with the expected life of the stock options. The risk-free
interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield at the time of grant. Forfeitures are estimated
based on comparable data because we have limited relevant historical information. Compensation
cost is recognized on a straight-line basis over the awards vesting periods.
On July 31, 2006, the Company entered into a letter agreement with Stephanie Hayano pursuant
to which Ms. Hayano agreed to serve as the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company and
to serve on the Companys Board of Directors. Ms. Hayano was granted options to purchase 150,000
shares of the Companys common stock at an exercise price of $2.79 per share (the closing price on
The Nasdaq Stock Market on July 31, 2006, the date of grant). The options vest in equal annual
installments over three years and expire on July 31, 2011. The grant date fair value of the
options of $1.81 per share was estimated based on an expected life of 3.5 years, risk-free interest
rate of 4.9%, expected volatility of 94%, and dividend yield of zero. No other stock options were
granted during the three months ended September 30, 2006.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2006, the Company granted 170,000 stock options
with a weighted-average fair value of $2.27 per share. The fair value of each option grant was
estimated on the date of grant with the following weighted-average assumptions: expected life of
3.5 years, risk-free interest rate of 4.9%, expected volatility of 93%, and dividend yield of zero.
8
A summary of the status and activity of the Companys stock option awards is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wtd. Avg. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wtd. Avg. |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Price |
|
|
Life |
|
|
Value1 |
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2005 |
|
|
1,922,124 |
|
|
$ |
5.17 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
|
$ |
11,431 |
|
Granted |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
9.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(1,091,066 |
) |
|
|
1.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
(148,934 |
) |
|
|
2.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
702,124 |
|
|
|
12.25 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
630 |
|
Granted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at June 30, 2006 |
|
|
702,124 |
|
|
|
12.25 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
Granted |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
2.79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
(7,500 |
) |
|
|
10.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at September 30, 2006 |
|
|
844,624 |
|
|
|
10.59 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested and expected to vest at September 30, 2006 |
|
|
826,918 |
|
|
|
10.66 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
Exercisable at September 30, 2006 |
|
|
512,132 |
|
|
|
12.98 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Aggregate intrinsic value is defined as the
positive difference between the current market value and the exercise price and
is estimated using the closing price of the Companys common stock on the
last trading day of the periods ended as of the dates indicated (in thousands). |
9
No stock options were exercised during the three months ended September 30, 2006. The total
intrinsic value of stock options exercised during the nine months ended September 30, 2006 was
$9,701,000. No options were exercised during the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The total
fair value of stock options vested during each of the three months ended September 30, 2005 and
2006 was $20,000, and the total fair value of stock options vested during the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and 2006 was $92,000 and $197,000, respectively.
A summary of the Companys non-vested stock activity is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wtd. Avg. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
at Grant |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Date |
|
Non-vested at December 31, 2005 |
|
|
222,980 |
|
|
$ |
6.74 |
|
Granted |
|
|
12,000 |
|
|
|
6.03 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(17,496 |
) |
|
|
6.69 |
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
(30,000 |
) |
|
|
6.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
187,484 |
|
|
|
6.74 |
|
Granted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested |
|
|
(2,496 |
) |
|
|
7.87 |
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested at June 30, 2006 |
|
|
184,988 |
|
|
|
6.72 |
|
Granted |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
1.81 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(2,496 |
) |
|
|
7.87 |
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested at September 30, 2006 |
|
|
332,492 |
|
|
|
4.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. SALE OF SUBSIDIARY STOCK
KGC Networks
Effective December 31, 2005, the Company entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement with Bannks
Foundation (Bannks), a Lichtenstein foundation and owner of 49% of the common shares of KGC
Networks Pte Ltd. (KGC), a Singapore corporation, pursuant to which the Company sold to Bannks
51,000 common shares representing the Companys 51% of the outstanding shares of capital stock of
KGC for a total cash purchase price of $350,000.
At the same time and as a condition of the sale, the Company entered into a separate agreement
pursuant to which KGC is obligated to pay to the Company 24 monthly payments of approximately
$169,000 each, including interest at 2.5%, to settle an outstanding inter-company payable in the
amount of approximately $2.1 million and to pay for inventories ordered and partially delivered
totaling approximately $884,000, as well as the Companys undertaking to continue to supply KGC
with certain products for a period of at least 48 months. The Company discounted the 24 monthly
payments based on its cost of capital and recorded the receivable at $3.1 million. Given its
interest in the retained profits and cumulative translation adjustment of KGC of approximately
$434,000, the Company recognized a nominal gain on sale. Since the receivable from KGC is
unsecured, the Company recorded a reserve totaling approximately $2.8 million, which will be
reduced as payments are received. As of September 30, 2006, KGC is current on all monthly payments
due, and as such, the Company reversed $652,000 of the reserve.
KGC sells the Companys products into a separate network of independent distributors located
primarily in Russia and other Eastern European countries. Upon the effective date of the
transactions above, the Company no longer consolidates the financial statements of KGC. The
Company does not believe these transactions result in a discontinued operation as the Company will
continue to supply KGC with a significant amount of product for the foreseeable future. Therefore,
the results of KGC for the first nine months of 2005 have been reported in results from operations.
10
Had KGC not been reflected in results from operations, the Companys statement of operations
for the first three and nine months of 2005 would have reflected the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
September 30, 2005 |
|
September 30, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
Actual |
|
Adjusted |
|
Actual |
|
Adjusted |
Net sales |
|
$ |
58,071 |
|
|
$ |
48,231 |
|
|
$ |
150,789 |
|
|
$ |
124,315 |
|
Gross profit |
|
|
45,087 |
|
|
|
36,988 |
|
|
|
117,199 |
|
|
|
95,812 |
|
Distributor commissions |
|
|
29,087 |
|
|
|
24,891 |
|
|
|
77,959 |
|
|
|
65,799 |
|
Income from operations |
|
|
892 |
|
|
|
1,675 |
|
|
|
2,578 |
|
|
|
3,363 |
|
Kaire Entities
Effective July 1, 2006, the Company entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement with Kaire
International (Canada) Ltd. (Kaire International) pursuant to which the Company sold to Kaire
International 1,000 common shares of eKaire.com (eKaire), a Delaware corporation, representing
100% of the total number of common shares of eKaire outstanding; 510 common shares of Kaire
Nutraceuticals Australia Pty. Limited (Kaire Australia), an Australian company, representing the
Companys 51% of the total number of common shares of Kaire Australia outstanding; and 510 common
shares of Kaire Nutraceuticals New Zealand Limited (Kaire New Zealand), a New Zealand company,
representing the Companys 51% of the total number of common shares of Kaire New Zealand
outstanding for book value, which approximates $150,000.
Upon the effective date of the transaction, the Company no longer consolidates the financial
statements of the Kaire Entities. The Company does not believe the historical revenues and
expenses of the Kaire Entities or the actual sale transaction is significant, and therefore, does
not warrant discontinued operation presentation. As such, the results of the Kaire Entities for
the first six months of 2006 have been reported in the Companys consolidated results from
operations.
5. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) (In Thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
119 |
|
|
$ |
(2,475 |
) |
|
$ |
755 |
|
|
$ |
(6,424 |
) |
Other comprehensive income, net of tax: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
$ |
179 |
|
|
$ |
(2,266 |
) |
|
$ |
899 |
|
|
$ |
(5,988 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. CONTINGENCIES
Legal Matters
During the fall of 2003, the customs agency of the government of South Korea brought a charge
against LXK, Ltd. (LXK), the Companys wholly-owned subsidiary operating in South Korea, with
respect to the importation of the Companys Alura product. The customs agency alleges that Alura
is not a cosmetic product, but rather should be categorized and imported as a pharmaceutical
product. On February 18, 2005, the Seoul Central District Court ruled against LXK and fined it a
total of 206.7 million Korean won (approximately $216,000 at September 30, 2006). LXK also
incurred related costs of 40.0 million Korean won (approximately $42,000 at September 30, 2006) as
a result of the judgment. The Company recorded a reserve for the entire 246.7 million Korean won
at December 31, 2004 and has appealed the ruling. On May 10, 2006, an intermediate court of
appeals issued a ruling that the Company believes reversed that part of the judgment that had
imposed 186.7 million Korean won of the fine, but upheld the fine of 20.0 million Korean won (which
has already been paid) and the ruling that Alura cannot be imported as a cosmetic product. LXK has
filed an appeal of this ruling with the Korean Supreme Court. The Company has been unable to
determine with certainty that it will not be subject to the fine of 186.7 million Korean won if the
appeal is unsuccessful, and will therefore continue to reserve 226.7 million Korean won
(approximately $236,000 at September 30, 2006). The inability to sell Alura in South Korea if the
appeal is unsuccessful is not anticipated to have a material adverse effect on the financial
condition, results of operations, cash flow or business prospects of LXK.
11
On or around March 31, 2004, NHT Global U.S. received a letter from John Loghry, a former NHT
Global distributor, alleging that NHT Global U.S. had wrongfully terminated an alleged oral
distributorship agreement with Mr. Loghry and that the Company had breached an alleged oral
agreement to issue shares of the Companys common stock to Mr. Loghry. On May 13, 2004, NHT
Global U.S. and the Company filed an action against Mr. Loghry in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas (the Loghry Case) seeking, inter alia, unspecified damages
from Mr. Loghry for disparagement and a declaration that Mr. Loghry was not wrongfully terminated
and is not entitled to recover anything from NHT Global U.S. or the Company. Mr. Loghry filed
counterclaims against the Company and NHT Global U.S. asserting his previously threatened claims.
In September 2004, Mr. Loghry filed third party claims against certain officers of the Company and
NHT Global U.S., including against Terry LaCore, former Chief Executive Officer of NHT Global U.S.
and former director of the Company, and Mark Woodburn, former President and director of the
Company, for fraud, Messrs. LaCore, Woodburn, and a certain NHT Global distributor for conspiracy
to commit fraud and tortuous interference with contract. In February 2005, the court dismissed all
of Mr. Loghrys claims against the individual defendants, except the claims for fraud and
conspiracy to commit fraud. Mr. Loghry then filed amended counterclaims and, on June 2, 2005, the
Company and the other counterclaim defendants moved to dismiss the counterclaims on the grounds
that the claims were barred by Mr. Loghrys failure to disclose their existence when he filed for
personal bankruptcy in September 2002. On June 30, 2005, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District
of Nebraska granted Mr. Loghrys request to reopen his bankruptcy case. On September 6, 2005, the
United States Trustee filed an action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska (the
Trustees Case) against the Company; NHT Global U.S.; Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn; Curtis Broome,
President of Greater China and Southeast Asia; and a certain independent distributor of NHT Global
U.S., essentially alleging the same claims asserted by Loghry in the Northern District of Texas. On
February 21, 2006, the Trustees Case was transferred to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas. The Company has filed, and the Trustee has opposed, a motion to
consolidate the Loghry Case and the Trustees Case. The Court has not yet ruled on that motion.
On August 29, 2006, the Loghry Case was removed from the Courts October 2006 trial docket and has
not been reset for trial. Nor has the Trustees Case been set for trial. In addition, in the
Loghry Case, the Company has filed a motion for summary judgment dismissing Mr. Loghrys remaining
claim against the Company in that case. Each of the other plaintiffs in the Loghry Case has also
filed motions for summary judgment dismissing all of the remaining counter-claims against them in
that case. Mr. Loghry has also filed a motion for partial summary judgment dismissing certain
claims and counter-claim defenses of the Company and the other plaintiffs in the Loghry Case. All
of these motions for summary judgment are still pending. The Company continues to deny the
allegations by Loghry and the United States Trustee and intends to vigorously contest their claims.
An unfavorable judgment could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of the
Company.
On November 1, 2004, Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha (d/b/a Toyota Motor Corporation) and
Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. (the Toyota Entities) filed a complaint against the Company and NHT
Global U.S. in United States District Court for the Central District of California (CV04-9028). The
complaint alleges trademark and service mark dilution, unfair competition, trademark and service
mark infringement, and trade name infringement, each with respect to Toyotas Lexus trademark. The
Company reached a settlement agreement, dated August 31, 2005, under which the Toyota Entities
agreed to terminate their claims against the Company, and the Company agreed to discontinue use of
the Lexxus name and mark and change the name of its Lexxus operations and domain names by June 1,
2006, and sell or otherwise dispose of all product inventory marked with the name Lexxus by
December 1, 2006. In compliance with this settlement agreement, the Company has since June 1,
2006, used the name NHT Global in place of Lexxus and Lexxus International and has changed the
domain name for its NHT Global business. Continued compliance with this settlement could, however,
have a material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or
business prospects of the Company.
On November 12, 2004, Dorothy Porter filed a complaint against the Company in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois alleging that she sustained a brain
hemorrhage after taking Formula One, an ephedra-containing product marketed by Kaire
Nutraceuticals, Inc. and eKaire.com, Inc., former subsidiaries of the Company. Ms. Porter sued the
Company for strict liability, breach of warranty and negligence. On October 10, 2006, the Company
and Ms. Porter entered into a settlement agreement that requires Ms. Porter to dismiss this lawsuit
with prejudice.
On January 13, 2005, Natures Sunshine Products, Inc. and Natures Sunshine Products de Mexico
S.A. de C.V. (collectively Natures Sunshine) filed suit against the Company in the Fourth
Judicial District Court, Utah County, State of Utah seeking injunctive relief and unspecified
damages against the Company, NHT Global U.S., the Companys Mexican subsidiary, and the Companys
Mexico management team, Oscar de la Mora Romo and Jose Villarreal Patino, alleging among other
things that the Companys employment of De la Mora and Villarreal violated or could lead to the
violation of certain non-compete, non-solicitation, and confidentiality agreements allegedly in
effect between De la Mora and Villarreal and Natures Sunshine. After the Company removed the case
to federal court, Natures Sunshine voluntarily dismissed its lawsuit and filed a new lawsuit in
the Fourth Judicial District Court in Utah County, Utah. After a hearing on August 22, 2005, the
district court preliminarily enjoined Messrs. De la Mora and Villarreal from disclosing any
confidential information of Natures Sunshine or soliciting any employee or distributor of Natures
Sunshine or inducing them to terminate their relationship with Natures Sunshine. The court
refused, however, to enjoin Messrs. De la Mora or Villarreal from competing with Natures Sunshine.
Natures Sunshine subsequently filed a petition for interlocutory review
12
with the Utah Supreme Court. The Supreme Court delegated the petition to the Utah Court of
Appeals, which denied the petition. On April 6, 2006, a mutual agreement was entered into with
Messrs. De la Mora and Villarreal terminating their employment between them and affiliates of the
Company. Nevertheless, Natures Sunshine continues to seek damages from the Company and Messrs. De
la Mora and Villarreal for alleged solicitation of Nature Sunshines employees and distributors and
use of Natures Sunshines confidential information. If the Company or Messrs. De la Mora and
Villarreal are unsuccessful in defending this action, the Company may be required to pay damages
and attorneys fees that may be assessed against it.
On or about March 1, 2006, the Company hired Peter Dale, a former executive with the Natures
Sunshine subsidiary doing business in Japan, Natures Sunshine Japan Co., Ltd. (NSJ), to serve as
an executive vice president with responsibilities in Asia. On August 14, 2006, NSJ filed a lawsuit
against Mr. Dale, but not the Company, in federal court in Utah alleging that Mr. Dale has breached
an agreement containing covenants of non-competition, non-solicitation, and confidentiality. The
Company intends to assist Mr. Dale in vigorously defending this lawsuit. However, if Natures
Sunshine were to prevail in such a lawsuit, Mr. Dale could be enjoined from working for the Company
until at least February 15, 2007, which could have a material adverse effect on the Companys
business in Japan.
On September 11, 2006, a putative class action lawsuit was filed by The Rosen Law Firm P.A.
purportedly on behalf of certain purchasers of the Companys common stock to recover damages caused
by alleged violations of federal securities laws. The lawsuit names the Company and certain
current and former officers and directors as defendants. The Company believes that the claims
alleged in this lawsuit are without merit, and the Company intends to vigorously defend this
lawsuit.
Currently, there is no other significant litigation pending against the Company other than as
disclosed in the paragraphs above. From time to time, the Company may become a party to litigation
and subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of the Companys business. Although the
results of such litigation and claims in the ordinary course of business cannot be predicted with
certainty, the Company believes that the final outcome of such matters will not have a material
adverse effect on the Companys business, results of operations or financial condition. Regardless
of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense costs,
diversion of management resources and other factors.
Other Matters
In August 2006, the Company was advised by the Staff of the SEC that it was conducting an
informal inquiry into matters that are the subject of previously disclosed investigations by the
Companys Audit Committee, including the payments received by two former officers and directors of
the Company from an independent distributor. In connection with the inquiry, the SEC Staff
requested that the Company voluntarily provide it with certain information and documents, including
information gathered by the independent investigator engaged by the Companys Audit Committee. The
Company voluntarily cooperated with this inquiry. On October 20, 2006, the Company received a
formal order of investigation issued by the SEC (see Note 8).
On October 31, 2006, the Company, Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore entered into several agreements
(collectively, the Settlement Agreements), pursuant to which they resolved certain pending
disputes among the parties (see Note 8).
7. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
In August 2001, the Company entered into a written lease agreement and an oral management
agreement with S&B Business Services, an affiliate of Brad LaCore, the brother of Terry LaCore,
former Chief Executive Officer of NHT Global U.S. and a director of the Company, and Sherry LaCore,
Brad LaCores spouse. Under the terms of the two agreements, S&B Business Services provided
warehouse facilities and certain equipment, managed and shipped inventory, provided independent
distributor support services and disbursed payments to independent distributors. In exchange for
these services, the Company paid $18,000 annually for leasing the warehouse, $3,600 annually for
the lease of warehouse equipment and $120,000 annually for the management services provided, plus
an annual average of approximately $12,000 for business related services. The Company paid S&B
Business Services approximately $41,000 during the three month periods ended September 30, 2005,
and approximately $119,000 and $18,000 during the nine month periods ended September 30, 2005 and
2006, respectively. No amounts were paid during the three months ended September 30, 2006.
The payment disbursement function was transferred to the Companys Dallas head office during
the third quarter of 2005. In January 2006, the Company hired Sherry LaCore as an employee and
simultaneously terminated the oral management agreement with S&B Business Services. Additionally,
the Company closed the warehouse facility by the end of March 2006 and terminated the related lease
agreement.
A director of the Companys China subsidiary is the sole director of Access Intl (Zhuhai Ftz)
Warehousing & Trading Co. Ltd. and its group (collectively, Access), a transportation and
logistics company, and the owner of Info Development Ltd. (Info), an
13
import services company, both of which provided services to the Companys Hong Kong
subsidiary. Payments totaling approximately $1,928,000 and $3,854,000 were paid to Access and Info
during the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2005, respectively. Payments totaling
approximately $47,000 and $429,000 were paid to Access and Info during the three and nine month
periods ended September 30, 2006, respectively. At September 30, 2006, approximately $43,000 was
due to Info.
In connection with its acquisition of MarketVision Communications Corporation (MarketVision)
in 2004, the Company entered into a software license agreement (the Software License Agreement),
with MarketVision Consulting Group, LLC, a limited liability company owned by John Cavanaugh, the
President of MarketVision, and Jason Landry, a Vice President of MarketVision (the Licensee).
Upon an Event of Default (as defined), the Software License Agreement grants, among other things,
the Licensee with an irrevocable, exclusive, perpetual, royalty free, fully-paid, worldwide,
transferable, sublicensable right and license to use, copy, modify, distribute, rent, lease,
enhance, transfer, market, and create derivative works to the MarketVision software. An Event of
Default under the Software License Agreement includes a Share Default, which is defined as the
market value per share of the Company failing to equal or exceed $10.00 per share for any one
rolling period of six months for a certain period following the acquisition of MarketVision. The
last time that the Companys stock closed at or above $10.00 per share was February 16, 2006, and a
Share Default would otherwise have occurred on August 17, 2006. In August, September, and October
2006, the parties to the Software License Agreement amended that agreement to provide that no Share
Default will occur prior to November 30, 2006.
Despite the granting of such a license to the Licensee if an Event of Default should occur,
under the Software License Agreement, the Company and MarketVision retain the right to continue to
use the MarketVision software for its internal use only and not as an application service provider
or service bureau, but may not rent, lease, license, transfer or distribute the software without
the Licensees prior written consent. Moreover, the Company would have the right to receive
certain application service provider services from Licensee. Although the Company does not believe
that an Event of Default would, by itself, have a material adverse effect on the Company, it is
possible that it could trigger other events that have such an effect. For example, it is possible
that the Company could lose the services of Mr. Cavanaugh, Mr. Landry, or other employees of
MarketVision.
On November 10, 2005, an independent investigator retained by the Companys Audit Committee
learned that an entity controlled by Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore received payments from an
independent distributor of the Companys products during 2001 through August 2005. The Company
believes that Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore received from such independent distributor a total of
approximately $1.4 million and $1.1 million, respectively. The Company believes that the fees paid
by the Company to such independent distributor were not in excess of the amounts due under the
Companys regular distributor compensation plan.
Approximately $2.4 million of the funds paid by the independent distributor to Messrs.
Woodburn and LaCore were paid at the direction of Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore to an entity that is
partially owned by Mr. Woodburns father and Randall A. Mason, the Chairman of the Companys Board
of Directors and former Chairman of the Companys Audit Committee. The funds were subsequently
paid to an entity controlled by Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore at their direction. After
investigation by the Audit Committee, the Board of Directors of the Company concluded that Mr.
Mason was unaware that these payments were directed by Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore to an entity
partially owned by him until uncovered by the Audits Committees independent investigator on
November 10, 2005, and that Mr. Mason was not involved in any misconduct and received no pecuniary
benefit from the payments made by the independent distributor. However, since payments were
directed into an entity that is partially owned by Mr. Mason, he could no longer be considered
independent in accordance with the rules of Nasdaq and under the federal securities laws.
Therefore, effective November 11, 2005, Mr. Mason resigned as Chairman and a member of the
Companys Audit Committee.
On November 14, 2005, in light of the information learned by the Companys Audit Committee on
November 10, 2005, the Company terminated the employment of each of Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore.
See Note 8.
In addition, a loan made by the Company under the direction of Mr. Woodburn in the aggregate
principal amount of $256,000 in February 2004 was previously recorded as a loan to a third party.
On November 10, 2005, the Audit Committee investigator learned that the Company actually loaned the
funds to an entity owned and controlled by the parents of Mr. Woodburn. The loan was repaid in
full, partially by an entity controlled by a third party and partially by an entity controlled by
Mr. Woodburn in December 2004.
On March 23, 2006, an independent investigator retained by the Audit Committee of the Board of
Directors confirmed that affiliates of immediate family members of Mr. Woodburn have owned since
1998, and continue to own on March 23, 2006, equity interests in Aloe Commodities (Aloe), the
largest manufacturer of the Company and the supplier of the Skindulgence® Line and LaVie products,
representing approximately 5% of the outstanding shares of Aloe. The Company paid Aloe and certain
of its affiliates approximately $3,234,000 and $7,369,000 during the three and nine month periods
ended September 30, 2005, respectively. The Company paid Aloe and certain of its affiliates
approximately $1,874,000 and $3,431,000 during the three and nine month periods ended September 30,
2006, respectively. At September 30, 2006, approximately $7,000 was due to Aloe and certain of its
affiliates.
14
8. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
Formal SEC Investigation
On October 20, 2006, the Company received a formal order of investigation issued by the SEC
regarding possible securities laws violations by the Company and/or other persons. At this time,
it is not possible to predict the outcome of the investigation nor is it possible to assess its
impact on the Company. The Company intends to cooperate fully with the SEC with respect to its
investigation.
Settlement with Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore
On February 10, 2006, the Company entered into an Escrow Agreement (the Escrow Agreement)
with Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore, the LaCore and Woodburn Partnership, an affiliate of Woodburn and
LaCore, and Krage and Janvey LLP, as escrow agent (the Escrow Agent). Pursuant to the Escrow
Agreement, (i) the Company issued and deposited with the Escrow Agent stock certificates in the
name of the Escrow Agent representing an aggregate of 1,081,066 shares of the Companys common
stock (the Escrowed Shares) and (ii) Woodburn and LaCore deposited with the Agent an aggregate of
$1,206,000 in immediately available funds (the Cash Deposit). The Escrowed Shares are the shares
of common stock issuable upon the cashless exercise of options issued in 2001 and 2002 to Mr.
LaCore and the LaCore and Woodburn Partnership for 1,200,000 shares of common stock exercisable at
$1.00 and $1.10 per share. The Escrowed Shares were issued to the Escrow Agent upon receipt from
the Escrow Agent of an irrevocable proxy to the Company to vote the Escrowed Shares on matters
presented at meetings of stockholders or written consents executed in lieu thereof. The parties
also agreed that the Escrow Agent will hold the Escrowed Shares and the Cash Deposit until it
receives (i) joint written instructions from the Company, Woodburn and LaCore, or (ii) a final
non-appealable order from a court of competent jurisdiction.
On October 31, 2006, the Company, Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore entered into several agreements
(collectively, the Settlement Agreements), pursuant to which they resolved certain pending
disputes among the parties. The following is a summary of the principal terms of the Settlement
Agreements:
Main Agreement
Each of the Company, Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore have agreed that:
|
i. |
|
In connection with certain payments received by Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore from an
independent distributor of the Company (see Note 7), they have agreed to pay an aggregate
of $2.5 million (the Payment Amount) to the Company by no later than October 31, 2008
(see Non-Recourse Secured Promissory Note below); |
|
|
ii. |
|
The Escrowed Shares shall be reissued to Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore (or their
designees) and such shares (the Pledged Shares) shall be pledged to the Company as
collateral for their obligations under (x) the Non-Recourse Secured Promissory Note and (y)
the indemnification agreement (see Indemnification Agreement below); |
|
|
iii. |
|
The Pledged Shares and other shares of Company capital stock held directly or
indirectly by Messrs. LaCore and/or Woodburn shall be the subject of a voting agreement
with the Company (see Voting Agreement below); |
|
|
iv. |
|
The Cash Deposit plus accrued and unpaid interest shall be wired by the Escrow Agent to
Mr. LaCore concurrent with the signing of the Settlement Agreements; |
|
|
v. |
|
Mr. LaCore shall provide the Company with assistance for up to 10 hours per month with
respect to network marketing, compensation plan adjustments and strategic planning
assistance during the one-year period ending October 31, 2007; |
|
|
vi. |
|
Mr. Woodburn shall be engaged as a consultant to the Company (see Consulting
Agreement below); |
|
|
vii. |
|
Each of Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn shall enter into restricted activity and
proprietary rights assignment agreements (see Restricted Activity Agreements below); |
|
|
viii. |
|
The Company shall issue a limited release to each of Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn (see
Limited Release below); |
|
|
ix. |
|
Each of Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn shall issue a general release to the Company (see
General Releases below); |
15
|
x. |
|
Prior to October 31, 2009, without the prior written consent of the Company, each of
Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn shall not, among other things, acquire (or seek to acquire)
Company assets or capital stock, solicit proxies or influence the voting of the Companys
capital stock, or attend Company stockholder meetings (unless invited by the Company); |
|
|
xi. |
|
Each of Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn agree to other restrictive covenants, including
participate in any class action or other legal action against the Company or its affiliates
(except with respect to defending claims), making disparaging statements about the Company
or its affiliates, or accepting payments from Company distributors; and |
|
|
xii. |
|
Claims for indemnification and advancement by Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn shall be
governed by Delaware law and the Companys certificate of incorporation and by-laws. |
Non-Recourse Secured Promissory Note
Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn have executed and delivered a Non-Recourse Secured Promissory Note
(the Note), pursuant to which they have jointly and severally agreed to pay to the Company the
Payment Amount plus interest accrued at the rate of 6% per annum by no later than October 31, 2008.
The Pledged Shares have been pledged as the sole collateral to secure Messrs. LaCore and Woodburns
obligations under the Note and the Indemnification Agreement. At any time, Messrs. LaCore and
Woodburn may elect to repay all or part of the Note by delivering a number of Pledged Shares based
upon the Fair Market Value (as defined in the Note) of such shares. The Company may also elect at
any time to have all or part of the Note repaid by requiring the surrender of a number of Pledged
Shares having a Fair Market Value equal to the repayment amount. In no event shall Messrs. LaCore
and/or Woodburn be obligated to repay an amount due under the Note in excess of the Fair Market
Value of the Pledged Shares.
Indemnification Agreement
The Company, Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn have executed and delivered an Indemnification
Agreement, pursuant to which each of Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn has agreed as to his individual
conduct to indemnify and hold harmless the Company and its affiliates for his conduct except for
(i) Specified Conduct (as defined), and (ii) conduct for which Messrs. LaCore or Woodburn, as the
case may be, is entitled to indemnification from the Company under the Companys certificate of
incorporation, by-laws and Delaware law.
Voting Agreement
The Company, Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn have executed and delivered a Voting Agreement,
pursuant to which during the three year period ending October 31, 2009 each of Messrs. LaCore and
Woodburn has agreed that all shares of Company capital stock beneficially owned by them or shares
acquired by them will be, or become, the subject of the Voting Agreement. Pursuant to the Voting
Agreement, all of such shares shall be voted by the Companys Board of Directors, or such third
party that is reasonably acceptable to each of the Company, Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn.
Consulting Agreement
The Company and Mr. Woodburn have executed and delivered a Consulting Agreement, pursuant to
which the Company has engaged Mr. Woodburn as a consultant for a one-year period. Mr. Woodburn is
to report directly to the Companys President and Chief Executive Officer and has agreed to assist
the Company with general administration, accounting, finance and strategic planning. Mr. Woodburn
will be paid $17,000 per month plus reimbursement of bona fide business expenses approved in
advance in writing by the Company. If Mr. Woodburn is terminated without Cause (as defined in the
Consulting Agreement), he will be entitled to continue to receive his monthly retainer fee for the
remainder of the term, unless he breaches the terms of his Restricted Activity Agreement or
otherwise engages in a Competitive Activity (as defined in the Restricted Activity Agreement). Mr.
Woodburn is permitted to engage in certain consulting activities for third parties that will not
constitute Cause under the Consulting Agreement.
Restricted Activity Agreements
Each of Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn have executed and delivered Restricted Activity and
Proprietary Rights Assignment Agreements with the Company, pursuant to which they have each agreed
to keep confidential or competitively sensitive information confidential and to disclose and assign
to the Company any Work Product (as defined in the agreements). During the one year period ending
October 31, 2007, Mr. LaCore has agreed not to directly or indirectly (i) recruit or solicit any
company personnel or independent distributors, or (ii) perform any services for any independent
distributor of the Company (the Covenant Not to Interfere). During the term of his consulting
arrangement with the Company through the one year period following the receipt of his
16
last monthly consulting fee or severance payment, Mr. Woodburn has also agreed to the Covenant
Not to Interfere. In addition, except for Permitted Consulting Arrangements (as hereinafter
defined), during the one year period ending on October 31, 2007, Mr. Woodburn has agreed not engage
in any activity which competes with any substantial aspect or part of the Companys business (or
any affiliate thereof). Permitted Consulting Arrangements means any consulting or similar
arrangement or agreement between Woodburn and any third party so long as Woodburn delivers to the
Company not less than 10 business days prior to the commencement of service a written notice that
describes the terms and conditions of the proposed consulting arrangement.
Limited Release
The Company has executed a limited release in favor of Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn with
respect to all charges, claims, causes of action and demands related to their (i) directing,
accepting, or permitting payments to or from positions 1001 to 1014 in the Companys distributor
tree from January 1, 2001 through the date of the release, (ii) any related party transactions
relating or pertaining to Messrs. LaCore or Woodburn that were previously disclosed in the
Companys public filings, and (iii) any disclosures made or omitted, if any, relating or pertaining
to any of the foregoing conduct (collectively, the Specified Conduct).
General Releases
Messrs. LaCore and Woodburn have executed a general release in favor of the Company and its
affiliates, including present and former stockholders, officers, directors, shareholders,
employees, and representatives with respect to all charges, claims, causes of action and demands of
any nature, known or unknown, which Messrs. LaCore or Woodburn had or may have in the future,
except with respect to the Companys obligations under the Settlement Agreements.
In connection with the execution of the Settlement Agreements, the Company, Mr. LaCore, Mr.
Woodburn, and the Escrow Agent terminated the Escrow Agreement.
|
|
|
Item 2. |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
The following Managements Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with
Managements Discussion and Analysis included in our 2005 Amended Annual Report on Form 10-K/A
filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on May 31, 2006, and our
other filings, including Current Reports on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC through the date of this
report.
Company Overview
The Company is an international direct-selling organization. Subsidiaries controlled by the
Company sell personal care, wellness, and quality of life products under the NHT Global brand
to an independent distributor network that either uses the products themselves or resells them to
consumers. Prior to June 1, 2006, the Company marketed its NHT Global branded products under the
name, Lexxus International. As part of this worldwide name change, the Companys U.S. subsidiary
changed its name from Lexxus International, Inc. to NHT Global, Inc (NHT Global U.S.).
NHT Global commenced operations in January 2001 and has experienced tremendous growth. As of
September 30, 2006, it is conducting business in at least 15 countries through approximately
103,000 active distributors. We consider a distributor active if they have placed at least one
product order with us during the preceding year.
Although we have experienced significant revenue growth in prior years due in part to our
efforts to expand into new markets, we do not intend to devote material resources to opening any
additional foreign markets in 2006. Our priority for the remainder of 2006 is to progress further
on developing the Japanese, Mexican and Chinese markets.
In year 2005 and the first nine months of 2006, we generated greater than 90% of our revenue
from outside North America, with sales in Hong Kong representing approximately 62% and 68% of
revenue, respectively. Because of the size of our foreign operations, operating results can be
impacted negatively or positively by factors such as foreign currency fluctuations, and economic,
political and business conditions around the world. In addition, our business is subject to various
laws and regulations, in particular regulations related to direct selling activities that create
certain risks for our business, including improper claims or activities by our distributors and
potential inability to obtain necessary product registrations.
17
Effective December 31, 2005, the Company entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement with Bannks
Foundation (Bannks), a Lichtenstein foundation and owner of 49% of the common shares of KGC
Networks Pte Ltd. (KGC), a Singapore corporation, pursuant to which the Company sold to Bannks
51,000 common shares representing the Companys 51% of the outstanding shares of capital stock of
KGC for a total cash purchase price of $350,000.
At the same time and as a condition of the sale, the Company entered into a separate agreement
pursuant to which KGC is obligated to pay to the Company 24 monthly payments of approximately
$169,000 each, including interest at 2.5%, to settle an outstanding inter-company payable in the
amount of approximately $2.1 million and to pay for inventories ordered and partially delivered
totaling approximately $884,000, as well as the Companys undertaking to continue to supply KGC
with certain products for a period of at least 48 months. The Company discounted the 24 monthly
payments based on its cost of capital and recorded the receivable at $3.1 million. Given its
interest in the retained profits and cumulative translation adjustment of KGC of approximately
$434,000, the Company recognized a nominal gain on sale. Since the receivable from KGC is
unsecured, the Company recorded a reserve totaling approximately $2.8 million, which will be
reduced as payments are received. As of September 30, 2006, KGC is current on all monthly payments
due, and as such, the Company reversed $652,000 of the reserve.
KGC sells the Companys products into a separate network of independent distributors located
primarily in Russia and other Eastern European countries. Upon the effective date of the
transactions above, the Company no longer consolidates the financial statements of KGC. The
Company does not believe these transactions result in a discontinued operation as the Company will
continue to supply KGC with a significant amount of product for the foreseeable future. Therefore,
the results of KGC for the first nine months of 2005 have been reported in results from operations.
Had KGC not been reflected in results from operations, the Companys statement of operations
for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2005 would have reflected the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
September 30, 2005 |
|
September 30, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
Actual |
|
Adjusted |
|
Actual |
|
Adjusted |
Net sales |
|
$ |
58,071 |
|
|
$ |
48,231 |
|
|
$ |
150,789 |
|
|
$ |
124,315 |
|
Gross profit |
|
|
45,087 |
|
|
|
36,988 |
|
|
|
117,199 |
|
|
|
95,812 |
|
Distributor commissions |
|
|
29,087 |
|
|
|
24,891 |
|
|
|
77,959 |
|
|
|
65,799 |
|
Income from operations |
|
|
892 |
|
|
|
1,675 |
|
|
|
2,578 |
|
|
|
3,363 |
|
Effective July 1, 2006, the Company sold its equity interests in eKaire.com, Inc. and other
subsidiaries that distribute nutritional supplements aimed at general health and wellness (see Note
4 to the consolidated financial statements).
China is currently the Companys most important business development project. New direct
selling legislation was adopted in December 2005, while multi-level marketing was banned in
November 2005 by the government in China. Before the formal adoption of direct selling laws, many
of the international direct selling companies started to operate in China in a retail format. In
June 2004, NHT Global obtained a license to engage in retail business in China. The license
stipulates a capital requirement of $12.0 million over a three-year period, including a $1.8
million initial payment that the Company made in January 2005. In December 2005, the Company
submitted a preliminary application for a direct selling license and fully capitalized its Chinese
entity with the $12.0 million cash infusion. In June 2006, the Company submitted a final
application package.
During 2005 and the first nine months of 2006, approximately 62% and 68% of our revenue,
respectively, was generated in Hong Kong. Most of the Companys Hong Kong revenues are derived
from the sale of products that are delivered to members in China. After consulting with outside
professionals, the Company believes that our Hong Kong e-commerce business does not violate any
applicable laws in China even though it is used for the internet purchases of our products by
buyers in China. But the government in China could, in the future, officially interpret its laws
and regulations or adopt new laws and regulations to prohibit some or all of our e-commerce
activities with China and, if our members engage in illegal activities in China, those actions
could be attributable to us.
The Company is unable to predict whether it will be successful in obtaining a direct selling
license to operate in China, and if it is successful, when it will be permitted to commence direct
selling operations there. Further, even if the Company is successful in obtaining a direct selling
license to do business in China, it is uncertain as to whether the Company will generate profits
from such operations.
18
Income Statement Presentation
The Company derives its revenue from sales of its products, sales of its enrollment packages,
and from shipping charges. Substantially all of its product sales are to independent distributors
at published wholesale prices. We translate revenue from each markets local currency into U.S.
dollars using average rates of exchange during the period. The following table sets forth revenue
by market and product line for the time periods indicated (in thousands).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, |
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, |
|
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America |
|
$ |
3,534 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
% |
|
$ |
3,138 |
|
|
|
10.5 |
% |
|
$ |
12,486 |
|
|
|
8.3 |
% |
|
$ |
9,385 |
|
|
|
8.9 |
% |
Hong Kong |
|
|
37,653 |
|
|
|
64.8 |
|
|
|
19,124 |
|
|
|
63.9 |
|
|
|
94,902 |
|
|
|
62.9 |
|
|
|
72,337 |
|
|
|
68.4 |
|
Taiwan |
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
1,132 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
2,895 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
3,046 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
Southeast Asia |
|
|
2,687 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
530 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
5,493 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
1,388 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
Russia and Eastern Europe1 |
|
|
9,840 |
|
|
|
16.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,474 |
|
|
|
17.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
South Korea |
|
|
2,453 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
3,324 |
|
|
|
11.1 |
|
|
|
6,066 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
9,552 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
Australia/New Zealand |
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
1,120 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
831 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
Japan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,572 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,702 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
Latin America |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
2,808 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total NHT Global |
|
|
57,696 |
|
|
|
99.3 |
|
|
|
29,945 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
149,501 |
|
|
|
99.1 |
|
|
|
105,049 |
|
|
|
99.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America |
|
|
267 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
956 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
Australia/New Zealand |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total eKaire2 |
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,288 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
691 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
58,071 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
29,945 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
150,789 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
105,740 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
The Company no longer consolidates the
operating results of KGC for periods beginning after December 31, 2005 as it
sold its 51% interest in KGC to Bannks Foundation effective December 31, 2005. |
|
2 |
|
The Company no longer consolidates the
operating results of the Kaire Entities for periods beginning after June 30,
2006 as it sold its interests in the Kaire Entities to Kaire International
(Canada) Ltd. effective July 1, 2006. |
19
Cost of sales consist primarily of products purchased from third-party manufacturers, freight
cost of shipping products to distributors and import duties for the products, costs of promotional
materials sold to the Companys distributors at or near cost, and provisions for slow moving or
obsolete inventories. Cost of sales also includes purchasing costs, receiving costs, inspection
costs and warehousing costs.
Distributor commissions are our most significant expense and are classified as operating
expenses. Under our compensation plan, distributors are paid weekly commissions in the
distributors home country, in their local currency, for product sold by that distributors
down-line distributor network across all geographic markets. Distributors are not paid commissions
on purchases or sales of our products made directly by them. This seamless compensation plan
enables a distributor located in one country to sponsor other distributors located in other
countries where we are authorized to do business. Currently, there are two fundamental ways in
which our distributors can earn income:
|
|
|
Through retail markups on sales of products purchased by distributors at wholesale prices; and |
|
|
|
|
Through a series of commissions paid on product purchases made by their down-line distributors. |
Each of our products carries a specified number of sales volume points. Commissions are based
on total personal and group sales volume points per sales period. Sales volume points are
essentially based upon a percentage of a products wholesale cost. To be eligible to receive
commissions, a distributor may be required to make nominal monthly purchases of our products.
Certain of our subsidiaries do not require these nominal purchases for a distributor to be eligible
to receive commissions. In determining commissions, the number of levels of down-line distributors
included within the distributors commissionable group increases as the number of distributorships
directly below the distributor increases. Distributor commissions are dependent on the sales mix
and, for the first nine months of 2006, represented 52% of net sales. From time to time we make
modifications and enhancements to our compensation plan to help motivate distributors, which can
have an impact on distributor commissions. From time to time, we also enter into agreements for
business or market development, which may result in additional compensation to specific
distributors.
Selling, general and administrative expenses consist of administrative compensation and
benefits, travel, credit card fees and assessments, professional fees, certain occupancy costs,
depreciation and amortization, and other corporate administrative expenses. In addition, this
category includes selling, marketing, and promotion expenses including costs of distributor
conventions which are designed to increase both product awareness and distributor recruitment.
Because our various distributor conventions are not always held at the same time each year, interim
period comparisons will be impacted accordingly.
Provision for income taxes depends on the statutory tax rates in each of the jurisdictions in
which we operate. We implemented a foreign holding and operating company structure for our
non-United States businesses effective December 1, 2005. This new structure re-organizes our
non-United States subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands. Though our goal is to improve the overall
tax rate, there is no assurance that the new tax structure could be successful. If the United
States Internal Revenue Service or the taxing authorities of any other jurisdiction were to
successfully challenge these agreements, plans, or arrangements, or require changes in our transfer
pricing practices, we could be required to pay higher taxes, interest and penalties, and our
earnings would be adversely affected.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
In response to SEC Release No. 33-8040, Cautionary Advice Regarding Disclosure about Critical
Accounting Policies and SEC Release Number 33-8056, Commission Statement about Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, the Company has
identified certain policies that are important to the portrayal of its consolidated financial
condition and consolidated results of operations. These policies require the application of
significant judgment by the Companys management.
The most significant accounting estimates inherent in the preparation of the Companys
financial statements include estimates associated with obsolete inventory and the fair value of
acquired intangible assets and goodwill, as well as those used in the determination of liabilities
related to sales returns, distributor commissions, and income taxes. Various assumptions and other
factors prompt the determination of these significant estimates. The process of determining
significant estimates is fact specific and takes into account historical experience and current and
expected economic conditions. Historically, actual results have not significantly deviated from
those determined using the estimates described above. If circumstances change relating to the
various assumptions or other factors used in such estimates the Company could experience an adverse
effect on its consolidated financial condition, changes in financial condition, and results of
operations. The Companys critical accounting policies at September 30, 2006 include the following:
Inventory Valuation. The Company reviews its inventory carrying value and compares it to the
net realizable value of its inventory and any inventory value in excess of net realizable value is
written down. In addition, the Company reviews its inventory for obsolescence and any inventory
identified as obsolete is reserved or written off. The Companys determination of obsolescence is
20
based on assumptions about the demand for its products, product expiration dates, estimated
future sales, and managements future plans. Also, if actual sales or management plans are less
favorable than those originally projected by management, additional inventory reserves or
write-downs may be required. The Companys inventory value at September 30, 2006 was approximately
$9.9 million, net of reserve of $0.9 million. The Company recorded additional reserve of $0.4
million during the three months ended September 30, 2006.
Valuation of Goodwill and Impairment Analysis. The Company has adopted Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets. SFAS No. 142 requires
that goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives no longer be amortized, but
instead be tested for impairment at least annually or sooner whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that they may be impaired. At September 30, 2006, goodwill of approximately
$14.1 million was reflected on the Companys balance sheet. No impairment of goodwill has been
identified in any of the periods presented. In accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, the Company reviews the book value of its property
and equipment and intangible assets whenever an event or change in circumstances indicates that the
net book value of an asset or group of assets may be unrecoverable. The Companys impairment
review includes a comparison of future projected cash flows (undiscounted and without interest
charges) generated by the asset or group of assets with its associated carrying value. The Company
believes its expected future cash flows approximate or exceed its net book value. However, if
circumstances change and the net book value of the asset or group of assets exceeds expected cash
flows, the Company would have to recognize an impairment loss to the extent the net book value of
the asset exceeds its fair value. At September 30, 2006, the net book value of the Companys
property and equipment, and intangible assets, were approximately $3.9 million and $3.8 million,
respectively. No such losses were recognized for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2006.
Allowance for Sales Returns. An allowance for sales returns is provided during the period the
product is shipped. The allowance is based upon the return policy of each country, which varies
from 14 days to one year, and their historical return rates, which range from approximately 1% to
approximately 13% of product sales. Sales returns are approximately 4% and 5% of product sales for
the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and 2006, respectively. The allowance for sales returns
was approximately $1.7 million and $1.8 million at December 31, 2005 and September 30, 2006,
respectively. No material changes in estimates have been recognized for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2006.
Revenue Recognition. Product sales are recorded when the products are shipped and title passes
to independent distributors. Product sales to distributors are made pursuant to a distributor
agreement that provides for transfer of both title and risk of loss upon our delivery to the
carrier that completes delivery to the distributors, which is commonly referred to as F.O.B.
Shipping Point. The Company primarily receives payment by credit card at the time distributors
place orders. The Companys sales arrangements do not contain right of inspection or customer
acceptance provisions other than general rights of return. Amounts received for unshipped product
are recorded as deferred revenue. Such amounts totaled approximately $1.5 million at December 31,
2005 and $1.0 million at September 30, 2006 respectively. Shipping charges billed to distributors
are included in net sales. Costs associated with shipments are included in cost of sales.
During April 2005, the Company launched a new product line, Gourmet Coffee Café, which
consists of coffee machines and the related coffee and tea pods, in the North American market. As
the Gourmet Coffee Café is a very different product than the Companys other products and since
there is no basis to reasonably estimate the Companys sales returns or warranty obligation, the
Company has deferred revenue generated from their sale until sufficient return and warranty
experience on the product can be established. The deferral totaled approximately $1.7 million and
$1.2 million in revenue and related costs, respectively, for product shipped through September 30,
2006. The deferred costs are recorded in other current assets, as the sales return period for
distributors is only for a year. Since the launch, the Company has experienced a high rate of
defects and product returns. As a result, the Company has delayed continued sales of our existing
inventory of this product and approached the manufacturer for resolution. The manufacturer has
agreed to repair all of the machines in our existing inventory and provide discounts on future
purchases. The Company is currently planning to re-launch the sale of the coffee machines in the
second half of 2007.
Enrollment package revenue, including any nonrefundable set-up fees, is deferred and
recognized over the term of the arrangement, generally twelve months. Enrollment packages provide
distributors access to both a personalized marketing website and a business management system. No
upfront costs are deferred as the amount is nominal. Costs associated with shipments are included
in cost of sales. At September 30, 2006, enrollment package revenue totaling $5.4 million was
deferred. Although the Company has no immediate plans to significantly change the terms or
conditions of enrollment packages, any changes in the future could result in additional revenue
deferrals or could cause us to recognize the deferred revenue over a longer period of time.
Tax Valuation Allowance. The Company evaluates the probability of realizing the future
benefits of any of its deferred tax assets and records a valuation allowance when it believes a
portion or all of its deferred tax assets may not be realized. At September 30, 2006, the valuation
allowance equaled its net deferred tax assets due to the uncertainty of future operating results.
The valuation
21
allowance will be reduced at such time as management believes it is more likely than not that
the deferred tax assets will be realized. Any reductions in the valuation allowance will reduce
future income tax provisions.
Results of Operations
The following table sets forth our operating results as a percentage of net sales for the periods
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Net sales |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Cost of sales |
|
|
22.4 |
|
|
|
22.2 |
|
|
|
22.3 |
|
|
|
22.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
77.6 |
|
|
|
77.8 |
|
|
|
77.7 |
|
|
|
78.0 |
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributor commissions |
|
|
50.1 |
|
|
|
51.6 |
|
|
|
51.7 |
|
|
|
51.9 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
26.0 |
|
|
|
35.5 |
|
|
|
24.3 |
|
|
|
32.7 |
|
Recovery of KGC receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
76.1 |
|
|
|
86.0 |
|
|
|
76.0 |
|
|
|
84.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
(8.2 |
) |
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
(6.0 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
(7.2 |
) |
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
(5.3 |
) |
Income tax provision |
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
(8.3 |
)% |
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
|
(6.1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Sales. Net sales were $29.9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2006 compared
to $58.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2005. Part of this decrease of $28.2
million, or 49%, was due to the sale of KGC effective December 31, 2005. Excluding KGC, the
Companys net sales decreased $18.3 million, or 38%, for the three months ended September 30, 2006
over the comparable period in the prior year. This decrease was primarily due to the distractions
and disruptions caused by management changes in the last twelve months as well as the reaction
stemming from the uncertain regulatory environment in China that is currently impacting the Hong
Kong based business. Hong Kong net sales decreased $18.5 million, or 49%, over the comparable
period a year ago. Net sales for North America were down $0.7 million, or 17%, versus the
comparable period a year ago. Partly offsetting the decrease, South Korea net sales increased $0.9
million, or 36%, compared to the same period in 2005, as it experienced a significant increase in
its distributor count and introduced new products to the local market. Additionally, Japan and
Mexico generated sales totaling $1.6 million and $0.9 million, respectively. A year ago, advanced
sales to Japanese distributors from Singapore were approximately $2.0 million.
Net sales were $105.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 compared to $150.8
million for the nine months ended September 30, 2005. Part of this decrease of $45.1 million, or
30%, was due to the sale of KGC effective December 31, 2005. Excluding KGC, the Companys net
sales decreased $18.6 million, or 15%, for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 over the
comparable period in the prior year. This decrease was primarily due to the distractions and
disruptions caused by management changes in the last twelve months as well as the reaction stemming
from the uncertain regulatory environment in China that is currently impacting the Hong Kong based
business. Decreases in Hong Kong net sales (down $22.6 million or 24% versus the comparable period
a year ago) and North America (down $3.6 million or 26%) were offset by a net sales increase in
South Korea ($3.5 million or 57%). Additionally, Japan and Mexico generated net sales totaling
$5.7 million and $2.8 million, respectively. A year ago, advanced sales to Japanese distributors
from Singapore were approximately $4.4 million.
As of September 30, 2006, the operating subsidiaries of the Company had approximately 103,000
active distributors, compared to 119,000 and 118,000 active distributors at December 31, 2005 and
September 30, 2005, respectively, excluding KGC and the Kaire subsidiaries, which were sold
effective July 1, 2006. This decrease is primarily due to the uncertain regulatory environment in
China that is currently impacting the Hong Kong-based business.
As of September 30, 2006, the Company had deferred revenue of approximately $8.1 million, of
which approximately $1.0 million pertained to product sales and approximately $5.4 million
pertained to unamortized enrollment package revenue. Additionally, deferred revenue included
approximately $1.7 million of Gourmet Coffee Café product shipped but unrecognized as of September
30, 2006 (approximately $1.2 million in Gourmet Coffee Café related costs are also deferred and
recorded in other current assets as of September 30, 2006).
22
Cost of Sales. Cost of sales was $6.6 million, or 22.2% of net sales, for the three months
ended September 30, 2006 compared with $13.0 million, or 22.4% of net sales, for the three months
ended September 30, 2005. Excluding KGC, cost of sales decreased $4.6 million, or 41%, for the
three months ended September 30, 2006 over the comparable period in the prior year, due primarily
to the decrease in net sales. Additionally, excluding KGC, cost of sales as a percentage of net
sales was 23.3% in the comparable period in the prior year. The percentage decrease results from
greater importation cost incurred in Hong Kong a year ago as the Company implemented changes in its
logistical processes on product delivered into China.
Cost of sales was $23.2 million, or 22.0% of net sales, for the nine months ended September
30, 2006 compared with $33.6 million, or 22.3% of net sales, for the nine months ended September
30, 2005. Excluding KGC, cost of sales decreased $5.3 million, or 19%, for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 over the comparable period in the prior year, due primarily to the decrease in
net sales. Additionally, excluding KGC, cost of sales as a percentage of net sales was 22.9% in
the comparable period in the prior year. The percentage decrease results from greater importation
cost incurred in Hong Kong a year ago as the Company implemented changes in its logistical
processes on product delivered into China.
Gross Profit. Gross profit was $23.3 million, or 77.8% of net sales, for the three months
ended September 30, 2006 compared with $45.1 million, or 77.6% of net sales, for the three months
ended September 30, 2005. Excluding KGC, gross profit was 76.7% of net sales in the comparable
period in the prior year, and decreased $13.7 million, or 37%, in the three months ended September
30, 2006, as a result of decreased sales.
Gross profit was $82.5 million, or 78.0% of net sales, for the nine months ended September 30,
2006 compared with $117.2 million, or 77.7% of net sales, for the nine months ended September 30,
2005. Excluding KGC, gross profit was 77.1% of net sales in the comparable period in the prior
year, and decreased $13.3 million, or 14%, in the nine months ended September 30, 2006.
Distributor Commissions. Distributor commissions were $15.5 million, or 51.6% of net sales,
for the three months ended September 30, 2006 compared with $29.1 million, or 50.1% of net sales,
for the three months ended September 30, 2005. Excluding KGC, distributor commissions decreased by
$9.4 million, or 38%, mainly due to the decrease in net sales. Additionally, excluding KGC,
distributor commissions as a percentage of sales remained flat at 51.6% compared to a year ago.
Distributor commissions were $54.9 million, or 51.9% of net sales, for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 compared with $78.0 million, or 51.7% of net sales, for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. Excluding KGC, distributor commissions decreased by $10.9 million, or 17%,
mainly due to the decrease in net sales. Additionally, excluding KGC, distributor commissions as a
percentage of sales decreased one point from 52.9% a year ago primarily as a result of fewer
commissions earned in newer markets such as Japan and Mexico, and a reduction in the overall
commission rate in South Korea.
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses
were $10.6 million, or 35.5% of net sales, for the three months ended September 30, 2006 compared
with $15.1 million, or 26.0% of net sales, for the three months ended September 30, 2005.
Excluding KGC, selling, general and administrative expenses were 21.6% of net sales in the
comparable period in the prior year, and increased by $0.2 million, or 2%, in the three months
ended September 30, 2006, mainly due to the following:
|
|
|
costs of opening new markets in Mexico ($0.2 million) and Japan ($0.2 million); |
|
|
|
|
higher personnel costs, event costs, professional fees and credit card charges and assessments in Korea ($0.2 million); |
|
|
|
|
higher personnel costs (including stock-based compensation) ($0.2 million), legal fees
($0.3 million), and Oracle support costs in North America ($0.2 million); partly offset by |
|
|
|
|
lower distributor training costs and credit card charges and assessments in Hong Kong
($1.2 million). |
Selling, general and administrative expenses were $34.6 million, or 32.7% of net sales, for
the nine months ended September 30, 2006 compared with $36.7 million, or 24.3% of net sales, for
the nine months ended September 30, 2005. Excluding KGC, selling, general and administrative
expenses were 21.4% of net sales in the comparable period in the prior year, and increased by $7.9
million, or 30%, in the nine months ended September 30, 2006, mainly due to the following:
|
|
|
costs of opening new markets in Mexico ($1.1 million) and Japan ($2.5 million); |
|
|
|
|
costs of expansion into China ($0.8 million); |
|
|
|
|
higher personnel costs, event costs, professional fees and credit card charges and assessments in Korea ($0.8 million); |
|
|
|
|
higher accounting fees ($0.7 million), legal fees ($0.5 million), other professional
fees ($0.3 million), personnel costs (including stock-based compensation) ($1.3 million),
and Oracle support costs in North America ($0.6 million); |
|
|
|
|
increased personnel costs, professional fees, and rent expense in Hong Kong ($1.1 million); partly offset by |
|
|
|
|
lower distributor training costs and credit card charges and assessments in Hong Kong ($1.9 million). |
23
Other Income (Expense). Other income was $0.3 million for the three months ended September 30,
2006 compared with an expense of $0.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2005. For
the first nine months of the year, other income was $0.7 million compared with an expense of $0.8
million a year ago. This increase in other income for the nine month period results primarily from
interest income, including imputed interest of $0.5 million on the KGC receivable, and a reduction
in foreign currency losses of $0.7 million due to the elimination of the Companys exposure to the
euro.
Income Taxes. The Company recorded a provision of $0.3 million and $0.8 million during the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2006, respectively, related to its international
operations. The Company did not recognize a tax benefit for U.S. tax purposes due to uncertainty
that the benefit will be realized. The Company recorded an income tax provision of $0.6 million,
or 76% of income before income taxes and minority interest, for the three months ended September
30, 2005, and a provision of $0.9 million, or 51% of income before income taxes and minority
interest, for the nine months ended September 30, 2005.
Minority Interest. Minority interest income was $9 thousand for the three months ended
September 30, 2006 compared to expense of $75 thousand for the three months ended September 30,
2005. Minority interest expense was $35 thousand for the nine months ended September 30, 2006
compared to expense of $138 thousand for the nine months ended September 30, 2005. Since the sale
of KGC, minority interest expense has become insignificant.
Net Income (Loss). Net loss was $2.5 million, or 8.3% of net sales, for the three months ended
September 30, 2006 compared to net income of $0.1 million, or 0.2% of net sales, for the three
months ended September 30, 2005. Net loss was $6.4 million, or 6.1% of net sales, for the nine
months ended September 30, 2006 compared to net income of $0.8 million, or 0.5% of net sales, for
the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The increased losses were primarily due to lower sales
in Hong Kong, and higher selling, general and administrative costs, specifically in North America
and the new markets of Mexico, Japan, and China.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Cash generated from operations has been the main funding source for the Companys working
capital and capital expenditure. In October 2004, the Company raised approximately $16 million,
net of transaction fees, through a private equity placement. The Company is constantly evaluating
its financial needs and potential sources of additional funding. At September 30, 2006, the
Companys cash and cash equivalents totaled approximately $12.1 million, including $4.6 million in
China that may not be freely transferable to other countries because the Companys Chinese
subsidiary is subject to a business license capitalization requirement.
At September 30, 2006, the ratio of current assets to current liabilities was 1.20 to 1.00 and
the Company had working capital of approximately $4.6 million. Working capital as of September 30,
2006 decreased $6.0 million compared to that as of December 31, 2005.
Cash used in operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 was approximately $6.5
million. Cash was mainly utilized due to the incurrence of net losses and decreases in current
liabilities, including deferred revenue, partly offset by a reduction in existing inventories.
Cash provided by investing activities during the period was approximately $0.1 million, which
primarily results from proceeds received on the KGC receivable, offset by investment in property
and equipment. Cash used in financing activities during the period was approximately $5 thousand
due to repayment of debt, partially offset by proceeds received from stock option exercises. Total
cash and cash equivalents decreased by approximately $6.3 million during the period.
The Company believes that its existing liquidity and cash flows from operations, including its
cash and cash equivalents, should be adequate to fund normal business operations expected in the
near future, assuming no significant unforeseen expense or substantial revenue decline.
The Company plans to focus on further developing the Japanese, the Mexican and the Chinese
markets in the next twelve months. The Company does not expect the sale of its equity interests in
the Kaire Entities effective July 1, 2006 (see Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements), to
have a significant impact on its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
Related Party Transactions
In August 2001, the Company entered into a written lease agreement and an oral management
agreement with S&B Business Services, an affiliate of Brad LaCore, the brother of Terry LaCore,
former Chief Executive Officer of NHT Global U.S. and a director of the Company, and Sherry LaCore,
Brad LaCores spouse. Under the terms of the two agreements, S&B Business Services provided
warehouse facilities and certain equipment, managed and shipped inventory, provided independent
distributor support services and disbursed payments to independent distributors. In exchange for
these services, the Company paid $18,000 annually for leasing the
24
warehouse, $3,600 annually for the lease of warehouse equipment and $120,000 annually for the
management services provided, plus an annual average of approximately $12,000 for business related
services. The Company paid S&B Business Services approximately $41,000 during the three month
periods ended September 30, 2005, and approximately $119,000 and $18,000 during the nine month
periods ended September 30, 2005 and 2006, respectively. No amounts were paid during the three
months ended September 30, 2006.
The payment disbursement function was transferred to the Companys Dallas head office during
the third quarter of 2005. In January 2006, the Company hired Sherry LaCore as an employee and
simultaneously terminated the oral management agreement with S&B Business Services. Additionally,
the Company closed the warehouse facility by the end of March 2006 and terminated the related lease
agreement.
A director of the Companys China subsidiary is the sole director of Access Intl (Zhuhai Ftz)
Warehousing & Trading Co. Ltd. and its group (collectively, Access), a transportation and
logistics company, and the owner of Info Development Ltd. (Info), an import services company,
both of which provided services to the Companys Hong Kong subsidiary. Payments totaling
approximately $1,928,000 and $3,854,000 were paid to Access and Info during the three and nine
month periods ended September 30, 2005, respectively. Payments totaling approximately $47,000 and
$429,000 were paid to Access and Info during the three and nine month periods ended September 30,
2006, respectively. At September 30, 2006, approximately $43,000 was due to Info.
In connection with its acquisition of MarketVision Communications Corporation (MarketVision)
in 2004, the Company entered into a software license agreement (the Software License Agreement),
with MarketVision Consulting Group, LLC, a limited liability company owned by John Cavanaugh, the
President of MarketVision, and Jason Landry, a Vice President of MarketVision (the Licensee).
Upon an Event of Default (as defined), the Software License Agreement grants, among other things,
the Licensee with an irrevocable, exclusive, perpetual, royalty free, fully-paid, worldwide,
transferable, sublicensable right and license to use, copy, modify, distribute, rent, lease,
enhance, transfer, market, and create derivative works to the MarketVision software. An Event of
Default under the Software License Agreement includes a Share Default, which is defined as the
market value per share of the Company failing to equal or exceed $10.00 per share for any one
rolling period of six months for a certain period following the acquisition of MarketVision. The
last time that the Companys stock closed at or above $10.00 per share was February 16, 2006, and a
Share Default would otherwise have occurred on August 17, 2006. In August, September, and October
2006, the parties to the Software License Agreement amended that agreement to provide that no Share
Default will occur prior to November 30, 2006.
Despite the granting of such a license to the Licensee if an Event of Default should occur,
under the Software License Agreement, the Company and MarketVision retain the right to continue to
use the MarketVision software for its internal use only and not as an application service provider
or service bureau, but may not rent, lease, license, transfer or distribute the software without
the Licensees prior written consent. Moreover, the Company would have the right to receive
certain application service provider services from Licensee. Although the Company does not believe
that an Event of Default would, by itself, have a material adverse effect on the Company, it is
possible that it could trigger other events that have such an effect. For example, it is possible
that the Company could lose the services of Mr. Cavanaugh, Mr. Landry, or other employees of
MarketVision.
On November 10, 2005, an independent investigator retained by the Companys Audit Committee
learned that an entity controlled by Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore received payments from an
independent distributor of the Companys products during 2001 through August 2005. The Company
believes that Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore received from such independent distributor a total of
approximately $1.4 million and $1.1 million, respectively. The Company believes that the fees paid
by the Company to such independent distributor were not in excess of the amounts due under the
Companys regular distributor compensation plan.
Approximately $2.4 million of the funds paid by the independent distributor to Messrs.
Woodburn and LaCore were paid at the direction of Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore to an entity that is
partially owned by Mr. Woodburns father and Randall A. Mason, the Chairman of the Companys Board
of Directors and former Chairman of the Companys Audit Committee. The funds were subsequently
paid to an entity controlled by Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore at their direction. After
investigation by the Audit Committee, the Board of Directors of the Company concluded that Mr.
Mason was unaware that these payments were directed by Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore to an entity
partially owned by him until uncovered by the Audits Committees independent investigator on
November 10, 2005, and that Mr. Mason was not involved in any misconduct and received no pecuniary
benefit from the payments made by the independent distributor. However, since payments were
directed into an entity that is partially owned by Mr. Mason, he could no longer be considered
independent in accordance with the rules of Nasdaq and under the federal securities laws.
Therefore, effective November 11, 2005, Mr. Mason resigned as Chairman and a member of the
Companys Audit Committee.
On November 14, 2005, in light of the information learned by the Companys Audit Committee on
November 10, 2005, the Company terminated the employment of each of Messrs. Woodburn and LaCore.
See Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements.
In addition, a loan made by the Company under the direction of Mr. Woodburn in the aggregate
principal amount of $256,000 in February 2004 was previously recorded as a loan to a third party.
On November 10, 2005, the Audit Committee investigator learned
25
that the Company actually loaned the funds to an entity owned and controlled by the parents of
Mr. Woodburn. The loan was repaid in full, partially by an entity controlled by a third party and
partially by an entity controlled by Mr. Woodburn in December 2004.
On March 23, 2006, an independent investigator retained by the Audit Committee of the Board of
Directors confirmed that affiliates of immediate family members of Mr. Woodburn have owned since
1998, and continue to own on March 23, 2006, equity interests in Aloe Commodities (Aloe), the
largest manufacturer of the Company and the supplier of the Skindulgence® Line and LaVie products,
representing approximately 5% of the outstanding shares of Aloe. The Company paid Aloe and certain
of its affiliates approximately $3,234,000 and $7,369,000 during the three and nine month periods
ended September 30, 2005, respectively. The Company paid Aloe and certain of its affiliates
approximately $1,874,000 and $3,431,000 during the three and nine month periods ended September 30,
2006, respectively. At September 30, 2006, approximately $7,000 was due to Aloe and certain of its
affiliates.
Adoption of SFAS 123(R)
Prior to January 1, 2006, the Company accounted for its stock-based compensation plans under
the recognition and measurement provisions of Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related Interpretations, as permitted by SFAS No.
123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. The Company did not recognize compensation cost
related to stock options granted to its employees and non-employee directors that had an exercise
price equal to or above the market value of the underlying common stock on the date of grant.
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS
No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, and related interpretations using the modified-prospective
transition method. The modified-prospective transition method does not allow for restatement of
prior periods and accordingly, the results of operations for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2006 and future periods will not be comparable to our historical results of
operations. Under the modified-prospective transition method, compensation cost recognized in our
results of operations includes (1) compensation cost for all stock-based awards granted prior to,
but not yet vested as of, January 1, 2006 based on the grant date fair value estimated in
accordance with the original provisions of SFAS No. 123, and (2) compensation cost for all
stock-based awards granted on or subsequent to January 1, 2006, based on the grant-date fair value
estimated in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R). Compensation cost is presented in
the same lines as cash compensation paid to the same individuals.
As a result of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006, the Company recognized stock-based
compensation of approximately $167,000 and $469,000 for the three and nine months ended September
30, 2006, respectively, which approximates $0.02 and $0.06 per share, respectively. Because the
Company maintained a full valuation allowance on its deferred tax assets, the Company did not
recognize any tax benefit related to stock-based compensation for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2006.
As of September 30, 2006, there was $1.1 million of total unrecognized stock-based
compensation on a pre-tax basis related to non-vested stock options. These costs are expected to
be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.3 years.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In July 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Interpretation No.
48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (FIN
48), which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in tax positions. This Interpretation requires
the Company to recognize in its financial statements the impact of a tax position if that position
is more likely than not of being sustained on audit, based on the technical merits of the position.
The provisions of FIN 48 are effective January 1, 2007, with the cumulative effect, if any, of the
change in accounting principle recorded as an adjustment to beginning-of-year accumulated deficit.
The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting FIN 48 on the consolidated financial
statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements, which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value in generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and expands disclosures about fair value
measurements. SFAS No. 157 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007. The Company is currently evaluating the impact, if any, the adoption of
SFAS No. 157 will have on its consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 108, Considering the
Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial
Statements, which provides interpretive guidance on the consideration of the effects of prior year
misstatements in quantifying current year misstatements for the purpose of a materiality
assessment. SAB No. 108 is effective for fiscal years ending after November 15, 2006. The Company
is currently assessing the
26
impact, if any, the adoption of SAB No. 108 will have on the consolidated financial
statements. The cumulative effect, if any, of applying the provisions of SAB No. 108 will be
reported as an adjustment to beginning-of-year accumulated deficit.
Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
The Company does not utilize off-balance sheet financing arrangements other than in the normal
course of business. The Company finances the use of certain facilities, office and computer
equipment, and automobiles under various operating lease agreements.
Item 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Foreign Currency Risk
In the first nine months of 2006, approximately 91% of our revenue was recorded in markets
outside the United States. However, that figure does not accurately reflect our foreign currency
exposure mainly because the Hong Kong dollar is pegged to the U.S. dollar. We also purchase all
inventories in U.S. dollars. Therefore, our currency exposure, mainly to the Korean won, Singapore
dollar, New Taiwan dollar, Japanese yen, Mexican peso, and Australian dollar, represents
approximately 22% of our revenue in the first nine months of 2006. The Company incurred a foreign
currency loss of $6 thousand and $201 thousand for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2006, respectively.
In preparing our consolidated financial statements, we translate revenue and expenses in
foreign countries from their local currencies into U.S. dollars using the average exchange rates
for the period. The local currency of each subsidiarys primary markets is considered the
functional currency. The effect of the translation of the Companys foreign operations is included
in accumulated other comprehensive income within stockholders equity and does not impact the
statement of operations.
As currency rates change, translation of our foreign currency functional businesses into U.S.
dollars affects year-over-year comparability of equity. We do not plan to hedge translation risks
because cash flows from our international operations are generally reinvested locally. Changes in
the currency exchange rates that would have the largest impact on translating our international net
assets included Korean won, Chinese yuan, Japanese yen, Mexican peso, New Taiwan dollar, and
Australian dollar.
Hedging
Our exposure to foreign currency fluctuation is expected to increase as the Company further
develops the markets in Japan, Mexico and China. The Company currently has no specific plans, but
expects to evaluate whether it should use forward or option contracts to hedge its foreign currency
exposure.
Seasonality
Historically our revenue has not been impacted by seasonality on any significant basis. From
quarter to quarter, the Company is somewhat impacted by seasonal factors and trends such as major
cultural events and vacation patterns. For example, most Asian markets celebrate their respective
local New Year in the first quarter, which generally has a negative impact on that quarter. We
believe that direct selling is also generally negatively impacted during the third quarter, when
many individuals, including our distributors, traditionally take time off for vacations. In
addition, the national holidays in Hong Kong, China and Taiwan in early October tend to have a
significant adverse effect on sales in those markets.
The Companys spending is materially affected by the major events planned for at different
times of the year. A major promotional event could significantly increase the reported expenses
during the quarter in which the event actually takes place, while the revenue that might be
generated by the event may not occur in the same reporting period.
Interest Rate Risk
As of September 30, 2006, we do not think the Company has any exposure to interest rate risk
as the Company has limited borrowings that are interest rate sensitive.
27
Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining an adequate level of internal
controls over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP). Internal control over financial reporting includes policies and
procedures that:
|
|
|
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; |
|
|
|
|
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP, and that receipts and
expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the Company; and |
|
|
|
|
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized
acquisition, use, or disposition of the Companys assets that could have a material effect
on the consolidated financial statements. |
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent
or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that
the degree of compliance with existing policies or procedures may deteriorate.
The following material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting were
reported in our 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 8, 2006:
|
|
|
We did not maintain an effective control environment because (1) we lack an effective
anti-fraud program to detect and prevent fraud, for example, relating to the previous top
two executive officers of the Company, Mark Woodburn and Terry LaCore, in terms of (i)
conflicts of interests related to executive officers, especially their financial dealings
with independent distributors and other vendors, and (ii) proper supervision of the
executives conduct separating their executive duties from personal financial interests
outside the Company, (2) we failed to perform background checks consistently on personnel
being placed into positions of responsibility, (3) an adequate tone was not set from the
top as control measures in place were ignored by the previous top two executives and the
importance of controls was not properly emphasized and communicated throughout the Company
and (4) we did not effectively address the control deficiencies noted in the fiscal year
2004 external audit; |
|
|
|
|
We did not maintain effective monitoring controls over financial reporting because (1)
our policies regarding review, supervision and monitoring of our accounting operations
throughout the Company were not fully designed, in place, or operating effectively and (2)
we do not have an internal audit function; |
|
|
|
|
We did not maintain effective control over period-end financial close and reporting
because (1) we lacked sufficient complement of personnel with an appropriate level of
accounting knowledge, experience and training in the application of GAAP commensurate with
our financial reporting requirements to prepare, review and approve account reconciliations
and supporting schedules, and (2) our legacy accounting systems do not facilitate the
appropriate review and approval over the recording of journal entries to ensure the
accuracy and completeness of the journal entries recorded; |
|
|
|
|
We did not maintain effective controls over the disbursement function since we (1)
lacked adequate segregation of duties and (2) lacked appropriate review, approval, and
supporting documentation; |
|
|
|
|
We did not maintain effective controls over the payroll function since we (1) lacked
adequate segregation of duties and (2) lacked appropriate review, approval, and supporting
documentation; |
|
|
|
|
We did not maintain effective controls over the inventory function since we (1) did not
maintain restricted access to the inventory detail schedule used to support the general
ledger balances and (2) used the periodic inventory system and performed monthly inventory
counts using physical inventory count sheets lacking reviewer documentation; |
|
|
|
|
We lacked documentation with respect to certain related party transactions, subsidiary
operations and expense reimbursement procedures. In addition, sufficient policies regarding
loans to employees and third parties had not been adopted or implemented, and policies
related to independent distributor relationships were inadequate; |
28
|
|
|
We lacked timely resolution of identified accounting and legal issues, and as a result,
did not timely complete period-end financial statements and reporting; and |
|
|
|
|
We do not have all material contracts in writing and approved by all parties. |
Each of the control deficiencies described above could result in a misstatement of the
aforementioned accounts or disclosures that would result in a material misstatement to the annual
or interim consolidated financial statements that would not be prevented or detected. Management
has determined that each of the control deficiencies constitutes a material weakness.
Based on this evaluation, the Companys Chief Financial Officer has concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures at December 31, 2005 were not effective to provide reasonable
assurance that information required to be disclosed in the reports we file and submit under the
Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported as and when required.
In light of this conclusion and as part of the preparation of this report, we have applied
compensating procedures and processes as necessary to ensure the reliability of our financial
reporting. Accordingly, management believes, based on its knowledge, that (1) this report does not
contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report, and (2) the
financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in
all material respects our financial condition as of December 31, 2005 and September 30, 2006, and
our results of operations and cash flows for each of the three and nine month periods ended
September 30, 2005 and 2006.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In light of the noted material weaknesses, we have instituted, and will continue to institute,
control improvements that we believe will reduce the likelihood of similar errors:
|
|
|
We are devoting more resources to develop an anti-fraud program to detect and prevent
fraud. We have subscribed to compliance training programs provided by WeComply, Inc.
concerning fraud awareness, insider trading, and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and
intend to require substantially all employees to complete such programs. We intend to
engage outside counsel in each market to review our distributor-related policies,
procedures and business practices. Additionally, the program may include the hiring of
outside or in-house counsel to be dedicated to the development and enforcement of
compliance programs. Background checks have been performed on Stephanie Hayano, the new
President and Chief Executive Officer, the only significant hiring since July 2006, and
will be performed on all personnel being placed into positions of material responsibility.
The compliance program also will include a communication project to set the right tone from
the top. Additionally, we plan to allocate additional resources to following up on
addressing control deficiencies identified in the previous audits; |
|
|
|
|
The Company is developing additional policies and procedures to further strengthen its
reporting, including the areas of revenue recognition, sales and expense cut-off and sales
returns. During 2006, the Company hired an analyst to assist in revenue reporting and
reconciliation. The Company also developed and distributed to all international
subsidiaries formal checklists to provide guidance regarding matters to consider in the
period end close process. In addition, we will evaluate whether to engage outside
resources to perform internal audit projects; |
|
|
|
|
The Company began implementation of the Oracle E-Business Suite during the fourth
quarter of 2005 and commenced use of certain functionality on January 1, 2006 that address
certain of the material weaknesses listed above, including the effective control over
period-end financial close and reporting and the effective control over certain accounting
functions. The Oracle implementation facilitated the appropriate review and approval over
the recording of journal entries to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the journal
entries recorded. Additionally, the Company has made changes to its corporate accounting
staff, including the hiring or contracting of additional personnel in the U.S. In December
2005, the Company hired a new general counsel to assist in the legal and compliance effort.
The new general counsel commenced work in January 2006; |
|
|
|
|
Additional segregation of duties and appropriate review, approval, and supporting
documentation were installed in 2006 to maintain effective controls over the disbursement
function. We are developing policies for proper documentation, review and approval related
to related party transactions, subsidiary operations, distributor compensation adjustments,
employee loans, expense reimbursements, and distributor relationships; |
|
|
|
|
Additional segregation of duties and appropriate review, approval, and supporting
documentation have been implemented since 2005 year end to maintain effective controls over
the payroll function; |
29
|
|
|
With the implementation of the Oracle e-Business Suites financial reporting package, we
have taken steps to restrict access to the inventory detail schedule used to support the
general ledger balances. Additionally, we have hired an inventory accountant and developed
additional inventory-related tools to assist our international controllers. With
additional implementation of Oracle applications, we plan to eventually replace the current
periodic inventory system, relying on monthly inventory counts using physical inventory
count sheets, with a perpetual inventory system. Meanwhile, more procedures will be
installed for review of inventory count documentation; |
|
|
|
|
Additional processes will be instituted to timely resolve identified accounting and
legal issues so that period-end financial statements and reporting can be timely completed;
and |
|
|
|
|
Stronger policy enforcement will be pushed down throughout the Company to eliminate
executives making verbal agreements ahead of properly approved written contracts. |
Certain of these remediation efforts, primarily associated with our information technology
infrastructure and related controls, will require significant ongoing effort and investment. Our
management, with the oversight of our audit committee, will continue to identify and take steps to
remedy known material weaknesses as expeditiously as possible and enhance the overall design and
capability of our control environment. We believe that the foregoing actions have improved and
will continue to improve our internal control over financial reporting, as well as our disclosure
controls and procedures.
If the remedial policies and procedures we have implemented, and continue to implement, are
insufficient to address the material weakness or if additional significant deficiencies or other
conditions relating to our internal controls are discovered in the future, we may fail to meet our
future reporting obligations, our financial statements may contain material misstatements and our
operating results may be adversely affected. Any such failure could also adversely affect the
results of the periodic management evaluations and annual auditor attestation reports regarding the
effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting, which will be required when the
SECs rules under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 become applicable to us beginning
with the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007. Internal
control deficiencies could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial
information. Although we believe that we have addressed, or will address in the near future, our
material weakness in internal controls, we cannot guarantee that the measures we have taken to date
or any future measures will remediate the material weakness identified or that any additional
material weakness or significant deficiencies will not arise in the future due to a failure to
implement and maintain adequate internal controls over financial reporting.
Other than described above, there were no changes in our internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the most recent fiscal quarter covered by this report, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
30
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
The Company is subject to certain legal proceedings which could have an adverse effect on its
business, results of operations, or financial condition. For information relating to such legal
proceedings, see Note 6 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained in Part I, Item
1 of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
The Company is exposed to certain risks factors that may affect operations. The significant
risk factors known to the Company are described in Item 1A in the Companys Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on May 8, 2006. There have been no material changes from the risk factors as previously
disclosed in that Form 10-K, except for the following.
We May Continue To Experience Substantial Negative Cash Flows, Which May Have A Significant Adverse
Effect On Our Business And Could Threaten Our Solvency.
We have experienced substantial negative cash flows during the year ended December 31, 2005,
and the nine months ended September 30, 2006, primarily due to increase in investment in 2005 as
well as declines in our revenues without as much proportional decreases in expenditures in 2006. If
this trend continued, the decreasing cash balance could impair our ability to support our
operations and, eventually, threaten our solvency, which would have a material adverse effect on
our business, results of operations and financial condition as well as our stock price. Negative
cash flows and the related adverse market perception associated therewith may have negatively
affected, and may in the future negatively affect, our ability to attract new distributors and/or
sell our products. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in
maintaining an adequate level of cash resources and we could be forced to act more aggressively in
the area of expense reduction in order to conserve cash resources as we look for alternative
solutions.
If We Continue To Experience Negative Cash Flows, We May Need To Seek Debt Or Equity Financing,
Which May Not Be Available On Acceptable Terms Or At All. If Available, It Could Have A Dilutive
Effect On The Holdings Of Existing Stockholders.
Unless we are able to
stabilize or grow revenues, control expenses and achieve positive cash
flows, our ability to support our obligations could be impaired and our liquidity could be
adversely affected. Eventually, our solvency and our ability to repay our debts when they come due
could be threatened. We may need to seek additional debt or equity financing on acceptable terms in order to
improve our liquidity. However, we may not be able to obtain additional debt or equity financing on satisfactory terms,
or at all, and any new financing could have a dilutive effect to our existing stockholders.
We Face Risks Related To An SEC Investigation And Securities Litigation That Could Have A Material
Adverse Effect On Our Relationships With Our Distributors, Business, Financial Condition And
Results Of Operations. We May Face Additional Litigation In The Future That Could Also Harm Our
Business.
The SEC has issued a formal order of investigation to determine whether there have been
violations of the federal securities laws by us and/or others involved with us. Although we have
fully cooperated with the SEC in this matter and intend to continue to fully cooperate, we cannot
predict when this investigation will be completed or its outcome. We could face sanctions in
connection with any resolution of the SEC investigation, including but not limited to, significant
monetary penalties and injunctive relief.
In addition, we and certain of our directors and officers have been named as defendants in a
securities class action lawsuit. Due to the volatility of the stock market and particularly the
stock prices of network marketing companies, it is possible that we will face additional class
action lawsuits in the future. The findings and outcome of the SEC investigation may affect the
class action and other lawsuits that are pending and any future litigation that we may face.
Any settlement of the class action and other litigation or any resolution of the SEC
investigation may involve significant cash payments that could create or increase negative cash
flows. If we are unable to achieve a settlement of the class action and other litigation, we could
be liable for large damage awards. There can be no assurance that damage awards, if any, and the
costs of litigation will be covered by insurance. If not, this could have a material adverse
effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Defending against existing and potential litigation and other governmental proceedings may
continue to require significant attention and resources of our management. There can be no
assurance that the significant time and effort spent will not adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
31
Continued Adverse News About The Company Could Have A Material Adverse Effect On Our Ability To
Attract And Maintain Distributors.
Our recent operating performance, changes in management, decline in stock price, SEC
investigation of us and lawsuits filed against us may have negatively affected, and may continue to
negatively affect, our ability to attract and retain distributors, without whom we would be unable
to sell our products and generate revenues.
Loss Of Key Personnel Could Adversely Affect Our Business.
Our future success depends to a significant degree on the skills, experience and efforts of
our top management and key consultants, particularly our management personnel responsible for our
Hong Kong and MarketVision subsidiaries. In November 2005, the Company terminated the top two
employees, Mark Woodburn, former President and director of the Company, and Terry LaCore, former
Chief Executive Officer of NHT Global and former director of the Company, due to misconduct.
Although we have recently settled our disputes with these individuals, the changes in senior
management during the last twelve months may have had a material adverse effect on our business,
results of operations and financial condition. We also depend on the ability of our executive
officers and other members of senior management to work effectively as a team. The loss of one or
more of our executive officers, members of our senior management, or key consultants could have a
material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Item 6. EXHIBITS
31.1 |
|
Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
31.2 |
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32.1 |
|
Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32.2 |
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
32
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP.
|
|
Date: November 9, 2006 |
/s/ Stephanie S. Hayano
|
|
|
Stephanie S. Hayano |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
33