Unassociated Document
United
States
Securities
and Exchange Commission
Washington,
D.C. 20549
Form
10-Q
(Mark One)
|
x
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2010
|
¨
|
TRANSITION
REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
Commissions
file number 001-12000
YASHENG
ECO-TRADE CORPORATION
(Exact
name of registrant - registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
13-3696015
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or
organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
1061 ½ N
Spaulding, Los Angeles, CA 90046
(Address of principal
executive offices)
(323)
822-1750
|
(323)
822-1784
|
Issuer’s
telephone number
|
Issuer’s
facsimile number
|
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 x No ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on
its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this
chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See
the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller
reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large
accelerated filer ¨
|
Accelerated
filer ¨
|
|
Non
accelerated filer ¨ (Do not check if
a smaller reporting company) Smaller reporting company x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No x
State the
number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of common equity,
as of the latest practicable date:
Common
Stock, $0.001 par value
|
179,709,795
|
(Class)
|
(Outstanding
at May 17, 2010)
|
YASHENG
ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES CORP.)
INDEX
PART
I.
|
Financial
Information
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements (Un-Audited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2010 and as of December 31,
2009
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' equity for the three months ended
march 31, 2010
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31,
2010 and 2009
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
8
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
31
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
45
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
45
|
|
|
|
PART
II.
|
Other
Information
|
45
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
48
|
Management’s
Representation of Interim Financial Information
Yasheng
Eco-Trade Corporation has prepared the accompanying financial statements without
audit pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange
Commission. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in
financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles may have been shortened or omitted as allowed by such rules and
regulations, and management believes that the disclosures are adequate to make
the information presented not misleading. These financial statements include all
of the adjustments that, in the opinion of management, are necessary to a fair
presentation of financial position and results of operations. All such
adjustments are of a normal and recurring nature. These financial statements
should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements at December
31, 2009 included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K and associated amendments
for the year then ended. The results of operations for the periods
presented are not necessarily indicative of the results we expect for the full
year.
YASHENG
ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES CORP.)
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Amounts
in US dollars
|
|
March
31
|
|
|
December
31
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
(audited)
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
85,789 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
85,789 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Non Current assets from discontinued operations
|
|
|
1,544,690 |
|
|
|
1,544,690 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
1,544,979 |
|
|
|
1,630,479 |
|
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
544,706 |
|
|
|
507,835 |
|
Accrued
expenses
|
|
|
1,040,274 |
|
|
|
882,616 |
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
591,293 |
|
|
|
151,742 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
2,176,273 |
|
|
|
1,542,193 |
|
Convertible
Notes Payable to Third Party
|
|
|
3,000,000 |
|
|
|
3,535,000 |
|
Total
non Current liabilities
|
|
|
3,000,000 |
|
|
|
5,077,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders'
equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock, series B convertible, $.025 stated value, 210,087 shares authorized
issued and outstanding 1,200,000 and 0 shares,
respectively
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock, $0.001 par value - Authorized 400,000,000 shares; 161,909,795 and
140,909,795 shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, respectively
|
|
|
161,910 |
|
|
|
140,910 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
92,750,975 |
|
|
|
92,624,105 |
|
Accumulated
deficit
|
|
|
(96,522,144 |
) |
|
|
(96,189,694 |
) |
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(2,226 |
) |
|
|
(2,226 |
) |
Treasury
stock – 1,000 common shares at cost
|
|
|
(24,809 |
) |
|
|
(24,809 |
) |
Total
stockholders' equity
|
|
|
(3,631,294 |
) |
|
|
(3,446,714 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
liabilities and stockholders' equity
|
|
|
1,544,979 |
|
|
|
1,630,479 |
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
YASHENG
ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES CORP.)
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(LOSS)
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three
months ended
|
|
|
|
March
31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Revenues
from Sales
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of revenues
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation
and related costs
|
|
|
79,187 |
|
|
|
71,533 |
|
Consulting,
professional and directors fees
|
|
|
93,001 |
|
|
|
159,209 |
|
Other
selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
103,210 |
|
|
|
40,595 |
|
Total
operating expenses
|
|
|
275,398 |
|
|
|
271,337 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(275,398 |
) |
|
|
(271,337 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
171,565 |
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(57,052 |
) |
|
|
(262,240 |
) |
Net
interest income (expense)
|
|
|
(57,052 |
) |
|
|
(362,012 |
) |
Financing
loss - change in conversion price
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,786,000 |
) |
Loss
before income taxes
|
|
|
(332,450 |
) |
|
|
(2,148,012 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Loss before minority interest in loss of consolidated
subsidiary
|
|
|
(332,450 |
) |
|
|
(2,148,012 |
) |
Less
minority interest in loss of consolidated subsidiary
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(485,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
|
(332,450 |
) |
|
|
(2,633,012 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
(loss)
|
|
$ |
(332,450 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,633,012 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per share from continuing operations, basic
|
|
|
(0.00 |
) |
|
|
(0.12 |
) |
Net
Loss per share, basic
|
|
|
(0.00 |
) |
|
|
(0.12 |
) |
Loss
per share from continuing operations, diluted
|
|
|
(0.00 |
) |
|
|
(0.12 |
) |
Net
Loss per share, diluted
|
|
|
(0.00 |
) |
|
|
(0.12 |
) |
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding, basic
|
|
|
120,373,694 |
|
|
|
21,908,878 |
|
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding, diluted
|
|
|
120,373,694 |
|
|
|
21,908,878 |
|
See
accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial
statements.
YASHENG
ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES CORP.)
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (unaudited)
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Accumulated
Other
|
|
|
Treasury
|
|
|
Shareholders'
|
|
|
|
of
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
of
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Comprehensive Loss
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
Balances
January 1, 2009
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
|
|
1,200,000 |
|
|
|
872,809 |
|
|
|
873 |
|
|
|
85,467,283 |
|
|
|
(89,497,091 |
) |
|
|
(2,226 |
) |
|
|
(24,809 |
) |
|
|
(2,855,970 |
) |
Conversion
of note to common shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,500,000 |
|
|
|
8,500 |
|
|
|
1,048,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,057,333 |
|
Change
in conversion price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,786,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,786,000 |
|
Shares
issued to Yasheng
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,000,000 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
146,830 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196,830 |
|
Shares
issued to Capitol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,461,538 |
|
|
|
38,462 |
|
|
|
112,948 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
151,410 |
|
Conversion
of preferred Series B stock
|
|
|
(1,000,000 |
) |
|
|
(1,200,000 |
) |
|
|
7,500,000 |
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
1,192,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Issuance
of Series C Preferred Stock
|
|
|
210,087 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,945 |
|
Discount
on conversion of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,278,821 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,278,821 |
|
Star
note payable conversion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,000,000 |
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
|
342,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
Moran
note payable conversion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,903,333 |
|
|
|
11,903 |
|
|
|
88,097 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
Common
stock issuance: Raccah
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,075,655 |
|
|
|
1,076 |
|
|
|
376,144 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
377,220 |
|
Common
stock issuance: Yaniv
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
74,950 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
Common
stock issuance for servies: Fleming law firm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,460 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
22,254 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,300 |
|
Common
stock issuance for servies: Public Relations firm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
51,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,000 |
|
Common
stock for Rusk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000,000 |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
396,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400,000 |
|
Common
stock for Socius
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000,000 |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
240,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
Net
loss for period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,692,603 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,692,603 |
) |
Balance
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
210,087 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
140,909,795 |
|
|
|
140,910 |
|
|
|
92,624,105 |
|
|
|
(96,189,694 |
) |
|
|
(2,226 |
) |
|
|
(24,809 |
) |
|
|
(3,446,714 |
) |
Common
stock for Moran Atias
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,000,000 |
|
|
|
13,000 |
|
|
|
87,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
Common
stock issuances for services: legal fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,000,000 |
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
|
39,870 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,870 |
|
Net
loss for period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(332,450 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(332,450 |
) |
Balance
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
210,087 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
161,909,795 |
|
|
|
161,910 |
|
|
|
92,750,975 |
|
|
|
(96,522,144 |
) |
|
|
(2,226 |
) |
|
|
(24,809 |
) |
|
|
(3,631,294 |
) |
See
accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial
statements.
YASHENG
ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES CORP.)
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three
months ended
|
|
|
|
March
31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
loss
|
|
|
(332,450 |
) |
|
|
(2,633,012 |
) |
Increase
in accounts payable
|
|
|
194,529 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Financing
loss
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,786,000 |
|
Amortization
of debt discount
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
210,000 |
|
Noncash
compensation
|
|
|
47,870 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Increase
in other current liabilities
|
|
|
4,551 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net
cash used by continuing operations
|
|
|
(85,500 |
) |
|
|
(637,012 |
) |
Net
cash provided by discontinued operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
447,820 |
|
Net
cash used by operating activities
|
|
|
(85,500 |
) |
|
|
(189,192 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds
from the issuance of stock
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(85,500 |
) |
|
|
(114,192 |
) |
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
|
|
85,789 |
|
|
|
123,903 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of year
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
9,711 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosure:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid for interest expense
|
|
|
4,552 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary
of non-cash transactions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note
payable converted to common stock
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
1,020,000 |
|
See
accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial
statements.
YASHENG
ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES CORP.)
Notes
to Un-Audited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
ITEM
1. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
1.
Organization and Business
Yasheng
Eco-Trade Corporation (f/k/a Vortex Resources Corp, Emvelco Corp., and Euroweb
International Corp.) , is a Delaware corporation and was organized on November
9, 1992. It was a development stage company through December
1993. Yasheng Eco-Trade Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries
are collectively referred to herein as “Yasheng Eco”, “Vortex” or the
“Company”.
The
Company’s headquarters and operational offices are located in West Hollywood,
California.
General
Business Strategy
Our
business plan since 1993 has been identifying, developing and operating
companies within emerging industries for the purpose of consolidation and sale
if favorable market conditions exist. Although the Company primarily focuses on
the operation and development of its core businesses, the Company pursues
consolidations and sale opportunities in a variety of different industries, as
such opportunities may present themselves, in order to develop its core
businesses and additional areas outside of its core business. The
Company may invest in other unidentified industries that the Company deems
profitable. If the opportunity presents itself, the Company will consider
implementing its consolidation strategy with its subsidiaries and any other
business that it enters into a transaction. In January 2009, the
Company commenced the development of a logistics center in Southern
California.
In 2008,
the Company changed or amended its business model to focus on the mineral
resources industry, commencing gas and oil sub-industry, which was approved by
its shareholders. Based on series of agreements, the Company entered into an
Agreement and Plan of Exchange (the "DCG Agreement") with Davy Crockett Gas
Company, LLC ("DCG") and its members ("DCG Members"). Pursuant to the DCG
Agreement, the Company acquired and the DCG Members sold, 100% of the
outstanding membership in DCG. DCG is a limited liability company organized
under the laws of the State of Nevada. As a newly formed designated
LLC, DCG holds certain development rights for gas drilling in Crockett County,
Texas. DCG has entered into the final DCG Agreement with the Company, which
provided that the members sold all of their membership units to the Company.
DCG, a wholly owned subsidiary is a limited liability company and was organized
in Nevada on February 22, 2008. The Company's members’ capital accounts consist
of 10,000 units. As of December 31, 2008, 10,000 member’s units are issued and
outstanding. DCG has obtained drilling rights from a third party in
Wolfcamp Canyon Sandstone Field in West Texas and entering the natural gas
production & exploration, drilling, and extraction business. DCG
had the option to purchase rights on up to 180 in-fill drilling locations on
about specific 3,600 acres, based on a 20 acres spacing. The field
was first developed in the 1970s on a 160 acre well spacing and was later
reduced based on a small radius of the wells drainage. The spacing has
subsequently been reduced to 40 acres, 20 acres, and 10 acres accordingly. DCG’s
drilling program is based on 20 acres spacing. Due to major issues in the
development of the oil and gas project in Crockett County, Texas, the board
obtained additional reserve report for the Company's interest in DCG and Vortex
Ocean One, LLC (“Vortex Ocean”), which report indicated that the DCG properties
being in essence negative in value. As a result of such report, the world and US
recessions and the depressed oil and gas prices, the board of directors elected
to dispose of the DCG property. As Such, Vortex Ocean sold during 2009 the DCG
properties to a third party (See Commitment and Contingencies).
As a
result of the series of transactions described above, the Company’s ownership
structure at December 31, 2008 was as follows (designated for sale – see
subsequent events):
100% of
DCG – discontinued operations
50% of
Vortex Ocean One, LLC
Approximately
7% of Micrologic through its ownership in EA Emerging Ventures
Corp)
100% of
610 N. Crescent Heights, LLC and 50% of 13059 Dickens, LLC – both properties
divested
In
January 2009, the Company commenced the development of a logistics center in
Southern California. Our mission is to develop an Asian Pacific Cooperation Zone
in Southern California to enhance and enable increased trade between the United
States and China. The facility would provide a “Gateway to China” through a
centralized location for the marketing, sales, customer service, product
completion for “Made in the USA” products and distribution of goods imported
from China. It would also promote Joint Ventures and exporting opportunities for
US companies.
Yasheng
Group - Logistics Center and Potential Acquisition - During 2009, the Company
entered into series of agreements with Yasheng Group, Inc., a California
corporation (“Yasheng”). Yasheng is an agriculture conglomerate which
has subsidiaries located in the Peoples Republic of China who are engaged in the
production and distribution of agricultural, chemical and biotechnological
products to the United States, Canada, Australia, Pakistan and various European
Union countries as well as in China. Pursuant to these series of
agreements, Yasheng agreed to transfer certain assets and know-how for the
development of a logistics center and eco-trade cooperation zone (the
“Project”).
As part
of the Company due diligence and closing procedure, the Company requested that
Yasheng-BVI (allegedly Yasheng’s parent company) provide a current legal opinion
from a reputable Chinese law firm attesting to the fact that no further
regulatory approval from the Chinese government is required as well as other
closing conditions to close the transaction. On November
3, 2009, the Company sent Yasheng and Yasheng-BVI a formal letter demanding
various closing items. Yasheng and Yasheng-BVI did not deliver the
requested items and, on November 9, 2009 Yasheng and Yasheng-BVI sent a
termination notice to the Company advising that the definitive Agreement had
been terminated pursuant to the termination provision in the Agreement. The
Company is presently evaluating its options in moving forward with respect to
Yasheng based on various letters of intent and agreements with Yasheng
regarding various matters and is presently determining whether it should cease
all activities with Yasheng.
As
Yasheng failed to enter into a definitive agreement with the Company, we may
lose a significant source of our potential clients for the logistics
center. As such, we would be required to develop additional sources
of clients and develop a significant sales force to achieve favorable results.
On April 5, 2010 the Company issued a formal request to Yasheng demanding that
they surrender of the 50,000,000 shares that were issued to them, as well as
reimburse the Company for its expenses associated with the transaction in the
amount of $348,240.
Micrologic,
Inc. - Micrologic, Inc. (“Micrologic”), is in the business of design and
production of EDA applications and Integrated Circuit (“IC”) design processes;
The Company owns 100,000 shares of Micrologic through its ownership interest in
EA Emerging Ventures Inc. (“EVC”) – which represented less than ten percent
(10%) equity ownership in Micrologic, prior to further
dilution. Micrologic subsequently issued additional securities to
third parties diluting our interest to approximately 7% of the issued and
outstanding of Micrologic, Inc. On April 15, 2010 the Company sold all its
holdings in Micrologic for consideration of $20,000.
The
Company’s holdings in its subsidiaries at March 31, 2010 were as
follows:
100% of
DCG – discontinued operations
100% of
Vortex Ocean One, LLC
During
2008 The Company elected to move from The NASDAQ Stock Market to the OTCBB to
reduce, and more effectively manage, its regulatory and administrative costs,
and to enable Company’s management to better focus on its business. The Company
was traded on the OTCBB under the symbol VXRC (on February 24, 2009 the Company
symbol was changed from VTEX into VXRC). Before that, the Company’s common stock
was traded on the NASDAQ Capital Market (“NASDAQ”) under the symbol “EMVL”. On
July 15, 2009 the Company changed its name from “Vortex Resources Corp.” to its
current name, which subsequently changed the Company symbol into
“YASH”.
2.
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The
consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“US
GAAP”).
Basis of consolidation - The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its
majority-owned subsidiaries and all variable interest entities for which the
Company is the primary beneficiary. All intercompany balances and transactions
have been eliminated upon consolidation. Control is determined based on
ownership rights or, when applicable, whether the Company is considered the
primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity.
Variable Interest Entities -
The Company is required to consolidate variable interest entities (“VIE's”),
where it is the entity’s primary beneficiary. VIE's are entities in which equity
investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial interest or
do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities
without additional subordinated financial support from other parties. The
primary beneficiary is the party that has exposure to a majority of the expected
losses and/or expected residual returns of the VIE.
For the
period ending March 31, 2010, the balance sheets and results of operations of
DCG, and Vortex Ocean One, LLC are consolidated into these financial statements.
As of and for the year ending December 31, 2009, the balance sheets and results
of operations of DCG, and Vortex Ocean One, LLC are consolidated into these
financial statements
Use of estimates - The
preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with US GAAP
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts
reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual
results could differ from those estimates.
Fair value of financial instruments-
The carrying values of cash equivalents, notes and loans receivable,
accounts payable, loans payable and accrued expenses approximate fair
values.
Revenue recognition - The
Company applies the provisions of Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”)
Staff Accounting Bulletin ("SAB") No. 104, “Revenue Recognition in
Financial Statements” (“SAB 104”), which provides guidance on the recognition,
presentation and disclosure of revenue in financial statements filed with the
SEC. SAB 104 outlines the basic criteria that must be met to recognize revenue
and provides guidance for disclosure related to revenue recognition policies.
The Company recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement
exists, the product or service has been delivered, fees are fixed or
determinable, collection is probable and all other significant obligations have
been fulfilled.
Revenues
from property sales are recognized when the risks and rewards of ownership are
transferred to the buyer, when the consideration received can be reasonably
determined and when Emvelco has completed its obligations to perform certain
supplementary development activities, if any exist, at the time of the sale.
Consideration is reasonably determined and considered likely of collection when
Emvelco has signed sales agreements and has determined that the buyer has
demonstrated a commitment to pay. The buyer’s commitment to pay is supported by
the level of their initial investment, Emvelco’ assessment of the buyer’s credit
standing and Emvelco’ assessment of whether the buyer’s stake in the property is
sufficient to motivate the buyer to honor their obligation to it.
Revenue
from fixed price contracts is recognized on the percentage of
completion method. The percentage of
completion method is also used for condominium projects in which the Company is
a real estate developer and all units have been sold prior to the completion of
the preliminary stage and at least 25% of the project has been carried out.
Percentage of completion is measured by the percentage of costs incurred to
balance sheet date to estimated total costs. Selling, general,
and administrative costs are charged to expense as incurred. Profit
incentives are included in revenues, when their realization is reasonably
assured. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted projects are made in the
period in which such losses are first determined, in the amount of the
estimated loss of the full contract. Differences between estimates and actual
costs and revenues are recognized in the year in which such differences are
determined. The provision for warranties is provided at certain percentage of
revenues, based on the preliminary calculations and best estimates of the
Company's management.
Cost of revenues - Cost of
revenues includes the cost of real estate sold and rented as well as costs
directly attributable to the properties sold such as marketing, selling and
depreciation and are included in discontinued operations.
Real estate - Real estate held
for development is stated at the lower of cost or market. All direct and
indirect costs relating to the Company's development project are capitalized on
the Company’s balance sheet. Such standard requires costs associated with the
acquisition, development and construction of real estate and real estate-related
projects to be capitalized as part of that project. The realization of these
costs is predicated on the ability of the Company to successfully complete and
subsequently sell or rent the property. During 2008, the Company sold all its
real estate properties.
Treasury Stock - Treasury
stock is recorded at cost. Issuance of treasury shares is accounted for on a
first-in, first-out basis. Differences between the cost of treasury shares and
the re-issuance proceeds are charged to additional paid-in capital.
Foreign currency translation -
The Company considers the United States Dollar (“US Dollar” or "$") to be
the functional currency of the Company and its subsidiaries, the prior owned
subsidiary, AGL, which reports its financial statements in New Israeli Shekel.
(“N.I.S”) The reporting currency of the Company is the US Dollar and
accordingly, all amounts included in the consolidated financial statements have
been presented or translated into US Dollars. For non-US subsidiaries that do
not utilize the US Dollar as its functional currency, assets and liabilities are
translated to US Dollars at period-end exchange rates, and income and expense
items are translated at weighted-average rates of exchange prevailing during the
period. Translation adjustments are recorded in “Accumulated other comprehensive
income” within stockholders’ equity. Foreign currency transaction gains and
losses are included in the consolidated results of operations for the periods
presented.
Cash and cash equivalents -
Cash and cash equivalents include cash at bank and money market funds
with maturities of three months or less at the date of acquisition by the
Company.
Marketable securities - The
Company determines the appropriate classification of all marketable securities
as held-to-maturity, available-for-sale or trading at the time of purchase, and
re-evaluates such classification as of each balance sheet date. The Company
assesses whether temporary or other-than-temporary gains or losses on its
marketable securities have occurred due to increases or declines in fair value
or other market conditions. The Company did not have any marketable securities
within continuing operations for the period ended march 31, 2010 and the year
ended December 31, 2009 (other than Treasury Stocks as disclosed).
Goodwill and intangible assets -
Goodwill results from business acquisitions and represents the excess of
purchase price over the fair value of identifiable net assets acquired at the
acquisition date.
Earnings (loss) per share -
Basic earnings (loss) per share are computed by dividing income (loss)
attributable to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common
shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings (loss) per share reflect the
effect of dilutive potential common shares issuable upon exercise of stock
options and warrants and convertible preferred stock.
Comprehensive income (loss) -
Comprehensive income includes all changes in equity except those
resulting from investments by and distributions to
shareholders.
Income taxes - Income taxes
are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to
differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets
and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit
carry-forwards. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance if it
is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax asset will
not be realized. Deferred tax assets and liabilities, are measured using enacted
tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those
temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on
deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in
income in the period that includes the enactment date
Stock-based compensation -
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted SFAS No. 123R,
now ASC Topic 718, “Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS 123R”). Under ASC Topic
718, the Company is required to measure the cost of employee services received
in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair
value of the award. The measured cost is recognized in the statement of
operations over the period during which an employee is required to provide
service in exchange for the award. Additionally, if an award of an equity
instrument involves a performance condition, the related compensation cost is
recognized only if it is probable that the performance condition will be
achieved. The Company adopted ASC Topic 718 using the modified prospective
method, which requires the application of the accounting standard as of
January 1, 2006, the first day of the Company’s fiscal year
2006. Under this method, compensation cost recognized during the year ended
December 31, 2006 includes: (a) compensation cost for all share-based payments
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 123
and amortized on an straight-line basis over the requisite service period, and
(b) compensation cost for all share-based payments granted subsequent to January
1, 2006, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the
provisions of SFAS 123R amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite
service period. Results for prior periods have not been restated. The Company
estimates the fair value of each option award on the date of the grant using the
Black-Scholes option valuation model. Expected volatilities are based on the
historical volatility of the Company’s common stock over a period commensurate
with the options’ expected term. The expected term represents the period of time
that options granted are expected to be outstanding and is calculated in
accordance with SEC guidance provided in the SAB 107, using a “simplified”
method. The risk-free interest rate assumption is based upon observed interest
rates appropriate for the expected term of the Company’s stock
options.
Gas Rights on Real Property, plant,
and equipment -Depreciation, depletion and amortization, based on cost
less estimated salvage value of the asset, are primarily determined under either
the unit-of-production method or the straight-line method, which is based on
estimated asset service life taking obsolescence into consideration. Maintenance
and repairs, including planned major maintenance, are expensed as incurred.
Major renewals and improvements are capitalized and the assets replaced are
retired. Interest costs incurred to finance expenditures during the construction
phase of multiyear projects are capitalized as part of the historical cost of
acquiring the constructed assets. The project construction phase commences with
the development of the detailed engineering design and ends when the constructed
assets are ready for their intended use. Capitalized interest costs are included
in property, plant and equipment and are depreciated over the service life of
the related assets. The Company uses the “successful efforts” method to account
for its exploration and production activities. Under this method, costs are
accumulated on a field-by-field basis with certain exploratory expenditures and
exploratory dry holes being expensed as incurred. Costs of productive wells and
development dry holes are capitalized and amortized on the unit-of-production
method. The Company records an asset for exploratory well costs when the well
has found a sufficient quantity of reserves to justify its completion as a
producing well and where the Company is making sufficient progress assessing the
reserves and the economic and operating viability of the project. Exploratory
well costs not meeting these criteria are charged to expense. Acquisition costs
of proved properties are amortized using a unit-of-production method, computed
on the basis of total proved natural gas reserves. Significant unproved
properties are assessed for impairment individually and valuation allowances
against the capitalized costs are recorded based on the estimated economic
chance of success and the length of time that the Company expects to hold the
properties. The valuation allowances are reviewed at least
annually. Other exploratory expenditures, including geophysical
costs, other dry hole costs and annual lease rentals, are expensed as incurred.
Unit-of-production depreciation is applied to property, plant and equipment,
including capitalized exploratory drilling and development costs, associated
with productive depletable extractive properties. Unit-of-production
rates are based on the amount of proved developed reserves of natural gas and
other minerals that are estimated to be recoverable from existing facilities
using current operating methods. Under the unit-of-production method, natural
gas volumes are considered produced once they have been measured through meters
at custody transfer or sales transaction points at the outlet valve on the lease
or field storage tank. Gains on sales of proved and unproved properties are only
recognized when there is no uncertainty about the recovery of costs applicable
to any interest retained or where there is no substantial obligation for future
performance by the Company’s. Losses on properties sold are recognized when
incurred or when the properties are held for sale and the fair value of the
properties is less than the carrying value. Proved oil and gas properties held
and used by the Company are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes
in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts may not be recoverable.
Assets are grouped at the lowest levels for which there are identifiable cash
flows that are largely independent of the cash flows of other groups of
assets. The Company estimates the future undiscounted cash flows of
the affected properties to judge the recoverability of carrying amounts. Cash
flows used in impairment evaluations are developed using annually updated
corporate plan investment evaluation assumptions for natural gas commodity
prices. Annual volumes are based on individual field production profiles, which
are also updated annually. Cash flow estimates for impairment testing exclude
derivative instruments. Impairment analyses are generally based on proved
reserves. Where probable reserves exist, an appropriately risk-adjusted amount
of these reserves may be included in the impairment evaluation. Impairments are
measured by the amount the carrying value exceeds the fair
value.
Restoration, Removal and
Environmental Liabilities - The Company is subject to extensive federal,
state and local environmental laws and regulations. These laws
regulate the discharge of materials into the environment and may require the
Company to remove or mitigate the environmental effects of the disposal or
release of natural gas substances at various sites. Environmental
expenditures are expensed or capitalized depending on their future economic
benefit. Expenditures that relate to an existing condition caused by
past operations and that have no future economic benefit are expensed.
Liabilities for expenditures of a noncapital nature are recorded when
environmental assessments and/or remediation is probable, and the costs can be
reasonably estimated. Such liabilities are generally undiscounted unless the
timing of cash payments for the liability or component is fixed or reliably
determinable.
The
Company accounts for asset retirement obligations in accordance with SFAS No.
143, "Accounting for Asset
Retirement Obligations” (now ASC Topic 410). ASC Topic 410 addresses
accounting and reporting for obligations associated with the retirement of
tangible long-lived assets and the associated asset retirement
costs. ASC Topic 410 requires that the fair value of a liability for
an asset's retirement obligation be recorded in the period in which it is
incurred and the corresponding cost capitalized by increasing the
carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. The liability is
accreted to its then present value each period, and the capitalized cost is
depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. The Company
will include estimated future costs of abandonment and dismantlement in the full
cost amortization base and amortize these costs as a component of our depletion
expense in the accompanying financial statements.
Business segment reporting -
Though the company had minor holdings of real estate properties which have been
sold, the Company manages its operations in one business segment, the Resources,
Logistic Development, Development and Mineral business.
Effect of Recent Accounting
Pronouncements
In
December 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 110 (“SAB 110”). SAB 110 amends and replaces
Question 6 of Section D.2 of Topic 14, “Share-Based Payment,” of the Staff
Accounting Bulletin series. Question 6 of Section D.2 of Topic 14 expresses the
views of the staff regarding the use of the “simplified” method in developing an
estimate of the expected term of “plain vanilla” share options and allows usage
of the “simplified” method for share option grants prior to December 31,
2007. SAB 110 allows public companies which do not have historically sufficient
experience to provide a reasonable estimate to continue to use the “simplified”
method for estimating the expected term of “plain vanilla” share option grants
after December 31, 2007. The Company will continue to use the “simplified”
method until it has enough historical experience to provide a reasonable
estimate of expected term in accordance with SAB 110.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(“SFAS”) 141-R, “Business Combinations,” now ASC Topic 805. ASC Topic
805 retains the fundamental requirements that the acquisition method of
accounting (referred to as the purchase method) be used for all business
combinations and for an acquirer to be identified for each business combination.
It also establishes principles and requirements for how the acquirer:
(a) recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable
assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any non-controlling interest in
the acquiree; (b) recognizes and measures the goodwill acquired in the
business combination or a gain from a bargain purchase and (c) determines
what information to disclose to enable users of the financial statements to
evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business combination. ASC Topic
805 will apply prospectively to business combinations for which the acquisition
date is on or after the Company’s fiscal year beginning October 1, 2009.
While the Company has not yet evaluated the impact, if any, that ASC Topic 805
will have on its consolidated financial statements, the Company will be required
to expense costs related to any acquisitions after September 30,
2009.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 160, “Non-controlling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements,” now ASC Topic 810. This Statement amends
Accounting Research Bulletin 51 to establish accounting and reporting standards
for the non-controlling (minority) interest in a subsidiary and for the
deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It clarifies that a non-controlling interest in
a subsidiary is an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be
reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. The Company has not
yet determined the impact, if any, that ASC Topic 810 will have on its
consolidated financial statements. ASC Topic 810 is effective for the Company’s
fiscal year beginning October 1, 2009.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” now ASC
Topic 820. ASC Topic 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for
measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles, and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements. This Statement applies under other
accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements, the
FASB having previously concluded in those accounting pronouncements that fair
value is the relevant measurement attribute. Accordingly, this Statement does
not require any new fair value measurements. ASC Topic 820 is effective for
financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007,
and interim periods within those fiscal years. In February 2008, the FASB issued
FASB Staff Position No. FAS 157–2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement
No. 157”, which provides a one year deferral of the effective date of SFAS
157 for non–financial assets and non–financial liabilities, except those that
are recognized or disclosed in the financial statements at fair value at least
annually. Therefore, effective January 1, 2008, we adopted the provisions of ASC
Topic 820 with respect to our financial assets and liabilities only. Since the
Company has no investments available for sale, the adoption of this
pronouncement has no material impact to the financial
statements.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities — including an amendment of
FASB Statement No. 115” now ASC Topic 825. ASC Topic 825 permits entities to
choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair
value. This statement provides entities the opportunity to mitigate volatility
in reported earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities
differently without having to apply complex hedge accounting provisions. This
Statement is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that
begins after November 15, 2007. Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted ASC
Topic 825 and have chosen not to elect the fair value option for any items that
are not already required to be measured at fair value in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States .
Critical
Accounting Estimates
Our
discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are
based upon our consolidated financial statements that have been prepared in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of
America (“US GAAP”). This preparation requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues
and expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. US GAAP
provides the framework from which to make these estimates, assumptions and
disclosures. We choose accounting policies within US GAAP that management
believes are appropriate to accurately and fairly report our operating results
and financial position in a consistent manner. Management regularly assesses
these policies in light of current and forecasted economic conditions. Although
we believe that our estimates, assumptions and judgments are reasonable, they
are based upon information presently available. Actual results may differ
significantly from these estimates under different assumptions, judgments or
conditions for a number of reasons.
Investment
in Real Estate and Commercial Leasing Assets. Real estate held for sale and
construction in progress is stated at the lower of cost or fair value less costs
to sell and includes acreage, development, construction and carrying costs and
other related costs through the development stage. Commercial leasing assets,
which are held for use, are stated at cost. When events or circumstances
indicate than an asset’s carrying amount may not be recoverable, an impairment
test is performed in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 144. For properties
held for sale, if estimated fair value less costs to sell is less than the
related carrying amount, then a reduction of the assets carrying value to fair
value less costs to sell is required. For properties held for use, if the
projected undiscounted cash flow from the asset is less than the related
carrying amount, then a reduction of the carrying amount of the asset to fair
value is required. Measurement of the impairment loss is based on the fair value
of the asset. Generally, we determine fair value using valuation techniques such
as discounted expected future cash flows.
Our
expected future cash flows are affected by many factors including:
a) The
economic condition of the US and Worldwide markets – especially during the
current worldwide financial crisis.
b) The
performance of the underlying assets in the markets where our properties are
located;
c) Our
financial condition, which may influence our ability to develop our properties;
and
d)
Government regulations.
As any
one of these factors could substantially affect our estimate of future cash
flows, significant variance between our estimates and the reality could result
in us recording an impairment loss, which may result in a significant diminution
of our net earnings.
The
estimate of our future revenues is also important because it is the basis of our
development plans and also a factor in our ability to obtain the financing
necessary to complete our development plans. If our estimates of future cash
flows from our properties differ significantly from actual performance in terms
of delivering that cash flows, then our financial and liquidity position may be
compromised, which could result in our default under certain debt instruments or
result in our suspending some or all of our development activities.
Allocation
of Overhead Costs. We periodically capitalize a portion of our overhead costs
and also allocate a portion of these overhead costs to cost of sales based on
the activities of our employees that are directly engaged in these activities.
In order to accomplish this procedure, we periodically evaluate our “corporate”
personnel activities to see what, if any, time is associated with activities
that would normally be capitalized or considered part of cost of sales. After
determining the appropriate aggregate allocation rates, we apply these factors
to our overhead costs to determine the appropriate allocations. This is a
critical accounting policy because it affects our net results of operations for
that portion which is capitalized. In accordance with GAAP, we only capitalize
direct and indirect project costs associated with the acquisition, development
and construction of a real estate project. Indirect costs include allocated
costs associated with certain pooled resources (such as office supplies,
telephone and postage) which are used to support our development projects, as
well as general and administrative functions. Allocations of pooled resources
are based only on those employees directly responsible for development (i.e.
project manager and subordinates). We charge to expense indirect costs that do
not clearly relate to a real estate project such as salaries and allocated
expenses related to the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer.
Accounting
for Income Taxes: We recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the
expected future tax consequences of transactions and events. Under this method,
deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference
between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities using
enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected
to reverse. If necessary, deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation
allowance to an amount that is determined to be more likely than not
recoverable. We must make significant estimates and assumptions about future
taxable income and future tax consequences when determining the amount of the
valuation allowance. In addition, tax reserves are based on significant
estimates and assumptions as to the relative filing positions and potential
audit and litigation exposures related thereto. To the extent the Company
establishes a valuation allowance or increases this allowance in a period, the
impact will be included in the tax provision in the statement of
operations.
The
disclosed information presents the Company’s natural gas producing collateral
activities.
Off
Balance Sheet Arrangements
There are
no materials off balance sheet arrangements.
Inflation
and Foreign Currency
The
Company maintains its books in local currency US Dollars for the Parent Company
registered in the State of Delaware. The Company’s operations are primarily in
the United States through its wholly owned subsidiaries. The Company does not
currently hedge its currency exposure. In the future, we may engage in hedging
transactions to mitigate foreign exchange risk.
3.
Non Current assets from discontinued operations
Vortex
one entered into a sale agreement with third parties regarding specific 4 wells
assignments. In consideration for the sale of the Assignments, The buyer(s)
shall pay the total sum of $2,300,000 to Seller as follows: (i) A $225,000.00
payment upon execution (paid) (ii) A 12 month $600,000.00 secured promissory
note bearing no interest with payments to begin on the first day of the second
month after the properties contained in the Assignments begin producing. (iii) A
60 month $1,500,000.00 secured promissory note bearing no interest with payments
to begin the first day of the fourteenth month after the properties contained in
the Assignments begin producing. As the Note bears no interest the Company
discounts it to present value (for the day of issuing, e.g. March 1, 2009) using
12% as discount interest rate per annum, which is the Company’s approximate cost
of borrowing.
The face
value of the Notes and the discounted value per the original agreement should be
paid as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Discounted
|
|
Year
|
|
Face
Value
|
|
|
Value
|
|
2009
|
|
$ |
450,000 |
|
|
$ |
424,060 |
|
2010
|
|
|
375,000 |
|
|
$ |
321,288 |
|
2011
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
$ |
226,057 |
|
2012
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
$ |
200,614 |
|
2013
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
$ |
178,035 |
|
2014
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
$ |
157,997 |
|
2015
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
$ |
36,638 |
|
Total
|
|
|
2,100,000 |
|
|
$ |
1,544,690 |
|
The
Company alleges that the buyers are not performing under the notes. Per the
terms of the sale, Vortex One and the Company should be paid commencing May 1,
2009. Vortex One and the Company agreed to give the buyers a one-time 60 day
extension, and put them on notice for being default on said notes. To date the
operator of the wells paid Vortex One (on behalf of the Buyer) 3
payments (for the months of April, May and July 2009 – Operator did not pay for
the month of June 2009) amounting to $13,093.12. Vortex Ocean One’s position is
that the buyers as well as the operator breached the Sale agreement and the
Note’s terms, and notice has been issued for default. In lieu of the non
material amount, no provision was made to income of $2,617 (20% the Company
share per the operating agreement) until the Company finishes its investigation
of the subject. The Company retained an attorney in Texas to pursue
its rights under the agreements.
4.
Convertible Notes Payable
Trafalgar Capital Specialized
Investment Fund, Luxembourg (“Trafalgar”)- The Company
entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the "Agreement") with Trafalgar
Capital Specialized Investment Fund, Luxembourg ("Buyer") on September 25, 2008
for the sale of up to $2,750,000 in convertible notes (the "Notes"). Pursuant to
the terms of the Agreement, the Company and the Buyer closed on the sale and
purchase of $1,600,000 in Notes on September 25, 2008, with escrow instruction
to be closed on October 1, 2008. The Buyer, at its sole discretion, has the
option to close on a second financing for $400,000 in Notes (which has been
exercised as discussed below) and a third financing for $750,000 in Notes.
Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Company agreed to pay to the Buyer a
commitment fee of 4% of the commitment amount, a structuring fee of $15,000, a
facility draw down fee of 4%, issue the Buyer 150,000 shares of common stock,
and pay a due diligence fee to the Buyer of $15,000. The Notes bear interest at
8.5% with such interest payable on a monthly basis with the first two payments
due at closing. The Notes are due in full in September 2010. In the event of
default, the Buyer may elect to convert the interest payable in cash or in
shares of common stock at a conversion price using the closing bid price of when
the interest is due or paid. The Notes are convertible into common stock, at the
Buyer's option, at a conversion price equal to 85% of the volume weighted
average price for the ten days immediately preceding the conversion but in no
event below a price of $2.00 per share. If on the conversion or redemption of
the Notes, the Euro to US dollar spot exchange rate (the "Exchange Rate") is
higher that the Exchange Rate on the closing date, then the number of shares
shall be increased by the same percentage determined by dividing the Exchange
Rate on the date of conversion or redemption by the Exchange Rate on the closing
date ($0.68 per Euro). The Company is required to redeem the Notes starting on
the fourth month in equal installments of $56,000 with a final payment of
$480,000 with respect to the initial funding of $1,600,000. We are also required
to pay a redemption premium of 7% on the first redemption payment, which will
increase 1% per month. The Company may prepay the Notes in advance, which such
prepayment will include a redemption premium of 15%. In the event the Company
closes on a funding in excess of $4,000,000, the Buyer, in its sole election,
may require that the Company redeem the Notes in full. On any principal or
interest repayment date, in the event that the Euro to US dollar spot exchange
rate is lower than the Euro to US dollar spot exchange rate at closing, then we
will be required to pay additional funds to compensate for such adjustment.
Pursuant to the terms of the Notes, the Company shall default if (i) the Company
fails to pay amounts due within 15 days of maturity, (ii) failure of the Company
to comply with any provision of the Notes upon ten days written notice; (iii)
bankruptcy or insolvency or (iv) any breach of the Agreement and such breach is
not cured upon ten days written notice. Upon default by the Company, the Buyer
may accelerate full repayment of all Notes outstanding and all accrued interest
thereon, or may convert all Notes outstanding (and accrued interest thereon)
into shares of common stock (notwithstanding any limitations contained in the
Agreement and the Notes). The Buyer has a secured lien on three of our wells and
would be entitled to foreclose on such wells in the event an event of default is
entered. In the event that the foregoing was to occur, significant adverse
consequences to the Company would be reasonably anticipated. So long as any of
the principal or interest on the Notes remains unpaid and unconverted, the
Company shall not, without the prior written consent of the Buyer, (i) issue or
sell any common stock or preferred stock, (ii) issue or sell any Company
preferred stock, warrant, option, right, contract, call, or other security or
instrument granting the holder thereof the right to acquire Common Stock, (iii)
incur debt or enter into any security instrument granting the holder a security
interest in any of the assets of the Company or (iv) file any registration
statement on Form S-8. The Buyer has contractually agreed to restrict their
ability to convert the Notes and receive shares of our common stock such that
the number of shares of the Company common stock held by a Buyer and its
affiliates after such conversion or exercise does not exceed 9.9% of the
Company's then issued and outstanding shares of common stock. The Buyer
exercised its option to close on a second financing for $400,000 in Notes on
October 28, 2008 and still holds an option to close on additional financing for
$750,000 in Notes. The terms of the second financing for $400,000 are
identical to the terms of the $1,600,000 Note, as disclosed in detail on the
Company filing on October 2, 2008 on Form 8-K. The Notes are convertible into
our common stock, at the Buyer's option, at a conversion price equal to 85% of
the volume weighed average price for the ten days immediately preceding the
conversion but in no event below a price of $2.00 per share. As of the date
hereof, the Company is obligated on the Notes issued to the Buyer in connection
with this offering. The Notes are a debt obligation arising other than in the
ordinary course of business, which constitute a direct financial obligation of
the Company. The Notes were offered and sold to the Buyer in a private placement
transaction made in reliance upon exemptions from registration pursuant to
Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506 promulgated there
under. The Buyer is an accredited investor as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation
D promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933. The Company recorded a discount
on the issuance of debt for the conversion feature, which decreased the note
payable by the same amount.
The
Company and Trafalgar became adversaries where each party filled a lawsuit
against the other party in different jurisdictions which included California,
Nevada (indirect lawsuit filed by Verge) and Florida. On April 15, 2010 the
parties settled their outstanding disputes. Based on said settlement which was
declared effective as of December 31, 2009 the parties agreed that Trafalgar
will convert its notes (at agreed amount of $3,000,000) into a new
class of Series E Preferred Shares, which shall have the following terms: (i) $3
Million Face Amount (as agreed amount between all parties) (ii) Maturity in cash
in Thirty Months (30 months) from date of issue (iii) Optional Redemption by the
Company at any time, for Face Value including accrued unpaid dividends (iv)
Dividends Accrue at 7% (seven percent) per annum. Said Series
Preferred E shares will be convertible at the Option of the Holders, into Six
Hundred Million (six hundred million) common shares of the Company, at any time
upon written notice to the company. This share issuance is larger than the
shares currently authorized by the Company; at the point where we issue the
shares, we will authorize a sufficient number of shares. Trafalgar will be
entitled to appoint 4 directors to the Company board.
Priscilla Dunckel - On August
12, 2008 the Company signed a Note Payable for $20,000 payable to Mrs. Dunckel
in connection with the Company efforts to fund its drilling program (see
Subsequent events for full pay-off, via exchange agreement).
Kobi Loria – On November 23,
2009 the Company signed a Note Payable for $100,000 payable to Kobi Loria due on
March 31, 2010 at 12% per annum. The Note includes a
convertible feature into the Company Common Stock based on conversion ratio that
shall be valued at 95% of the volume-weighted average price for 5 trading days
immediately preceding the conversion notice. On December 23, 2009 the Company
signed an additional Note Payable for $50,000 to Kobi Loria on the same terms as
the prior Note. The consideration for the Notes was cash, which the Company used
for working capital. On April 15, 2010 the Company agreed with Mr. Loria that as
the Company did not have the cash resources to pay off the Notes due to current
capital constraints, that it would convey to him the Company’s interests in
Micrologic (which had been designated for sale since 2008) as partial payments
on the Notes. The parties agreed that the Micrologic conveyed interests will be
valued at $20,000(see Subsequent events).
Tiran Ibgui – On November 23,
2009 the Company ratified and issued a Note Payable for $365,000 to Tiran Ibgui.
Tiran Ibgui was a 50% member with Vortex Ocean which invested in cash $525,000
on June 30, 2008. The Company entered numerous settlement agreements with Mr.
Ibgui in connection with Vortex Ocean; including providing collateral in form of
pledge the DCG wells to Mr. Ibgui. On February 2009, Vortex Ocean sold its
interest to third parties, where per said sale the original balance of Mr. Ibgui
was reduced to $365,000 which remains due. Mr. Ibgui waived all his membership
rights, and remains a secure lender under said note dated November 23, 2009 for
his original investment that was consummated in cash on June 30, 2008. Said
Note in the amount of $365,000 is convertible to 10,000,000 common shares of the
Company, which per adjustment mechanism increases to 18,000,000 common shares of
the Company (see Subsequent events for conversion via exchange agreement). The
Note has adjustment mechanism which states that the number of Conversion Shares
issuable to the Lender shall be adjusted such that the aggregate number of
Exchange Shares issuable to the Holder is equal to (a) 18,000,000 plus the
actual legal fees and costs incurred by the Lender and the Lender’s successors,
designees and assigns, divided by (b) 75% of the volume-weighted average price
for the 20 trading days following delivery of the Conversion Shares, calculated
by dividing the aggregate value of Common Stock traded on its trading market
(price multiplied by number of shares traded) by the total volume (number of
shares) of Common Stock traded on the trading market for such trading
day. If this adjustment requires the issuance of additional
Conversion Shares to the Lender (i.e. if a total issuance of more than
18,000,000 shares is required), such additional Conversion Shares shall be
issued to the Lender or its designee within one business day. If this
adjustment requires the return of Conversion Shares to the Borrower (i.e. if an
aggregate issuance of less than 18,000,000 shares is required), such Conversion
Shares shall be promptly returned to the Borrower.
The net
amounts owed to Mr. Ibgui per the operating agreement instructions, and
settlement agreements can be summarized as following:
Original
Cash Investment
|
|
|
525,000.00 |
|
Proceeds
from sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
amount
|
|
|
(225,000.00 |
) |
Fee
paid by Ibgui
|
|
|
25,000.00 |
|
Company
Interest 20% Per operating Agreement
|
|
|
40,000.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Balance to March 2009 (date of Sale Ratify November 2009 via
Note)
|
|
|
365,000.00 |
|
Moran Atias - The Company
entered into an Exchange Agreement with Moran Atias (“Atias”) whereby the
Company and Ms. Atias exchanged $200,000 of a promissory note in the amount of
$250,000 held by Ms. Atias into 24,903,333 shares of Common Stock of the
Company, in transactions made pursuant to Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act
of 1933. The promissory note, of which a portion was converted by Ms.
Atias, was initially issued on August 8, 2008 (see Subsequent events for further
Exchange Agreement). Ms. Atias still holds a note payable by the
Company for $50,000.
5.
Acquisition and Dispositions
Davy Crockett Gas Company, LLC (DCG)
- Based on series of agreements that were formalized on May 1, 2008, the
Company entered into an Agreement and Plan of Exchange with
DCG.
Vortex Ocean One, LLC - On
June 30, 2008, the Company formed a limited liability company with Tiran Ibgui,
an individual ("Ibgui"), named Vortex Ocean One, LLC (the "Vortex One"). The
Company and Ibgui each own a fifty percent (50%) membership interest in Vortex
One. The Company is the Manager of the Vortex One. Vortex One has been formed
and organized to raise the funds necessary for the drilling of the first well
being undertaken by the Company's wholly owned subsidiary DCG (as reported on
the Company's Form 8-Ks filed on May 7, 2008 and May 9, 2008 and amended on June
16, 2008). The Company and Ibgui entered into a Limited Liability Company
Operating Agreement which sets forth the description of the membership
interests, capital contributions, allocations and distributions, as well as
other matters relating to Vortex One. Mr. Ibgui paid $525,000 as
consideration for his 50% ownership in Vortex One and the Company issued 5,250
common shares at an establish $1.00 per share price for its 50% ownership in
Vortex One. In October and November 2008, the Company entered into settlement
arrangements with Mr. Ibgui, whereby the Company agree to transfer the 5,250
common shares previously owned by Vortex One to Mr. Ibgui in exchange for
settlement of all disputes between the two parties, and also pledged and
assigned the DCG four term assignments. On March 2009, Vortex One exercised its
rights under the pledge and entered into a sale agreement with third party with
regards to the 4 term assignments. Said sale was given full effect in these
financial statements.
Divesture of DCG and Vortex Ocean
Wells - On March 2009 the board of directors of the company decided to
vacate the DCG project. Goodwill was impaired by approximately $35.0M in
association with this segment. On February 28, 2009 Vortex Ocean sold its term
assignment interest in 4 wells to third party. In consideration for the sale of
the Assignments, Buyer shall pay the total sum of $2,300,000 to Seller as
follows: (i) A $225,000.00 payment upon execution (paid) (ii) A 12 month
$600,000.00 secured promissory note bearing no interest with payments to begin
on the first day of the second month after the properties contained in the
Assignments begin producing. (iii) A 60 month $1,500,000.00 secured promissory
note bearing no interest with payments to begin the first day of the fourteenth
month after the properties contained in the Assignments begin
producing.
6.
Income taxes
For U.S.
Federal income tax purposes, the Company had unused net operating loss carry
forwards at December 31, 2008 of approximately $36.6 million available to offset
future taxable income. From the $36.6 million of losses, $0.5 million expires in
2009, $0.3 million expires in 2010, $1.6 million expires in 2011, $0.9 million
expires in 2012, and $33.3 million expires in various years from 2017 through
2027. The Company has no capital loss carryover for US income tax
purposes.
The Tax
Acts of some jurisdictions contain provisions which may limit the net operating
loss carry forwards available to be used in any given year if certain events
occur, including significant changes in ownership interests. As a result of
various equity transactions, management believes the Company experienced an
“ownership change” in the second half of 2006 as well as in the first half of
2008 in lieu of the DCG transaction (which was approved by the Company
shareholders as ownership change), as defined by Section 382 of the Internal
Revenue Code, which limits the annual utilization of net operating loss carry
forwards incurred prior to the ownership change. As calculated, the Section 382
limitation does not necessarily impact the ultimate recovery of the U.S. net
operating loss; although it will defer the realization of the tax benefit
associated with certain of the net operating loss carry forwards.
The
Company recorded a full valuation allowance against the net deferred tax assets.
In assessing deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely
than some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. The
ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of
future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences
and tax loss carry forwards become deductible. Management considers the
scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income
and tax planning strategies in making this assessment. Based upon the level of
historical taxable income and projections for future taxable income over the
periods in which the deferred tax assets are deductible, management believes
that it is more likely than not that the Company will not realize the benefit of
these deductible differences, net of existing valuation allowances at December
31, 2008. Undistributed earnings of the Company’s indirect investment into
foreign subsidiaries are currently not material. Those earnings are considered
to be indefinitely reinvested; accordingly, no provision for US federal and
state income tax has been provided thereon. Upon repatriation of those earnings,
in the form of dividends or otherwise, the Company would be subject to both U.S.
income taxes (subject to an adjustment for foreign tax credits) and withholding
taxes payable to the various foreign countries. Determination of the amount of
unrecognized deferred U.S. income tax liability is not practicable due to the
complexities associated with its hypothetical calculation.
7.
Commitments and Contingencies
Employment
Agreement:
Effective
July 1, 2006, the Company entered into a five-year employment agreement with
Yossi Attia as the President and provides for annual compensation in the amount
of $240,000, an annual bonus not less than $120,000 per year, and an annual car
allowance. During the years 2009 and 2008, Yossi Attia paid substantial expenses
for the Company and also deferred his salary. As of March 31, 2010, the Company
owes Mr., Attia approximately $998,000. The Company relies upon Mr. Attia for
financing. There is no assurance that Mr. Attia will continue to provide the
Company with funding.
Lease
Agreements:
The
Company head office was located at 9107 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 450, Beverly
Hills, CA 90210, based on a month-to-month basis (The Company notified the
landlord that effective December 1, 2009 it will terminate and vacate the
premises), paying $219 per month. The Company’s operation office (and
headquarter from December 1, 2009) is located at 1061 ½ N Spaulding Ave, West
Hollywood, CA 90046, paying $2,500 per month (lease term ends June 2011).
Effective December 1, 2009 the Company is operating only from its operational
offices located in West Hollywood, California.
Future
minimum payments of obligations under the operating lease at December 31, 2009
are as follows:
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
$ |
22,500 |
|
|
$ |
15,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
— |
|
See
subsequent events for re-location of the Company in lieu of filling form
14F-1.
Legal
Proceedings:
From time
to time, we are a party to litigation or other legal proceedings that we
consider to be a part of the ordinary course of our business. We are not
involved currently in legal proceedings other than detailed below that could
reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our business,
prospects, financial condition or results of operations. We may become involved
in material legal proceedings in the future.
Navigator
– Registration Rights - The Company entered into a registration rights agreement
dated July 21, 2005, whereby it agreed to file a registration statement
registering the 441,566 shares of Company common stock issued in connection with
the Navigator acquisition within 75 days of the closing of the transaction. The
Company also agreed to have such registration statement declared effective
within 150 days from the filing thereof. In the event that Company failed to
meet its obligations to register the shares, it may have been required to pay a
penalty equal to 1% of the value of the shares per month. The Company obtained a
written waiver from the seller stating that the seller would not raise any
claims in connection with the filing of registration statement through May 30,
2006. The Company since received another waiver extending the registration
deadline through May 30, 2007 without penalty. As of June 30, 2008 (effective
March 31, 2008), the Company was in default of the Registration Rights Agreement
and therefore made a provision for compensation for $150,000 to represent agreed
final compensation (the "Penalty"). The holder of the Penalty subsequently
assigned the Penalty to three unaffiliated parties (the "Penalty Holders"). On
December 26, 2008, the Company closed agreements with the Penalty Holders
pursuant to which the Penalty Holders agreed to cancel any rights to the Penalty
in consideration of the issuance 66,667 shares of common stock to each of the
Penalty Holders. The shares of common stock were issued in connection with this
transaction in a private placement transaction made in reliance upon exemptions
from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and
Rule 506 promulgated there under. Each of the Penalty Holders is an accredited
investor as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities
Act of 1933.
Trafalgar
Capital Specialized Investment Fund, Luxembourg - The Company via series of
agreements (directly or via affiliates) with European based alternative
investment fund - Trafalgar Capital Specialized Investment Fund, Luxembourg
(“Trafalgar”) established financial relationship which should create source of
funding to the Company and its subsidiaries (see detailed description of said
series of agreements in the Company filling). The Company position is that the
DCG transactions (among others) would not have been closed by the Company,
unless Trafalgar had provided the needed financing for the drilling
program. The Company and Trafalgar became adversaries where each
party filled a lawsuit against the other party in different jurisdictions which
included California, Nevada (indirect lawsuit filed by Verge) and Florida. On
April 15, 2010 the parties settled their outstanding disputes. Based on said
settlement which was declared effective as of December 31, 2009 the parties
agreed that Trafalgar will convert its notes (at agreed amount of $3,000,000)
into a new class of Series E Preferred Shares, which shall have the
following terms: (i) $3 Million Face Amount (as agreed amount between all
parties) (ii) Maturity in cash in Thirty Months (30 months) from date of issue
(iii) Optional Redemption by the Company at any time, for Face Value including
accrued unpaid dividends (iv) Dividends Accrue at 7% (seven percent) per
annum. Said Series Preferred E shares will be convertible at
the Option of the Holders, into Six Hundred Million (six hundred million) common
shares of YASH, at any time upon written notice to the company. This share
issuance is larger than the shares currently authorized by the Company; at the
point where we issue the shares, we will authorize a sufficient number of
shares. Trafalgar will be entitled to appoint 4 directors to the Company
board.
Verge
Bankruptcy & Rusk Litigation - On January 23, 2009, Verge Living Corporation
(the “Debtor”), a former wholly owned subsidiary of Atia Group Limited (“AGL”),
a former subsidiary of the Company, filed a voluntary petition (the “Chapter 11
Petitions”) for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code
(the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District
of California (the “Bankruptcy Court”). The Chapter 11 Petitions are
being administered under the caption In re: verge Living Corporation,
et al., Chapter 11 Case No. ND 09-10177 (the “Chapter 11
Proceedings”). The Bankruptcy Court assumed jurisdiction over the
assets of the Debtors as of the date of the filing of the Chapter 11
Petitions. . On April 28, 2009, Chapter 11 Proceedings changed venue
to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada, Chapter
11 Case No BK-S-09-16295-BAM. As Debtor as well as its parent AGL were
subsidiaries of the Company at time when material agreements where executed
between the parties, the Company may become part of the proceeding. In August
2008, Dennis E. Rusk Architect LLC and Dennis E. Rusk, (“Rusk”) were terminated
by a former affiliate of the Company. Rusk filed a lawsuit against the Debtor,
the Company and multiple other parties in Clark County, Nevada, Case No.
A-564309. The Rusk parties seek monetary damages for breach of contract. The
Company has taken the position that the Company will have no liability in this
matter as it never entered an agreement with Rusk. The court handling the Verge
bankruptcy entered an automatic stay for this matter. On or about October 28,
2009 the parties settled said complaint, where the other parties agreed to pay
the Rusk parties the sum of $400,000. The amount of $37,500 was advanced by the
other parties to the Rusk parties. The Company’s Board of Directors agreed to
issue to the other parties 4 million shares of the Company, as the Company
participation in said settlement, which was done on October 2008. The shares of
common stock were issued in connection with this transaction in a private
placement transaction made in reliance upon exemptions from registration
pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506
promulgated there under. Each of the Penalty Holders is an accredited investor
as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act of
1933. The complaint against the Company was dismissed with prejudice as final on
March 23, 2010.
Yalon
Hecht - On February 14, 2007, the Company filed a complaint in the Superior
Court of California, County of Los Angeles against Yalon Hecht, a foreign
attorney alleging fraud and seeking the return of funds held in escrow, and
sought damages in the amount of approximately 250,000 Euros (approximately
$316,000 as of the date of actual transferring the funds), plus interest, costs
and fees. On April 2007, Mr. Hecht returned $92,694 (70,000 Euros on the date of
transfer) to the Company which netted $72,694. On June 2007, the
Company filed a claim seeking a default judgment against Yalon
Hecht. On October 25, 2007, the Company obtained a default judgment against
Yalon Hecht for the sum of $249,340.65. As of today, the Company has not
commenced procedures to collect on the default judgment.
Vortex
One entered into a sale agreement with third parties regarding specific 4 wells
assignments. In consideration for the sale of the Assignments, The buyer(s)
shall pay the total sum of $2,300,000 to Seller as follows: (i) A $225,000.00
payment upon execution (paid) (ii) A 12 month $600,000.00 secured promissory
note bearing no interest with payments to begin on the first day of the second
month after the properties contained in the Assignments begin producing. (iii) A
60 month $1,500,000.00 secured promissory note bearing no interest with payments
to begin the first day of the fourteenth month after the properties contained in
the Assignments begin producing. As the Note bears no interest the Company
discounts it to present value (for the day of issuing, e.g. March 1, 2009) using
12% as discount interest rate per annum, which is the Company’s approximate cost
of borrowing. The Company alleges that the buyers are not performing
under the notes. Per the terms of the sale, Vortex One and the Company should be
paid commencing May 1, 2009. Vortex One and the Company agreed to give the
buyers a one-time 60 day extension, and put them on notice for being default on
said notes. To date the operator of the wells paid Vortex One (on behalf of the
Buyer) 3 payments (for the months of April, May and July 2009 –
Operator did not pay for the month of June 2009) amounting to $13,093.12. Vortex
Ocean One’s position is that the buyers as well as the operator breached the
Sale agreement and the Note’s terms, and notice has been issued for default. In
lieu of the non material amount, no provision was made to income of $2,617 (20%
the Company share per the operating agreement) until the Company finishes its
investigation of the subject. The Company retained an attorney in
Texas to pursue its rights under the agreements.
On July
1, 2008, DCG entered into a Drilling Contract (Model Turnkey Contract)
("Drilling Contract") with Ozona Natural Gas Company LLC ("Ozona"). Pursuant to
the Drilling Contract, Ozona has been engaged to drill four wells in Crockett
County, Texas. The drilling of the first well commenced immediately at the cost
of $525,000 and the drilling of the subsequent three wells scheduled for as
later phase, by Ozona and Mr. Mustafoglu, as well as the wells locations. Based
on Mr. Mustafoglu negligence and executed un-authorized agreements with third
parties, the Company may have hold Ozona and others responsible for damages to
the Company with regards to surface rights, wells locations and further charges
of Ozona which are not acceptable to the Company. The Company did not commence
legal acts yet, and evaluate its rights with its legal consultants.
Wang - On
August 4, 2009, the Company filed a Form 8-K Current Report with the Securities
and Exchange Commission advising that Eric Ian Wang (“Wang”) was appointed as a
director of the Company on August 3, 2009. Mr. Yang was nominated as a director
at the suggestion of Yasheng which approved the filing of the initial Form 8-K.
On August 5, 2009, Mr. Wang contacted the Company advising that he has not
consented to such appointment. Accordingly, Mr. Wang has been nominated as a
director of the Company but has not accepted such nomination and is not
considered a director of the Company. Mr. Wang's nomination was subsequently
withdrawn. Furthermore, although no longer relevant, Mr. Wang's work history as
disclosed on the initial Form 8K was derived from a resume provided by Mr. Wang.
Subsequent to the filing of the Form 8-K, Mr. Wang advised that the disclosure
regarding his work history was inaccurate. As a result, the disclosure relating
to Mr. Wang's work history should be completely disregarded. The Company believe
that at the time that these willful, malicious, false and fraudulent
representations were made by Wang to the company, Wang knew that the
representations were false and that he never intended to be appointed to the
board. The company informed and believe the delivery of the resumes, and the
later demand for a retraction of the resumes, were part of a scheme (with
others) to injure the business reputation of the company to otherwise damages
its credibility such that the Company would have a lesser bargaining position in
the finalization of the documents relating to the Yasheng transaction. As such
the Company filled on September 2009 a complaint against Wang in California
Superior Court – San Bernardino County – Case No.: CIVRS909705. On or about
January 4, 2010 the parties settled all their adversaries. Under said
settlement, Wang represents, warrants, and agrees that the information about him
that was contained in the 8K Filing and other disclosure documents was supplied
by him. Any alleged inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and/or
misstatements in the 8K Filing and other disclosure documents, regarding his
resume, background and/or qualifications, if any exist, were based upon the
information he provided to the Company.
Sharp -
On October 20, 2009, an alleged former shareholder of the Company (Mr. Sharp),
has filed a lawsuit against the Company and Mr. Attia in San Diego County,
California (case number SC105331). Mr. Sharp subsequently attempted to settle
the matter for a nominal fee, which the Company refused to accept. The Company
disputes all of Mr. Sharp’s claims as meritless, frivolous and unsubstantiated
and believes that it has substantial and meritorious legal and factual defenses,
which the Company intends to pursue vigorously. The Company filed a motion to
change venue which was successfully granted by court. On January 15, 2010, the
case was transferred to Los Angeles.
Except as
set forth above, there are no known significant legal proceedings that have been
filed and are outstanding or pending against the Company.
Sub-Prime
Crisis and Financials Markets Crisis:
The
global recession has negatively affected the pricing of commodities such as oil
and natural gas. In order to reduce the Company risks and more
effectively manage its business and to enable Company management to better focus
on its business on developing the natural gas drilling rights, the board of
directors had a discussion and resolution vacating the DCG project.
Voluntarily
delisting from The NASDAQ Stock Market:
On June
6, 2008, the Company provided NASDAQ with notice of its intent to voluntarily
delist from The NASDAQ Stock Market, which notice was amended on June 10, 2008.
The Company is voluntarily delisting to reduce and more effectively manage its
regulatory and administrative costs, and to enable Company management to better
focus on its business. The Company requested that its shares be suspended from
trading on NASDAQ at the open of the market on June 16, 2008, which was done.
Following clearance by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA") of
a Form 211 an application was filed by a market maker in the Company's
stock.
Vortex
Ocean One, LLC:
On June
30, 2008, the Company formed a limited liability company with third party, an
individual ("TI"), named Vortex Ocean One, LLC (the "Vortex One"). The Company
and TI each owned a fifty percent (50%) membership Interest in Vortex One. The
Company is the Manager of the Vortex One. Vortex One has been formed and
organized to raise the funds necessary for the drilling of the first well being
undertaken by the Company's wholly owned subsidiary. To date there has been no
production or limited production. As such a dispute has arisen between the
Parties with regards to the Vortex One and other matters, so in order to fulfill
its obligations to Investor and avoid any potential litigation, Vortex One has
agreed to issue the Shares directly into the name of the TI, as well as pledging
the 4 term assignments to secure the investment and future proceeds per the LLC
operating agreement (where the investor entitled to 80% of any future cash flow
proceeds, until he recover his investments in full, then after the parties will
share the cash flow equally). As disclosed before, said 4 wells were sold to a
third party. The Company, via its subsidiary, completed the drilling of all 4
wells at the estimated cost of $2,100,000 for four wells (not including option
payments). The Company also exercised its fifth well option (by paying per the
master agreement $50,000 option fee on November 5, 2008). In lieu of
the world financial markets crisis, the Company approached the land owners on
DCG mineral rights, requesting an amendment to allow DCG an additional six (6)
months before it is required to exercise another option to secure a Term
Assignment of Oil and Gas Lease pursuant to the terms of the original Agreement
dated March 5, 2008. The land owner’s representative has answered the Company’s
request with discrepancies about the date as effective date. During 2009 the
Company received production reports from third party that appear to be
inaccurate. The company is currently investigating its possibilities. On
November 2009 the Company agreed with TI that his paid-up balance will prevail
as a note, and all his equity interest will be belong to the
Company.
Potential
exposure due to Pending Project under Due Diligence:
Barnett
Shale, Fort Worth area of Texas Project - On September 2, 2008, the Company
entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (the "MOU") to enter into a
definitive asset purchase agreement with Blackhawk Investments Limited, a Turks
& Caicos company ("Blackhawk") based in London, England. Blackhawk exercised
its exclusive option to acquire all of the issued and allotted share capital in
Sand haven Securities Limited ("SSL"), and its underlying oil and gas assets in
NT Energy. SSL owns approximately 62% of the outstanding securities of NT
Energy, Inc., a Delaware company ("NT Energy"). NT energy holds rights to
mineral leases covering approximately 12,972 acres in the Barnett Shale, Fort
Worth area of Texas containing proved and probable undeveloped natural gas
reserves. SSL was a wholly owned subsidiary of Sand haven Resources plc ("Sand
haven"), a public company registered in Ireland, and listed on the Plus exchange
in London. In lieu of hindering the due diligence process by Sand
haven officers, the Company could not complete adequately its due diligence, and
said transaction was null and void.
Trafalgar
Convertible Note:
In
connection with the convertible note and as collateral for performance by the
Company under the terms of said note, the Company issued to Trafalgar 45,000
common shares to be placed as security for said note. Said shares considered by
the Company to be escrow shares. Given the net loss for the period,
such shares are ant dilutive to weighted-average basic shares
outstanding.
Short
Term Loan – by Investor:
On
September 5, 2008 the Company entered a short term loan memorandum, with Mahomet
Hauk Nudes, for a short term loan (“bridge”) of $220,000 to bridge the drilling
program of the Company. As a consideration for said facility, the Company grants
the investor with 100% cashless warrants coverage for two years at exercise
price of $1.50 per share. The investor made a loan of $220,000 to the company on
September 15, 2008 (where said funds were wired to the company drilling
contractor), that was paid in full on October 8, 2008. Accordingly the investor
is entitled to 2,000 cashless warrants from September 15, 2008 at exercise price
of $1.50 for a period of 2 years. The Company contests the validity
of said warrants for a cause.
DCG
Drilling Rights:
On
November 6, 2008, the Company exercised an option to drill its fifth well in the
Adams-Baggett field in West Texas. The Company has 120 days to drill the lease
to be assigned to it as a result of the option exercise. Pipeline construction
related to connecting wells 42-105-40868 and 42-105-40820 had been completed.
Per the owners of the land the assignment of the lease will terminate effective
March 3, 2009 in the event that the Company does not drill and complete a well
that is producing or capable of producing oil and/or gas in paying quantities.
The Company contests the owner termination dates.
As
detailed in this report, the Buyer is not performing under the notes. The
Company retained an attorney in Texas to pursue its rights under the agreements
and the collateral.
Status as
Vendor with the Federal Government:
The
Company updated its vendor status with the Central Contractor Registration which
is the primary registrant database for the US Federal government that collects,
validates, stores, and disseminates data in support of agency acquisition
missions, including Federal agency contract and assistance awards.
Reverse
Split and Name changed:
Effective
February 24, 2009, the Company affected a reverse split of its issued and
outstanding shares of common stock on a 100 for one basis. As a
result of the reverse split, the issued and outstanding shares of common stock
were reduced from 92,280,919 to 922,809. The authorized shares of common
stock will remain as 400,000,000 and the par value will remain the same. New
CUSIP was issued for the Company's common stock which is 92905M
203. The symbol of the Company was changed from VTEX into
VXRC. Effective July 15, 2009, the Company changed its name from
Vortex Resources Corp. to Yasheng Eco-Trade Corporation. In addition,
effective July 15, 2009, the Company’s quotation symbol on the Over-the-Counter
Bulletin Board was changed from VXRC to YASH. As such a new CUSIP number was
issued on July 5, 2009. The new number is: 985085109.
Pending
Transactions and exposure associated with the Yasheng Group:
As
discussed prior, the Company entered into series of agreements with Yasheng
Group. Yasheng Group failed to comply with the Company due diligence procedure,
and as such terminated the definitive agreement with the Company on November
2009. In connection to the Yasheng agreements, the Company entered agreements or
arrangement or negotiations as followings:
(i) On
July 2009 the Company signed a financial advisor engagement letter with
Cukierman & Co. Investment House Ltd, a foreign Investment
banking firm (“CIH”) to obtain bank financing for the Yasheng Russia Breading
Complex as was signed in June with Create (See note Commitments and
contingencies). CIH has retained Dr. Sam Frankel to assist in obtaining funds
from semi-governmental funding sources. Per the agreement the Company will pay
CIH a monthly retainer fee of $3,750. A millstone payment of $25,000 will be
paid to CIH provided that CIH will present a banking institution which in
principal will secure minimum $25 million financing to the Create joint
venture.
(ii) On
July 2009 the Company signed an agreement with Better Online Solutions (“BOSC”)
for consulting services for the Company logistics center, as well as for the
Crate joint venture. Said agreement was signed for the purpose of establishing
supply chain solutions and RFID protocols. In return the Company will provide
BOSC with a right of first refusal of matching its best contract for supplying
services to the logistics center.
(iii) On
July 2009 the Company has entered negotiations with Management Consulting
Company (“MCC”) to explore further expansion and acquisitions for Yasheng Russia
(See Create Joint Venture). MCC is a division of IFD Capital Group in
Russia.
(iv) On
January 20, 2009, the Company entered into a non-binding Term Sheet (the "Term
Sheet") with Yasheng in connection with the development of a logistics center.
Pursuant to the Term Sheet, the Company granted Yasheng an irrevocable option to
merge all or part of its assets into the Company (the "Yasheng Option"). If
Yasheng exercises the Yasheng Option, as consideration for the transaction to be
completed between the parties, the Company would issue Yasheng such number of
shares of the Company's common stock calculated by dividing the value of the
assets which will be included in the transaction with the Company by the volume
weighted average price of the Company's common stock as quoted on a national
securities exchange or the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board for the ten days
preceding the closing date of such transaction. The value of the assets
contributed by Yasheng will be based upon the asset value set forth in Bashing’s
audited financial statements provided to the Company prior to the closing of any
such transaction. On June 18, 2009, Change Golden Dragon Industrial Co., Ltd., a
company which is not affiliated with Yasheng ("Golden Dragon"), delivered a
notice whereby it has advised that it wishes to exercise the Yasheng Option by
merging into the Company in consideration of shares of preferred stock with a
stated value in the amount of $220,000,000 that may be converted at a $1.10 per
share, a premium to the Company's current market price, into 200,000,000 shares
of common stock of the Company. The shareholders of Golden Dragon (the
"Shareholders") are all foreign citizens. As a result, the issuance, if
consummated will be in accordance with Regulation S as adopted under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Further, the Shareholders are entitled to
assign such shares as each deems appropriate. In addition, the Company is
required to raise $20,000,000 to be used by Golden Dragon for working capital
purposes. Golden Dragon is a Chinese corporation with primary operation in Gansu
province of China. The Company designs, develops, manufactures and markets
farming and sideline products including fruits, barley, hops and agricultural
materials. In lieu of merging its assets into the Company, the
Company and Yasheng entered into an additional Letter of Intent on June 12, 2009
whereby Yasheng agreed to use its best efforts to have the majority stockholders
of Yasheng (the "Group Stockholders") enter and close an agreement with the
Company whereby the Company would acquire approximately 55% of the issued and
outstanding securities of Yasheng from the Group Stockholders in consideration
of 300,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company. The June 12, 2009 letter
of intent was approved by the Company's Board of Directors on August 12, 2009.
The Company and Yasheng initially contemplated a closing date of July 15,
2009.
(v) On
August 7, 2009, the Company has entered into a Memorandum of Terms in
which it will provide an equity line in the amount up to $1,000,000 to Golden
Water Agriculture, a corporation to be formed in Israel (“Golden
Water”). Upon funding the equity line, the Company will receive
shares of Series A Preferred Stock (the “Golden Water Preferred”) convertible
into 30% of Golden Water, which assumes that the full $1,000,000 is
funded. The Company will be entitled to convert the Golden
Water Preferred into the most senior class of shares of Golden Water at a 15%
discount to any recent round of financing. The Company shall be
required to convert the Golden Water Preferred in the event of an initial public
offering based on a valuation three times the valuation of the
investment. To date, no consideration has been exchanged between the
Company and Golden Water. Golden Water has developed a process by which gaseous
oxygen can be introduced into water at the molecular level and retained at a
high concentration for a long period of time, as well as the ability to add
gaseous elements including nitrogen, carbon dioxide and more. The parties that
are forming Golden Water have filed for patents in the United States and
Israel.
(vi)
Logistics Center - On August 12, 2009, the Company entered into a 45 day
exclusivity period to finalize an "Option to Buy" on a lease agreement for a
"big box" facility located in Southern, California (the "Facility"). The
Facility consists of approximately 1,000,010 square feet industrial building
located in Victorville, California and the lease is expected to commence
November 1, 2009 and continue for a period of seven years, with two five-year
extension periods The Company advanced a $25,000 non-refundable deposit
representing 10% of the required security deposit for the entire lease. The
non-refundable deposit allowed the Company to exclusively negotiate the option
to buy the Facility as all other terms of the lease have been agreed upon in
principal. The Company is also pursuing certain tax and economic incentives
associated with the establishment and development of the Yasheng Asia Pacific
Cooperative Zone – its core business. These incentives include LAMBRA Enterprise
Zone Sales and Use Tax Credit (7% of qualified capital equipment expenses),
LAMBRA Enterprise Zone Hiring Credit (50% of qualified employees wages reducing
10% each year for 5 years), County of San Bernardino Economic Development Agency
assistance in employee recruitment screening and qualification and filing for
LAMBRA benefits (estimated value $8,000 per qualified employee).
Assuming
that the option to purchase were finalized, the economic terms of the lease
agreement of the Facility (as all other terms of the lease have been agreed upon
in principal) would have been be as follows:
Year
|
|
Rent
|
|
|
Security
|
|
|
R/E tax (est.)
|
|
|
Mica (est.)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Begin
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
252,500.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
100,000.00 |
|
|
|
352,500.00 |
|
1
|
|
|
575,700.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
992,664.00 |
|
2
|
|
|
2,302,800.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
2,719,764.00 |
|
3
|
|
|
2,545,200.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
2,962,164.00 |
|
4
|
|
|
2,545,200.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
2,962,164.00 |
|
5
|
|
|
2,787,600.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
3,204,564.00 |
|
6
|
|
|
3,030,000.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
3,446,964.00 |
|
7
|
|
|
3,030,000.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
3,446,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
|
|
|
16,816,500.00 |
|
|
|
252,500.00 |
|
|
|
2,520,000.00 |
|
|
|
498,748.00 |
|
|
|
20,087,748.00 |
|
Per
authorization received from Yasheng Group the Company entered negotiations with
the owner of the Facility to acquire the “big box” with financing from the
owner. The Company exchanged a few counter offers with the Facility’s owner. As
disclosed by the Company (see below and Subsequent events), Yasheng BVI noticed
the Company of termination of the Exchange Agreement, and as such the Company,
which is still pursuing its core business (developing of a logistics center),
instructed its listing agents to locate a smaller Facility for the company than
the above.
(vii) On
August 5, 2009, the Company together with Yasheng Group, a California
corporation ("Yasheng" and together with the Company, the "Yasheng Parties")
entered a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU")with Pfau, Pfau & Pfau LLC
("Pfau") a Florida limited liability company for the purpose of creating a joint
venture for the development and operation of three properties owned by Pfau. The
Company received Paul’s countersigned MOU on August 16, 2009. Pfau owns three
properties including (i) approximately 28,000 acres in Southeastern San Benito
County, California which includes approximately 12,000 acres designated and
planned by Pfau for olive trees, an olive oil milling and bottling plant and
potential oil wells (nine wells exiting on the property, where only one well is
producing), (ii) approximately 45 acres in Kona, Hawaii which is planned to be
developed by Pfau into a coffee plantation and (iii) approximately 502 acres in
San Marcos, California planned to be developed by Pfau into about 750 residences
and an off-site 1.5 million square feet of commercial/mixed use land. The
intentions of the parties to this proposed joint venture are (i) to re-finance
the existing liens to provide that the new loans in the approximate amount of
$50 million (the "New Loan"), which debt can be serviced through the proceeds
generated from the properties, and (ii) to obtain financing (a development line
of credit in the additional amount of $85 million) (the "Line of Credit") for
further implementation of the Pfau properties' agricultural, crude oil and
residential development. Pfau members shall deposit into an escrow account 50%
ownership of Pfau, which will be released to the Yasheng Parties upon the
funding and the release of any existing liens on Pfau and its properties. In
return for the 50% ownership of Pfau, Yasheng Parties will guaranty the New Loan
and the Line of Credit, if needed, , subject to acceptance by the Yasheng
Parties of the terms and conditions of the funding. Pfau will allow Yasheng
Parties to use its collateral to obtain the New Loan and the Line of Credit. As
Pfau has filed for Chapter 11 protection with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the
Southern District of California (case # is 08-12840-PB11), it is intended that
the signing of the MOU or the Yasheng Parties ownership of 50% of Pfau, will in
no way subject the Yasheng Parties or any of their officers or directors to
liability to the existing creditors of Pfau or to any third party. As such any
funding obtained by Yasheng Parties, if at all, and the execution of definitive
joint venture documents, will be subject to Court approval. Pfau is has filed
for Chapter 11 protection with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern
District of California (case # is 08-12840-PB11). On October 22, 2009, Pfau
reached an agreement with its secured creditors for extension of the first
mortgage amounting to approximately $22.8M until May 2010, which may be extended
further until September 2010. The second and third secured creditors represent
about $28M in debt have consented to the extension. Pfau is in active
negotiations with the holders of the second and third position in order to
re-structure this debt as well. There is no guaranty that Pfau will be
successful in re-structuring this debt. The agreement providing for the
extension of the first position holder was approved by the Court. As such any
funding obtained by Yasheng Parties, if at all, and the execution of definitive
joint venture documents, will be subject to Court approval as well as the
approval of the Board of Directors of the Company.
(viii) On
August 26, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with Yasheng Group, a
California corporation ("Group"), pursuant to which the Company agreed to
acquire 49% of the outstanding securities (the "Yasheng Logistic Securities") of
Yasheng (the United States) Logistic Service Company Incorporated ("Yasheng
Logistic"), a California corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Group. In
consideration of the Yasheng Logistic Securities, the Company would issue Group
100,000,000 restricted shares of common stock of the Company (the "Company
Shares"). The Company is required to issue the Company Shares and Yasheng
Logistic is required to issue the Yasheng Logistic Securities within 32 days of
the Agreement. Further, Group has agreed to cancel the 50,000,000 shares of the
Company that were previously issued to Group. The sole asset of Yasheng Logistic
is the certificate of approval for Chinese enterprises investing in foreign
countries granted by the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of
China.
(ix) On
August 26, 2009, the Company entered into a Stock Exchange Agreement (the
“Exchange Agreement”) with Yasheng Group (BVI), a British Virgin Island
corporation (“Yasheng-BVI”), pursuant to which Yasheng-BVI agreed to sell the
Company 75,000,000 shares (the “Group Shares”) of common stock of Yasheng Group,
a California corporation (“Group”) in consideration of 396,668,000 shares (the
“Company Shares”) of common stock of the Company (the “Exchange”).
(x) On
October 29, 2009, the Company entered into a Collaboration Agreement (the
"Agreement") with IPF-AGRO Management Company ("IPF"), Yasheng Group ("Yasheng")
and Cukierman & Co. Consulting (the Company, IPF and Yasheng herein
collectively referred to as the "Parties") for the purpose of creating a joint
venture on the basis of joining the agricultural and financial assets of the
Parties and developing business contacts of the Parties. The Parties would
collaborate on various investment projects associated with agricultural industry
development in Russia, including the production, storage and marketing of
potatoes and barley, cattle breeding and the trading of agricultural products on
an international basis. Under the Exchange Agreement, the Exchange Agreement may
be terminated by written consent of both parties, by either party if the other
party has breached the Exchange Agreement or if the closing conditions are not
satisfied or by either party if the exchange is not closed by September 30, 2009
(the “Closing Date”). As part of the closing procedure, the Company
requested that Yasheng-BVI provide a current legal opinion from a reputable
Chinese law firm attesting to the fact that no further regulatory approval from
the Chinese government is required as well as other closing conditions to close
the Exchange. On November 3, 2009, the Company sent Group
and Yasheng-BVI a letter demanding various closing items. Group and
Yasheng-BVI did not deliver the requested items and, on November 9, 2009, after
verbally consulting management of the Company with respect to the hardship and
delays expected consolidating both companies audits, Group and
Yasheng-BVI sent a termination notice to the Company advising that
the Exchange Agreement had been terminated.
The
Company is presently evaluating its options in moving forward with respect to
Group based on various letters of intent and agreements with Group regarding
various matters and is presently determining whether it should cease all
activities with Group. As stated in Group press release: “Yasheng Group has
other agreements with or involving Yasheng Eco Trade Corp as previously
announced by Yasheng Eco Trade Corp and Yasheng Group can provide no assurances
at this time that those agreements will be consummated”. As such, the
closing of any of the above (i) to (x) business opportunities by the Company, if
at all, will require the completion of definitive documentations and completion
of due diligence by the Company. There is no guarantee that the
parties will reach final agreements or that the transactions will close on the
terms set forth above. Cukierman & Co. Investment House Ltd – a foreign
Investment banking firm, as an advisor to the Company, is currently working with
Yasheng Group trying to complete the due diligence package needed for the
Company to acquire a stake in Yasheng Group or to proceed with any of the
above, if at all. On April 5, 2010 the Company issued a formal
request to Yasheng demanding that they surrender of the 50,000,000 shares that
were issued to them, as well as reimburse the Company for its expenses
associated with the transaction in the amount of $348,240.
Common
Stock:
On
January 23, 2009, the Company completed the sale of 50,000 shares of the
Company's common stock to one accredited investor for net proceeds of $75,000
(or $0.015 per common share). The shares of common stock were issued in
connection with this transaction in a private placement transaction made in
reliance upon exemptions from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) under the
Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506 promulgated there under. The investor is an
accredited investor as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the
Securities Act of 1933.
On March
5, 2009, the Company and Yasheng Group implemented an amendment to the Term
Sheet pursuant to which the parties agreed to explore further business
opportunities including the potential lease of an existing logistics center
located in Inland Empire, California, and/or alliance with other major groups
complimenting and/or synergetic to the Company/Yasheng JV as approved by the
board of directors on March 9, 2009. Further, in accordance with the amendment,
the Company issued 50,000,000 shares to Yasheng and 38,461,538 shares to Capitol
Properties in consideration for exploring the business opportunities, and
providing –intellectual property and know-how. The shares of common
stock were issued based on the Board consent on March 9, 2009, in connection
with this transaction in a private transaction made in reliance upon exemptions
from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933
and/or Rule 506 promulgated there under. Yasheng and Capitol are accredited
investors as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the
Securities Act of 1933. The Company calculated its expenses associated with the
transaction to be $348,240, and expensed that amount on the income
statement.
As
reported by the Company on its Form 10-Q filed on November 14, 2008, Star Equity
Investments, LLC (“Star”) entered, on September 1, 2008, into that certain
Irrevocable Assignment of Promissory Note, which resulted in Star being a
creditor of the Company with a loan payable by the Company in the amount of
$1,000,000 (the “Debt”). No relationship exists between Star and the Company
and/or its affiliates, directors, officers or any associate of an officer or
director. On March 11, 2009, the Company entered and closed an
agreement with Star pursuant to which Star agreed to convert all principal and
interest associated with the Debt into 8,500,000 shares of common stock and
released the Company from any further claims.
On
October 1, 2008, the Company entered into a short term note payable (6 month
maturity) with AP – a foreign Company controlled by Shalom Attia (the brother of
Yossi Attia, the Company CEO – the “Holder”), a third party, for $330,000. The
note had 12% interest commencing October 1, 2008 and can be converted (including
interest) into common shares of the Company at an established conversion price
of $0.015 per share. Holder has advised that it has no desire to convert the AP
Note into shares of the Company’s common stock at $1.50 per share at this time
as the Company’s current bid and ask is $0.23 and $0.72, respectively, and there
was virtually no liquidity in the Company’s common stock. The Company was in
default on the AP Note, and Holder has threatened to commence litigation if it
not paid in full. The Company does not have the cash resources to pay off the AP
Note due to current capital constraints. Holder has agreed that it is willing to
convert the AP Note if the conversion price is reset to $0.04376 resulting in
the issuance of 8,000,000 shares of common stock (the “Shares”) of the Company
or 7.56% of the Company assuming 105,884,347 shares of common stock outstanding
(97,884,347 as of May 7, 2009 plus 8,000,000 shares issued to Holder). The
parties entered a settlement agreement in May 2009. The agreement
with AP was approved by the Board of Directors where Mr. Yossi Attia has
abstained from voting due to a potential conflict of interest.
On July
15, 2009 TAS which owned Series B preferred shares, converted the Series B
Preferred Shares to 7,500,000 common stock 0.001 par values per
share.
On July
23, 2009, the Company issued 46,460 shares of its common stock 0.001 par value
per share, to Stephen M. Fleming, the Company’s securities counsel pursuant to
the 2008 Employee Stock Incentive Plan registered on Form S-8
Registration.
On August
17, 2009, the Company entered into a Subscription Agreement with an accredited
investor pursuant to which the investor agreed to acquire up $400,000 in shares
of common stock of the Company at a per share purchase price equal to the
average closing price for the five trading days prior to close. On August 17,
2009, the accredited investor purchased 350,877 restricted shares of common each
at $0.57 per share for an aggregate purchase price of $200,000, which was paid
in cash. On August 31, 2009, the accredited investor purchased an additional
150,060 shares of common stock at $.3332 per share for an aggregate purchase
price of $50,000, which was paid in cash. On September 4, 2009, an accredited
investor purchased 574,718 restricted shares of common each at $.22136 per share
for an aggregate purchase price of $127,219.48, which was paid in cash. The
shares of common stock were offered and sold to the accredited investor in a
private placement transaction made in reliance upon exemptions from registration
pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and/or Rule 506
promulgated thereunder. The investor is an accredited investor as defined in
Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act of
1933.
On
October 22, 2009, the Company issued Corporate Evolutions, Inc. 500,000 shares
of common stock. Corporate Evolutions, Inc. provides investor relation services
to the Company and is an accredited investor as defined in Rule 501 of
Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933. The shares were
issued in reliance upon exemptions from registration pursuant to Section 4(2)
under the Securities Act of 1933 and/or Rule 506 promulgated
thereunder.
On or
around October 28, 2009 the Company and all other parties settled the Rusk
dispute for $400,000 to be paid within 75 days from settlement. As the Company
does not have sufficient funds to pay the Settlement Amount, and Emvelco RE
Corp. (“Emvelco RE Corp.”) has agreed indemnify the Company and pay
the Settlement Amount if the Company issues Emvelco RE 4,000,000 shares of
common stock of the Company (the “Shares”)., the Company authorized to issue
Emvelco RE the Shares which shall be issued under Section 4(2) of the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, and which shall be considered validly issued and duly
authorized.
On
December 30, 2009, the Company entered into a Preferred Stock Purchase
Agreement dated as of December 30, 2009 (the “Agreement”). Pursuant to the
Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Investor a commitment fee of $250,000
(the “Commitment Fee”), payable at the earlier of the six monthly anniversary of
the execution of the Agreement or the first tranche. The Company has
the right to elect to pay the Commitment Fee in immediately available funds or
by issuance of shares of Common Stock. As such the Company issued to the
Investor 10,000,000 shares of Common Stock of the Company, in a transaction made
pursuant to Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act of 1933.
On
December 30, 2009, the Company entered into an Exchange Agreement with Moran
Atias (“Atias”) whereby the Company and Ms. Atias exchanged $100,000 of a
promissory note in the amount of $250,000 held by Ms. Atias into 11,903,333
shares of Common Stock of the Company, in a transaction made pursuant to Section
3(a)(9) of the Securities Act of 1933. The promissory note, of which
a portion was converted by Ms. Atias, was initially issued on August 8, 2008
(See also subsequent events).
On
January 20, 2010, the Company, in an effort to reduce outstanding debt of the
Company, entered into an Exchange Agreement with Moran Atias (“Atias”) whereby
the Company and Ms. Atias exchanged $100,000 of a promissory note in the amount
of $250,000 held by Ms. Atias into 13,000,000 shares of common stock of the
Company, in a transaction made pursuant to Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act
of 1933. The promissory note, of which a portion was converted by Ms.
Atias (see above), was initially issued on August 8, 2008. The
Company’s issuance of the securities described in the preceding sentence is
exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 pursuant to the
exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act
of 1933 for a transaction not involving a public offering of
securities. Ms. Atias still holds a note payable by the Company
for $50,000.
On March
23, 2010, the Company issued 8,000,000 shares of its common stock at 0.006 par
value to Donfeld, Kelley & Rollman (“Kelley”), the Company lawyer, as
partial payment for legal fees due. The promissory note, which was converted by
Kelley, was issued on August 30, 2009. The Company’s issuance
of the securities described in the preceding sentence is exempt from
registration under the Securities Act of 1933 pursuant to the exemption from
registration provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 for a
transaction not involving a public offering of securities
Preferred
Stock:
Series A and B were converted in 2009 into
common stock – see above.
Series C - On November 26,
2009, the Company issued 210,087 shares of Series C Preferred Stock for
aggregate consideration of $5,000. Each six shares of Series C
Preferred Stock is convertible into one share of common stock; provided,
however, in the event that the shares of Series C Preferred Stock have been
outstanding for a period of one year, then it shall be automatically converted
into shares of common stock in accordance with the aforementioned conversion
formula. The Company issued the securities to one non-U.S. persons
(as that term is defined in Regulation S of the Securities Act of 1933) in an
offshore transaction relying on Regulation S and/or Section 4(2) of the
Securities Act of 1933.
Commitment
of Issuance of Preferred Stock:
Series D – Not issued yet - On
December 30, 2009, the Company entered into a Preferred Stock Purchase
Agreement dated as of December 30, 2009 (the “Agreement”) with Socius
Capital Group, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company d/b/a Socius Life
Sciences Capital Group, LLC including its designees, successors and assigns (the
“Investor”). Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company will issue to the Investor
up to $5,000,000 of the Company’s newly created Series D Preferred Stock (the
“Preferred Stock”). The purchase price of the Preferred Stock is $10,000 per
share. The shares of Preferred Stock that are issued to the Investor will bear a
cumulative dividend of 10.0% per annum, payable in shares of Preferred
Stock, will be redeemable under certain circumstances and will not be
convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock (the “Common Stock”).
Subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the Company has the right
to determine (1) the number of shares of Preferred Stock that it will
require the Investor to purchase from the Company, up to a maximum purchase
price of $5,000,000, (2) whether it will require the Investor to purchase
Preferred Stock in one or more tranches, and (3) the timing of such
required purchase or purchases of Preferred Stock. The terms of the Preferred
Stock are set forth in a Certificate of Designations of Preferences, Rights and
Limitations of Series D Preferred Stock (the “Preferred Stock Certificate”) that
the Company filed with the Delaware Secretary of State on December 18,
2009. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Investor a
commitment fee of $250,000 (the “Commitment Fee”), payable at the earlier of the
six monthly anniversary of the execution of the Agreement or the first
tranche. The Company has the right to elect to pay the Commitment Fee
in immediately available funds or by issuance of shares of Common Stock.
Concurrently with its execution of the Agreement, the Company issued to the
Investor a warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase shares of Common Stock with an
aggregate exercise price of up to $6,750,000 depending upon the amount of
Preferred Stock that is purchased by the Investor. Each time that the Company
requires the Investor to purchase shares of Preferred Stock, a portion of the
Warrant will become exercisable by the Investor over a five-year period for a
number of shares of Common Stock equal to (1) the aggregate purchase price
payable by the Investor for such shares of Preferred Stock multiplied by 135%,
with such amount divided by (2) the per share Warrant exercise price. The
initial exercise price under the Warrant is $0.022 per share of Common Stock.
Thereafter, the exercise price for each portion of the Warrant that becomes
exercisable upon the Company’s election to require the Investor to purchase
Preferred Stock will equal the closing price of the Common Stock on the date
that the Company delivers its election notice. The Investor is entitled to pay
the Warrant exercise price in immediately available funds, by delivery of cash,
a secured promissory note or, if a registration statement covering the resale of
the Common Stock subject to the Warrant is not in effect, on a cashless basis.
Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company agreed to file with the Securities and
Exchange Commission a registration statement covering the resale of the shares
of Common Stock that are issuable to the Investor under the Warrant and in
satisfaction of the Commitment Fee.
Series E – Not issued yet – On
April 15, 2010 the Company’s Board of Director approved settlement agreement
with Trafalgar effective December 31, 2009. The parties agreed that the debts
owed to Trafalgar will be converted into Series E Preferred Stock which shall
carry a maturity of 30 months and bear 7% annual interest. The Series E
Preferred Shares are convertible into six hundred million common shares of the
Company, at any time upon written notice to the Company. The Company
recognizes that the conversion would cause it to exceed its authorized shares;
in the event of conversion, the Company will authorize more shares at that time.
9.
Stock Option Plan and Employee Options
2004
Incentive Plan
a) Stock
option plans
In 2004,
the Board of Directors established the “2004 Incentive Plan” (“the Plan”), with
an aggregate of 800,000 shares of common stock authorized for issuance under the
Plan. The Plan was approved by the Company’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders in
May 2004. In 2005, the Plan was adjusted to increase the number of shares of
common stock issuable under such plan from 800,000 shares to 1,200,000 shares.
The adjustment was approved at the Company’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders in
June 2005. The Plan provides that incentive and nonqualified options may be
granted to key employees, officers, directors and consultants of the Company for
the purpose of providing an incentive to those persons. The Plan may be
administered by either the Board of Directors or a committee of two directors
appointed by the Board of Directors (the "Committee"). The Board of Directors or
Committee determines, among other things, the persons to whom stock options are
granted, the number of shares subject to each option, the date or dates upon
which each option may be exercised and the exercise price per share. Options
granted under the Plan are generally exercisable for a period of up to ten years
from the date of grant. Incentive options granted to stockholders that hold
in excess of 10% of the total combined voting power or value of all classes of
stock of the Company must have an exercise price of not less than 110% of the
fair market value of the underlying stock on the date of the grant. The Company
will not grant a nonqualified option with an exercise price less than 85% of the
fair market value of the underlying common stock on the date of the
grant.
(b) Other
Options
As of
March 31, 2010, there were 330,000 options outstanding with a weighted average
exercise price of $3.77.
No
options were exercised during the period ended March 31, 2010 and the year ended
December 31, 2009.
The
following table summarizes information about shares subject to outstanding
options as of March 31, 2010, which was issued to current or former employees,
consultants or directors pursuant to the 2004 Incentive Plan and grants to
Directors:
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
Number
Outstanding
|
|
Range of
Exercise Prices
|
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Remaining
Life in Years
|
|
|
Number
Exercisable
|
|
|
Weighted-
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
100,000
|
|
$ |
4.21 |
|
|
$ |
4.21 |
|
|
|
1.79 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
4.21 |
|
30,000
|
|
$ |
4.78 |
|
|
$ |
4.78 |
|
|
|
2.32 |
|
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
$ |
4.78 |
|
200,000
|
|
$ |
3.40 |
|
|
$ |
3.40 |
|
|
|
3.31 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
330,000
|
|
$ |
3.40-$4.78 |
|
|
$ |
3.77 |
|
|
|
2.66 |
|
|
|
280,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.84 |
|
(c)
Warrants
On June
7, 2005, the Company granted 100,000 warrants to a consulting company as
compensation for investor relations services at exercise prices as follows:
40,000 warrants at $3.50 per share, 20,000 warrants at $4.25 per share, 20,000
warrants at $4.75 per share and 20,000 warrants at $5 per share. The warrants
have a term of five years and increments vest proportionately at a rate of a
total 8,333 warrants per month over a one year period. The warrants are being
expensed over the performance period of one year. In February 2006, the Company
terminated its contract with the consultant company providing investor relation
services. The warrants granted under the contract were reduced
time-proportionally to 83,330, based on the time in service by the consultant
company.
As part
of some Private Placement Memorandums the Company issued warrants that can be
summarized in the following table:
Name
|
|
Date
|
|
Terms
|
|
|
No. of
Warrants
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Party
1
|
|
3/30/2008
|
|
2
years from Issuing
|
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
$ |
1.50 |
|
Party
1
|
|
3/30/2008
|
|
2
years from Issuing
|
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
$ |
2.00 |
|
Party
2
|
|
6/05/2008
|
|
2
years from Issuing
|
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
$ |
1.50 |
|
Party
3
|
|
6/30/2008
|
|
2
years from Issuing
|
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
$ |
1.50 |
|
Party
4
|
|
9/5/2008
|
|
2
years from Issuing
|
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
$ |
1.50 |
|
None of
the warrants were exercised to the date of this filling.
Cashless
Warrants:
On
September 5, 2008 the Company entered a short term loan memorandum, with Mehmet
Haluk Undes a third party, for a short term loan (“bridge”) of up to $275,000 to
bridge the drilling program of the Company. As a consideration for said
facility, the Company grants the investor with 100% cashless warrants coverage
for two years at exercise price of 1.50 per share. The investor made a loan of
$220,000 to the company on September 15, 2008, that was paid in full on October
8, 2008. Accordingly the investor is entitled to 200,000 cashless warrants as
from September 15, 2008 at exercise price of $1.50 for a period of 2 years. The
Company contests the validity of said warrants.
(d)
Shares
On May 6,
2008 the Company issued 5,000 shares of its common stock, $0.001 par value per
share, to Stephen Martin Durante in accordance with the instructions provided by
the Company pursuant to the 2004 Employee Stock Incentive Plan registered on
Form S-8 Registration.
On June
11, 2008, the Company entered into a Services Agreement with Mehmet Haluk Undes
(the "Undes Services Agreement") pursuant to which the Company engaged Mr. Undes
for purposes of assisting the Company in identifying, evaluating and structuring
mergers, consolidations, acquisitions, joint ventures and strategic alliances in
Southeast Europe, Middle East and the Turkic Republics of Central Asia. Pursuant
to the Undes Services Agreement, Mr. Undes has agreed to provide us services
related to the identification, evaluation, structuring, negotiating and closing
of business acquisitions, identification of strategic partners as well as the
provision of legal services. The term of the agreement is for five years and the
Company has agreed to issue Mr. Undes 5,250 shares of common stock that shall be
registered on a Form S8 no later than July 1, 2008.
On August
13, 2008, the Company issued 160 shares of its common stock, $0.001 par value
per share, to Robin Ann Gorelick, the Company Secretary, in accordance with the
instructions provided by the Company pursuant to the 2004 Employee Stock
Incentive Plan registered on Form S-8 Registration.
Following
the above securities issuance, the 2004 Plan was closed, and no more securities
can be issued under this plan.
2008 Stock Incentive
Plan:
On July
28, 2008 - the Company held a special meeting of the shareholders for four
initiatives, consisting of approval of a new board of directors, approval of the
conversion of preferred shares to common shares, an increase in the authorized
shares and a stock incentive plan. All initiatives were approved by the majority
of shareholders. The 2008 Employee Stock Incentive Plan (the "2008
Incentive Plan") authorized the board to issue up to 50,000 shares of Common
Stock under the plan.
On August
23 the Company issued 1,000 shares of its common stock 0.001 par value per
share, to Robert M. Yaspan, the Company lawyer, in accordance with the
instructions provided by the Company pursuant to the 2008 Employee Stock
Incentive Plan registered on Form S-8 Registration.
On
November 4, 2008, the Company issued 2,540 shares of its common stock 0.001 par
value per share, to one consultant (2,000 shares) and two employees (540
shares), in accordance with the instructions provided by the Company pursuant to
the 2008 Employee Stock Incentive Plan registered on Form S-8
Registration.
On July
23, 2009 - , the Company issued 46,460 shares of its common stock 0.001 par
value per share, to Stephen M. Fleming, the Company’s securities counsel
pursuant to the 2008 Employee Stock Incentive Plan,
Following
the above securities issuance, the 2008 Plan was closed, and no more securities
can be issued under this plan.
10.
Related party transactions
During
the first quarter of 2010 and the years 2009 and 2008, Yossi Attia paid
substantial expenses for the Company and also deferred his salary. As of March
31, 2010, the Company owes Mr. Attia approximately $998,000.
During
the first fiscal quarter of 2010, the Company accrued, but did not pay,
approximately $25,000 in directors’ fees.
11.
Treasury Stock
Treasury Stock Repurchase - In
June 2006, the Company's Board of Directors approved a program to repurchase,
from time to time, at management's discretion, up to 700,000 shares of the
Company's common stock in the open market or in private transactions commencing
on June 20, 2006 and continuing through December 15, 2006 at prevailing market
prices. Repurchases will be made under the program using our own cash resources
and will be in accordance with Rule 10b-18 under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and other applicable laws, rules and regulations. A licensed Stock Broker
Firm is acting as agent for our stock repurchase program. Pursuant to the
unanimous consent of the Board of Directors in September 2006, the number of
shares that may be purchased under the Repurchase Program was increased from
700,000 to 1,500,000 shares of common stock and the Repurchase Program was
extended until October 1, 2007, or until the increased amount of shares is
purchased. Pursuant to the Sale Agreement of Navigator, the Company got on
closing (February 2, 2007) 622,531 shares of the Company’s common stock as
partial consideration. The Company shares were valued at $1.34 per share,
representing the closing price of the Company on the NASDAQ Capital Market on
February 16, 2007, the closing of the sale. The Company canceled the common
stock acquired during the disposition in the amount of $834,192. All, the
Company 660,362 treasury shares were retired and canceled during August and
September 2008. On November 20, 2008, the Company issued a press release
announcing that its Board of Directors has approved a share repurchase program.
Under the program the Company is authorized to purchase up to 100,000 of its
shares of common stock in open market transactions at the discretion of
management. All stock repurchases will be subject to the requirements of Rule
10b-18 under the Exchange Act and other rules that govern such
purchases.
As of
March 31, 2010 the Company has 1,000 treasury shares in its possession (which
been purchased in the open market per the above program) scheduled to be
cancelled.
12. Supplemental
Oil and Gas Disclosures
The
accompanying table presents information concerning the Company's natural gas
producing activities (as the assets been divested – see Note 5) as required by
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 69,
“Disclosures about Oil and Gas Producing Activities." Capitalized costs relating
to oil and gas producing activities from continuing operations for the year
ended on December 31, 2008 are as follows (said assets was disposed during the
first quarter of 2009):
|
|
As of December 31, 2008
|
|
Proved
undeveloped natural properties – Direct investment
|
|
$ |
2,300,000 |
|
Unproved
properties – option exercised
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
Total
|
|
|
2,350,000 |
|
Accumulated
depreciation, depletion, amortization , and impairment
|
|
|
— |
|
Net
capitalized costs
|
|
$ |
2,350,000 |
|
All of
these reserves are located in DCG field located in the USA.
Estimated
Quantities of Proved Oil and Gas Reserves
The
following table presents the Company's estimate of its net proved crude oil and
natural gas reserves as of September 30, 2008 elated to
continuing operations. The Company's management emphasizes that reserve
estimates are inherently imprecise and that estimates of
new discoveries are more imprecise than those of producing
oil and gas properties. Accordingly, the estimates are expected to
change as future information becomes available. The estimates have
been prepared by independent natural gas reserve engineers.
|
|
MMCF
(thousand cubic feet)
|
|
Proved
undeveloped natural gas reserves at February 22, 2008
|
|
|
— |
|
Purchases
of drilling rights for minerals in place for period February 22, 2008
(inception of DCG) to December 31, 2008 – 4 wells at 355 MCF
each
|
|
|
1,420 |
|
Revisions
of previous estimates *)
|
|
|
(180 |
) |
Extensions
and discoveries**)
|
|
|
— |
|
Sales
of minerals in place
|
|
|
— |
|
Proved
undeveloped natural gas reserves at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
1,420 |
|
*) the
current reserve report revised to include revision by decreasing the MMCF from
1,600 to 1,420 based on 355 MCF compare to 400 MCF in prior report.
Standardized
Measure of Discounted Future Net Cash Flows Relating to Proved Oil and Gas
Reserves
The
following disclosures concerning the standardized measure of future cash flows
from proved crude oil and natural gas are presented in accordance with SFAS No.
69. The standardized measure does not purport to represent the fair market value
of the Company's proved crude oil and natural gas reserves. An estimate of fair
market value would also take into account, among other factors, the recovery of
reserves not classified as proved, anticipated future changes in prices and
costs, and a discount factor more representative of the time value of money and
the risks inherent in reserve estimates. Under
the standardized measure, future
cash inflows were estimated by
applying period-end prices at December 31, 2008 adjusted for fixed and
determinable escalations, to the estimated future production of
year-end proved reserves. Future cash inflows were reduced by
estimated future production and development costs based on year-end costs to
determine pre-tax cash inflows. Future income taxes were computed by applying
the statutory tax rate to the excess of pre-tax cash inflows over the tax basis
of the properties. Operating loss carry
forwards, tax credits, and permanent differences to
the extent estimated to
be available in the future were
also considered in the future income tax calculations,
thereby reducing the expected tax expense. Future net cash inflows after income
taxes were discounted using a 10% annual discount rate to arrive at the
Standardized Measure.
Set forth
below is the Standardized Measure relating to proved undeveloped natural gas
reserves for the period ending December 31, 2008:
|
|
Period ending December 31,
2008 (in thousands of $)
|
|
|
Period ending
March 30, 2008 (in
thousands of $)
|
|
Future
cash inflows, net of royalties
|
|
|
109,890 |
|
|
|
231,230 |
|
Future
production costs
|
|
|
(32,964 |
) |
|
|
(38,702 |
) |
Future
development costs
|
|
|
(43,050 |
) |
|
|
(25,800 |
) |
Future
income tax expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
— |
|
Net
future cash flows
|
|
|
33,876 |
|
|
|
166,728 |
|
Discount
|
|
|
(33,296 |
) |
|
|
(117,475 |
) |
Standardized
Measure of discounted future net cash relating to proved
reserves
|
|
|
580 |
|
|
|
49,253 |
|
Changes
in Standardized Measure of Discounted Future Net Cash Flows Relating to Proved
Natural Gas Reserves. The table above shows the second standardized measure of
discounted future net cash flows for the Company since
inception. Accordingly, there are material changes to disclose, which
in essence were contributed by substantial decline in gas prices in lieu of the
financial turmoil that the USA (and the world) is facing.
Drilling
Contract:
On July
1, 2008, DCG entered into a Drilling Contract (Model Turnkey Contract)
("Drilling Contract") with Ozona Natural Gas Company LLC ("Ozona"). Pursuant to
the Drilling Contract, Ozona has been engaged to drill four wells in Crockett
County, Texas. The drilling of the first well commenced immediately at the cost
of $525,000 and the drilling of the subsequent three wells shall take place in
secession. The drilling operations on the first well are due to funding provided
by Vortex One. Such drilling took place, and the Vortex One well has
successfully hit natural gas at a depth of 4,783 feet. As disclosed
on this report Vortex one entered into sale agreements of said four assignments,
and allows 60 days extension (until July 1, 2009) to both Buyer and operator, to
commence payments.
13. Restatement
We have
restated our balance sheet at December 31, 2008 and statements of income,
stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2008.
The restatement in 2008 did not have a material impact on (x) the net loss
reported; (y) loss per share; and (z) the negative equity position of the
Company from what the Company had previously reported for the year ended
December 31, 2008. We have also restated our balance sheet at March 31, 2009 and
statements of income, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009. The restatement in the first quarter of 2009 did not have
a material impact on (x) the net loss reported; (y) loss per share; and (z) the
negative equity position of the Company from what the Company had previously
reported for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.
14.
Subsequent events
On April
9, 2010, the Company, in an effort to reduce outstanding debt of the Company,
entered into an Exchange Agreement with Atias whereby the Company and Ms. Atias
exchanged $50,000 of a promissory note in the amount of $250,000 held by Ms.
Atias, which is the remaining balance on said Note, into 12,714,286
shares of common stock of the Company, in a transaction made pursuant to Section
3(a)(9) of the Securities Act of 1933. The promissory note of which a
portion was converted by Ms. Atias was initially issued on August 8,
2008. The Company’s issuance of the securities described in the
preceding sentence is exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933
pursuant to the exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of the
Securities Act of 1933 for a transaction not involving a public offering of
securities. Post said agreement; the Company paid in full the Atias
Note.
On April
5, 2010 the Company issued a formal request to Yasheng demanding that they
surrender of the 50,000,000 shares that were issued to them, as well as
reimburse the Company for its expenses associated with the transaction in the
amount of $348,240
On April
9, 2010, the Company, in an effort to reduce outstanding debt of the Company,
entered into an Exchange Agreement with Priscilla Dunckel whereby the Company
and Mrs. Dunckel exchanged $20,000 of a promissory note in the amount of $20,000
held by her into 5,085,714 shares of common stock of the Company, in a
transaction made pursuant to Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act of
1933. The Company’s issuance of the securities described in the
preceding sentence is exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933
pursuant to the exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of the
Securities Act of 1933 for a transaction not involving a public offering of
securities.
On April
15, 2010 effective December 31, 2009 the company and Trafalgar settled their
outstanding disputes. The parties agreed that the debts owed to Trafalgar will
be settled as $3,000,000 with maturity of 30 months from date of issuing
carrying 7% annual interest. Via issuance of Series E Preferred Stock, the debt
is convertible at the Option of the Holders, into 600,000,000 common shares of
the Company, at any time upon written notice to the company. In the
event of conversion, the issuance would exceed the shares currently authorized
by the Company; at that point we will authorize more shares. Trafalgar will
appoint 4 directors to the Company’s Board of Directors. Trafalgar agrees to
continue and pursue the core business of the Company. After filling
of this report during May 2010, the Company filed with the SEC the Information
Statement which is being furnished pursuant to Section 14(f) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act ”) and
Rule 14f-1 promulgated thereunder, in connection with proposed changes in a
majority of the membership of our board of directors (the “ Board ”) as a result
of the Settlement Agreement as described above. This Information
Statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and will be
mailed to our stockholders of record. On the tenth (10th) day
after this Information Statement has been distributed to the stockholders, the
director designees named will be appointed to the Board (the “Effective
Date”).
In 2009,
the Company had signed a Note Payable for $100,000 payable to Kobi Loria due on
March 31, 2010 at 12% per annum. The Note includes a
convertible feature into the Company Common Stock based on conversion ratio that
shall be valued at 95% of the volume-weighted average price for 5 trading days
immediately preceding the conversion notice. On December 23, 2009 the Company
signed an additional Note Payable for $50,000 to Kobi Loria on the same terms as
the prior Note. On April 15, 2010 the Company agreed with Kobi Loria that as the
Company did not have the cash resources to pay off the Notes at 3/31/10 pursuant
to the agreements signed in connection with said Note(s), that it would convey
to him the Company’s interests in Micrologic (which had been designated for sale
since 2008) as partial payments on the Notes. The parties agreed that the
Micrologic conveyed interests will be valued at $20,000.
ITEM
2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations
The
following discussion and analysis summarizes the significant factors affecting
our condensed consolidated results of operations, financial condition and
liquidity position for the three months ended March 31, 2010. This
discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our audited financial
statements and notes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for our
year-ended December 31, 2009 and the condensed consolidated unaudited financial
statements and related notes included elsewhere in this filing. The following
discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that reflect our
plans, estimates and beliefs. Our actual results could differ materially from
those discussed in the forward-looking statements.
Forward-Looking
Statements
This
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward looking statements, including
without limitation, statements related to our plans, strategies, objectives,
expectations, intentions and adequacy of resources. Investors are cautioned that
such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties including
without limitation the following: (i) our plans, strategies, objectives,
expectations and intentions are subject to change at any time at our discretion;
(ii) our plans and results of operations will be affected by our ability to
manage growth; and (iii) other risks and uncertainties indicated from time to
time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
In some
cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as
‘‘may,’’ ‘‘will,’’ ‘‘should,’’ ‘‘could,’’ ‘‘expects,’’ ‘‘plans,’’ ‘‘intends,’’
‘‘anticipates,’’ ‘‘believes,’’ ‘‘estimates,’’ ‘‘predicts,’’ ‘‘potential,’’ or
‘‘continue’’ or the negative of such terms or other comparable terminology.
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking
statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of
activity, performance, or achievements. Moreover, neither we nor any other
person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of such
statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these
forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. We are under
no duty to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this
Report.
Operating
Assets and General Business Strategy:
Yasheng
Eco-Trade Corporation (f/k/a Vortex Resources Corp, Emvelco Corp., and Euroweb
International Corp.), is a Delaware corporation and was organized on November 9,
1992. It was a development stage company through December 1993. Yasheng
Eco-Trade Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries are collectively
referred to herein as “Yasheng Eco” or “Vortex” or the “Company”.
The
Company’s headquarters and operational offices are located in West Hollywood,
California.
Results
of Operations
Three
Months Period Ended March 31, 2010 Compared to Three Months Period Ended March
31, 2009
Due to
the new financial investment in Gas and Oil activity, which commenced in May
2008, and the development of our logistic operations, the consolidated
statements of operations for the periods ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 are not
comparable. The financial figures for 2009 only include the corporate expenses
of the Company’s legal entity registered in the State of Delaware. This section
of the report should be read together with the Company consolidated
financials.
The
consolidated statements of operations for the periods ended March 31, 2010 and
20098 are compared (subject to the above description) in the sections
below:
Compensation
and related costs
The
following table summarizes compensation and related costs for the three months
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009:
Three
months ended March 31,
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Compensation
and related costs
|
|
$ |
79,187 |
|
|
$ |
71,533 |
|
Amounts
did not change materially from the prior year.
Consulting,
director and professional fees
The
following table summarizes consulting and professional fees for the three months
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009:
Three
months ended March 31,
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Consulting,
director and professional fees
|
|
$ |
93,001 |
|
|
$ |
159,209 |
|
Overall
consulting, professional and director fees decreased by 42%, or $66,208,
primarily as the result of use of stock and warrants to compensate, at fair
market value, for services rendered to the Company, several consultants,
investment bankers, advisors, accountants and lawyers in 2009.
Other
selling, general and administrative expenses
The
following table summarizes other selling, general and administrative expenses
for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009:
Three
months ended March 31,
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Other
selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
$ |
103,210 |
|
|
$ |
40,595 |
|
Overall,
other selling, general and administrative expenses increased by 154%, or
$62,615, due mostly to increased development expenses associated with the
logistic center, as well as various other Yasheng-related transactions underway
during the first quarter of 2010, some of which required
travel. Management is currently evaluating in what form to go forward
with some or all of these transactions, if at all. The Company also owed
its law firm approximately $48,000, which was paid by issuing
shares.
Interest
income and expense
The
following table summarizes interest income and expense for the three months
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009:
Three
months ended March 31,
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Interest
income
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
171,565 |
|
Interest
expense
|
|
$ |
(57,052 |
) |
|
$ |
(262,240 |
) |
Interest
income was not comparable between the periods, due to the changed business model
from the first quarter of 2009 to the first quarter of 2010. Interest expense
decreased by 78%, or $205,188, mostly due to the conversion of notes payable
into equity of the Company.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The
Company currently anticipates that its available cash resources will not be
sufficient to meet its presently anticipated working capital requirements for at
least the next 12 months. During the first quarter of 2010 and the fiscal year
2009, Yossi Attia paid substantial expenses for the Company and also deferred
his salary. As of March 31, 2010, the Company owes Mr. Attia approximately
$998,000. The Company will either need to raise capital from third
parties or continue borrowing funds from Mr. Attia. There is no
guarantee that Mr. Attia will continue to lend the company money going
forward.
As of
March 31, 2010, our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities were $289,
a decrease of approximately $85,500 from the end of fiscal year 2009. The
decrease in our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities is the result
of cash flow used by our operations during the first quarter of
2010. Cash flows (used in) and provided by operating activities for
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was $ (85,500) and $ (189,192),
respectively. The change is primarily due to the increase in our
payables.
Cash
flows used in investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and
2009 was $0 and $0, respectively. There was no change between
the periods. Cash provided by financing activities for the three
months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was $0 and $75,000, respectively. This
decrease is due to the fact that the Company did not issue stock in the first
quarter of 2010.
In the
event the Company makes future acquisitions or investments, additional bank
loans or fund raising may be used to finance such future acquisitions. The
Company may consider the sale of non-strategic assets. The Company currently
anticipates that its available cash resources will not be sufficient to meet its
prior anticipated working capital requirements, though it may be sufficient
manage the existing business of the Company assuming no further
acquisitions.
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
The
consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“US
GAAP”).
Basis of consolidation - The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, its
majority-owned subsidiaries and all variable interest entities for which the
Company is the primary beneficiary. All intercompany balances and transactions
have been eliminated upon consolidation. Control is determined based on
ownership rights or, when applicable, whether the Company is considered the
primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity.
Variable Interest Entities -
The Company is required to consolidate variable interest entities (“VIE's”),
where it is the entity’s primary beneficiary. VIE's are entities in which equity
investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial interest or
do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities
without additional subordinated financial support from other parties. The
primary beneficiary is the party that has exposure to a majority of the expected
losses and/or expected residual returns of the VIE.
For the
period ending March 31, 2010, the balance sheets and results of operations of
DCG, and Vortex Ocean One, LLC are consolidated into these financial statements.
As of and for the year ending December 31, 2009, the balance sheets and results
of operations of DCG, and Vortex Ocean One, LLC are consolidated into these
financial statements
Use of estimates - The
preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with US GAAP
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts
reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual
results could differ from those estimates.
Fair value of financial instruments-
The carrying values of cash equivalents, notes and loans receivable,
accounts payable, loans payable and accrued expenses approximate fair
values.
Revenue recognition - The
Company applies the provisions of Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”)
Staff Accounting Bulletin ("SAB") No. 104, “Revenue Recognition in
Financial Statements” (“SAB 104”), which provides guidance on the recognition,
presentation and disclosure of revenue in financial statements filed with the
SEC. SAB 104 outlines the basic criteria that must be met to recognize revenue
and provides guidance for disclosure related to revenue recognition policies.
The Company recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement
exists, the product or service has been delivered, fees are fixed or
determinable, collection is probable and all other significant obligations have
been fulfilled.
Revenues
from property sales are recognized when the risks and rewards of ownership are
transferred to the buyer, when the consideration received can be reasonably
determined and when Emvelco has completed its obligations to perform certain
supplementary development activities, if any exist, at the time of the sale.
Consideration is reasonably determined and considered likely of collection when
Emvelco has signed sales agreements and has determined that the buyer has
demonstrated a commitment to pay. The buyer’s commitment to pay is supported by
the level of their initial investment, Emvelco’ assessment of the buyer’s credit
standing and Emvelco’ assessment of whether the buyer’s stake in the property is
sufficient to motivate the buyer to honor their obligation to it.
Revenue
from fixed price contracts is recognized on the percentage of
completion method. The percentage of
completion method is also used for condominium projects in which the Company is
a real estate developer and all units have been sold prior to the completion of
the preliminary stage and at least 25% of the project has been carried out.
Percentage of completion is measured by the percentage of costs incurred to
balance sheet date to estimated total costs. Selling, general,
and administrative costs are charged to expense as incurred. Profit
incentives are included in revenues, when their realization is reasonably
assured. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted projects are made in the
period in which such losses are first determined, in the amount of the
estimated loss of the full contract. Differences between estimates and actual
costs and revenues are recognized in the year in which such differences are
determined. The provision for warranties is provided at certain percentage of
revenues, based on the preliminary calculations and best estimates of the
Company's management.
Cost of revenues - Cost of
revenues includes the cost of real estate sold and rented as well as costs
directly attributable to the properties sold such as marketing, selling and
depreciation and are included in discontinued operations.
Real estate - Real estate held
for development is stated at the lower of cost or market. All direct and
indirect costs relating to the Company's development project are capitalized on
the Company’s balance sheet. Such standard requires costs associated with the
acquisition, development and construction of real estate and real estate-related
projects to be capitalized as part of that project. The realization of these
costs is predicated on the ability of the Company to successfully complete and
subsequently sell or rent the property. During 2008, the Company sold all its
real estate properties.
Treasury Stock - Treasury
stock is recorded at cost. Issuance of treasury shares is accounted for on a
first-in, first-out basis. Differences between the cost of treasury shares and
the re-issuance proceeds are charged to additional paid-in
capital.
Foreign currency translation -
The Company considers the United States Dollar (“US Dollar” or "$") to be
the functional currency of the Company and its subsidiaries, the prior owned
subsidiary, AGL, which reports its financial statements in New Israeli Shekel.
(“N.I.S”) The reporting currency of the Company is the US Dollar and
accordingly, all amounts included in the consolidated financial statements have
been presented or translated into US Dollars. For non-US subsidiaries that do
not utilize the US Dollar as its functional currency, assets and liabilities are
translated to US Dollars at period-end exchange rates, and income and expense
items are translated at weighted-average rates of exchange prevailing during the
period. Translation adjustments are recorded in “Accumulated other comprehensive
income” within stockholders’ equity. Foreign currency transaction gains and
losses are included in the consolidated results of operations for the periods
presented.
Cash and cash equivalents -
Cash and cash equivalents include cash at bank and money market funds
with maturities of three months or less at the date of acquisition by the
Company.
Marketable securities - The
Company determines the appropriate classification of all marketable securities
as held-to-maturity, available-for-sale or trading at the time of purchase, and
re-evaluates such classification as of each balance sheet date. The Company
assesses whether temporary or other-than-temporary gains or losses on its
marketable securities have occurred due to increases or declines in fair value
or other market conditions. The Company did not have any marketable securities
within continuing operations for the period ended march 31, 2010 and the year
ended December 31, 2009 (other than Treasury Stocks as disclosed).
Goodwill and intangible assets -
Goodwill results from business acquisitions and represents the excess of
purchase price over the fair value of identifiable net assets acquired at the
acquisition date.
Earnings (loss) per share -
Basic earnings (loss) per share are computed by dividing income (loss)
attributable to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common
shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings (loss) per share reflect the
effect of dilutive potential common shares issuable upon exercise of stock
options and warrants and convertible preferred stock.
Comprehensive income (loss) -
Comprehensive income includes all changes in equity except those
resulting from investments by and distributions to shareholders.
Income taxes - Income taxes
are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to
differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets
and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit
carry-forwards. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance if it
is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax asset will
not be realized. Deferred tax assets and liabilities, are measured using enacted
tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those
temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on
deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in
income in the period that includes the enactment date
Stock-based compensation -
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted SFAS No. 123R,
now ASC Topic 718, “Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS 123R”). Under ASC Topic
718, the Company is required to measure the cost of employee services received
in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair
value of the award. The measured cost is recognized in the statement of
operations over the period during which an employee is required to provide
service in exchange for the award. Additionally, if an award of an equity
instrument involves a performance condition, the related compensation cost is
recognized only if it is probable that the performance condition will be
achieved. The Company adopted ASC Topic 718 using the modified prospective
method, which requires the application of the accounting standard as of
January 1, 2006, the first day of the Company’s fiscal year
2006. Under this method, compensation cost recognized during the year ended
December 31, 2006 includes: (a) compensation cost for all share-based payments
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 123
and amortized on an straight-line basis over the requisite service period, and
(b) compensation cost for all share-based payments granted subsequent to January
1, 2006, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the
provisions of SFAS 123R amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite
service period. Results for prior periods have not been restated. The Company
estimates the fair value of each option award on the date of the grant using the
Black-Scholes option valuation model. Expected volatilities are based on the
historical volatility of the Company’s common stock over a period commensurate
with the options’ expected term. The expected term represents the period of time
that options granted are expected to be outstanding and is calculated in
accordance with SEC guidance provided in the SAB 107, using a “simplified”
method. The risk-free interest rate assumption is based upon observed interest
rates appropriate for the expected term of the Company’s stock
options.
Gas Rights on Real Property, plant,
and equipment -Depreciation, depletion and amortization, based on cost
less estimated salvage value of the asset, are primarily determined under either
the unit-of-production method or the straight-line method, which is based on
estimated asset service life taking obsolescence into consideration. Maintenance
and repairs, including planned major maintenance, are expensed as incurred.
Major renewals and improvements are capitalized and the assets replaced are
retired. Interest costs incurred to finance expenditures during the construction
phase of multiyear projects are capitalized as part of the historical cost of
acquiring the constructed assets. The project construction phase commences with
the development of the detailed engineering design and ends when the constructed
assets are ready for their intended use. Capitalized interest costs are included
in property, plant and equipment and are depreciated over the service life of
the related assets. The Company uses the “successful efforts” method to account
for its exploration and production activities. Under this method, costs are
accumulated on a field-by-field basis with certain exploratory expenditures and
exploratory dry holes being expensed as incurred. Costs of productive wells and
development dry holes are capitalized and amortized on the unit-of-production
method. The Company records an asset for exploratory well costs when the well
has found a sufficient quantity of reserves to justify its completion as a
producing well and where the Company is making sufficient progress assessing the
reserves and the economic and operating viability of the project. Exploratory
well costs not meeting these criteria are charged to expense. Acquisition costs
of proved properties are amortized using a unit-of-production method, computed
on the basis of total proved natural gas reserves. Significant unproved
properties are assessed for impairment individually and valuation allowances
against the capitalized costs are recorded based on the estimated economic
chance of success and the length of time that the Company expects to hold the
properties. The valuation allowances are reviewed at least
annually. Other exploratory expenditures, including geophysical
costs, other dry hole costs and annual lease rentals, are expensed as incurred.
Unit-of-production depreciation is applied to property, plant and equipment,
including capitalized exploratory drilling and development costs, associated
with productive depletable extractive properties. Unit-of-production
rates are based on the amount of proved developed reserves of natural gas and
other minerals that are estimated to be recoverable from existing facilities
using current operating methods. Under the unit-of-production method, natural
gas volumes are considered produced once they have been measured through meters
at custody transfer or sales transaction points at the outlet valve on the lease
or field storage tank. Gains on sales of proved and unproved properties are only
recognized when there is no uncertainty about the recovery of costs applicable
to any interest retained or where there is no substantial obligation for future
performance by the Company’s. Losses on properties sold are recognized when
incurred or when the properties are held for sale and the fair value of the
properties is less than the carrying value. Proved oil and gas properties held
and used by the Company are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes
in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts may not be recoverable.
Assets are grouped at the lowest levels for which there are identifiable cash
flows that are largely independent of the cash flows of other groups of
assets. The Company estimates the future undiscounted cash flows of
the affected properties to judge the recoverability of carrying amounts. Cash
flows used in impairment evaluations are developed using annually updated
corporate plan investment evaluation assumptions for natural gas commodity
prices. Annual volumes are based on individual field production profiles, which
are also updated annually. Cash flow estimates for impairment testing exclude
derivative instruments. Impairment analyses are generally based on proved
reserves. Where probable reserves exist, an appropriately risk-adjusted amount
of these reserves may be included in the impairment evaluation. Impairments are
measured by the amount the carrying value exceeds the fair value.
Restoration, Removal and
Environmental Liabilities - The Company is subject to extensive federal,
state and local environmental laws and regulations. These laws
regulate the discharge of materials into the environment and may require the
Company to remove or mitigate the environmental effects of the disposal or
release of natural gas substances at various sites. Environmental
expenditures are expensed or capitalized depending on their future economic
benefit. Expenditures that relate to an existing condition caused by
past operations and that have no future economic benefit are expensed.
Liabilities for expenditures of a noncapital nature are recorded when
environmental assessments and/or remediation is probable, and the costs can be
reasonably estimated. Such liabilities are generally undiscounted unless the
timing of cash payments for the liability or component is fixed or reliably
determinable.
The
Company accounts for asset retirement obligations in accordance with SFAS No.
143, "Accounting for Asset
Retirement Obligations” (now ASC Topic 410). ASC Topic 410 addresses
accounting and reporting for obligations associated with the retirement of
tangible long-lived assets and the associated asset retirement
costs. ASC Topic 410 requires that the fair value of a liability for
an asset's retirement obligation be recorded in the period in which it is
incurred and the corresponding cost capitalized by increasing the
carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. The liability is
accreted to its then present value each period, and the capitalized cost is
depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. The Company
will include estimated future costs of abandonment and dismantlement in the full
cost amortization base and amortize these costs as a component of our depletion
expense in the accompanying financial statements.
Business segment reporting -
Though the company had minor holdings of real estate properties which have been
sold, the Company manages its operations in one business segment, the Resources,
Logistic Development, Development and Mineral business.
Effect of Recent Accounting
Pronouncements
In
December 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 110 (“SAB 110”). SAB 110 amends and replaces
Question 6 of Section D.2 of Topic 14, “Share-Based Payment,” of the Staff
Accounting Bulletin series. Question 6 of Section D.2 of Topic 14 expresses the
views of the staff regarding the use of the “simplified” method in developing an
estimate of the expected term of “plain vanilla” share options and allows usage
of the “simplified” method for share option grants prior to December 31,
2007. SAB 110 allows public companies which do not have historically sufficient
experience to provide a reasonable estimate to continue to use the “simplified”
method for estimating the expected term of “plain vanilla” share option grants
after December 31, 2007. The Company will continue to use the “simplified”
method until it has enough historical experience to provide a reasonable
estimate of expected term in accordance with SAB 110.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(“SFAS”) 141-R, “Business Combinations,” now ASC Topic 805. ASC Topic
805 retains the fundamental requirements that the acquisition method of
accounting (referred to as the purchase method) be used for all business
combinations and for an acquirer to be identified for each business combination.
It also establishes principles and requirements for how the acquirer:
(a) recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable
assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any non-controlling interest in
the acquiree; (b) recognizes and measures the goodwill acquired in the
business combination or a gain from a bargain purchase and (c) determines
what information to disclose to enable users of the financial statements to
evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business combination. ASC Topic
805 will apply prospectively to business combinations for which the acquisition
date is on or after the Company’s fiscal year beginning October 1, 2009.
While the Company has not yet evaluated the impact, if any, that ASC Topic 805
will have on its consolidated financial statements, the Company will be required
to expense costs related to any acquisitions after September 30,
2009.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 160, “Non-controlling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements,” now ASC Topic 810. This Statement amends
Accounting Research Bulletin 51 to establish accounting and reporting standards
for the non-controlling (minority) interest in a subsidiary and for the
deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It clarifies that a non-controlling interest in
a subsidiary is an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be
reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements. The Company has not
yet determined the impact, if any, that ASC Topic 810 will have on its
consolidated financial statements. ASC Topic 810 is effective for the Company’s
fiscal year beginning October 1, 2009.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” now ASC
Topic 820. ASC Topic 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for
measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles, and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements. This Statement applies under other
accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements, the
FASB having previously concluded in those accounting pronouncements that fair
value is the relevant measurement attribute. Accordingly, this Statement does
not require any new fair value measurements. ASC Topic 820 is effective for
financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007,
and interim periods within those fiscal years. In February 2008, the FASB issued
FASB Staff Position No. FAS 157–2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement
No. 157”, which provides a one year deferral of the effective date of SFAS
157 for non–financial assets and non–financial liabilities, except those that
are recognized or disclosed in the financial statements at fair value at least
annually. Therefore, effective January 1, 2008, we adopted the provisions of ASC
Topic 820 with respect to our financial assets and liabilities only. Since the
Company has no investments available for sale, the adoption of this
pronouncement has no material impact to the financial statements.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities — including an amendment of
FASB Statement No. 115” now ASC Topic 825. ASC Topic 825 permits entities to
choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair
value. This statement provides entities the opportunity to mitigate volatility
in reported earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities
differently without having to apply complex hedge accounting provisions. This
Statement is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that
begins after November 15, 2007. Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted ASC
Topic 825 and have chosen not to elect the fair value option for any items that
are not already required to be measured at fair value in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States .
Critical
Accounting Estimates
Our
discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are
based upon our consolidated financial statements that have been prepared in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of
America (“US GAAP”). This preparation requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues
and expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. US GAAP
provides the framework from which to make these estimates, assumptions and
disclosures. We choose accounting policies within US GAAP that management
believes are appropriate to accurately and fairly report our operating results
and financial position in a consistent manner. Management regularly assesses
these policies in light of current and forecasted economic conditions. Although
we believe that our estimates, assumptions and judgments are reasonable, they
are based upon information presently available. Actual results may differ
significantly from these estimates under different assumptions, judgments or
conditions for a number of reasons.
Investment
in Real Estate and Commercial Leasing Assets. Real estate held for sale and
construction in progress is stated at the lower of cost or fair value less costs
to sell and includes acreage, development, construction and carrying costs and
other related costs through the development stage. Commercial leasing assets,
which are held for use, are stated at cost. When events or circumstances
indicate than an asset’s carrying amount may not be recoverable, an impairment
test is performed in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 144. For properties
held for sale, if estimated fair value less costs to sell is less than the
related carrying amount, then a reduction of the assets carrying value to fair
value less costs to sell is required. For properties held for use, if the
projected undiscounted cash flow from the asset is less than the related
carrying amount, then a reduction of the carrying amount of the asset to fair
value is required. Measurement of the impairment loss is based on the fair value
of the asset. Generally, we determine fair value using valuation techniques such
as discounted expected future cash flows.
Our
expected future cash flows are affected by many factors including:
a) The
economic condition of the US and Worldwide markets – especially during the
current worldwide financial crisis.
b) The
performance of the underlying assets in the markets where our properties are
located;
c) Our
financial condition, which may influence our ability to develop our properties;
and
d)
Government regulations.
As any
one of these factors could substantially affect our estimate of future cash
flows, significant variance between our estimates and the reality could result
in us recording an impairment loss, which may result in a significant reduction
of our net earnings.
The
estimate of our future revenues is also important because it is the basis of our
development plans and also a factor in our ability to obtain the financing
necessary to complete our development plans. If our estimates of future cash
flows from our properties differ significantly from actual performance in terms
of delivering that cash flows, then our financial and liquidity position may be
compromised, which could result in our default under certain debt instruments or
result in our suspending some or all of our development activities.
Allocation
of Overhead Costs. We periodically capitalize a portion of our overhead costs
and also allocate a portion of these overhead costs to cost of sales based on
the activities of our employees that are directly engaged in these activities.
In order to accomplish this procedure, we periodically evaluate our “corporate”
personnel activities to see what, if any, time is associated with activities
that would normally be capitalized or considered part of cost of sales. After
determining the appropriate aggregate allocation rates, we apply these factors
to our overhead costs to determine the appropriate allocations. This is a
critical accounting policy because it affects our net results of operations for
that portion which is capitalized. In accordance with GAAP, we only capitalize
direct and indirect project costs associated with the acquisition, development
and construction of a real estate project. Indirect costs include allocated
costs associated with certain pooled resources (such as office supplies,
telephone and postage) which are used to support our development projects, as
well as general and administrative functions. Allocations of pooled resources
are based only on those employees directly responsible for development (i.e.
project manager and subordinates). We charge to expense indirect costs that do
not clearly relate to a real estate project such as salaries and allocated
expenses related to the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer.
Accounting
for Income Taxes: We recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the
expected future tax consequences of transactions and events. Under this method,
deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference
between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities using
enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected
to reverse. If necessary, deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation
allowance to an amount that is determined to be more likely than not
recoverable. We must make significant estimates and assumptions about future
taxable income and future tax consequences when determining the amount of the
valuation allowance. In addition, tax reserves are based on significant
estimates and assumptions as to the relative filing positions and potential
audit and litigation exposures related thereto. To the extent the Company
establishes a valuation allowance or increases this allowance in a period, the
impact will be included in the tax provision in the statement of
operations.
The
disclosed information presents the Company’s natural gas producing collateral
activities.
Off
Balance Sheet Arrangements
There are
no materials off balance sheet arrangements.
Inflation
and Foreign Currency
The
Company maintains its books in local currency US Dollars for the Parent Company
registered in the State of Delaware. The Company’s operations are primarily in
the United States through its wholly owned subsidiaries. The Company does not
currently hedge its currency exposure. In the future, we may engage in hedging
transactions to mitigate foreign exchange risk.
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|
Payments
due by period
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Less
than 1
year
|
|
|
1-3
years
|
|
Long-Term
Debt Obligations
|
|
$ |
3,000,000 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
$ |
3,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
3,000,000 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
$ |
3,000,000 |
|
Our
Commitments and contingencies are stated in detail in the Notes to the
Consolidated Financial Statements, which include required supplemental
information about gas and oil. In this section management provides
synopsis disclosures regarding commitments and contingencies.
Employment
Agreement:
Effective
July 1, 2006, the Company entered into a five-year employment agreement with
Yossi Attia as the President and provides for annual compensation in the amount
of $240,000, an annual bonus not less than $120,000 per year, and an annual car
allowance. During the years 2009 and 2008, Yossi Attia paid substantial expenses
for the Company and also deferred his salary. As of March 31, 2010, the Company
owes Mr., Attia approximately $998,000. The Company relies upon Mr. Attia for
financing. There is no assurance that Mr. Attia will continue to provide the
Company with funding.
Lease
Agreements:
The
Company head office was located at 9107 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 450, Beverly
Hills, CA 90210, based on a month-to-month basis (The Company notified the
landlord that effective December 1, 2009 it will terminate and vacate the
premises), paying $219 per month. The Company’s operation office (and
headquarter from December 1, 2009) is located at 1061 ½ N Spaulding Ave, West
Hollywood, CA 90046, paying $2,500 per month (lease term ends June 2011).
Effective December 1, 2009 the Company is operating only from its operational
offices located in West Hollywood, California.
Future
minimum payments of obligations under the operating lease at December 31, 2009
are as follows:
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
$
|
22,500 |
|
$ |
15,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
— |
|
See
subsequent events for re-location of the Company in lieu of filling form
14F-1.
Legal
Proceedings:
From time
to time, we are a party to litigation or other legal proceedings that we
consider to be a part of the ordinary course of our business. We are not
involved currently in legal proceedings other than detailed below that could
reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our business,
prospects, financial condition or results of operations. We may become involved
in material legal proceedings in the future.
Navigator
– Registration Rights - The Company entered into a registration rights agreement
dated July 21, 2005, whereby it agreed to file a registration statement
registering the 441,566 shares of Company common stock issued in connection with
the Navigator acquisition within 75 days of the closing of the transaction. The
Company also agreed to have such registration statement declared effective
within 150 days from the filing thereof. In the event that Company failed to
meet its obligations to register the shares, it may have been required to pay a
penalty equal to 1% of the value of the shares per month. The Company obtained a
written waiver from the seller stating that the seller would not raise any
claims in connection with the filing of registration statement through May 30,
2006. The Company since received another waiver extending the registration
deadline through May 30, 2007 without penalty. As of June 30, 2008 (effective
March 31, 2008), the Company was in default of the Registration Rights Agreement
and therefore made a provision for compensation for $150,000 to represent agreed
final compensation (the "Penalty"). The holder of the Penalty subsequently
assigned the Penalty to three unaffiliated parties (the "Penalty Holders"). On
December 26, 2008, the Company closed agreements with the Penalty Holders
pursuant to which the Penalty Holders agreed to cancel any rights to the Penalty
in consideration of the issuance 66,667 shares of common stock to each of the
Penalty Holders. The shares of common stock were issued in connection with this
transaction in a private placement transaction made in reliance upon exemptions
from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and
Rule 506 promulgated there under. Each of the Penalty Holders is an accredited
investor as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities
Act of 1933.
Trafalgar
Capital Specialized Investment Fund, Luxembourg - The Company via series of
agreements (directly or via affiliates) with European based alternative
investment fund - Trafalgar Capital Specialized Investment Fund, Luxembourg
(“Trafalgar”) established financial relationship which should create source of
funding to the Company and its subsidiaries (see detailed description of said
series of agreements in the Company filling). The Company position is that the
DCG transactions (among others) would not have been closed by the Company,
unless Trafalgar had provided the needed financing for the drilling
program. The Company and Trafalgar became adversaries where each
party filled a lawsuit against the other party in different jurisdictions which
included California, Nevada (indirect lawsuit filed by Verge) and Florida. On
April 15, 2010 the parties settled their outstanding disputes. Based on said
settlement which was declared effective as of December 31, 2009 the parties
agreed that Trafalgar will convert its notes (at agreed amount of $3,000,000)
into a new class of Series E Preferred Shares, which shall have the
following terms: (i) $3 Million Face Amount (as agreed amount between all
parties) (ii) Maturity in cash in Thirty Months (30 months) from date of issue
(iii) Optional Redemption by the Company at any time, for Face Value including
accrued unpaid dividends (iv) Dividends Accrue at 7% (seven percent) per
annum. Said Series Preferred E shares will be convertible at
the Option of the Holders, into Six Hundred Million (six hundred million) common
shares of YASH, at any time upon written notice to the company. This share
issuance is larger than the shares currently authorized by the Company; at the
point where we issue the shares, we will authorize a sufficient number of
shares. Trafalgar will be entitled to appoint 4 directors to the Company
board.
Verge
Bankruptcy & Rusk Litigation - On January 23, 2009, Verge Living Corporation
(the “Debtor”), a former wholly owned subsidiary of Atia Group Limited (“AGL”),
a former subsidiary of the Company, filed a voluntary petition (the “Chapter 11
Petitions”) for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code
(the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District
of California (the “Bankruptcy Court”). The Chapter 11 Petitions are
being administered under the caption In re: verge Living Corporation,
et al., Chapter 11 Case No. ND 09-10177 (the “Chapter 11
Proceedings”). The Bankruptcy Court assumed jurisdiction over the
assets of the Debtors as of the date of the filing of the Chapter 11
Petitions. . On April 28, 2009, Chapter 11 Proceedings changed venue
to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada, Chapter
11 Case No BK-S-09-16295-BAM. As Debtor as well as its parent AGL were
subsidiaries of the Company at time when material agreements where executed
between the parties, the Company may become part of the proceeding. In August
2008, Dennis E. Rusk Architect LLC and Dennis E. Rusk, (“Rusk”) were terminated
by a former affiliate of the Company. Rusk filed a lawsuit against the Debtor,
the Company and multiple other parties in Clark County, Nevada, Case No.
A-564309. The Rusk parties seek monetary damages for breach of contract. The
Company has taken the position that the Company will have no liability in this
matter as it never entered an agreement with Rusk. The court handling the Verge
bankruptcy entered an automatic stay for this matter. On or about October 28,
2009 the parties settled said complaint, where the other parties agreed to pay
the Rusk parties the sum of $400,000. The amount of $37,500 was advanced by the
other parties to the Rusk parties. The Company’s Board of Directors agreed to
issue to the other parties 4 million shares of the Company, as the Company
participation in said settlement, which was done on October 2008. The shares of
common stock were issued in connection with this transaction in a private
placement transaction made in reliance upon exemptions from registration
pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506
promulgated there under. Each of the Penalty Holders is an accredited investor
as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act of
1933. The complaint against the Company was dismissed with prejudice as final on
March 23, 2010.
Yalon
Hecht - On February 14, 2007, the Company filed a complaint in the Superior
Court of California, County of Los Angeles against Yalon Hecht, a foreign
attorney alleging fraud and seeking the return of funds held in escrow, and
sought damages in the amount of approximately 250,000 Euros (approximately
$316,000 as of the date of actual transferring the funds), plus interest, costs
and fees. On April 2007, Mr. Hecht returned $92,694 (70,000 Euros on the date of
transfer) to the Company which netted $72,694. On June 2007, the
Company filed a claim seeking a default judgment against Yalon
Hecht. On October 25, 2007, the Company obtained a default judgment against
Yalon Hecht for the sum of $249,340.65. As of today, the Company has not
commenced procedures to collect on the default judgment.
Vortex
One entered into a sale agreement with third parties regarding specific 4 wells
assignments. In consideration for the sale of the Assignments, The buyer(s)
shall pay the total sum of $2,300,000 to Seller as follows: (i) A $225,000.00
payment upon execution (paid) (ii) A 12 month $600,000.00 secured promissory
note bearing no interest with payments to begin on the first day of the second
month after the properties contained in the Assignments begin producing. (iii) A
60 month $1,500,000.00 secured promissory note bearing no interest with payments
to begin the first day of the fourteenth month after the properties contained in
the Assignments begin producing. As the Note bears no interest the Company
discounts it to present value (for the day of issuing, e.g. March 1, 2009) using
12% as discount interest rate per annum, which is the Company’s approximate cost
of borrowing. The Company alleges that the buyers are not performing
under the notes. Per the terms of the sale, Vortex One and the Company should be
paid commencing May 1, 2009. Vortex One and the Company agreed to give the
buyers a one-time 60 day extension, and put them on notice for being default on
said notes. To date the operator of the wells paid Vortex One (on behalf of the
Buyer) 3 payments (for the months of April, May and July 2009 –
Operator did not pay for the month of June 2009) amounting to $13,093.12. Vortex
Ocean One’s position is that the buyers as well as the operator breached the
Sale agreement and the Note’s terms, and notice has been issued for default. In
lieu of the non material amount, no provision was made to income of $2,617 (20%
the Company share per the operating agreement) until the Company finishes its
investigation of the subject. The Company retained an attorney in
Texas to pursue its rights under the agreements.
On July
1, 2008, DCG entered into a Drilling Contract (Model Turnkey Contract)
("Drilling Contract") with Ozona Natural Gas Company LLC ("Ozona"). Pursuant to
the Drilling Contract, Ozona has been engaged to drill four wells in Crockett
County, Texas. The drilling of the first well commenced immediately at the cost
of $525,000 and the drilling of the subsequent three wells scheduled for as
later phase, by Ozona and Mr. Mustafoglu, as well as the wells locations. Based
on Mr. Mustafoglu negligence and executed un-authorized agreements with third
parties, the Company may have hold Ozona and others responsible for damages to
the Company with regards to surface rights, wells locations and further charges
of Ozona which are not acceptable to the Company. The Company did not commence
legal acts yet, and evaluate its rights with its legal
consultants.
Wang - On
August 4, 2009, the Company filed a Form 8-K Current Report with the Securities
and Exchange Commission advising that Eric Ian Wang (“Wang”) was appointed as a
director of the Company on August 3, 2009. Mr. Yang was nominated as a director
at the suggestion of Yasheng which approved the filing of the initial Form 8-K.
On August 5, 2009, Mr. Wang contacted the Company advising that he has not
consented to such appointment. Accordingly, Mr. Wang has been nominated as a
director of the Company but has not accepted such nomination and is not
considered a director of the Company. Mr. Wang's nomination was subsequently
withdrawn. Furthermore, although no longer relevant, Mr. Wang's work history as
disclosed on the initial Form 8K was derived from a resume provided by Mr. Wang.
Subsequent to the filing of the Form 8-K, Mr. Wang advised that the disclosure
regarding his work history was inaccurate. As a result, the disclosure relating
to Mr. Wang's work history should be completely disregarded. The Company believe
that at the time that these willful, malicious, false and fraudulent
representations were made by Wang to the company, Wang knew that the
representations were false and that he never intended to be appointed to the
board. The company informed and believe the delivery of the resumes, and the
later demand for a retraction of the resumes, were part of a scheme (with
others) to injure the business reputation of the company to otherwise damages
its credibility such that the Company would have a lesser bargaining position in
the finalization of the documents relating to the Yasheng transaction. As such
the Company filled on September 2009 a complaint against Wang in California
Superior Court – San Bernardino County – Case No.: CIVRS909705. On or about
January 4, 2010 the parties settled all their adversaries. Under said
settlement, Wang represents, warrants, and agrees that the information about him
that was contained in the 8K Filing and other disclosure documents was supplied
by him. Any alleged inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and/or
misstatements in the 8K Filing and other disclosure documents, regarding his
resume, background and/or qualifications, if any exist, were based upon the
information he provided to the Company.
Sharp -
On October 20, 2009, an alleged former shareholder of the Company (Mr. Sharp),
filed a lawsuit against the Company and Mr. Attia in San Diego County,
California (case number SC105331). Mr. Sharp subsequently attempted to settle
the matter for a nominal fee, which the Company refused to accept. The Company
disputes all of Mr. Sharp’s claims as meritless, frivolous and unsubstantiated
and believes that it has substantial and meritorious legal and factual defenses,
which the Company intends to pursue vigorously. The Company filed a motion to
change venue which was successfully granted by court. On January 15, 2010, the
case was transferred to Los Angeles.
Except as
set forth above, there are no known significant legal proceedings that have been
filed and are outstanding or pending against the Company.
Sub-Prime
Crisis and Financials Markets Crisis:
The
global recession has negatively affected the pricing of commodities such as oil
and natural gas. In order to reduce the Company risks and more
effectively manage its business and to enable Company management to better focus
on its business on developing the natural gas drilling rights, the board of
directors had a discussion and resolution vacating the DCG project.
Voluntarily
delisting from The NASDAQ Stock Market:
On June
6, 2008, the Company provided NASDAQ with notice of its intent to voluntarily
delist from The NASDAQ Stock Market, which notice was amended on June 10, 2008.
The Company is voluntarily delisting to reduce and more effectively manage its
regulatory and administrative costs, and to enable Company management to better
focus on its business. The Company requested that its shares be suspended from
trading on NASDAQ at the open of the market on June 16, 2008, which was done.
Following clearance by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA") of
a Form 211 an application was filed by a market maker in the Company's
stock.
Vortex
Ocean One, LLC:
On June
30, 2008, the Company formed a limited liability company with third party, an
individual ("TI"), named Vortex Ocean One, LLC (the "Vortex One"). The Company
and TI each owned a fifty percent (50%) membership Interest in Vortex One. The
Company is the Manager of the Vortex One. Vortex One has been formed and
organized to raise the funds necessary for the drilling of the first well being
undertaken by the Company's wholly owned subsidiary. To date there has been no
production or limited production. As such a dispute has arisen between the
Parties with regards to the Vortex One and other matters, so in order to fulfill
its obligations to Investor and avoid any potential litigation, Vortex One has
agreed to issue the Shares directly into the name of the TI, as well as pledging
the 4 term assignments to secure the investment and future proceeds per the LLC
operating agreement (where the investor entitled to 80% of any future cash flow
proceeds, until he recover his investments in full, then after the parties will
share the cash flow equally). As disclosed before, said 4 wells were sold to a
third party. The Company via its sub, completed the drilling of all 4 wells at
the estimated cost of $2,100,000 for four wells (not including option payments).
The Company also exercised its fifth well option (by paying per the master
agreement $50,000 option fee on November 5, 2008). In lieu of the
world financial markets crisis, the Company approached the land owners on DCG
mineral rights, requesting an amendment to allow DCG an additional six (6)
months before it is required to exercise another option to secure a Term
Assignment of Oil and Gas Lease pursuant to the terms of the original Agreement
dated March 5, 2008. The land owner’s representative has answered the Company’s
request with discrepancies about the date as effective date. During 2009 the
Company received production reports from third party that appear to be
inaccurate. To date, the company investigating its possibilities. On November
2009 the Company agreed with TI that his paid-up balance will prevail as a note,
and all his equity interest will be belong to the Company.
Potential
exposure due to Pending Project under Due Diligence:
Barnett
Shale, Fort Worth area of Texas Project - On September 2, 2008, the Company
entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (the "MOU") to enter into a
definitive asset purchase agreement with Blackhawk Investments Limited, a Turks
& Caicos company ("Blackhawk") based in London, England. Blackhawk exercised
its exclusive option to acquire all of the issued and allotted share capital in
Sand haven Securities Limited ("SSL"), and its underlying oil and gas assets in
NT Energy. SSL owns approximately 62% of the outstanding securities of NT
Energy, Inc., a Delaware company ("NT Energy"). NT energy holds rights to
mineral leases covering approximately 12,972 acres in the Barnett Shale, Fort
Worth area of Texas containing proved and probable undeveloped natural gas
reserves. SSL was a wholly owned subsidiary of Sand haven Resources plc ("Sand
haven"), a public company registered in Ireland, and listed on the Plus exchange
in London. In lieu of hindering the due diligence process by Sand
haven officers, the Company could not complete adequately its due diligence, and
said transaction was null and void.
Trafalgar
Convertible Note:
In
connection with the convertible note and as collateral for performance by the
Company under the terms of said note, the Company issued to Trafalgar 45,000
common shares to be placed as security for said note. Said shares considered by
the Company to be escrow shares. Given the net loss for the period,
such shares are ant dilutive to weighted-average basic shares
outstanding.
Short
Term Loan – by Investor:
On
September 5, 2008 the Company entered a short term loan memorandum, with Mahomet
Hauk Nudes, for a short term loan (“bridge”) of $220,000 to bridge the drilling
program of the Company. As a consideration for said facility, the Company grants
the investor with 100% cashless warrants coverage for two years at exercise
price of $1.50 per share. The investor made a loan of $220,000 to the company on
September 15, 2008 (where said funds were wired to the company drilling
contractor), that was paid in full on October 8, 2008. Accordingly the investor
is entitled to 2,000 cashless warrants from September 15, 2008 at exercise price
of $1.50 for a period of 2 years. The Company contests the validity
of said warrants for a cause.
DCG
Drilling Rights:
On
November 6, 2008, the Company exercised an option to drill its fifth well in the
Adams-Baggett field in West Texas. The Company has 120 days to drill the lease
to be assigned to it as a result of the option exercise. Pipeline construction
related to connecting wells 42-105-40868 and 42-105-40820 had been completed.
Per the owners of the land the assignment of the lease will terminate effective
March 3, 2009 in the event that the Company does not drill and complete a well
that is producing or capable of producing oil and/or gas in paying quantities.
The Company contests the owner termination dates.
As
detailed in this report, the Buyer is not performing under the notes. The
Company retained an attorney in Texas to pursue its rights under the agreements
and the collateral.
Commitment
of Issuance of Preferred Stock:
Series D – Not issued yet - On
December 30, 2009, the Company entered into a Preferred Stock Purchase
Agreement dated as of December 30, 2009 (the “Agreement”) with Socius
Capital Group, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company d/b/a Socius Life
Sciences Capital Group, LLC including its designees, successors and assigns (the
“Investor”). Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company will issue to the Investor
up to $5,000,000 of the Company’s newly created Series D Preferred Stock (the
“Preferred Stock”). The purchase price of the Preferred Stock is $10,000 per
share. The shares of Preferred Stock that are issued to the Investor will bear a
cumulative dividend of 10.0% per annum, payable in shares of Preferred
Stock, will be redeemable under certain circumstances and will not be
convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock (the “Common Stock”).
Subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the Company has the right
to determine (1) the number of shares of Preferred Stock that it will
require the Investor to purchase from the Company, up to a maximum purchase
price of $5,000,000, (2) whether it will require the Investor to purchase
Preferred Stock in one or more tranches, and (3) the timing of such
required purchase or purchases of Preferred Stock. The terms of the Preferred
Stock are set forth in a Certificate of Designations of Preferences, Rights and
Limitations of Series D Preferred Stock (the “Preferred Stock Certificate”) that
the Company filed with the Delaware Secretary of State on December 18,
2009. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Investor a
commitment fee of $250,000 (the “Commitment Fee”), payable at the earlier of the
six monthly anniversary of the execution of the Agreement or the first
tranche. The Company has the right to elect to pay the Commitment Fee
in immediately available funds or by issuance of shares of Common Stock.
Concurrently with its execution of the Agreement, the Company issued to the
Investor a warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase shares of Common Stock with an
aggregate exercise price of up to $6,750,000 depending upon the amount of
Preferred Stock that is purchased by the Investor. Each time that the Company
requires the Investor to purchase shares of Preferred Stock, a portion of the
Warrant will become exercisable by the Investor over a five-year period for a
number of shares of Common Stock equal to (1) the aggregate purchase price
payable by the Investor for such shares of Preferred Stock multiplied by 135%,
with such amount divided by (2) the per share Warrant exercise price. The
initial exercise price under the Warrant is $0.022 per share of Common Stock.
Thereafter, the exercise price for each portion of the Warrant that becomes
exercisable upon the Company’s election to require the Investor to purchase
Preferred Stock will equal the closing price of the Common Stock on the date
that the Company delivers its election notice. The Investor is entitled to pay
the Warrant exercise price in immediately available funds, by delivery of cash,
a secured promissory note or, if a registration statement covering the resale of
the Common Stock subject to the Warrant is not in effect, on a cashless basis.
Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company agreed to file with the Securities and
Exchange Commission a registration statement covering the resale of the shares
of Common Stock that are issuable to the Investor under the Warrant and in
satisfaction of the Commitment Fee.
Series E – Not issued yet – On
April 15, 2010 the Company’s Board of Director approved settlement agreement
with Trafalgar effective December 31, 2009. The parties agreed that the debts
owed to Trafalgar will be set as $3,000,000 with maturity of 30 months from date
of issuing carry a 7% annual interest. Via issuance of Preferred Stock, the debt
is Convertible at the Option of the Holders, into 600,000,000 common
shares of the Company, at any time upon written notice to the
Company. The Company recognizes that in the event of conversion, the
shares to be issued would exceed its authorized shares; in that event, the
Company will authorize more shares at that time.
Reverse
Split and Name changed:
Effective
February 24, 2009, the Company affected a reverse split of its issued and
outstanding shares of common stock on a 100 for one basis. As a
result of the reverse split, the issued and outstanding shares of common stock
was reduced from 92,280,919 to 922,809. The authorized shares of common
stock will remain as 400,000,000 and the par value will remain the same. New
CUSIP was issued for the Company's common stock which is 92905M
203. The symbol of the Company was changed from VTEX into
VXRC. Effective July 15, 2009, the Company changed its name from
Vortex Resources Corp. to Yasheng Eco-Trade Corporation. In addition,
effective July 15, 2009, the Company’s quotation symbol on the Over-the-Counter
Bulletin Board was changed from VXRC to YASH. As such a new CUSIP number was
issued on July 5, 2009. The new number is: 985085109.
Pending
Transactions and exposure associated with the Yasheng Group:
As
discussed prior, the Company entered into series of agreements with Yasheng
Group. Yasheng Group failed to comply with the Company due diligence procedure,
and as such terminated the definitive agreement with the Company on November
2009. In connection to the Yasheng agreements, the Company entered agreements or
arrangement or negotiations as followings:
(i) On
July 2009 the Company signed a financial advisor engagement letter with
Cukierman & Co. Investment House Ltd, a foreign Investment
banking firm (“CIH”) to obtain bank financing for the Yasheng Russia Breading
Complex as was signed in June with Create (See note Commitments and
contingencies). CIH has retained Dr. Sam Frankel to assist in obtaining funds
from semi-governmental funding sources. Per the agreement the Company will pay
CIH a monthly retainer fee of $3,750. A millstone payment of $25,000 will be
paid to CIH provided that CIH will present a banking institution which in
principal will secure minimum $25 million financing to the Create joint
venture.
(ii) On
July 2009 the Company signed an agreement with Better Online Solutions (“BOSC”)
for consulting services for the Company logistics center, as well as for the
Crate joint venture. Said agreement was signed for the purpose of establishing
supply chain solutions and RFID protocols. In return the Company will provide
BOSC with a right of first refusal of matching its best contract for supplying
services to the logistics center.
(iii) On
July 2009 the Company has entered negotiations with Management Consulting
Company (“MCC”) to explore further expansion and acquisitions for Yasheng Russia
(See Create Joint Venture). MCC is a division of IFD Capital Group in
Russia.
(iv) On
January 20, 2009, the Company entered into a non-binding Term Sheet (the "Term
Sheet") with Yasheng in connection with the development of a logistics center.
Pursuant to the Term Sheet, the Company granted Yasheng an irrevocable option to
merge all or part of its assets into the Company (the "Yasheng Option"). If
Yasheng exercises the Yasheng Option, as consideration for the transaction to be
completed between the parties, the Company would issue Yasheng such number of
shares of the Company's common stock calculated by dividing the value of the
assets which will be included in the transaction with the Company by the volume
weighted average price of the Company's common stock as quoted on a national
securities exchange or the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board for the ten days
preceding the closing date of such transaction. The value of the assets
contributed by Yasheng will be based upon the asset value set forth in Bashing’s
audited financial statements provided to the Company prior to the closing of any
such transaction. On June 18, 2009, Change Golden Dragon Industrial Co., Ltd., a
company which is not affiliated with Yasheng ("Golden Dragon"), delivered a
notice whereby it has advised that it wishes to exercise the Yasheng Option by
merging into the Company in consideration of shares of preferred stock with a
stated value in the amount of $220,000,000 that may be converted at a $1.10 per
share, a premium to the Company's current market price, into 200,000,000 shares
of common stock of the Company. The shareholders of Golden Dragon (the
"Shareholders") are all foreign citizens. As a result, the issuance, if
consummated will be in accordance with Regulation S as adopted under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Further, the Shareholders are entitled to
assign such shares as each deems appropriate. In addition, the Company is
required to raise $20,000,000 to be used by Golden Dragon for working capital
purposes. Golden Dragon is a Chinese corporation with primary operation in Gansu
province of China. The Company designs, develops, manufactures and markets
farming and sideline products including fruits, barley, hops and agricultural
materials. In lieu of merging its assets into the Company, the
Company and Yasheng entered into an additional Letter of Intent on June 12, 2009
whereby Yasheng agreed to use its best efforts to have the majority stockholders
of Yasheng (the "Group Stockholders") enter and close an agreement with the
Company whereby the Company would acquire approximately 55% of the issued and
outstanding securities of Yasheng from the Group Stockholders in consideration
of 300,000,000 shares of common stock of the Company. The June 12, 2009 letter
of intent was approved by the Company's Board of Directors on August 12, 2009.
The Company and Yasheng initially contemplated a closing date of July 15,
2009.
(v) On
August 7, 2009, the Company has entered into a Memorandum of Terms in
which it will provide an equity line in the amount up to $1,000,000 to Golden
Water Agriculture, a corporation to be formed in Israel (“Golden
Water”). Upon funding the equity line, the Company will receive
shares of Series A Preferred Stock (the “Golden Water Preferred”) convertible
into 30% of Golden Water, which assumes that the full $1,000,000 is
funded. The Company will be entitled to convert the Golden
Water Preferred into the most senior class of shares of Golden Water at a 15%
discount to any recent round of financing. The Company shall be
required to convert the Golden Water Preferred in the event of an initial public
offering based on a valuation three times the valuation of the
investment. To date, no consideration has been exchanged between the
Company and Golden Water. Golden Water has developed a process by which gaseous
oxygen can be introduced into water at the molecular level and retained at a
high concentration for a long period of time, as well as the ability to add
gaseous elements including nitrogen, carbon dioxide and more. The parties that
are forming Golden Water have filed for patents in the United States and
Israel.
(vi)
Logistics Center - On August 12, 2009, the Company entered into a 45 day
exclusivity period to finalize an "Option to Buy" on a lease agreement for a
"big box" facility located in Southern, California (the "Facility"). The
Facility consists of approximately 1,000,010 square feet industrial building
located in Victorville, California and the lease is expected to commence
November 1, 2009 and continue for a period of seven years, with two five-year
extension periods The Company advanced a $25,000 non-refundable deposit
representing 10% of the required security deposit for the entire lease. The
non-refundable deposit allowed the Company to exclusively negotiate the option
to buy the Facility as all other terms of the lease have been agreed upon in
principal. The Company is also pursuing certain tax and economic incentives
associated with the establishment and development of the Yasheng Asia Pacific
Cooperative Zone – its core business. These incentives include LAMBRA Enterprise
Zone Sales and Use Tax Credit (7% of qualified capital equipment expenses),
LAMBRA Enterprise Zone Hiring Credit (50% of qualified employees wages reducing
10% each year for 5 years), County of San Bernardino Economic Development Agency
assistance in employee recruitment screening and qualification and filing for
LAMBRA benefits (estimated value $8,000 per qualified employee).
Assuming
that the option to purchase were finalized, the economic terms of the lease
agreement of the Facility (as all other terms of the lease have been agreed upon
in principal) would have been be as follows:
Year
|
|
Rent
|
|
|
Security
|
|
|
R/E tax (est.)
|
|
|
Mica (est.)
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Begin
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
252,500.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
100,000.00 |
|
|
|
|
352,500.00 |
|
1
|
|
|
575,700.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
992,664.00 |
|
2
|
|
|
2,302,800.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
2,719,764.00 |
|
3
|
|
|
2,545,200.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
2,962,164.00 |
|
4
|
|
|
2,545,200.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
2,962,164.00 |
|
5
|
|
|
2,787,600.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
3,204,564.00 |
|
6
|
|
|
3,030,000.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
3,446,964.00 |
|
7
|
|
|
3,030,000.00 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
360,000.00 |
|
|
|
56,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
3,446,964.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
|
|
|
16,816,500.00 |
|
|
|
252,500.00 |
|
|
|
2,520,000.00 |
|
|
|
498,748.00 |
|
|
|
|
20,087,748.00 |
|
Per
authorization received from Yasheng Group the Company entered negotiations with
the owner of the Facility to acquire the “big box” with financing from the
owner. The Company exchanged a few counter offers with the Facility’s owner. As
disclosed by the Company (see below and Subsequent events), Yasheng BVI noticed
the Company of termination of the Exchange Agreement, and as such the Company,
which is still pursuing its core business (developing of a logistics center),
instructed its listing agents to locate a smaller Facility for the company than
the above.
(vii) On
August 5, 2009, the Company together with Yasheng Group, a California
corporation ("Yasheng" and together with the Company, the "Yasheng Parties")
entered a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU")with Pfau, Pfau & Pfau LLC
("Pfau") a Florida limited liability company for the purpose of creating a joint
venture for the development and operation of three properties owned by Pfau. The
Company received Paul’s countersigned MOU on August 16, 2009. Pfau owns three
properties including (i) approximately 28,000 acres in Southeastern San Benito
County, California which includes approximately 12,000 acres designated and
planned by Pfau for olive trees, an olive oil milling and bottling plant and
potential oil wells (nine wells exiting on the property, where only one well is
producing), (ii) approximately 45 acres in Kona, Hawaii which is planned to be
developed by Pfau into a coffee plantation and (iii) approximately 502 acres in
San Marcos, California planned to be developed by Pfau into about 750 residences
and an off-site 1.5 million square feet of commercial/mixed use land. The
intentions of the parties to this proposed joint venture are (i) to re-finance
the existing liens to provide that the new loans in the approximate amount of
$50 million (the "New Loan"), which debt can be serviced through the proceeds
generated from the properties, and (ii) to obtain financing (a development line
of credit in the additional amount of $85 million) (the "Line of Credit") for
further implementation of the Pfau properties' agricultural, crude oil and
residential development. Pfau members shall deposit into an escrow account 50%
ownership of Pfau, which will be released to the Yasheng Parties upon the
funding and the release of any existing liens on Pfau and its properties. In
return for the 50% ownership of Pfau, Yasheng Parties will guaranty the New Loan
and the Line of Credit, if needed, , subject to acceptance by the Yasheng
Parties of the terms and conditions of the funding. Pfau will allow Yasheng
Parties to use its collateral to obtain the New Loan and the Line of Credit. As
Pfau has filed for Chapter 11 protection with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the
Southern District of California (case # is 08-12840-PB11), it is intended that
the signing of the MOU or the Yasheng Parties ownership of 50% of Pfau, will in
no way subject the Yasheng Parties or any of their officers or directors to
liability to the existing creditors of Pfau or to any third party. As such any
funding obtained by Yasheng Parties, if at all, and the execution of definitive
joint venture documents, will be subject to Court approval. Pfau is has filed
for Chapter 11 protection with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern
District of California (case # is 08-12840-PB11). On October 22, 2009, Pfau
reached an agreement with its secured creditors for extension of the first
mortgage amounting to approximately $22.8M until May 2010, which may be extended
further until September 2010. The second and third secured creditors represent
about $28M in debt have consented to the extension. Pfau is in active
negotiations with the holders of the second and third position in order to
re-structure this debt as well. There is no guaranty that Pfau will be
successful in re-structuring this debt. The agreement providing for the
extension of the first position holder was approved by the Court. As such any
funding obtained by Yasheng Parties, if at all, and the execution of definitive
joint venture documents, will be subject to Court approval as well as the
approval of the Board of Directors of the Company.
(viii) On
August 26, 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with Yasheng Group, a
California corporation ("Group"), pursuant to which the Company agreed to
acquire 49% of the outstanding securities (the "Yasheng Logistic Securities") of
Yasheng (the United States) Logistic Service Company Incorporated ("Yasheng
Logistic"), a California corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Group. In
consideration of the Yasheng Logistic Securities, the Company would issue Group
100,000,000 restricted shares of common stock of the Company (the "Company
Shares"). The Company is required to issue the Company Shares and Yasheng
Logistic is required to issue the Yasheng Logistic Securities within 32 days of
the Agreement. Further, Group has agreed to cancel the 50,000,000 shares of the
Company that were previously issued to Group. The sole asset of Yasheng Logistic
is the certificate of approval for Chinese enterprises investing in foreign
countries granted by the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of
China.
(ix) On
August 26, 2009, the Company entered into a Stock Exchange Agreement (the
“Exchange Agreement”) with Yasheng Group (BVI), a British Virgin Island
corporation (“Yasheng-BVI”), pursuant to which Yasheng-BVI agreed to sell the
Company 75,000,000 shares (the “Group Shares”) of common stock of Yasheng Group,
a California corporation (“Group”) in consideration of 396,668,000 shares (the
“Company Shares”) of common stock of the Company (the “Exchange”).
(x) On
October 29, 2009, the Company entered into a Collaboration Agreement (the
"Agreement") with IPF-AGRO Management Company ("IPF"), Yasheng Group ("Yasheng")
and Cukierman & Co. Consulting (the Company, IPF and Yasheng herein
collectively referred to as the "Parties") for the purpose of creating a joint
venture on the basis of joining the agricultural and financial assets of the
Parties and developing business contacts of the Parties. The Parties would
collaborate on various investment projects associated with agricultural industry
development in Russia, including the production, storage and marketing of
potatoes and barley, cattle breeding and the trading of agricultural products on
an international basis.
Under the
Exchange Agreement, the Exchange Agreement may be terminated by written consent
of both parties, by either party if the other party has breached the Exchange
Agreement or if the closing conditions are not satisfied or by either party if
the exchange is not closed by September 30, 2009 (the “Closing
Date”). As part of the closing procedure, the Company requested that
Yasheng-BVI provide a current legal opinion from a reputable Chinese law firm
attesting to the fact that no further regulatory approval from the Chinese
government is required as well as other closing conditions to close the
Exchange. On November 3, 2009, the Company sent Group and
Yasheng-BVI a letter demanding various closing items. Group and
Yasheng-BVI did not deliver the requested items and, on November 9, 2009, after
verbally consulting management of the Company with respect to the hardship and
delays expected consolidating both companies audits, Group and
Yasheng-BVI sent a termination notice to the Company advising that
the Exchange Agreement had been terminated.
The
Company is presently evaluating its options in moving forward with respect to
Group based on various letters of intent and agreements with Group regarding
various matters and is presently determining whether it should cease all
activities with Group. As stated in Group press release: “Yasheng Group has
other agreements with or involving Yasheng Eco Trade Corp as previously
announced by Yasheng Eco Trade Corp and Yasheng Group can provide no assurances
at this time that those agreements will be consummated”. As such, the
closing of any of the above (i) to (x) business opportunities by the Company, if
at all, will require the completion of definitive documentations and completion
of due diligence by the Company. There is no guarantee that the
parties will reach final agreements or that the transactions will close on the
terms set forth above. Cukierman & Co. Investment House Ltd – a foreign
Investment banking firm, as an advisor to the Company, is currently working with
Yasheng Group trying to complete the due diligence package needed for the
Company to acquire a stake in Yasheng Group or to proceed with any of the
above, if at all. On April 5, 2010 the Company issued a formal
request to Yasheng demanding that they surrender of the 50,000,000 shares that
were issued to them, as well as reimburse the Company for its expenses
associated with the transaction in the amount of $348,240.
ITEM
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risks
Smaller
reporting companies are not required to provide the information required by Item
305.
ITEM
4. Controls and Procedures
The term
disclosure controls and procedures means controls and other procedures of an
issuer that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by
the issuer in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act (15
U.S.C. 78a, et seq.) is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified
in the 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 an issuer in the reports
that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated
to the issuer’s management, including its principal executive and principal
financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate to
allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Our
management, including our chief executive officer and principal financial
officer, does not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or our
internal controls over financial reporting will prevent all error and all
fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated,
can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the
control system are 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
inherent limitations in all control systems, internal control over financial
reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements, and no evaluation of controls
can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud,
if any, within the registrant have been detected. 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 the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
Evaluation of Disclosure and
Controls and Procedures. Our management is responsible for
establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting
as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Our 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 accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. We carried out an
evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management,
including our chief executive officer and principal financial officer, of the
effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and
procedures as of the end of the period covered by this
report. Based on that evaluation, our chief executive
officer and principal financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls
and procedures are currently effective to ensure that information required to be
disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified
in the SEC’s rules and forms. As we develop new business or if we
engage in an extraordinary transaction, we will review our disclosure controls
and procedures and make sure that they remain adequate.
Changes in internal
controls
There
have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified
in connection with the evaluation required by paragraph (d) of Rule 13a-15 or
15d-15 under the Exchange Act that occurred during the quarter ended March 31,
2010 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
our internal control over financial reporting.
PART
II OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM
1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Navigator
– Registration Rights - The Company entered into a registration rights agreement
dated July 21, 2005, whereby it agreed to file a registration statement
registering the 441,566 shares of Company common stock issued in connection with
the Navigator acquisition within 75 days of the closing of the transaction. The
Company also agreed to have such registration statement declared effective
within 150 days from the filing thereof. In the event that Company failed to
meet its obligations to register the shares, it may have been required to pay a
penalty equal to 1% of the value of the shares per month. The Company obtained a
written waiver from the seller stating that the seller would not raise any
claims in connection with the filing of registration statement through May 30,
2006. The Company since received another waiver extending the registration
deadline through May 30, 2007 without penalty. As of June 30, 2008 (effective
March 31, 2008), the Company was in default of the Registration Rights Agreement
and therefore made a provision for compensation for $150,000 to represent agreed
final compensation (the "Penalty"). The holder of the Penalty subsequently
assigned the Penalty to three unaffiliated parties (the "Penalty Holders"). On
December 26, 2008, the Company closed agreements with the Penalty Holders
pursuant to which the Penalty Holders agreed to cancel any rights to the Penalty
in consideration of the issuance 66,667 shares of common stock to each of the
Penalty Holders. The shares of common stock were issued in connection with this
transaction in a private placement transaction made in reliance upon exemptions
from registration pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and
Rule 506 promulgated there under. Each of the Penalty Holders is an accredited
investor as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities
Act of 1933.
Trafalgar
Capital Specialized Investment Fund, Luxembourg - The Company via series of
agreements (directly or via affiliates) with European based alternative
investment fund - Trafalgar Capital Specialized Investment Fund, Luxembourg
(“Trafalgar”) established financial relationship which should create source of
funding to the Company and its subsidiaries (see detailed description of said
series of agreements in the Company filling). The Company position is that the
DCG transactions (among others) would not have been closed by the Company,
unless Trafalgar had provided the needed financing for the drilling
program. The Company and Trafalgar became adversaries where each
party filled a lawsuit against the other party in different jurisdictions which
included California, Nevada (indirect lawsuit filed by Verge) and Florida. On
April 15, 2010 the parties settled their outstanding disputes. Based on said
settlement which was declared effective as of December 31, 2009 the parties
agreed that Trafalgar will convert its notes (at agreed amount of $3,000,000)
into a new class of Series E Preferred Shares, which shall have the
following terms: (i) $3 Million Face Amount (as agreed amount between all
parties) (ii) Maturity in cash in Thirty Months (30 months) from date of issue
(iii) Optional Redemption by the Company at any time, for Face Value including
accrued unpaid dividends (iv) Dividends Accrue at 7% per
annum. Said Series Preferred E shares will be convertible at
the Option of the Holders into 600,000,000 common shares of YASH, at any time
upon written notice to the company. This share issuance is larger than the
shares currently authorized by the Company; at the point where the Company
issues the shares, the Company will authorize a sufficient number of shares.
Trafalgar will be entitled to appoint 4 directors to the Company
board.
Verge
Bankruptcy & Rusk Litigation - On January 23, 2009, Verge Living Corporation
(the “Debtor”), a former wholly owned subsidiary of Atia Group Limited (“AGL”),
a former subsidiary of the Company, filed a voluntary petition (the “Chapter 11
Petitions”) for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code
(the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District
of California (the “Bankruptcy Court”). The Chapter 11 Petitions are
being administered under the caption In re: verge Living Corporation,
et al., Chapter 11 Case No. ND 09-10177 (the “Chapter 11
Proceedings”). The Bankruptcy Court assumed jurisdiction over the
assets of the Debtors as of the date of the filing of the Chapter 11
Petitions. . On April 28, 2009, Chapter 11 Proceedings changed venue
to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada, Chapter
11 Case No BK-S-09-16295-BAM. As Debtor as well as its parent AGL were
subsidiaries of the Company at time when material agreements where executed
between the parties, the Company may become part of the proceeding. In August
2008, Dennis E. Rusk Architect LLC and Dennis E. Rusk, (“Rusk”) were terminated
by a former affiliate of the Company. Rusk filed a lawsuit against the Debtor,
the Company and multiple other parties in Clark County, Nevada, Case No.
A-564309. The Rusk parties seek monetary damages for breach of contract. The
Company has taken the position that the Company will have no liability in this
matter as it never entered an agreement with Rusk. The court handling the Verge
bankruptcy entered an automatic stay for this matter. On or about October 28,
2009 the parties settled said complaint, where the other parties agreed to pay
the Rusk parties the sum of $400,000. The amount of $37,500 was advanced by the
other parties to the Rusk parties. The Company’s Board of Directors agreed to
issue to the other parties 4 million shares of the Company, as the Company
participation in said settlement, which was done on October 2008. The shares of
common stock were issued in connection with this transaction in a private
placement transaction made in reliance upon exemptions from registration
pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 and Rule 506
promulgated there under. Each of the Penalty Holders is an accredited investor
as defined in Rule 501 of Regulation D promulgated under the Securities Act of
1933. The complaint against the Company was dismissed with prejudice as final on
March 23, 2010.
Yalon
Hecht - On February 14, 2007, the Company filed a complaint in the Superior
Court of California, County of Los Angeles against Yalon Hecht, a foreign
attorney alleging fraud and seeking the return of funds held in escrow, and
sought damages in the amount of approximately 250,000 Euros (approximately
$316,000 as of the date of actual transferring the funds), plus interest, costs
and fees. On April 2007, Mr. Hecht returned $92,694 (70,000 Euros on the date of
transfer) to the Company which netted $72,694. On June 2007, the
Company filed a claim seeking a default judgment against Yalon
Hecht. On October 25, 2007, the Company obtained a default judgment against
Yalon Hecht for the sum of $249,340.65. As of today, the Company has not
commenced procedures to collect on the default judgment.
Vortex
One entered into a sale agreement with third parties regarding specific 4 wells
assignments. In consideration for the sale of the Assignments, The buyer(s)
shall pay the total sum of $2,300,000 to Seller as follows: (i) A $225,000.00
payment upon execution (paid) (ii) A 12 month $600,000.00 secured promissory
note bearing no interest with payments to begin on the first day of the second
month after the properties contained in the Assignments begin producing. (iii) A
60 month $1,500,000.00 secured promissory note bearing no interest with payments
to begin the first day of the fourteenth month after the properties contained in
the Assignments begin producing. As the Note bears no interest the Company
discounts it to present value (for the day of issuing, e.g. March 1, 2009) using
12% as discount interest rate per annum, which is the Company’s approximate cost
of borrowing. The Company alleges that the buyers are not performing
under the notes. Per the terms of the sale, Vortex One and the Company should be
paid commencing May 1, 2009. Vortex One and the Company agreed to give the
buyers a one-time 60 day extension, and put them on notice for being default on
said notes. To date the operator of the wells paid Vortex One (on behalf of the
Buyer) 3 payments (for the months of April, May and July 2009 –
Operator did not pay for the month of June 2009) amounting to $13,093.12. Vortex
Ocean One’s position is that the buyers as well as the operator breached the
Sale agreement and the Note’s terms, and notice has been issued for default. In
lieu of the non material amount, no provision was made to income of $2,617 (20%
the Company share per the operating agreement) until the Company finishes its
investigation of the subject. The Company retained an attorney in
Texas to pursue its rights under the agreements.
On July
1, 2008, DCG entered into a Drilling Contract (Model Turnkey Contract)
("Drilling Contract") with Ozona Natural Gas Company LLC ("Ozona"). Pursuant to
the Drilling Contract, Ozona has been engaged to drill four wells in Crockett
County, Texas. The drilling of the first well commenced immediately at the cost
of $525,000 and the drilling of the subsequent three wells scheduled for as
later phase, by Ozona and Mr. Mustafoglu, as well as the wells locations. Based
on Mr. Mustafoglu negligence and executed un-authorized agreements with third
parties, the Company may have hold Ozona and others responsible for damages to
the Company with regards to surface rights, wells locations and further charges
of Ozona which are not acceptable to the Company. The Company did not commence
legal acts yet, and evaluate its rights with its legal consultants.
Wang - On
August 4, 2009, the Company filed a Form 8-K Current Report with the Securities
and Exchange Commission advising that Eric Ian Wang (“Wang”) was appointed as a
director of the Company on August 3, 2009. Mr. Yang was nominated as a director
at the suggestion of Yasheng which approved the filing of the initial Form 8-K.
On August 5, 2009, Mr. Wang contacted the Company advising that he has not
consented to such appointment. Accordingly, Mr. Wang has been nominated as a
director of the Company but has not accepted such nomination and is not
considered a director of the Company. Mr. Wang's nomination was subsequently
withdrawn. Furthermore, although no longer relevant, Mr. Wang's work history as
disclosed on the initial Form 8K was derived from a resume provided by Mr. Wang.
Subsequent to the filing of the Form 8-K, Mr. Wang advised that the disclosure
regarding his work history was inaccurate. As a result, the disclosure relating
to Mr. Wang's work history should be completely disregarded. The Company believe
that at the time that these willful, malicious, false and fraudulent
representations were made by Wang to the company, Wang knew that the
representations were false and that he never intended to be appointed to the
board. The company informed and believe the delivery of the resumes, and the
later demand for a retraction of the resumes, were part of a scheme (with
others) to injure the business reputation of the company to otherwise damages
its credibility such that the Company would have a lesser bargaining position in
the finalization of the documents relating to the Yasheng transaction. As such
the Company filled on September 2009 a complaint against Wang in California
Superior Court – San Bernardino County – Case No.: CIVRS909705. On or about
January 4, 2010 the parties settled all their adversaries. Under said
settlement, Wang represents, warrants, and agrees that the information about him
that was contained in the 8K Filing and other disclosure documents was supplied
by him. Any alleged inaccuracies, misrepresentations, and/or
misstatements in the 8K Filing and other disclosure documents, regarding his
resume, background and/or qualifications, if any exist, were based upon the
information he provided to the Company.
Sharp -
On October 20, 2009, an alleged former shareholder of the Company (Mr. Sharp),
has filed a lawsuit against the Company and Mr. Attia in San Diego County,
California (case number SC105331). Mr. Sharp subsequently attempted to settle
the matter for a nominal fee, which the Company refused to accept. The Company
disputes all of Mr. Sharp’s claims as meritless, frivolous and unsubstantiated
and believes that it has substantial and meritorious legal and factual defenses,
which the Company intends to pursue vigorously. The Company filed a motion to
change venue which was successfully granted by court. On January 15, 2010, the
case was transferred to Los Angeles.
Item
1A. Risk Factors.
As a
smaller reporting company, we are not required to provide the information
required by this item..
Item
2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds.
On
January 20, 2010, the Company, in an effort to reduce outstanding debt of the
Company, entered into an Exchange Agreement with Moran Atias (“Atias”) whereby
the Company and Ms. Atias exchanged $100,000 of a promissory note in the amount
of $250,000 held by Ms. Atias into 13,000,000 shares of common stock of the
Company, in a transaction made pursuant to Section 3(a)(9) of the Securities Act
of 1933. The promissory note, of which a portion was converted by Ms.
Atias (see above), was initially issued on August 8, 2008. The
Company’s issuance of the securities described in the preceding sentence is
exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 pursuant to the
exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act
of 1933 for a transaction not involving a public offering of
securities. Ms. Atias still holds a note payable by the Company
for $50,000.
On March
23, 2010, the Company issued 8,000,000 shares of its common stock at 0.006 par
value to Donfeld, Kelley & Rollman (“Kelley”), the Company lawyer, as
partial payment for legal fees due. The promissory note, which was converted by
Kelley, was issued on August 30, 2009. The Company’s issuance
of the securities described in the preceding sentence is exempt from
registration under the Securities Act of 1933 pursuant to the exemption from
registration provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 for a
transaction not involving a public offering of securities
ITEM 3.
DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
As
reported under Legal
proceedings, the Company notified Trafalgar that Trafalgar is in breech
with regard to the services to be performed in accordance with the $2,000,000
loan agreement. As disclosed, the parties settled all their
Disputes.
ITEM 4.
SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
None.
ITEM 5.
OTHER INFORMATION
None.
ITEM
6. EXHIBITS
10.1
|
Exchange
Agreement dated January 20, 2010 between Yasheng Eco-trade Corporation and
Moran Atias (1)
|
|
|
10.2
|
Exchange
Agreement dated January 20, 2010 between Yasheng Eco-trade Corporation and
Donfeld, Kelley & Rollman (1)
|
|
|
31
|
Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and Principal
Financial Officer of YASHENG ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES
CORP.) pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
|
|
32
|
Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and Principal
Financial Officer of YASHENG ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES
CORP.) pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
|
(1)
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Form 8-K Current report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on January 22,
2010.
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Los
Angeles, California, on May17, 2010.
|
YASHENG
ECO-TRADE CORPORATION (F/K/A VORTEX RESOURCES CORP.)
|
|
|
|
|
By:
|
/s/Yossi
Attia
|
|
Yossi
Attia
|
|
Chief
Executive Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and
Principal
Financial Officer
|