Quarterly report pursuant to sections 13 or 15(d)

Fair Value Measurements

v2.4.0.6
Fair Value Measurements
 9 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2012
Fair Value Measurements
  5. Fair Value Measurements

The Company applies the provisions of ASC 820-10, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures.” ASC 820-10 defines fair value, and establishes a three-level valuation hierarchy for disclosures of fair value measurement that enhances disclosure requirements for fair value measures. The carrying amounts reported in the consolidated balance sheets for receivables and current liabilities each qualify as financial instruments and are a reasonable estimate of their fair values because of the short period of time between the origination of such instruments and their expected realization and their current market rate of interest. The three levels of valuation hierarchy are defined as follows:

 

  •  

Level 1 inputs to the valuation methodology are quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets.

 

  •  

Level 2 inputs to the valuation methodology include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the financial instrument.

 

  •  

Level 3 inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

The Company analyzes all financial instruments with features of both liabilities and equity under ASC 480, “Distinguishing Liabilities From Equity” and ASC 815, “Derivatives and Hedging.” Derivative liabilities are adjusted to reflect fair value at each period end, with any increase or decrease in the fair value being recorded in results of operations as adjustments to fair value of derivatives. The effects of interactions between embedded derivatives are calculated and accounted for in arriving at the overall fair value of the financial instruments. In addition, the fair values of freestanding derivative instruments such as warrant and option derivatives are valued using the Black-Scholes model.

 

The Company uses Level 2 inputs for its valuation methodology for the warrant derivatives as their fair values were determined by using the Black-Scholes option pricing model based on various assumptions. The Company’s derivative liabilities are adjusted to reflect fair value at each period end, with any increase or decrease in the fair value being recorded in results of operations as adjustments to fair value of derivatives.

In May 2012, the derivative warrant liability was exercised. Prior to the exercise, the fair value of the derivative warrant liability was determined to be $473 using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following assumptions: 1) expected life 5 years, 2) a risk free interest rate of .40%, 3) a dividend yield of 0% and 4) a volatility of 170%.

The Company identified the following liabilities that are required to be presented on the balance sheet at fair value:

Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis

 

Warrant derivative liabilities                            
(in thousands)    Total      Level 1      Level 2      Level 3  

December 31, 2012

    $ —      $ —       $ —      $ —   

March 31, 2012

    $ 452       $ —       $ 452       $ —   

The warrant derivative liability was exercised in the period ending June 30, 2012, and is discussed further at Note 13.

In September 2012, the Company recorded a contingent liability in connection with the acquisition of Logia. The liability was determined by using a valuation model that measured the probability of the liability to occur and the present value of the consideration at the time it would be paid. The value of the contingent liability as of September 30, 2012 was determined to be $758. At December 31, 2012, the contingent liability was re-measured to be $802. The Company recorded a loss on the fair value of the contingent liability of $44 in interest and other income / (expense) in the three months ended December 31, 2012.

 

Contingent liabilities                            
(in thousands)    Total      Level 1      Level 2      Level 3  

December 31, 2012

    $ 802      $ —       $ —       $ 802   

March 31, 2012

    $ —       $ —       $ —       $ —   

The Company did not identify any other recurring assets and liabilities that are required to be presented in the consolidated balance sheets at fair value in accordance with ASC 825.