SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
|x||Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Security Exchange Act of 1934 for the quarterly period ended May 31, 2014|
|o||Transmission Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Security Exchange Act of 1937 for the transition period from ______ to ______|
Commission file number: 001-32046
Simulations Plus, Inc.
(Name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|(State or other jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)||(I.R.S. Employer identification No.)|
42505 10th Street West
Lancaster, CA 93534-7059
(Address of principal executive offices including zip code)
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) 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 filings requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes x No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (Check one):
|o Large accelerated filer||o Accelerated filer|
|o Non-accelerated filer (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)||x Smaller reporting company|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No x
The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, as of July 8, 2014 was 16,342,804; no shares of preferred stock were outstanding.
Simulations Plus, Inc.
For the Quarterly Period Ended May 31, 2014
Table of Contents
|PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION|
|Item 1.||Condensed Financial Statements||Page|
|Condensed Balance Sheets at May 31, 2014 (unaudited) and August 31, 2013 (audited)||2|
|Condensed Statements of Operations for the three months and nine months ended May 31, 2014 and, 2013 (unaudited)||3|
|Condensed Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013 (unaudited)||4|
|Notes to Condensed Financial Statements (unaudited)||5|
|Item 2.||Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Result of Operations||15|
|Result of Operations||22|
|Liquidity and Capital Resources||26|
|Item 3.||Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk||26|
|Item 4.||Controls and Procedures||26|
|PART II. OTHER INFORMATION|
|Item 1.||Legal Proceedings||28|
|Item 1A.||Risk Factors||28|
|Item 2.||Changes in Securities||28|
|Item 3.||Defaults upon Senior Securities||28|
|Item 4.||Mine Safety Disclosures||28|
|Item 5.||Other Information||28|
SIMULATIONS PLUS, INC.
CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS
at May 31, 2014 (Unaudited) and August 31, 2013
|May 31,||August 31,|
|Cash and cash equivalents||$||7,757,972||$||10,179,298|
|Prepaid income taxes||946,518||301,573|
|Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $0||3,219,743||1,910,615|
|Prepaid expenses and other current assets||119,180||192,173|
|Deferred income taxes||217,655||184,258|
|Total current assets||12,385,338||12,971,830|
|Capitalized computer software development costs, net of accumulated amortization of $6,385,815 and $5,801,578||3,358,632||2,891,169|
|Property and equipment, net (note 3)||103,596||117,987|
|Intellectual property, net of accumulated amortization of $41,875 and $11,250||6,033,125||63,750|
|LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY|
|Accrued payroll and other expenses||349,464||311,209|
|Accrued bonuses to officers||90,000||60,000|
|Other Current Liabilities||19,859||19,859|
|Current portion - Contract payable (Note 4)||750,000||–|
|Total current liabilities||1,621,350||626,306|
|Deferred income taxes||2,529,371||1,146,389|
|Payments due under Contract payable (Note 4)||1,750,000||–|
|Other long-term liabilities||33,099||47,993|
|Commitments and contingencies (note 5)|
|Shareholders' equity (note 6)|
|Preferred stock, $0.001 par value 10,000,000 shares authorized no shares issued and outstanding||–||–|
|Common stock, $0.001 par value 50,000,000 shares authorized 16,335,804 and 16,030,894 shares issued and outstanding||4,807||4,502|
|Additional paid-in capital||6,021,432||4,842,794|
|Total shareholders' equity||15,965,316||14,242,493|
|Total liabilities and shareholders' equity||$||21,899,136||$||16,063,181|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
SIMULATIONS PLUS, INC.
CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For the three and nine months ended May 31,
|Three months ended||Nine months ended|
|Cost of sales||227,600||451,935||1,168,219||1,337,583|
|Selling, general, and administrative||1,204,312||903,589||3,378,950||2,689,632|
|Research and development||234,685||206,424||750,808||634,281|
|Total operating expenses||1,438,997||1,110,013||4,129,758||3,323,913|
|Income from operations||2,073,970||1,532,831||4,165,082||3,841,498|
|Other income (expense)|
|Gain on currency exchange||7,340||(980||)||35,477||96,662|
|Total other income (expense)||15,357||12,917||60,477||172,155|
|Income before provision for income taxes||2,089,327||1,545,748||4,225,559||4,013,653|
|Provision for income taxes||(781,778||)||(552,518||)||(1,422,991||)||(1,371,862||)|
|Earnings per share|
|Weighted-average common shares outstanding|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
SIMULATIONS PLUS, INC.
CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the nine months ended May 31,
|Cash flows from operating activities|
|Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities|
|Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment||35,730||31,411|
|Amortization of intellectual property||30,625||5,625|
|Amortization of capitalized computer software development costs||584,237||532,106|
|Excess tax benefits from share-based arrangements||–||(70,806||)|
|Deferred income taxes||1,349,585||99,402|
|(Increase) decrease in|
|Accounts receivable and Contracts receivable||(1,229,485||)||(1,611,838||)|
|Prepaid income taxes||(644,945||)||153,896|
|Prepaid expenses and other assets||72,993||13,284|
|Increase (decrease) in|
|Accrued payroll and other expenses||38,255||24,973|
|Accrued income taxes||–||(403,735||)|
|Net cash provided by operating activities||3,334,956||1,579,133|
|Cash flows from investing activities|
|Purchases of property and equipment||(21,339||)||(19,259||)|
|Purchase of intellectual property||(2,500,000||)||–|
|Capitalized computer software development costs||(1,051,700||)||(833,965||)|
|Net cash used in investing activities||(3,573,039||)||(853,224||)|
|Cash flows from financing activities|
|Excess tax benefits from share-based arrangements||–||70,806|
|Proceeds from the exercise of stock options||75,445||27,985|
|Net cash (used in) financing activities||(2,183,243||)||(3,421,494||)|
|Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents||(2,421,326||)||(2,695,585||)|
|Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year||10,179,298||12,701,075|
|Cash and cash equivalents, end of period||$||7,757,972||$||10,005,490|
|Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information|
|Income taxes paid||$||572,192||$||1,382,545|
|Non-Cash Investing and Financing|
|Purchase of intellectual property with shares and notes payable||3,500,000||–|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
Simulations Plus, Inc.
NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
May 31, 2014 and 2013
Note 1: GENERAL
This report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 31, 2014, should be read in conjunction with the Company's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended August 31, 2013, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on November 18, 2013. As contemplated by the SEC under Article 8 of Regulation S-X, the accompanying financial statements and footnotes have been condensed and therefore do not contain all disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles. The interim financial data are unaudited; however, in the opinion of Simulations Plus, Inc. ("we", "our", "us"), the interim data includes all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair statement of the results for the interim periods. Results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of those to be expected for the full year.
Note 2: SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Our condensed financial statements and accompanying notes are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Preparing financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenses. These estimates and assumptions are affected by management’s application of accounting policies. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Significant accounting policies for us include revenue recognition, accounting for capitalized computer software development costs, valuation of stock options, and accounting for income taxes.
We recognize revenues related to software licenses and software maintenance in accordance with Financial Accounting Standard Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standard Codification (“ASC”) 985-605, “Software - Revenue Recognition”. Software product revenue is recorded when the following conditions are met: 1) evidence of arrangement exists, 2) delivery has been made, 3) the amount is fixed, and 4) collectability is probable. Post-contract customer support ("PCS") obligations are insignificant; therefore, revenue for PCS is recognized at the same time as the licensing fee, and the costs of providing such support services are accrued and amortized over the obligation period.
As a byproduct of ongoing improvements and upgrades for the new programs and new modules of software, some modifications are provided to customers who have already purchased software at no additional charge. Other software modifications result in new, additional cost modules that expand the functionality of the software. These are licensed separately. We consider the modifications that are provided without charge to be minimal, as they do not significantly change the basic functionality or utility of the software, but rather add convenience, such as being able to plot some additional variable on a graph in addition to the numerous variables that had been available before, or adding some additional calculations to supplement the information provided from running the software. Such software modifications for any single product have typically occurred once or twice per year, sometimes more, sometimes less. Thus, they are infrequent. The Company provides, for a fee, additional training and service calls to its customers and recognizes revenue at the time the training or service call is provided.
Generally, we enter into one-year license agreements with customers for the use of our pharmaceutical software products. We recognize revenue on these contracts when all the criteria are met.
Most license agreements have a term of one year; however, from time to time, we enter into multi-year license agreements. We generally unlock and invoice software one year at a time for multi-year licenses. Therefore, revenue is recognized one year at a time.
We recognize revenue from collaboration research and revenue from grants equally over their terms. However, we recognize contract study revenue using the percentage-of-completion method, depending upon how the contract studies are engaged, in accordance with ASC 605-35, “Revenue Recognition – Construction-Type and Production-Type Contracts”. To recognize revenue using the percentage-of-completion method, we must determine whether we meet the following criteria: 1) there is a long-term, legally enforceable contract, 2) it is possible to reasonably estimate the total project costs, and 3) it is possible to reasonably estimate the extent of progress toward completion.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the statements of cash flows, we consider all highly liquid investments purchased with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
We analyze the age of customer balances, historical bad debt experience, customer creditworthiness, and changes in customer payment terms when making estimates of the collectability of the Company’s trade accounts receivable balances. If we determine that the financial conditions of any of its customers deteriorated, whether due to customer-specific or general economic issues, an increase in the allowance may be made. Accounts receivable are written off when all collection attempts have failed.
Capitalized Computer Software Development Costs
Software development costs are capitalized in accordance with ASC 985-20, “Costs of Software to Be Sold, Leased, or Marketed”. Capitalization of software development costs begins upon the establishment of technological feasibility and is discontinued when the product is available for sale.
The establishment of technological feasibility and the ongoing assessment for recoverability of capitalized software development costs require considerable judgment by management with respect to certain external factors including, but not limited to, technological feasibility, anticipated future gross revenues, estimated economic life, and changes in software and hardware technologies. Capitalized software development costs are comprised primarily of salaries and direct payroll-related costs and the purchase of existing software to be used in our software products.
Amortization of capitalized software development costs is calculated on a product-by-product basis on the straight-line method over the estimated economic life of the products (not to exceed five years, although all of our current software products have already been on the market for 7-15 years except for our newest MedChem Designer™ program, and we do not foresee an end-of-life for any of them at this point). Amortization of software development costs amounted to $584,237 and $532,106 for the nine months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and amortization of software development costs was $200,585 and $173,094 for the three months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. We expect future amortization expense to vary due to increases in capitalized computer software development costs.
We test capitalized computer software development costs for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable.
Property and Equipment
Property and equipment are recorded at cost, less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization are provided using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives as follows:
|Computer equipment||3 to 7 years|
|Furniture and fixtures||5 to 7 years|
|Leasehold improvements||Shorter of life of asset or lease|
Maintenance and minor replacements are charged to expense as incurred. Gains and losses on disposals are included in the results of operations.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
Assets and liabilities recorded at fair value in the Condensed Balance Sheets are categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their fair value. The categories, as defined by the standard are as follows:
|Level Input:||Input Definition:|
|Level I||Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets at the measurement date.|
|Level II||Inputs, other than quoted prices included in Level I, that are observable for the asset or liability through corroboration with market data at the measurement date.|
|Level III||Unobservable inputs that reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date.|
The following table summarizes fair value measurements by level at May 31, 2014 for assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
|Level I||Level II||Level III||Total|
|Cash and cash equivalents||$||7,757,972||$||–||$||–||$||7,757,972|
For certain of our financial instruments, including accounts receivable, accounts payable, contract payable, accrued payroll and other expenses, and accrued bonus to officer, the amounts approximate fair value due to their short maturities.
Research and Development Costs
Research and development costs are charged to expense as incurred until technological feasibility has been established. These costs consist primarily of salaries and direct payroll-related costs. It also includes purchased software and databases which were developed by other companies and incorporated into, or used in the development of, our final products.
We utilize FASB ASC 740-10, “Income Taxes” which requires the recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements or tax returns.
Under this method, deferred income taxes are recognized for the tax consequences in future years of differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their financial reporting amounts at each year-end based on enacted tax laws and statutory tax rates applicable to the periods in which the differences are expected to affect taxable income. Valuation allowances are established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized. The provision for income taxes represents the tax payable for the period and the change during the period in deferred tax assets and liabilities.
On February 28, 2012, we bought out the royalty agreement with Enslein Research of Rochester, New York. The cost of $75,000 is being amortized over 10 years under the straight-line method. Amortization expense for each of the nine months periods ended May 31, 2014 and 2013 was $5,625 and was $1,875 for each three month period ended May 31, 2014 and 2013. Accumulated amortization as of May 31, 2013 was $16,875.
On May 15, 2014, we acquired intellectual property from TSRL, Inc of Ann Arbor, Michigan. The cost of $6,000,000 is being amortized over 10 years under the straight-line method. Amortization expense for the period of May 15, 2014 to May 31, 2014 was $25,000. Accumulated amortization as of May 31, 2014 was $25,000. (See Note 4)
Total amortization expense for intellectual property agreements for each of the nine months periods ended May 31, 2014 and 2013 was $30,625 and $ 5,625, respectively, and was $26,875 and $1,875 respectively for the three month periods ended May 31, 2014 and 2013. Accumulated amortization as of May 31, 2014 was $41,875.
Earnings per Share
We report earnings per share in accordance with FASB ASC 260-10. Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing income available to common shareholders by the weighted-average number of common shares available. Diluted earnings per share is computed similar to basic earnings per share except that the denominator is increased to include the number of additional common shares that would have been outstanding if the potential common shares had been issued and if the additional common shares were dilutive. The components of basic and diluted earnings per share for the three and nine months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013 were as follows:
|Three months ended||Nine months ended|
|Net income attributable to common shareholders ||$||1,307,549||$||993,230||$||2,802,568||$||2,641,791|
|Weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period||16,193,976||16,024,467||16,117,198||15,984,819|
|Dilutive effect of stock options||261,102||311,141||244,497||322,799|
|Common stock and common stock equivalents used for diluted earnings per share||16,455,078||16,335,608||16,361,695||16,307,618|
Compensation costs related to stock options are determined in accordance with FASB ASC 718-10, “Compensation-Stock Compensation”, using the modified prospective method. Under this method, compensation cost is calculated based on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance FASB ASC 718-10, amortized on a straight-line basis over the options’ vesting period. Stock-based compensation was $103,498 and $98,495 for the nine months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and was $32,411 and $28,241 for the three months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. This expense is included in the condensed statements of operations as Selling, General and Administration (SG&A), and Research and Development expense.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In July 2012, the FASB issued ASU 2012-02, “Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment”, which amended the guidance in ASU 2011-08 to simplify the testing of indefinite-lived intangible assets other than goodwill for impairment. ASU 2012-02 becomes effective for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning on or after September 15, 2012 and earlier adoption is permitted. We adopted this standard in the first quarter of fiscal year 2013. We believe adoption did not have a material effect on our financial statements.
In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-11, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists, which eliminates diversity in practice for the presentation of an unrecognized tax benefit when a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss or a tax credit carryforward is available to reduce the taxable income or tax payable that would result from disallowance of a tax position. ASU 2013-11 affects only the presentation of such amounts in an entity’s balance sheet and is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2013 and interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permitted. We are evaluating the impact, if any, of the adoption of ASU 2013-11 on our balance sheet.
In May 2014, FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The standard will eliminate the transaction- and industry-specific revenue recognition guidance under current U.S. GAAP and replace it with a principles-based approach for determining revenue recognition. ASU 2014-09 is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. Early adoption is not permitted. The revenue recognition standard is required to be applied retrospectively, including any combination of practical expedients as allowed in the standard. We are evaluating the impact, if any, of the adoption of ASU 2014-09 to our financial statements and related disclosures. The Company has not yet selected a transition method nor has it determined the effect of the standard on its ongoing financial reporting.
Note 3: Property and Equipment
Property and equipment as of May 31, 2014 consisted of the following:
|Furniture and fixtures||51,466|
|Less: Accumulated depreciation and amortization||(241,451||)|
|Net Book Value||$||103,596|
Note 4: CONTRACT PAYABLE
On May 15, 2014 the Company entered into an agreement (the “Agreement”) with TSRL, Inc., a Michigan corporation (“TSRL”). Under the terms of the Agreement, the Company and TSRL agreed to transfer the rights of the intellectual property under the Exclusive Software Licensing Agreement dated June 30, 1997 (the “License Agreement”), under which TSRL licensed to the Company certain Software Technology and Databases (as defined in the License Agreement), and pursuant to which the Company paid royalties to TSRL to the Company.
The Agreement calls for the Company to pay TSRL total consideration of $6 million. The Company paid $3.5 million on May 20, 2014, comprised of cash in the amount of $2.5 million and the issuance of $1 million worth of the Company’s common stock-- 164,745 shares of the Company’s common stock based upon the April 25, 2014 closing price per share of $6.07. Future payments under the Agreement, which is non-interest- bearing, are due as follows:
|April 25, 2015||$||750,000|
|April 25, 2016||750,000|
|April 25, 2017||1,000,000|
|Less Current portion||(750,000||)|
|Contract payable, net of current portion||$||1,750,000|
Note 5: COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
On July 22, 2012, the Company entered into an employment agreement with its President/Chief Executive Officer that expired in August 2013. The employment agreement provided for an annual base salary of $300,000 per year, and a performance bonus in an amount not to exceed 10% of Employee’s salary, or $30,000 per year, at the end of each fiscal year. The specific amount of the bonus to be awarded to be determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, based on the financial performance and achievements of the Company for the previous fiscal year. The agreement also provided for Employee stock options, exercisable for five years, to purchase fifty (50) shares of Common Stock for each one thousand dollars ($1,000) of net income before taxes at the end of each fiscal year up to a maximum of 120,000 options over the term of the agreement at an exercise price equal to ten percent (10%) over the market value per share as of the date of grant (the number of shares to be adjusted accordingly for any stock splits or reverse splits after the date of the agreement). The agreement allows the Company to terminate the agreement upon 30 days written notice, if termination is without cause, the Company's only obligation would be to pay its President the greater of a) 12 month’s salary or b) the remainder of the term of the employment agreement from the date of notice of termination.
For fiscal year 2013, the Compensation Committee awarded a $30,000 performance bonus to Walter Woltosz, our President/Chief Executive Officer, which was paid in September 2013.
On August 22, 2013, effective as of September 1, 2013, the CEO’s employment agreement was renewed for another year by the Compensation Committee and provides for an annual bonus of up to five percent (5%) of the Company’s net income before taxes of the previous fiscal year not to exceed $60,000. In addition, at the CEO’s request, the agreement calls for a reduced granting of ten (10) options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock for each $1,000 of net income before taxes that the Company earns at the end of each fiscal year (up to a maximum of twenty thousand (20,000) options over the term of the agreement) at an exercise price equal to ten percent (10%) over the market value per share as of the date of grant (the number of shares to be adjusted accordingly for any stock splits or reverse splits after the date of the agreement). A copy of the agreement is attached to the Company’s 2013 Form 10-K filed with the SEC on November 18, 2013 as Exhibit 10.9.
The Company is a party to litigation. Management does not believe the outcome of such litigation will have a material impact on the Company’s financial position.
Note 6: SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
The Board of Directors declared cash dividends during fiscal year 2013. The details of dividends paid are in the following table:
|Record Date||Distribution Date||Number of Shares Outstanding on Record Date||Dividend per Share||Total Amount|
The Board of Directors has also declared cash dividends during fiscal year 2014. The details of dividends paid are in the following table:
|Record Date||Distribution Date||Number of Shares Outstanding on Record Date||Dividend per Share||Total Amount|
Stock Option Plan
In September 1996, the Board of Directors adopted, and the shareholders approved, the 1996 Stock Option Plan (the "Option Plan") under which a total of 1,000,000 shares of common stock had been reserved for issuance. In March 1999, the shareholders approved an increase in the number of shares that may be granted under the Option Plan to 2,000,000. In February 2000, the shareholders approved an increase in the number of shares that may be granted under the Option Plan to 4,000,000. In December 2000, the shareholders approved an increase in the number of shares that may be granted under the Option Plan to 5,000,000. Furthermore, in February 2005, the shareholders approved an additional 1,000,000 shares, resulting in the total number of shares that may be granted under the Option Plan to 6,000,000. The 1996 Stock Option Plan terminated in September 2006 by its term.
On February 23, 2007, the Board of Directors adopted and the shareholders approved the 2007 Stock Option Plan under which a total of 1,000,000 shares of common stock had been reserved for issuance. On February 25, 2014 the shareholders approved an additional 1,000,000 shares increasing the total number of shares that may be granted under the Option Plan to 2,000,000.
Qualified Incentive Stock Options (Qualified ISO)
As of May 31, 2014, employees hold Qualified ISO to purchase 466,000 shares of common stock at exercise prices ranging from $1.00 to $5.61 which were granted prior to May 31, 2014.
|Transactions in FY14||Number of Options||Weighted-Average Exercise Price |
|Weighted-Average Remaining Contractual Life|
|Outstanding, August 31, 2013||532,000||$||1.82||3.95|
|Outstanding, May 31, 2014||466,000||$||2.80||3.57|
|Exercisable, May 31, 2014||314,000||$||1.78||3.31|
The fair value of the options, including both ISO and NQSO options, granted during the nine months ended May 31, 2014 is estimated at $130,781. The fair value of these options was estimated at the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following assumptions for FQE May 31, 2014: dividend yield of 3.14%, pre-vest forfeiture rate of 6.25%, expected volatility of 38.95%, risk-free interest rate of 1.36%, and expected life of 5.0 years.
Non-Qualified Stock Options (Non-Qualified ISO)
As of May 31, 2014, the outside members of the Board of Directors hold options to purchase 45,600 shares of common stock at exercise prices ranging from $1.67 to $6.68, which were granted prior to May 31, 2014.
|Transactions in FY14||Number of Options|
Weighted-Average Exercise Price
|Weighted-Average Remaining Contractual Life|
|Outstanding, August 31, 2013||48,600||$||3.79||7.85|
|Outstanding, May 31, 2014||45,600||$||3.92||7.29|
|Exercisable, May 31, 2014||25,200||$||3.45||6.12|
The weighted-average remaining contractual life of options outstanding issued under the Plan, both Qualified ISO and Non-Qualified SO, was 4.19 years at May 31, 2014. The exercise prices for the options outstanding at May 31, 2014 ranged from $1.00 to $6.68, and the information relating to these options is as follows:
|Exercise Price||Awards Outstanding||Awards Exercisable|
|Low||High||Quantity||Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life||Weighted Average Exercise Price||Quantity||Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life||Weighted Average Exercise Price|
NOTE 7: RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
As of May 31, 2014, included in bonus expenses to officers was $120,000, of which $45,000 was accrued bonus representing an estimated quarterly amount of bonus payable to the Corporate Secretary, Virginia Woltosz, as part of the terms of the sale of Words+ to Simulations Plus in 1996, and $45,000 accrued bonus representing an estimated quarterly amount of bonus payable to our President/Chief Executive Officer, Walter Woltosz as part of his 2014 employment agreement The other $30,000, paid in September 2013, was FY2013 performance bonus to Walter Woltosz, our President/Chief Executive Officer, which was approved by the compensation committee in September 2013.
NOTE 8: CONCENTRATIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES
Revenue concentration shows that International sales accounted for 53% and 42% of net sales for the nine months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Three customers accounted for 14% (a dealer account in Japan representing various customers), 9% and 5% of sales for the nine months ended May 31, 2014 compared to three customers who accounted for 10% (a dealer account in Japan representing various customers) 9% and 7% of net sales during the nine months ended May 31, 2013.
Accounts receivable concentration shows that three customers comprised 23%, 18% (a dealer account in Japan representing various customers) and 10% of accounts receivable at May 31, 2014 compared to three customers comprising 18%, 13% and 11% (a dealer account in Japan representing various customers) of accounts receivable at May 31, 2013.
We operate in the computer software industry, which is highly competitive and changes rapidly. Our operating results could be significantly affected by our ability to develop new products and find new distribution channels for new and existing products.
The majority of our customers are in the pharmaceutical industry. During the current economic downturn, we have seen consolidations in the pharmaceutical industry, especially in this first fiscal quarter of 2013. Although we have not seen any significant reduction in total revenues to date, our growth rate has been affected. Continued consolidation and downsizing in the pharmaceutical industry could have an impact on our revenues and earnings going forward.
NOTE 9: Geographic Reporting
We allocate revenues to geographic areas based on the locations of our customers. Geographical revenues for the nine months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013 were as follows (in thousands):
|Nine month ended||North America||Europe||Asia||South America||Total|
|May 31, 2014||$||4,480||$||2,684||$||2,273||$||26||$||9,463|
|May 31, 2013||$||4,413||$||2,673||$||1,416||$||1||$||8,503|
Note 10: EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN
We maintain a 401(K) Plan for all eligible employees, and we make matching contributions equal to 100% of the employee’s elective deferral, not to exceed 4% of total employee compensation. We can also elect to make a profit-sharing contribution. Our contributions to this Plan amounted to $89,784 and $76,317 for the nine months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $28,028 and $25,772 for the three months ended May 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Note 11: SUBSEQUENT EVENT
On or about June 26, 2014, the Company was served with a complaint in a civil action entitled Sherri Winslow v. Incredible Adventures, Inc., et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC545789) alleging wrongful death and seeking unspecified damages arising out of a May 18, 2012 plane crash in the State of Nevada (the “Complaint”). In the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that the Company was the owner of the subject aircraft. The Company denies all material allegations against it, including that it owns or has ever owned any interest in the subject aircraft, and intends to vigorously defend itself.
Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operations
This document and the documents incorporated in this document by reference contain forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this document and the materials accompanying this document are forward-looking statements.
The forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs of our management, as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to our management. Frequently, but not always, forward-looking statements are identified by the use of the future tense and by words such as “believes,” expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “will,” “may,” “could,” “would,” “projects,” “continues,” “estimates” or similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results could differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our or our industry’s actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.
The forward-looking statements contained or incorporated by reference in this document are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”) and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) and are subject to the safe harbor created by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements include declarations regarding our plans, intentions, beliefs or current expectations.
Among the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by forward-looking statements are the risks and uncertainties described under “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report and elsewhere in this document and in our other filings with the SEC.
Forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. The forward-looking statements included in this document are made as of the date of this document and we do not undertake any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect new information, subsequent events or otherwise.
Simulations Plus, Inc., incorporated in 1996, develops and produces software for use in pharmaceutical research and for education, as well as provides contract research services to the pharmaceutical industry. Two recent in-house developments take advantage of the artificial neural network ensemble modeling engine in our ADMET Predictor™ software for new markets. AEROModeler™ predicts missile aerodynamic force and moment coefficients and MRIModeler™ classifies patients as either likely to experience some form of autism or not. These are discussed further below under ADMET Predictor.
We currently offer five software products for pharmaceutical research: ADMET Predictor™, MedChem Designer™, MedChem Studio™, DDDPlus™, and GastroPlus™. We call the combination of ADMET Predictor, MedChem Studio, and MedChem Designer our ADMET Design Suite™.
ADMET (Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, Excretion, and Toxicity) Predictor is a computer program that takes molecular structures as inputs and predicts about 145 different properties for them at the rate of over 100,000 compounds per hour on a fast laptop computer. This capability allows chemists to get estimates for a large number of important properties without the need to synthesize and test the molecules. ADMET Predictor has been consistently top-ranked for predictive accuracy in peer-reviewed, independent comparison studies, while generating its results at a very high throughput rate. Although the state-of-the-art of this type of software does not enable finding the best molecule in a series, it does allow identifying molecules that are highly likely to fail as potential drug candidates (the worst molecules, which is usually the majority of a chemical library) before synthesizing and testing them. Thus, millions of “virtual” compounds can be created and screened in a day, compared to potentially months or years of work to actually synthesize and test a much smaller number of actual compounds.
The ADMET Modeler™ subprogram that is integrated into ADMET Predictor enables scientists to use their own experimental data to quickly create high-quality, proprietary predictive models using the same powerful modeling methods we use to build our top-ranked property predictions. Pharmaceutical companies expend substantial time and money conducting a wide variety of experiments on new molecules each year, resulting in large databases of experimental data. Using this proprietary data to build predictive models can provide a second return on their investment; however, model building has traditionally been a difficult and tedious activity performed by specialists. The automation in ADMET Modeler makes it easy for a scientist to create very powerful models with a minimum of training.
We are now examining a very different application of this modeling engine – building predictive models for missile aerodynamic force and moment coefficients as a function of missile geometry, Mach number, and angle of attack. This problem was identified by the Aerospace Engineering department at Auburn University, and working with them, we have done some preliminary testing of the modeling engine in ADMET Modeler for this type of problem. Results have been very encouraging, and we believe there are government agencies and industrial aerospace companies that will find such a capability to be highly useful. We have developed a prototype AEROModeler™ program to test this concept and to use as a demonstrator for proposal efforts to potential funding agencies. Our proposed joint scientific poster on this subject with Auburn University’s Aerospace Engineering Department was selected for presentation at the NSMMS/CRASTE (National Space and Missile Material Symposium/Commercial and Government Responsive Access to Space Technology Exchange) conference in Huntsville, Alabama in June 2014, and received significant attention and positive feedback from both government agencies and aerospace contractors, not only for aerodynamic coefficient predictions, but for several other problems of interest to the industry.
We have also begun a preliminary investigation of applying this powerful modeling engine to the analysis of MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) data in cooperation with the MRI facility at Auburn University. This state-of-the-art facility has two MRIs – one a 3-Tesla machine and one a very powerful 7-Tesla machine, both built in the last few years. We are examining data from a series of subjects in four groups: healthy, PDD (Pervasive Developmental Disorder), ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder), and Asperger’s Syndrome, to determine whether we can discriminate between the groups from the MRI imaging data. The amount of data is massive (“big data”), requiring us to modify our code to handle much larger data arrays than our previous applications have required. Our current goal is to show the potential of our modeling technology to provide useful classification of a patient into one of the four groups based only on MRI imaging, so that we could go to various agencies (such as the National Institutes of Health) to obtain funding to develop a commercial product. Preliminary results exceed published classification accuracies from other groups by a substantial margin. We will be presenting a scientific poster at the Fourth Biennial Conference on Resting State/Brain Connectivity hosted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, MA on September 10-13, 2014. We believe our artificial neural network ensemble modeling engine has wide-ranging applications and we intend to pursue funding to develop customized tools based on the engine for a number of potential applications.
During this reporting period, we released version 7.0 of ADMET Predictor. This new version incorporates a powerful new model for predicting ionization constants (pKa’s), developed in a collaboration with Bayer AG that enabled us to more than double the size of our data set from about 16,000 pKa values to more than 35,000, and to expand the chemical space it covers to include a larger number of molecules more like those of interest to the pharmaceutical industry today. We believe the resulting improvement in pKa prediction puts our already best-in-class model well in front of any competitor. Predicting ionization is critical to predicting most other properties, so all of our models (approximately 144) were retrained based on this new capability for version 7.0. We are currently finalizing version 7.1, which incorporates several new capabilities that we expect to release during our 4th fiscal quarter.
MedChem Designer was launched in 2011. It was initially a molecule drawing program, or “sketcher”, but now has capabilities exceeding those of other molecule drawing programs because of its integration with both MedChem Studio and ADMET Predictor. We provide MedChem Designer for free because we believe that in the long run it will help to increase demand for ADMET Predictor and MedChem Studio, and because most other existing molecule drawing programs are also free. Our free version includes a small set of ADMET Predictor property predictions, allowing the chemist to modify molecular structures and then see a few key properties very quickly. The chemist also sees that with a paid ADMET Predictor license, the entire 140+ predictions would be available.
When coupled with a license for ADMET Predictor, MedChem Designer becomes a de novo design tool for medicinal chemists. With it, they can draw one or more molecular structures, then click on the ADMET Predictor icon and have over 140 properties for each structure calculated in seconds, including our proprietary ADMET Risk™ index. Scientists can also click on an icon to generate the likely metabolites of a molecule and then predict all of the properties of those metabolites from ADMET Predictor, including their ADMET Risk scores. This is important because a metabolite of a molecule can be harmful even though the parent molecule is not.
ADMET Risk provides a single number that tells the chemist how many default threshold values for 24 predicted properties were crossed (or violated) by each structure. The rules can be modified and new rules added by the user to include any desired rule set based on any combination of calculated descriptors, predicted properties, and user inputs. Thus, in a single number, the chemist can instantly compare the effects of different structural changes in many dimensions. As chemists attempt to modify structures to improve one property, they often cause others to become unacceptable. Without ADMET Risk, the chemist would have to individually examine many key properties for each new molecule (and its metabolites) to check whether any of them became unacceptable as a result of changing the structure.
During this reporting period, we released version 3.0 of MedChem Designer, which added the ability to capture the image of a molecular structure from a variety of publication files with a new snapshot tool, and then have the program automatically convert the graphic image into any of several computer-based chemical structure files. Converting from lines and letters on the screen to an exact chemical representation of the molecule (Optical Structure Recognition, or OSR) is a complex task. Although a few OSR programs are in existence, we are not aware of any that can accurately convert as many varieties of images to chemical representation as the OSR tool within MedChem Designer. Such a capability allows chemists to quickly capture molecular structures from the scientific literature to use for various purposes, including in our simulation and modeling software.
While MedChem Designer can be used to refine a small number of molecules, MedChem Studio can be used to create and screen (with ADMET Predictor) a very large number of molecules down to a few promising lead candidates. MedChem Studio has features that enable it to generate new molecular structures using a variety of de novo design methods. Coupled with ADMET Predictor and MedChem Designer, we believe the programs provide an unmatched capability for chemists to search through large libraries of compounds that have undergone high-throughput screening experiments to find the most promising classes (groups of molecules with a large part of their structures the same) and molecules that are active against a particular target. In addition, MedChem Studio can take an interesting (but not acceptable) molecule and, using a variety of design algorithms, very quickly generate many thousands to millions of high quality analogs (similar new molecules). These molecules can then be screened using ADMET Predictor to find molecules that are both active against the target as well as acceptable in a variety of ADMET properties.
MedChem Studio version 4.0 was released during the current reporting period.
During late 2012, based on our strong belief in the exceptional capabilities of our ADMET Design Suite (MedChem Studio/MedChem Designer/ADMET Predictor), we initiated a new molecule (NCE, or New Chemical Entity) design project. After considering various targets, we selected the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum, both because of the unmet need for a very low-cost cure, and because we believed that external funding opportunities might exist if we were successful in generating high-quality lead compounds using our software. Our goal was to demonstrate how well the ADMET Design Suite worked to generate new lead molecules in a fraction of the time and cost normally required in the pharmaceutical industry. We completed the design process in September 2012 and we announced that we had requested quotations from chemical synthesis companies for the cost and time to make a small set of molecules. Five molecules of our own design and two precursors (almost the final designed structures, but a step away in synthesis) were synthesized and tested for inhibition of the parasite at the University of California at Riverside. We were hoping that at least one would show inhibition of the growth cycle of the parasite.
We were excited to learn that every molecule showed activity against the parasite at less than micromolar concentrations, with two showing activity at less than 100 nanomolar concentration (high potency) against the drug-sensitive strain of the parasite. They were then tested against the newer drug-resistant strain of the parasite, and again potency was observed, with two molecules showing nanomolar activity. We believe this exercise – a software company using its own products to design novel molecules and have them synthesized and tested – is unprecedented. New software license sales resulting from presenting our results have already more than recovered our investment.
During previous reporting periods, we announced that we had completed the design of a number of new molecules for a different target – the cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) enzyme that is the target for Celebrex®. Celebrex is the only COX-2 inhibitor remaining on the market, after the withdrawal of other approved drugs (such as Vioxx®) due to cardiac toxicity. It appears from the scientific research that was conducted after the withdrawal of other COX-2 inhibitors from the market that it is important to inhibit both COX-2 and COX-1 at a certain ratio in order to provide the benefits of COX-2 inhibition without the cardiotoxicity risk that has been associated with inhibiting COX-2 alone. We designed our new molecules based on activity models for both COX-2 and COX-1 built from public data, with the goal of providing an acceptable ratio of COX-2 to COX-1 inhibition. This is more challenging than designing for a single target, as we did for the earlier malaria NCE project. Results reported during this reporting period showed that we were once again very successful, with all four molecules that were synthesized inhibiting both the COX-2 and COX-1 enzymes, and one of them providing the desired characteristic of higher affinity for COX-2 than COX-1. We believe this is a remarkable and unique achievement among software companies, and clearly demonstrates that our ADMET Design Suite can save considerable time and money in developing new lead compounds for particular targets.
DDDPlus simulates in vitro laboratory experiments used to measure the rate of dissolution of the drug and, if desired, the additives (excipients) contained in tablets and capsules under a variety of experimental conditions. This software program is used by formulation scientists in industry and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to (1) understand the physical mechanisms affecting the dissolution rate for various formulations, (2) reduce the number of cut-and-try attempts to design new drug formulations, and (3) to design in vitro dissolution experiments to better mimic in vivo conditions.
Our flagship product and largest source of revenues is GastroPlus. GastroPlus simulates the absorption, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of drugs administered to humans and animals, and is currently in widespread use at pharmaceutical companies, the FDA, the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), and other government agencies in the U.S. and other countries. Because of the widespread use of GastroPlus, we were the only non-European company invited to join the European Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) program for Oral Bioavailability Tools (“OrBiTo”). OrBiTo is an international collaboration among 27 industry, academic, and government organizations working in the area of oral absorption of pharmaceutical products. Because we are outside of Europe, our participation in this project is at our own expense, while other members are compensated for their work; however, we are a full member with access to all of the data and discussions of all other members. We believe participation in this initiative enables us to benefit from and to contribute to advancing the prediction of human oral absorption from preclinical data, and ensures that we are in front of the audience of member pharmaceutical companies and regulatory agencies.
Version 8.5 of GastroPlus was released during the previous reporting period, adding a number of important new capabilities requested by customers as well as improvements we have identified in-house, including:
A new model for precipitation based on classical nucleation theory
Infant physiologies, including for babies born as much as 16 weeks premature
A unique method for using transporter data from preclinical experiments to predict transporter effects in human and other animals
A number of additional expression levels of enzymes and transporters in human and animal physiologies
An interim release (8.6) is planned for the 4th fiscal quarter (June 1 – August 31) to enable certain customers to take advantage of a new physiological model for minipig, which has become a more frequently used animal species in preclinical development, and to add the ability to simulate populations within the Drug-drug interaction Module.
The next major release, version 9.0, is already well along in development. This version will add the ability to simulate dermal (through the skin) drug absorption from patches, creams, and ointments. This capability was developed through a funded collaboration with a top-5 pharmaceutical company, and is already in use at the customer’s sites at this time. A number of other improvements will be included in version 9.0 that will be announced with the release of the product.
MembranePlus is a new product that has been under development for a number of years, but was put on hold for several years due to other priorities. It was revived in the past year and is now nearing commercial release. Like DDDPlus, MembranePlus simulates laboratory experiments, but in this case, the experiments are for measuring permeability of drug-like molecules through various membranes, including several different cell cultures (Caco-2, MDCK) as well as artificially formulated membranes (PAMPA). The value of such a simulation results from the fact that when the permeabilities of the same molecules are measured in different laboratories, results are often strikingly different. These differences are caused by a complex interplay of factors in how the experiment was set up and run. MembranePlus simulates these experiments with their specific experimental details, and this enables the scientist to better interpret how results from specific experimental protocols can be used to predict permeability in human and animals, which is the ultimate goal. MembranePlus is unique and our customers have expressed significant interest in the new capability.
Priorities for developing material for our May training workshops as well as numerous conferences and on-site customer trainings required us to delay development of MembranePlus. We now plan to release version 1.0 of MembranePlus in the fourth fiscal quarter.
Contract Research and Consulting Services
Our expertise in oral absorption and pharmacokinetics is evidenced by the fact that our staff members have been speakers or presenters at over 150 scientific meetings worldwide in the past four years. We frequently conduct contracted studies for large customers (including the largest five pharmaceutical companies) who have particularly difficult problems and who recognize our expertise in solving them, as well as for smaller customers who prefer to have studies run by our scientists rather than to license our software and train someone to use it. The demand for our consulting services has been steadily increasing, and we have expanded our Simulations Studies team to meet the increased workload. Long-term collaborations and shorter-term consulting contracts serve both to expand and showcase our technologies, and to build and strengthen customer relationships.
During the current reporting period, we continued to work on our 5-year Research Collaboration Agreement (RCA) with the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) of the FDA. FDA scientists and our scientists are using ADMET Predictor/Modeler to build predictive models for likely toxicities of food additives and contaminants. During the first part of this collaboration, we analyzed FDA databases and worked with FDA scientists to ensure that the FDA data to be used for building new predictive models is as accurate as we can reasonably make it. Both FDA scientists and our scientists are building a series of models to classify new compounds as toxic or nontoxic from FDA datasets. Included early on in this effort was a special modification to ADMET Predictor to allow the user to set a minimum value for specificity or sensitivity when building a model, and this is now a standard part of the program available to all users. Sensitivity refers to how well a model identifies toxic (or any other property) compounds. A model that determined all compounds are toxic would have 100% sensitivity, because all toxic compounds would be labeled as such; however, all nontoxic compounds would also be labeled toxic. Specificity refers to how well a model distinguishes between toxic and nontoxic compounds. Increasing one usually results in decreasing the other. Depending on the purpose of the model, some scientists will prefer to train models that emphasize one statistic over the other.
Also during this reporting period, we began another five-year RCA, this time with the Office of Generic Drugs (OGD) within the FDA. This RCA is directed toward the FDA’s evaluation of mechanistic IVIVCs (in vitro-in vivo correlations), an approach to determine whether mechanistic absorption modeling (MAM) correlates laboratory (in vitro) dissolution experiments with the in vivo behavior of a dosage form better than traditional empirical methods. We have proposed this method for about 15 years and believe in it, so we are pleased to see the FDA giving it serious consideration with this RCA.
Our business strategy is to do the things we need to do to promote growth both organically (by expanding our current products and services through in-house efforts) and by acquisition. We believe in the “Built to Last” approach - that the fundamental science and technologies that underlie our business units are the keys both to improving our existing products and to expanding the product line with new products that meet our various customers’ needs.
With our significant cash reserves, seeking suitable acquisitions is a priority. Because we had been unable to identify suitable acquisitions and our cash continued to accumulate, the board of directors declared a $0.05 per share per quarter cash dividend that began in February 2012 and was paid in May, August, and November 2012. The board declared an accelerated cash dividend consisting of the February, 2013 dividend of $0.05 per share per quarter plus $0.03 per share from each of the expected May, August, and November 2013 dividends of $0.05 per share per quarter for a total of $0.14 per share, which was distributed on December 28, 2012, in order to provide our shareholders with the income tax benefits from lower capital gains rates in 2012 over 2013. We declared a $.04 per share dividend in November 2013 and $.05 per share dividends in February and May 2014. We anticipate the dividend to continue to be $0.05 per share per quarter, however there can be no assurances that such dividends will be distributed, or if so, whether the amounts will be more, less, or the same as expected. The Board of Directors must approve each quarterly dividend distribution and may decide to increase, decrease, or eliminate dividend distributions at any time.
Results of Operations
Comparison of Three Months Ended May 31, 2014 and 2013.
The following table sets forth our condensed statements of operations (in thousands) and the percentages that such items bear to net sales (because of rounding, numbers may not foot):
|Three Months Ended|
|Cost of sales||228||6.1||452||14.6|
|Selling, general and administrative||1,204||32.2||904||29.2|
|Research and development||235||6.3||206||6.7|
|Total operating expenses||1,439||38.5||1,110||35.9|
|Income from operations||2,074||55.4||1,533||49.5|
|Income from operations before taxes||2,089||55.9||1,546||49.9|
|(Provision for) income taxes||(781||)||(20.9||)||(553||)||(17.8||)|
Net sales Increased $646,000, or 20.9%, to $3,741,000 in the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2014 (“3QFY14”) from $3,095,000 in the third fiscal quarter of Fiscal Year 2013 (“3QFY13”), setting a new record for revenues for any quarter in our history. Software sales increased $692,000 during the quarter. This increase included approximately $300,000 of sales to a major customer that decided in 2QFY14 to move the timing of their global renewal order to our third quarter to synchronize purchases for their internal budget timelines. We expect this long-time customer will now continue to renew in the third quarter going forward. Analytical study revenues decreased by $66,000 during the quarter, mainly due to 3QFY13 collaboration revenues that were not replaced in 3QFY14. Within analytical study revenues, we distinguish between consulting services and collaborations; it was the completion of the funded collaboration to develop the dermal dosing capability within GastroPlus that results in reduced analytical study revenues. Training revenues increase by $20,000.
Cost of Sales
Cost of sales decreased by $224,000 or 49.5%, to $228,000 in 2QFY14 from $452,000 in 2QFY13. The majority of this decrease is due to the absence of royalty expense as a the result of the agreement with TSRL discussed in Note 4. As sales of GastroPlus increase, we anticipate this agreement will have a significant impact on earnings as we will no longer be paying royalties on that growth. Instead, starting May 15, 2014, the Company will incur amortization expense in the fixed amount of $150,000 per quarter. Amortization expense under this agreement for 3QFY14 was $25,000 because the agreement was only in effect for one-half of one month. We continue to pay royalties to Accelrys on a portion of the ADMET Predictor Metabolism Module. Total expense under the Accelrys agreement was $9,000 during the quarter.
Another significant portion of cost of sales for pharmaceutical software products is the systematic amortization of capitalized software development costs. Amortization cost increased approximately $27,000, or 16%, in 3QFY14 compared with 2QFY13. Workshop/Training costs increased by $24,000, as we did more workshop programs and more onsite training in 3QFY14 compared to 3QFY13.
Gross profit increased $870,000, or 32.9%, to $3,513,000 in 3QFY14 from $2,642,000 in 2QFY13. We attribute this change to increased revenues, and the absence of royalties in this quarter.
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses increased $300,000, or 33.3%, to $1,204,000 in 3QFY14 from $904,000 in 3QFY13.
The major changes in SG&A expenses for 2QFY14 vs 2QFY13 were:
|·||Commission expense - increased by $75K, we incurred increased commissions to our Japanese and Chinese dealers as we recorded significantly increased sales in our Asian markets|
|·||Marketing labor costs - increased by $24K, substantive employee time was incurred in conjunction with updating of training material, conference, trade shows|
|·||Travel expenses - increased $21K as the company continued its’ strategy of an increased presence at a number of trade shows and conferences in 3QFY14, in addition, a higher percentage of travel was at international destinations|
|·||Consulting Fees - increased by $44K, we used consultants in 3QF14 for review of contracts and other strategic issues|
|·||Professional fees - increased by $118K, due to the timing of accounting fees and legal fees associated with negotiation of the TSRL agreement (See Note 4) and other corporate matters|
Research and Development
We incurred approximately $552,000 of research and development costs during 3QFY14. Of this amount, $317,000 was capitalized and $235,000 was expensed. In 3QFY13, we incurred $458,000 of research and development costs, of which $252,000 was capitalized and $206,000 was expensed. The increase of $94,000, or 20%, in total research and development expenditures from 3QFY13 to 3QFY14 was due to an expansion of staff as well as increases in salaries and stock-based compensation for existing employees. In addition, the company incurred $14K of costs associated with its COX-2/COX-1 NCE initiative (see NCE discussion in Business section above).
Other income (expense)
Net other income in 3QFY14 decreased by $2,000 to $15,000 in 3QFY14 from $13,000 in 3QFY13.
Provision for Income Taxes
The provision for income taxes increased by $229,000, or 41.5%, to $782,000 in 3QFY14 from $553,000 in 3QFY13 due to increased income before taxes. The Company’s effective tax rate for 3QFY14 was 37.4.
Net income increased by $315,000, or 31.6%, to $1,308,000 in 3QFY14 from $993,000 in 3QFY13. We attribute this increase to the sales increase in excess of increased research and development costs and operating expenses.
Comparison of Nine Months Ended May 31, 2014 and 2013.
The following table sets forth our condensed statements of operations (in thousands) and the percentages that such items bear to net sales (because of rounding, numbers may not foot):
|Nine Months Ended|
|Cost of sales||1,168||12.4||1,338||15.7|
|Selling, general and administrative||3,380||35.7||2,690||31.6|
|Research and development||750||7.9||634||7.5|
|Total operating expenses||4,130||43.6||3,324||39.1|
|Income from operations||4,165||44.0||3,841||45.2|
|Income from operations before taxes||4,226||44.6||4,014||47.2|
|(Provision for) income taxes||(1,423||)||(15.0||)||(1,372||)||(16.1||)|
Net sales increased $960,000 or 11.3%, to $9,463,000 in the first 9 months of fiscal 2014 (“9moFY14”) from $8,503,000 in the first 9 months of fiscal 2013 (“9moFY13)”. The increase in revenues is due to an approximately $1,204,000 increase in software sales. Analytical studies and workshop/training revenues decreased by $244,000, primarily due to approximately $213,000 of funded collaboration revenues in 9moFY13 that were not replaced in 9moFY14.
Cost of Sales
Cost of sales decreased by $170,000, or 12.7%, to $1,168,000 in 9moFY14 from $1,338,000 in 9moFY13. As a percentage of revenue, cost of sales decreased in 9moFY14 by 3.4% mainly due to decreased royalty costs associated with the TRSL agreement. A significant portion of cost of sales for pharmaceutical software products is the systematic amortization of capitalized software development costs. Amortization cost increased approximately $27,000, or 15.9%, in 9moFY14 compared with 9moFY13.
Gross profit increased $1,130,000, or 15.8%, to $8,295,000 in 9moFY14 from $7,165,000 in 9moFY13. We attribute this change to increased revenues and the current-year effect on royalties of the TSRL Agreement.
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses increased $690,000, or 25.6%, to $3,379,000 in 9moFY14 from $2,690,000 in 9moFY13.
The major changes in SG&A expenses for 9moFY14 vs 9moFY13 were:
|·||Commission expense – increased by $139K, we incurred increased commissions to our Japanese and Chinese dealers as we recorded significantly increased sales in our Asian markets|
|·||Marketing labor costs – increased by $43K, as substantial employee time was incurred in conjunction with updating of training materials, trade shows, and visiting our Asian dealers and customers|
|·||Travel expenses - increased $72K as the company continued its increased presence at trade shows and conferences in 9moFY14. In addition, a higher percentage of travel was at international destinations|
|·||Bonus expense - increased by $45K, due to the changes in 2014 compensation plan for the company’s Chief Executive Officer (see Notes to Financial statements above)|
|·||Consulting fees – increased by $54K as we used consultants in 9moFY14 for the TSRL analysis and review of contracts and other strategic issues|
|·||Professional fees – increased by $148K, primarily due to increased legal costs associated with review of proxy issues, legal expense associated with the company’s amendment of its 2007 Stock Option Plan, negotiation of the TSRL agreement (See Note 4), and other corporate matters|
|·||Investor relations – increased by $28K due to a change in stock transfer agents which occurred in the 3QFY13|
|·||Salaries and wages – increased $90K due to annual salary review increases and some duplicated salaries associated with the transition of the company’s CFO. In addition the Life Science staff spent more time on G&A activities (marketing, sales, and support) in 9moFY14 compared to 9moFY13, resulting in more expense allocated to SG&A|
Research and Development
We incurred approximately $1,803,000 of research and development costs during 9moFY14. Of this amount, $1,052,000 was capitalized and $751,000 was expensed. In 9moFY13 we incurred $1,468,000 of research and development costs, of which $834,000 was capitalized and $634,000 was expensed. The increase of $335,000, or 22.8%, in total research and development expenditures from 9moFY13 to 9moFY14 was due to expansion of staff and increases in salaries and stock-based compensation for existing employees. In addition, the company incurred $40K of costs associated with its NCE initiative (See NCE discussion in Business section above).
Other income (expense)
Net other income decreased by $111,000, or 65%, to $61,000 in 9moFY14 from $172,000 in 9moFY13. This is due to lower interest income and lower currency exchange gain in 9moFY14 compared with 9moFY13. In addition 9moFY14 did not include any sublease income, while $36K was included in 9moFY13.
Provision for Income Taxes
Provision for income taxes increased by $51,000 or 15%, to $1,423,000 in 9moFY14 from $1,372,000 in 9moFY13 due to increased income before taxes. The Company’s effective tax rate was 33.7%, which differs from statutory rates for the quarter mainly due to R&D tax credits recognized during the period.
Net income increased by $161,000 or 29.6%, to $2,803,000 in 9moFY14 from $2,642,000 in 9moFY13. We attribute this increase to the sales increase in excess of increased decrease to increased research and development costs and operating expenses.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our principal sources of capital have been cash flows from our operations. We have achieved continuous positive cash flow from operations for the last fourteen fiscal years. We believe that our existing capital and anticipated funds from operations will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for working capital and capital expenditures for the foreseeable future. Thereafter, if cash generated from operations is insufficient to satisfy our capital requirements, we may open a revolving line of credit with a bank, or we may have to sell additional equity or debt securities or obtain expanded credit facilities. In the event such financing is needed in the future, there can be no assurance that such financing will be available to us, or, if available, that it will be in amounts and on terms acceptable to us. If cash flows from operations became insufficient to continue operations at the current level, and if no additional financing was obtained, then management would restructure the Company in a way to preserve its pharmaceutical business while maintaining expenses within operating cash flows.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Our risk from exposure to financial markets is limited to foreign exchange variances and fluctuations in interest rates. We may be subject to some foreign exchange risks. Most of our business transactions are in U.S. dollars, although we generate significant revenues from customers overseas. The exception is that we have been compensated in Japanese yen by Japanese customers and PRC Yuan by Chinese customers. In the future, if foreign currency transactions increase significantly, then we may mitigate this effect through foreign currency forward contracts whose market-to-market gains or losses are recorded in "Other Income or expense" at the time of the transaction. To date, exchange rate exposure has not resulted in a material impact.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
We are responsible for maintaining disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Disclosure controls and procedures are controls and other procedures designed to ensure that the information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating disclosure controls and procedures, management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and management is required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
Based on management’s evaluation (with the participation of our chief executive officer and chief financial officer) of our disclosure controls and procedures as required by Rule 13a-15 under the Exchange Act, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
Management's Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal controls over financial reporting, as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Our internal controls over financial reporting are designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of condensed financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
No changes were made in our internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act) during our most recent fiscal quarter that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.
Our management, including our CEO and CFO, does not expect that our disclosure controls or internal controls over financial reporting will prevent all errors or all instances of fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system's objectives will be met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within our company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple errors or mistakes. Controls can also be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the controls. The design of any system of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and any design may not succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of compliance with policies or procedures. Because of the inherent limitation of a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
Part II. Other Information
|Item 1.||Legal Proceedings|
|On or about June 26, 2014, the Company was served with a complaint in a civil action entitled Sherri Winslow v. Incredible Adventures, Inc., et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC545789) alleging wrongful death and seeking unspecified damages arising out of a May 18, 2012 plane crash in the State of Nevada (the “Complaint”). In the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that the Company was the owner of the subject aircraft. The Company denies all material allegations against it, including that it owns or has ever owned any interest in the subject aircraft, and intends to vigorously defend itself.|
|Item 1A.||Risk Factors|
|Item 2.||Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds|
|Item 3.||Defaults Upon Senior Securities|
|Item 4.||Mine Safety Disclosures|
|Item 5.||Other Information|
|3.1||Articles of Incorporation of the Company. (5)|
|3.2||Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Company. (5)|
|4.1||Articles of Incorporation of the Company. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 hereof)|
|4.2||Bylaws of the Company. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 hereof)|
|4.3||Form of Common Stock Certificate (1)|
|4.4||Share Exchange Agreement (1)|
|10.1||The Company’s 1996 Stock Option Plan (the “Option Plan”) and forms of agreements relating thereto (1)|
|10.2||Exclusive License Software Agreement by and between the Company and Therapeutic Systems Research Laboratories dated June 30, 1997. (2)|
|10.3||The Company’s 2007 Stock Option Plan. (3)|
|10.4||Notice of Election to Extend Term of Lease by and between the Company and Crest Development LLC formerly Freeway Ventures LLC, dated July 29, 2010.(4)|
|10.5||Employment Agreement by and between the Company and Walter S. Woltosz, dated as of July 22, 2011. (5) (†)|
|10.6||Employment Agreement by and between the Company and Walter S. Woltosz, dated as of August 22, 2013. (6) (†)|
|10.7||The Company’s Amended 2007 Stock Option Plan. (7).|
|10.8||Termination and Non-Assertion Agreement with TSRL, Inc. (8)|
|31.1||Section 302 – Certification of the Principal Executive Officer. (9)|
|31.2||Section 302 – Certification of the Principal Financial Officer. (9)|
|32.1||Section 906 – Certification of the Chief Executive Office and Chief Financial Officer. (9)|
|101.INS||XBRL Instance Document.|
|101.SCH||XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.|
|101.CAL||XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document.|
|101.DEF||XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document.|
|101.LAB||XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document.|
|101.PRE||XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document.|
|(1)||Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form SB-2 (Registration No. 333-6680) filed on March 25, 1997.|
|(2)||Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended August 31, 1997.|
|(3)||Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2009.|
|(4)||Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2010.|
|(5)||Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2011.|
|(6)||Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Form 8-K filed September 22, 2011.|
|(7)||Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Form 10-Q filed April 9, 2014.|
|(8)||Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Form 8-K filed May 19, 2014.|
In accordance with Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Lancaster, State of California, on July 8, 2014.
|Simulations Plus, Inc.|
|Date: July 8, 2014|
|By: /s/ John R Kneisel|
|John R. Kneisel|
|Chief Financial Officer|