e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
þ QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005
OR
o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number: 0-26272
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
59-2705336
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
12901 Hutton Drive
Dallas, Texas 75234
(Address of principal executive offices)
(Zip code)
(972) 241-4080
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined by Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No þ
At August 4, 2005, the number of shares outstanding of the registrants common stock was 6,896,267
shares.
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
June 30, 2005
INDEX
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In Thousands, Except Share Data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December |
|
June |
|
|
31, 2004 |
|
30, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
22,324 |
|
|
$ |
29,339 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
2,395 |
|
|
|
2,017 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
326 |
|
Inventories, net |
|
|
13,991 |
|
|
|
13,409 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
2,096 |
|
|
|
4,411 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
41,015 |
|
|
|
49,502 |
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
579 |
|
|
|
1,582 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
14,145 |
|
|
|
14,145 |
|
Intangible assets, net |
|
|
5,474 |
|
|
|
5,008 |
|
Deferred tax assets |
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
434 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
1,166 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
62,105 |
|
|
$ |
71,837 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
1,344 |
|
|
$ |
1,726 |
|
Income taxes payable |
|
|
1,797 |
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
Accrued distributor commissions |
|
|
4,259 |
|
|
|
5,796 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
4,154 |
|
|
|
6,106 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
9,551 |
|
|
|
13,707 |
|
Current portion of debt |
|
|
796 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
2,330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
23,496 |
|
|
|
31,877 |
|
Debt |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
23,518 |
|
|
|
31,888 |
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
598 |
|
|
|
661 |
|
Mezzanine common stock |
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
960 |
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.001 par value; 5,000,000 shares authorized; none issued and outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized, 6,819,667 and 6,871,267
shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2004 and June 30, 2005, respectively |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
64,933 |
|
|
|
65,512 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(27,799 |
) |
|
|
(27,163 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
37,029 |
|
|
|
38,328 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
62,105 |
|
|
$ |
71,837 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
1
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
(In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
17,686 |
|
|
$ |
49,959 |
|
|
$ |
56,431 |
|
|
$ |
92,718 |
|
Cost of sales |
|
|
4,863 |
|
|
|
12,440 |
|
|
|
13,117 |
|
|
|
20,606 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
12,823 |
|
|
|
37,519 |
|
|
|
43,314 |
|
|
|
72,112 |
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributor commissions |
|
|
12,578 |
|
|
|
27,599 |
|
|
|
32,323 |
|
|
|
48,872 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
8,194 |
|
|
|
12,308 |
|
|
|
14,162 |
|
|
|
21,554 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
20,772 |
|
|
|
39,907 |
|
|
|
46,485 |
|
|
|
70,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(7,949 |
) |
|
|
(2,388 |
) |
|
|
(3,171 |
) |
|
|
1,686 |
|
Other expense, net |
|
|
(189 |
) |
|
|
(399 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(673 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
|
|
(8,138 |
) |
|
|
(2,787 |
) |
|
|
(3,201 |
) |
|
|
1,013 |
|
Income tax benefit (provision) |
|
|
1,545 |
|
|
|
674 |
|
|
|
747 |
|
|
|
(314 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
(153 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(531 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(6,746 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,159 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,985 |
) |
|
$ |
636 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(1.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
(1.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average number of shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
5,447 |
|
|
|
6,853 |
|
|
|
5,059 |
|
|
|
6,836 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
5,447 |
|
|
|
6,853 |
|
|
|
5,059 |
|
|
|
8,184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
2
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (UNAUDITED)
(In Thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(2,985 |
) |
|
$ |
636 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(1,053 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Imputed compensation |
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Common stock issued for services |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities, excluding acquisitions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
(304 |
) |
|
|
(116 |
) |
Inventories, net |
|
|
(8,394 |
) |
|
|
186 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
(658 |
) |
|
|
(2,500 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
|
(712 |
) |
Accounts payable |
|
|
2,656 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
Income taxes payable |
|
|
(184 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
Accrued distributor commissions |
|
|
(744 |
) |
|
|
1,675 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
1,579 |
|
|
|
1,987 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
9,489 |
|
|
|
4,466 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
(277 |
) |
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
7,571 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business acquired |
|
|
(1,337 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Purchase of database |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(146 |
) |
|
|
(1,151 |
) |
Decrease (increase) in restricted cash |
|
|
(1,232 |
) |
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(2,675 |
) |
|
|
(762 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments on debt |
|
|
(494 |
) |
|
|
(407 |
) |
Minority interest contribution |
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
643 |
|
Offering costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
|
|
(618 |
) |
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(147 |
) |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(3,295 |
) |
|
|
7,015 |
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period |
|
|
11,133 |
|
|
|
22,324 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period |
|
$ |
7,838 |
|
|
$ |
29,339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
3
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED)
1. |
|
NATURE OF OPERATIONS AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION |
Nature of Operations
Natural Health Trends Corp. (the Company) is an international direct selling organization
headquartered in Dallas, Texas. The Company was originally incorporated as a Florida corporation in
1988. The Company re-incorporated in the state of Delaware effective June 29, 2005. Subsidiaries
controlled by the Company sell products to a distributor network that either uses the products
themselves or resells them to consumers. The Companys products promote health, wellness and
vitality and are sold under the Lexxus and Kaire brands.
The Companys majority-owned subsidiaries have an active physical presence in the following
markets: North America, which consists of the United States and Canada; Greater China, which
consists of Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan and China; Southeast Asia, which consists of Singapore,
Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia; Eastern Europe, which consists of Russia,
Mongolia and other former Soviet Union Republics; Australia and New Zealand, South Korea, Japan,
and Mexico.
Basis of Presentation
The unaudited interim consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America for interim financial
information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. As a result,
certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States have been condensed
or omitted. In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited interim consolidated financial
statements contain all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, considered
necessary for a fair statement of the Companys financial information as of June 30, 2005. The
results of operations of any interim period are not necessarily indicative of the results of
operations to be expected for the fiscal year. These consolidated financial statements should be
read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes included in our
2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) on March 31, 2005.
2. |
|
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES |
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and all of its
majority-owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been
eliminated in consolidation.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of
revenues and expenses during the reported period. Actual results may differ from these estimates.
The most significant accounting estimates inherent in the preparation of the Companys
financial statements include estimates associated with obsolete inventory and the fair value of
acquired intangible assets and goodwill, as well as those used in the determination of liabilities
related to sales returns, distributor commissions, and income taxes. Various assumptions and other
factors prompt the determination of these significant estimates. The process of determining
significant estimates is fact specific and takes into account historical experience and current and
expected economic conditions. Historically, actual results have not significantly deviated from
those determined using the estimates described above.
Reclassification
Certain balances have been reclassified in the prior year consolidated financial statements to
conform to current year presentation.
4
Revenue Recognition
Product sales are recorded when the products are shipped and title passes to independent
distributors. Product sales to distributors are made pursuant to a distributor agreement that
provides for transfer of both title and risk of loss upon our delivery to the carrier, which is
commonly referred to as F.O.B. Shipping Point. The Company primarily receives payment by credit
card at the time distributors place orders. Amounts received for unshipped product are recorded as
deferred revenue. The Companys sales arrangements do not contain right of inspection or customer
acceptance provisions other than general rights of return.
Actual product returns are recorded as a reduction to net sales. The Company estimates and
accrues a reserve for product returns based on its return policies and historical experience.
During April 2005, the Company launched a new product line, Gourmet Coffee Café, which
consists of coffee machines and the related coffee and tea pods, in the North American market. As
the Gourmet Coffee Café is a very different product than the Companys other products and there is
no reliable information on the Companys sales returns or warranty obligation, the Company has
deferred revenue generated from their sale until sufficient return and warranty experience on the
product can be established. The Company deferred approximately
$361,000 and $227,000 of revenue and cost of revenue, respectively, for product
shipped during the three months ended June 30, 2005. The
deferred costs are recorded in other current assets.
Enrollment package revenue, including any nonrefundable set-up fees, is deferred and
recognized over the term of the arrangement, generally twelve months. During the third quarter of
2004, the Company changed its amortization methodology from a monthly method to the preferred daily
method whereby revenues for each enrollment package start the day of enrollment. The change in
methodology resulted in additional deferred revenue of approximately $280,000 during 2004.
Enrollment packages provide distributors access to both a personalized marketing website and a
business management system. Prior to the acquisition of MarketVision Communications Corp.
(MarketVision) on March 31, 2004, the Company paid MarketVision a fixed amount in exchange for
MarketVision creating and maintaining individual web pages for such distributors. These payments to
MarketVision were deferred and recorded as a prepaid expense. The related amortization was recorded
to cost of sales over the term of the arrangement. The remaining unamortized costs were included in
the determination of the purchase price of MarketVision. Subsequent to the acquisition of
MarketVision, no upfront costs are deferred as the amount is nominal.
Shipping charges billed to distributors are included in net sales. Costs associated with
shipments are included in cost of sales.
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation
The Company continues to account for stock-based compensation plans under the recognition and
measurement principles of Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock
Issued to Employees, and related Interpretations. The following table illustrates the effect on
net income and income per share if the Company had applied the fair value recognition provisions of
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation, to stock-based employee compensation (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss), as reported |
|
$ |
(6,746 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,159 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,985 |
) |
|
$ |
636 |
|
Add: Stock-based employee
compensation expense included in
reported net income, net of
related tax effects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deduct: Stock-based employee
compensation expense determined
under fair value based method for
all awards, net of related tax
effects |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(3,843 |
) |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(6,752 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,179 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,828 |
) |
|
$ |
596 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic income (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
(1.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
Pro forma |
|
$ |
(1.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.35 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
Diluted income (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
(1.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
Pro forma |
|
$ |
(1.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(1.35 |
) |
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
5
The weighted-average fair value of options granted was $7.87 and $11.91 for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2004, respectively. The fair value of each option grant was estimated on the
date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following weighted-average
assumptions: expected life of 4 years, risk-free interest rate of 2.5%, expected volatility of
97%, and dividend yield of zero. No options were granted during the six months ended June 30,
2005.
Income Per Share
Basic income per share is computed by dividing net income applicable to common stockholders by
the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted income per
share is determined using the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the
period, adjusted for the dilutive effect of common stock equivalents, consisting of shares that
might be issued upon the exercise of outstanding stock options and warrants. In periods where
losses are reported, the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding excludes common stock
equivalents because their inclusion would be anti-dilutive.
The dilutive effect of stock options and warrants is reflected by application of the treasury
stock method. The potential tax benefit derived from exercise of non-qualified stock options has
been excluded from the treasury stock calculation as the Company is uncertain that the benefit will
be realized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In Thousands, Except Per Share Data) |
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(6,746 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,159 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,985 |
) |
|
$ |
636 |
|
Basic weighted-average number of shares outstanding |
|
|
5,447 |
|
|
|
6,853 |
|
|
|
5,059 |
|
|
|
6,836 |
|
Effect of dilutive stock options and warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,348 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted weighted-average number of shares outstanding |
|
|
5,447 |
|
|
|
6,853 |
|
|
|
5,059 |
|
|
|
8,184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(1.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
(1.24 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
Options and warrants to purchase 1,675,543 shares of common stock were outstanding during the
three and six months ended June 30, 2004, but were not included in the computation of diluted
income per share because their inclusion would be anti-dilutive. Options and warrants to purchase
2,992,228 shares of common stock were outstanding during the three months ended June 30, 2005, but
were not included in the computation of diluted income per share because their inclusion would be
anti-dilutive.
Options to purchase 310,000 shares of common stock were outstanding during the six months
ended June 30, 2005 but were not included in the computation of diluted income per share because
the exercise prices were greater than the average market price of the common shares. The options,
which expire on March 31, 2011, were still outstanding at June 30, 2005.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In November 2004, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 151,
Inventory Costs. This statement requires that certain costs such as idle facility expense,
excessive spoilage, double freight, and re-handling costs be recognized as current-period charges
and that allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of conversion be based on the normal
capacity of the production facilities. The provisions of the statement shall be effective for
inventory costs incurred during fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. Adoption of this
statement is not anticipated to have a significant impact on the Companys financial condition,
results of operations, or cash flows.
In December 2004, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised
2004), Share-Based Payment. This statement is a revision of FASB Statement No. 123, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation, and supersedes APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees. This Statement requires that we record compensation expense for stock options issued,
based on the estimated fair value of the options at the date of grant. This statement is effective
at the beginning of the next fiscal year that begins after June 15, 2005. We currently are not
required to record stock-based compensation charges if the employees stock option exercise price
is equal to or exceeds the fair value of the stock at the date of grant. We have not yet determined
what impact, if any, the proposed pronouncement would have on our financial statements.
6
In May 2005, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 154, Accounting
Changes and Error Corrections a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3. The
statement requires retrospective application to prior periods financial statements of changes in
accounting principle, unless it is impracticable to determine either the period-specific effects or
the cumulative effect of the change. The statement is effective for accounting changes and
corrections of errors made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. Adoption of this
statement is not expected to have a material impact on the Companys financial condition, results
of operations, or cash flows.
3. RESTATEMENT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
On March 23, 2005, the Company filed a Current Report on Form 8-K to report, after
consultation with its audit committee, that an amendment to its financial statements for the year
ended December 31, 2003 and for the first quarter of 2004 is warranted as certain commission and
transportation-related expenses incurred as of December 31, 2003 were under-accrued and certain
revenues not earned until 2004 were improperly recorded as revenue by its Eastern European
business, KGC Networks Ptd. Ltd., for the year ended December 31, 2003. The restatement of the
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2003 reduced the Companys net sales by
approximately $310,000, increased cost of sales by approximately $180,000, increased distributor
commission expense by approximately $460,000, reduced minority interest expense by approximately
$300,000, and reduced after-tax net income by approximately $650,000 for the quarter as well as the
year ended December 31, 2003.
For the quarter ended March 31, 2004, the restatement increased the Companys net sales by
approximately $310,000, reduced cost of sales by approximately $180,000, reduced distributor
commission expense by approximately $460,000, increased minority interest expense by approximately
$300,000, and increased after-tax net income by approximately $650,000 for the quarter ended March
31, 2004.
Although the financial statements for the three month periods ended June 30, 2004 and
September 30, 2004 are unaffected by this error, the consolidated financial statements for the
second and third quarters of 2004 include inaccurate information on a year to date basis because
they include the erroneous information from the first quarter of 2004 which financial statements
should not be relied upon. The Company also intends to file in the near future an amended annual
report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, and amended quarterly reports on Form
10-Q for the first three quarters of 2004.
A reconciliation of the amounts as previously reported and as restated for the six months
ended June 30, 2004 is as follows (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previously |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported |
|
Adjustments |
|
As Restated |
Net sales |
|
$ |
56,121 |
|
|
$ |
310 |
1 |
|
$ |
56,431 |
|
Gross profit |
|
|
42,824 |
|
|
|
490 |
2 |
|
|
43,314 |
|
Distributor commissions |
|
|
32,782 |
|
|
|
(459 |
)3 |
|
|
32,323 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
14,162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,162 |
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(4,120 |
) |
|
|
949 |
|
|
|
(3,171 |
) |
Net loss |
|
|
(3,635 |
) |
|
|
650 |
4 |
|
|
(2,985 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(0.72 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
Diluted |
|
$ |
(0.72 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Revenues not earned until 2004 were improperly recorded as revenue by the Companys
Eastern European business, KGC Networks Ptd. Ltd., for the year ended December 31, 2003. |
|
2 |
|
Includes certain transportation-related expenses incurred but not accrued as of December 31, 2003. |
|
3 |
|
Reflects distributor commissions incurred but not accrued as of December 31, 2003. |
|
4 |
|
Includes minority interest related to the restatement adjustments. |
7
4. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) (In Thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(6,746 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,159 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,985 |
) |
|
$ |
636 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
(263 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(408 |
) |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
$ |
(7,009 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,201 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,393 |
) |
|
$ |
720 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. BUSINESS COMBINATION
On March 31, 2004, the Company entered into a merger agreement with MarketVision. MarketVision
is the exclusive developer and service provider of direct selling internet technology used by the
Company since 2001. MarketVision hosts and maintains the internet technology for the Company and
charged an annual fee for this service based upon the number of enrolled distributors of the
Companys products. MarketVision earned revenues for this service of approximately $579,000 for the
three months ended March 31, 2004.
The results of operations of MarketVision have been included in the Companys consolidated
statements of operations since the completion of the acquisition on March 31, 2004. The following
unaudited pro forma information presents a summary of the results of operations of the Company
assuming the acquisition of MarketVision occurred on January 1, 2004 (in thousands, except per
share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, 2004 |
|
|
Actual |
|
Pro Forma |
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
56,431 |
|
|
$ |
56,431 |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(2,985 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,884 |
) |
Loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.50 |
) |
Diluted |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.50 |
) |
6. CONTINGENCIES
During the fall of 2003, the customs agency of the government of South Korea brought a charge
against LXK, Ltd. (LXK), the Companys wholly-owned subsidiary operating in South Korea, with
respect to the importation of the Companys Alura product. The customs agency alleges that Alura is
not a cosmetic product, but rather should be categorized and imported as a pharmaceutical product.
On February 18, 2005, the Seoul Central District Court ruled against LXK and fined it a total of
approximately $200,000. LXK also incurred related costs of approximately $40,000 as a result of the
judgment. The Company recorded a reserve for the entire $240,000 at December 31, 2004 and is
appealing the ruling. The failure to sell Alura in South Korea is not anticipated to have a
material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or business
prospects of LXK.
In May 2005 the Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) asserted that certain product
literature produced by independent distributors made improper claims in violation of Korean law. In
June 2005, KFDA notified the Companys Korean subsidiary, LXK, Ltd., that it was required to cease
all operations for a fifteen-day period and destroy certain existing product inventory. The
Company denies responsibility for the actions of its independent distributors and intends to
contest imposition of any injunction or punishment.
On or around March 31, 2004, Lexxus International, Inc. (Lexxus U.S.) received a letter from
John Loghry, a former Lexxus distributor, alleging that Lexxus U.S. had wrongfully terminated an
alleged oral distributorship agreement with Mr. Loghry and that the Company had breached an alleged
oral agreement to issue shares of the Companys common stock to Mr. Loghry. After Mr. Loghry
threatened to commence suit against Lexxus U.S. and the Company in Nebraska, on May 13, 2004,
Lexxus U.S. and the Company filed an action for declaratory relief against Mr. Loghry in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Texas seeking, inter alia, a declaration that
Mr. Loghry was not wrongfully terminated and is not entitled to recover anything from Lexxus U.S.
or the Company. Mr. Loghry has filed counterclaims against the Company and Lexxus U.S. asserting
his previously articulated claims. In September 2004, Mr. Loghry filed third party claims against
certain officers of the Company and Lexxus U.S., including against Terry LaCore, the Chief
Executive Officer of Lexxus U.S. and a director of the Company, and Mark Woodburn, President of
8
the
Company and a director, for fraud, LaCore, Woodburn, and a certain Lexxus distributor for
conspiracy to commit fraud and tortuous interference with contract. In February 2005, the court
dismissed all of Mr. Loghrys claims against the individual defendants, except the claims for fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud. On June 2, 2005, after Mr. Loghry
had filed amended counterclaims, Lexxus U.S., the Company, and the individual defendants moved to
dismiss the counterclaims on the grounds that the claims were barred because Mr. Loghry had failed
to disclose the existence of the alleged claims when he filed for personal bankruptcy in September
2002. On June 23, 2005, the court stayed discovery pending resolution of the pending motion to
dismiss.
On November 1, 2004, Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha (d/b/a Toyota Motor Corporation) and
Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. filed a complaint against the Company and Lexxus U.S. in United States
District Court for the Central District of California (CV04-9028). The complaint alleges trademark
and service mark dilution, unfair competition, trademark and service mark infringement, and trade
name infringement, each with respect to Toyotas Lexus trademark. Toyota seeks to enjoin the
Company and Lexxus U.S. from using the Lexxus mark and otherwise competing unfairly with Toyota, to
transfer the ownership of the mylexxus.com and lexxusinternational.com internet sites to Toyota,
and reimbursement of costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by Toyota in connection with this
matter. The Company has reached a tentative settlement agreement under which the Company will
discontinue use of the Lexxus name and mark and change the name of its Lexxus operations and domain
names, which could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of
operations, cash flow or business prospects of the Company.
On November 12, 2004, Dorothy Porter filed a complaint against the Company in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois alleging that she sustained a brain
hemorrhage after taking Formula One, an ephedra-containing product marketed by Kaire
Nutraceuticals, Inc., a former subsidiary of the Company, and, thereafter, eKaire.com, Inc., a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. Ms. Porter has sued the Company for strict liability,
breach of warranty and negligence. The Company intends to defend this case vigorously and on
December 27, 2004 filed an answer denying the allegations contained in the complaint. The plaintiff
demanded $2 million in damages to settle the case. On March 7, 2005, a Notice of Tag-Along Action
was filed by Ms. Porter with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. It is anticipated that
this case will be placed on the next Conditional Transfer Order and, ultimately, transferred to the
consolidated Ephedra Products Liability proceedings in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York. The Company does not believe that the plaintiff can demonstrate that
its products caused the alleged injury and intends to vigorously defend this action.
On January 13, 2005, Natures Sunshine Products, Inc. and Natures Sunshine Products de Mexico
S.A. de C.V. (collectively Natures Sunshine) filed suit against the Company in the Fourth
Judicial District Court, Utah County, State of Utah seeking injunctive relief and unspecified
damages against the Company, Lexxus U.S., the Companys Mexican subsidiary, and the Companys
Mexico management team, Oscar de la Mora Romo and Jose Villarreal Patino, alleging among other
things that the Companys employment of De la Mora and Villarreal violated or could lead to the
violation of certain non-compete, non-solicitation, and confidentiality agreements allegedly in
effect between De la Mora and Villarreal and Natures Sunshine. Following repeated unsuccessful
attempts by Natures Sunshine to remand the case to state court, Natures Sunshine voluntarily
dismissed its lawsuit on May 5, 2005. On May 17, 2005, Oscar de la Mora, Jose Villarreal commenced
an action against Natures Sunshine in Utah federal district court seeking a declaration that the
non-compete agreement Natures Sunshine seeks to enforce violates Mexican law and public policy,
and is therefore unenforceable. On May 19, 2005, Natures Sunshine again filed suit in Utah state
court against De la Mora and Villarreal and on June 17, 2005 filed suit against Natural Health
Trends Corp. and related subsidiaries in federal court in Dallas, Texas. The Company has sought to
transfer the Dallas federal court case to federal court in Utah for consolidation with the
Companys previously filed declaratory judgment action. Natures Sunshine seeks injunctive relief
against the Company, including De la Mora and Villarreal and subsidiaries of the Company. The
Company intends to vigorously defend this case on its own behalf, to the extent the Company remains
a party, and on behalf of De la Mora and Villarreal. The Company believes the voluntary dismissal
is another attempt by Natures Sunshine to avoid federal court jurisdiction and that a case will be
re-filed against De la Mora and Villarreal in state court. If the Company or De la Mora and
Villarreal are unsuccessful in defending this action, the Company may be required to change its
Mexico management team, at least during the unexpired term of any enforceable non-compete period.
Currently, there is no other significant litigation pending against the Company other than as
disclosed in the paragraphs above. From time to time, the Company may become a party to litigation
and subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of the Companys business. Although the
results of such litigation and claims in the ordinary course of business cannot be predicted with
certainty, the Company believes that the final outcome of such matters will not have a material
adverse effect on the Companys business, results of operations or financial condition. Regardless
of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense costs,
diversion of management resources and other factors.
9
7. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
In August 2001, the Company entered into a written lease agreement and an oral management
agreement with S&B Business Services, an affiliate of Brad LaCore, the brother of Terry LaCore,
Chief Executive Officer of Lexxus U.S. and a director of the Company, and Sherry LaCore, Brad
LaCores spouse. Under the terms of the two agreements, S&B Business Services provides warehouse
facilities and certain equipment, manages and ships inventory, provides independent distributor
support services and disburses payments to independent distributors. In exchange for these
services, the Company pays $18,000 annually for leasing the warehouse, $3,600 annually for the
lease of warehouse equipment and $120,000 annually for the management services provided, plus an
annual average of approximately $12,000 for business related services. The Company paid S&B
Business Services approximately $39,000 for each of the three month periods ended June 30, 2004 and
2005 and approximately $78,000 for each of the six month periods ended June 30, 2004 and 2005.
In September 2001, the Company entered into an oral consulting agreement with William
Woodburn, the father of Mark Woodburn, President of the Company and a director, pursuant to which
William Woodburn provided the Company with management advice and other advisory assistance. In
exchange for such services, the Company starting June 8, 2001 paid to Ohio Valley Welding, Inc., an
affiliate of William Woodburn, $6,250 on a bi-weekly basis. The Company paid $37,500 and $75,000
for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2004, respectively, to Ohio Valley Welding, Inc.
The consulting agreement between the Company and William Woodburn was terminated as of September
30, 2004.
The Companys former controller is married to Mark Woodburn, President of the Company and a
director. Her employment with the Company ended in August 2004. The Company paid her approximately
$23,000 and $46,000 for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2004, respectively.
On March 31, 2004, the Company entered into a merger agreement with MarketVision, pursuant to
which the Company acquired all of the outstanding capital stock of MarketVision (see Note 5). As a
founding stockholder of MarketVision, Terry LaCore, Chief Executive Officer of Lexxus U.S. and a
director of the Company, received 450,000 shares of the Companys common stock and is entitled to
receive approximately $840,000 plus interest from promissory notes issued by the Company. As of
June 30, 2005, the outstanding balance due Mr. LaCore was approximately $130,000.
Item 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following Managements Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with
Managements Discussion and Analysis included in our 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the
United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on March 31, 2005, and our other filings,
including Current Reports on Form 8-K, filed with the SEC through the date of this report.
Company Overview
Natural Health Trends Corp. (the Company) is an international direct selling organization.
We control subsidiaries that distribute products through two separate direct selling businesses
that promote health, wellness and vitality. Lexxus International, Inc., our wholly-owned subsidiary
(Lexxus U.S.), and other Lexxus subsidiaries (collectively, Lexxus), sell certain cosmetic
products, consumer as well as quality of life products, which accounted for approximately 99% of
our consolidated net revenues in 2004 as well as in the six months ended June 30, 2005. eKaire.com,
Inc. (eKaire), our wholly-owned subsidiary, distributes nutritional supplements aimed at general
health and wellness.
Lexxus commenced operations in January 2001 and has experienced tremendous growth, as we are
currently conducting business in at least 30 countries through approximately 149,000 active
distributors as of June 30, 2005. (We consider a distributor active if he or she has placed at
least one product order with us during the preceding year). The Lexxus business includes KGC
Networks Pte. Ltd. (KGC), a Singapore company owned 51% by the Company and 49% by a European
private investor. KGC sells Lexxus products into a separate network with distributors primarily in
Russia and other Eastern European countries. eKaire has been in business since 2000 and is
operating in four countries through approximately 3,200 active distributors.
We have experienced significant revenue growth over the last few years due in part to our
efforts to expand into new markets. We intend to pursue additional foreign markets in 2005. We
began accepting orders in Mexico the week of July 18, 2005 and anticipate commencing revenue
generation in Japan in the fourth quarter of 2005. We also opened our first of up to four
experience centers in Guangzhou, China the week of July 18, 2005.
10
In the quarter ended June 30, 2005, we generated approximately 91% of our revenue from outside
North America, with sales in Hong Kong representing approximately 64% of revenue. Because of the
size of our foreign operations, operating results can be impacted negatively or positively by
factors such as foreign currency fluctuations, and economic, political and business conditions
around the world. In addition, our business is subject to various laws and regulations, in
particular regulations related to direct selling activities that create certain risks for our
business, including improper claims or activities by our distributors and potential inability to
obtain necessary product registrations.
Income Statement Presentation
Net Sales. The Company derives its revenue from sales of its products, sales of its enrollment
packages, and from shipping charges. Substantially all of its product sales are to independent
distributors at published wholesale prices. We translate revenue from each markets local currency
into U.S. dollars using average rates of exchange during the period. The following table sets forth
revenue by market and product line for the time periods indicated (in thousands).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
|
North America |
|
$ |
3,277 |
|
|
$ |
4,296 |
|
|
$ |
6,825 |
|
|
$ |
8,952 |
|
Hong Kong |
|
|
2,889 |
|
|
|
32,041 |
|
|
|
29,047 |
|
|
|
57,249 |
|
Taiwan |
|
|
695 |
|
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
1,547 |
|
|
|
1,813 |
|
Southeast Asia |
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
2,806 |
|
Eastern Europe |
|
|
8,607 |
|
|
|
8,230 |
|
|
|
15,020 |
|
|
|
16,634 |
|
South Korea |
|
|
1,394 |
|
|
|
2,129 |
|
|
|
2,382 |
|
|
|
3,613 |
|
Australia/New Zealand |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
402 |
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
Other |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Lexxus |
|
|
17,223 |
|
|
|
49,559 |
|
|
|
55,464 |
|
|
|
91,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America |
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
714 |
|
|
|
689 |
|
Australia/New Zealand |
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Kaire |
|
|
463 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
967 |
|
|
|
913 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
17,686 |
|
|
$ |
49,959 |
|
|
$ |
56,431 |
|
|
$ |
92,718 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Sales. Cost of sales consist primarily of products purchased from third-party
manufacturers, freight cost of shipping products to distributors and import duties for the
products, costs of promotional materials sold to the Companys distributors at or near cost,
provisions for slow moving or obsolete inventories and, prior to the closing of the merger with
MarketVision Communications Corp. (MarketVision) as of March 31, 2004, the amortization of fees
charged by the Companys third party software service provider. Cost of sales also includes
purchasing costs, receiving costs, inspection costs and warehousing costs. Certain prior year
amounts have been re-classified into cost of sales so that the financial statements are comparable
between periods.
Distributor Commissions. Distributor commissions are our most significant expense and are
classified as operating expenses. Under our compensation plan, distributors are paid weekly
commissions in the distributors home country, in their local currency, for product sold by that
distributors down-line distributor network across all geographic markets. Distributors are not
paid commissions on purchases or sales of our products made directly by them. This seamless
compensation plan enables a distributor located in one country to sponsor other distributors
located in other countries where we are authorized to do business.
Currently, there are two fundamental ways in which our distributors can earn income:
|
|
|
Through retail markups on sales of products purchased by distributors at wholesale prices; and |
|
|
|
|
Through a series of commissions paid on product purchases made by their down-line distributors. |
Each of our products carries a specified number of sales volume points. Commissions are based
on total personal and group sales volume points per sales period. Sales volume points are
essentially based upon a percentage of a products wholesale cost. To be eligible to receive
commissions, a distributor may be required to make nominal monthly purchases of our products.
Certain of our subsidiaries do not require these nominal purchases for a distributor to be eligible
to receive commissions.
In determining commissions, the number of levels of down-line distributors included within the
distributors commissionable group increases as the number of distributorships directly below the
distributor increases. Distributor commissions are dependent on the sales mix and, for 2004,
typically ranged between 42% and 55% of net sales. From time to time we make modifications and
enhancements to our compensation plan to help motivate distributors, which can have an impact on
distributor commissions. In
11
January 2005, we implemented a 5% price increase across all product lines without changing the
sales volume points assigned to them. Effectively the price increase is expected to reduce the
distributor commissions as a percentage of revenue.
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses (SG&A). Selling, general and administrative
expenses consist of administrative compensation and benefits, travel, credit card fees and
assessments, professional fees, certain occupancy costs, depreciation and amortization, and other
corporate administrative expenses. In addition, this category includes selling, marketing, and
promotion expenses including costs of distributor conventions which are designed to increase both
product awareness and distributor recruitment. Because our various distributor conventions are not
always held at the same time each year, interim period comparisons will be impacted accordingly.
Income Tax Provision. Provision for income taxes depends on the statutory tax rates in each of
the jurisdictions in which we operate. We expect to complete by the end of 2005 the implementation
of a foreign holding and operating company structure for our non-United States businesses. This new
structure will re-organize our non-United States subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands. Though our
goal is to improve the overall tax rate, there is no assurance that the new tax structure could be
successful. If the United States Internal Revenue Service or the taxing authorities of any other
jurisdiction were to successfully challenge these agreements, plans, or arrangements, or require
changes in our transfer pricing practices, we could be required to pay higher taxes, interest and
penalties, and our earnings would be adversely affected.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
In response to SEC Release No. 33-8040, Cautionary Advice Regarding Disclosure about Critical
Accounting Policies and SEC Release Number 33-8056, Commission Statement about Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, the Company has
identified certain policies that are important to the portrayal of its consolidated financial
condition and consolidated results of operations. These policies require the application of
significant judgment by the Companys management.
The most significant accounting estimates inherent in the preparation of the Companys
financial statements include estimates associated with obsolete inventory and the fair value of
acquired intangible assets and goodwill, as well as those used in the determination of liabilities
related to sales returns, distributor commissions, and income taxes. Various assumptions and other
factors prompt the determination of these significant estimates. The process of determining
significant estimates is fact specific and takes into account historical experience and current and
expected economic conditions. Historically, actual results have not significantly deviated from
those determined using the estimates described above. If circumstances change relating to the
various assumptions or other factors used in such estimates the Company could experience an adverse
effect on its consolidated financial condition, changes in financial condition, and results of
operations. The Companys critical accounting policies at June 30, 2005 include the following:
Inventory Valuation. The Company reviews its inventory carrying value and compares it to the
net realizable value of its inventory and any inventory value in excess of net realizable value is
written down. In addition, the Company reviews its inventory for obsolescence and any inventory
identified as obsolete is reserved or written off. The Companys determination of obsolescence is
based on assumptions about the demand for its products, product expiration dates, estimated future
sales, and managements future plans. Also, if actual sales or management plans are less favorable
than those originally projected by management, additional inventory reserves or write-downs may be
required. The Companys inventory value at June 30, 2005 was approximately $13.4 million. Inventory
write-downs for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005 were not significant.
Asset Impairment. The Company reviews the book value of its property and equipment and
intangible assets whenever an event or change in circumstances indicates that the net book value of
an asset or group of assets may be unrecoverable. The Companys impairment review includes a
comparison of future projected cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges) generated by
the asset or group of assets with its associated carrying value. The Company believes its expected
future cash flows approximate or exceed its net book value. However, if circumstances change and
the net book value of the asset or group of assets exceeds expected cash flows, the Company would
have to recognize an impairment loss to the extent the net book value of the asset exceeds its fair
value. At June 30, 2005, the net book value of the Companys property and equipment and intangible
assets were approximately $1.6 million and $5 million, respectively. No such losses were recognized
for the three and six months ended June 30, 2005.
Allowance for Sales Returns. An allowance for sales returns is provided during the period
Lexxus and Kaire product is shipped. The allowance is based upon the return policy of each country,
which varies from 14 days to one year, and their historical return rates, which range from
approximately 1% to approximately 18% of product sales. Sales returns are approximately 4% of
product sales for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 and 2005. The allowance for sales
returns was approximately $1.5 million and $2.7 million at December 31, 2004 and June 30, 2005,
respectively. No material changes in estimates have been recognized for the three and six months
ended June 30, 2005.
12
Revenue Recognition. Product sales are recorded when the products are shipped and title passes
to independent distributors. Product sales to distributors are made pursuant to a distributor
agreement that provides for transfer of both title and risk of loss upon our delivery to the
carrier, which is commonly referred to as F.O.B. Shipping Point. The Company primarily receives
payment by credit card at the time distributors place orders. The Companys sales arrangements do
not contain right of inspection or customer acceptance provisions other than general rights of
return. Amounts received for unshipped product are recorded as deferred revenue. Such amounts
totaled $4.9 million at December 31, 2004 and $7.5 million at June 30, 2005.
Enrollment package revenue, including any nonrefundable set-up fees, is deferred and
recognized over the term of the arrangement, generally twelve months. Enrollment packages provide
distributors access to both a personalized marketing website and a business management system.
Prior to the merger with MarketVision on March 31, 2004, the Company paid MarketVision a fixed
amount in exchange for MarketVision creating and maintaining individual web pages for such
distributors. These payments to MarketVision were deferred and recorded as a prepaid expense. The
related amortization was recorded to cost of sales over the term of the arrangement. The remaining
unamortized costs were included in the determination of the purchase price of MarketVision.
Subsequent to the acquisition of MarketVision, no upfront costs are deferred as the amount is
nominal. Deferred enrollment package revenue totaled $4.7 million at December 31, 2004 and $6.2
million at June 30, 2005. Although the Company has no immediate plans to significantly change the
terms or conditions of enrollment packages, any changes in the future could result in additional
revenue deferrals or could cause us to recognize its deferred revenue over a longer period of time.
During
April 2005, the Company launched a new product line, Gourmet
Coffee Café, which
consists of coffee machines and the related coffee and tea pods, in the North American market. As
the Gourmet Coffee Café is a very different product than the Companys other products and there is
no reliable information on the Companys sales returns or warranty obligation, the Company has
deferred revenue generated from their sale until sufficient return and warranty experience on the
product can be established. The $7.5 million deferred revenue for product
sales at June 30, 2005 included $1.4 million of Gourmet Coffee Café product, including $0.4 million shipped but
unrecognized during the three months ended June 30, 2005.
Tax Valuation Allowance. The Company evaluates the probability of realizing the future
benefits of any of its deferred tax assets and records a valuation allowance when it believes a
portion or all of its deferred tax assets may not be realized. At December 31, 2004, the Company
recognized net deferred tax assets of approximately $515 thousand as it expects to utilize a
portion of its net operating loss carry-forward in connection with the implementation of a foreign
holding and operating company restructure. A valuation allowance of $1.5 million was established
for the remainder of its net deferred tax assets. If the Company is unable to realize the expected
future benefits of its deferred tax assets, it would be required to provide an additional valuation
allowance.
Results of Operations
The following table sets forth our operating results as a percentage of net sales for the periods
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Cost of sales |
|
|
27.5 |
|
|
|
24.9 |
|
|
|
23.2 |
|
|
|
22.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
72.5 |
|
|
|
75.1 |
|
|
|
76.8 |
|
|
|
77.8 |
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributor commissions |
|
|
71.1 |
|
|
|
55.3 |
|
|
|
57.3 |
|
|
|
52.7 |
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses |
|
|
46.3 |
|
|
|
24.6 |
|
|
|
25.1 |
|
|
|
23.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
117.4 |
|
|
|
79.9 |
|
|
|
82.4 |
|
|
|
76.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(44.9 |
) |
|
|
(4.8 |
) |
|
|
(5.6 |
) |
|
|
1.8 |
|
Other expense, net |
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
|
|
(46.0 |
) |
|
|
(5.6 |
) |
|
|
(5.7 |
) |
|
|
1.1 |
|
Income tax benefit (provision) |
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
(38.1 |
)% |
|
|
(4.3 |
)% |
|
|
(5.3 |
)% |
|
|
0.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Sales. Net sales were approximately $49.9 million for the three months ended June 30, 2005
compared to $17.7 million for the same period in the prior year, an increase of $32.2 million or
182% percent. This increase was largely due to the significant growth in the business based in
Hong Kong. In the second quarter of 2005, the Companys Hong Kong business recorded approximately
$32 million of net sales. In the second quarter a year ago, all but approximately $2.9 million of
Hong Kongs orders were deferred and recognized as revenue in the third quarter as distributors were required to receive
additional training before shipments were made and a
13
special policy was instituted by the Company to grant extended product return rights. The
special policy extended product return rights up to 180 days for goods sold around April 2004. The
standard return policy in Hong Kong is 14 days.
Furthermore, in the second quarter of 2005, approximately $1.4 million of the net sales
increase could be attributed to distributors purchasing products in anticipation of our opening in
the Japanese market. The remainder of the net sales increase for the second quarter over a year ago
was due to the North American market ($1 million) and South Korea ($0.7 million).
Net sales were approximately $92.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared to
$56.4 million for the same period in the prior year, an increase of $36.2 million or 64% percent.
The net sales increase was primarily due to Hong Kong (approximately $28 million), Japan ($3
million), KGC ($2 million) and North America ($2 million).
The growth in net sales could be also attributable to a 5% product price increase implemented
in January 2005 and an increase in the number of active independent distributors. As of June 30,
2005, the operating subsidiaries of the Company had approximately 152,000 active distributors,
compared to 133,000 active independent distributors at the end of 2004, and 101,000 at the end of
the second quarter of 2004. As of June 30, 2005, the Company had deferred revenue of approximately
$13.7 million, of which $7.5 million pertained to product sales. The $7.5 million deferred revenue
for product sales included $1.4 million of Gourmet Coffee Café product, including $0.4 million
shipped but unrecognized during the three months ended June 30, 2005.
Cost of Sales. Cost of sales was approximately $12.4 million or 24.9% of net sales for the
three months ended June 30, 2005 compared with approximately $4.9 million or 27.5% of net sales for
the same period in the prior year. Cost of sales was approximately $20.6 million or 22.2% of net
sales for the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared with approximately $13.1 million or 23.2% of
net sales for the same period in the prior year. This quarterly increase in cost of sales of
approximately $7.6 million or 156% was primarily driven by the significant increase in net sales.
Cost of sales as a percentage of net sales decreased over a year ago, mainly due to a 5% price
increase instituted in January 2005 as well as, in the case of the six-month comparison, the
elimination of the commissions paid to MarketVision (approximately $579,000) after its acquisition
by the Company on March 31, 2004.
Gross Profit. Gross profit was approximately $37.5 million or 75.1% of net sales for the three
months ended June 30, 2005 compared with approximately $12.8 million or 72.5% of net sales for the
same period in the prior year. Gross profit was approximately $72.1 million or 77.8% of net sales
for the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared with approximately $43.3 million or 76.8% of net
sales for the same period in the prior year. This increase in the dollar amount of gross profit
was primarily driven by increased sales, a 5% price increase instituted in January 2005, as well as
the elimination of the commissions paid to MarketVision after its acquisition by the Company on
March 31, 2004.
Distributor Commissions. Distributor commissions were approximately $27.6 million or 55.3% of
net sales for the three months ended June 30, 2005 compared with approximately $12.6 million or
71.1% of net sales for the same period in the prior year. Distributor commissions were
approximately $48.9 million or 52.7% of net sales for the six months ended June 30, 2005 compared
with approximately $32.3 million or 57.3% of net sales for the same period in the prior year. This
increase in the dollar amount of commission expense was mainly due to the increase in net sales.
The decrease in distributor commissions as a percentage of sales over a year ago was primarily
related to a 5% price increase implemented in January 2005 without changing the commission
calculation formula, as well as commissions totaling approximately $3.7 million pertaining to
products already returned (approximately $2 million net sales) or those that potentially could be
returned ($5.4 million net sales) under the special return policy the Company implemented in April
2004. As a special measure to establish long-term relationships with the distributors doing
business with our Hong Kong office, the Company did not seek to recover commissions associated with
the products returned. Net sales of approximately $5.4 million associated with $2.7 million of the
$3.7 million were recognized in the third quarter of 2004.
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses (SG&A). SG&A costs were approximately $12.3
million or 24.6% of net sales for the three months ended June 30, 2005 compared with approximately
$8.2 million or 46.3% of net sales for the same period in the prior year. In the second quarter,
this increase of approximately $4.1 million or 50% was mainly attributable to additional
marketing-related expenses primarily in Eastern Europe ($1.8 million), preparing the opening of new
markets in Mexico and Japan ($0.9 million), increased personnel cost in Hong Kong ($0.4 million),
and higher professional fees and personnel cost in North America ($1.0 million). SG&A costs are
expected to continue to increase for the balance of the year as spending on new markets and
marketing events increase.
SG&A costs were approximately $21.6 million or 23.3% of net sales for the six months ended
June 30, 2005 compared with approximately $14.2 million or 25.1% of net sales for the same period
in the prior year. The increase was due to increased marketing spending in Eastern Europe ($2.4
million) and North America ($0.4 million), preparing the opening of new markets in Mexico and
Japan ($1.5 million), increased personnel cost in Hong Kong ($0.6 million), and higher professional
fees and personnel cost in North America ($2.0 million).
14
Other Expense, Net. Other expense was approximately $399 thousand for the three months ended
June 30, 2005 compared to approximately $189 thousand for the same period in the prior year. For
the first half of the year, other expense was $673 thousand for 2005, versus $30 thousand a year
ago. This unfavorable variance was mainly due to exchange losses caused by a strengthening of the
U.S. dollar since December 31, 2004, particularly against the euro.
Income Taxes. Income tax expense was approximately $314 thousand or 31% of income before
income taxes and minority interest for the six months ended June 30, 2005, compared with an income
tax benefit of approximately $747 thousand or 23% of income before income taxes and minority
interest for the same period in the prior year. The increase in the effective tax rate is
attributable to use of net operating losses in the United States and lower effective tax rates on
foreign earnings in 2004 compared to 2005.
Minority Interest. Minority interest was approximately $46 thousand for the three months ended
June 30, 2005, compared to approximately $153 thousand for the same period in the prior year.
Minority interest was approximately $63 thousand for the six months ended June 30, 2005, compared
to approximately $531 thousand for the same period in the prior year. The change relates primarily
to the decreased profitability of our 51%-owned subsidiary, KGC Networks Pte. Ltd.
Net Income. Net loss was approximately $2.2 million or 4.3% of net sales for the three months
ended June 30, 2005, compared to net loss of approximately $6.7 million or 38.1% of net sales for
the same period in the prior year. Net income was approximately $636 thousand or 0.7% of net sales
for the six months ended June 30, 2005, compared to net loss of approximately $3 million or 5.3% of
net sales for the same period in the prior year. The improvement was primarily due to increased
revenue, better gross profit margin, and a reduction in SG&A as a percent of sales.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Cash generated from operations is the main funding source for the Companys working capital
and capital expenditure. In the past, the Company also borrowed from institutions and individuals
and issued preferred stock. In October 2004, the Company raised approximately $16 million, net of
transaction fees, through a private equity placement.
At June 30, 2005, the ratio of current assets to current liabilities was 1.55 to 1.00 and the
Company had working capital of approximately $17.6 million.
Cash provided by operations for the six months ended June 30, 2005 was approximately $7.6
million. The sales increase and the Companys anticipation of continued sales increase in the near
future was the most significant underlying trend for cash flows from operating activities and the
change in the Companys working capital. Cash was mainly generated from earnings, increases in
accrued distributor commissions and deferred revenue, all driven by
sales increase, partly offset by deposits to acquire additional
product. But there is no
assurance that the expected sales increase in the near term would be realized.
Cash used in investing activities during the period was approximately $762 thousand, which
primarily relates to the purchase of property and equipment for our Mexican operations and a
manufacturing facility in China. Cash provided by financing activities during the period was
approximately $139 thousand as a result of proceeds totaling $643 thousand received from the
exercise of a warrant for 51,600 shares of common stock offset by the continued repayment of
MarketVision acquisition-related promissory notes. In connection with the MarketVision acquisition,
the Company issued three different promissory notes in the aggregate principal amount of
approximately $3.2 million. As of June 30, 2005, approximately $288 thousand remained to be paid
over the rest of the year in 2005.
Total cash increased by approximately $7 million during the period.
With cash generated from profitable business operations and the net proceeds from the private
placement closed in October 2004, the Company believes that its existing liquidity and cash flows
from operations, including its cash and cash equivalents, should be adequate to fund normal
business operations expected in the future.
The Company intends to continue to open additional operations in new foreign markets. The
Company continues to incur expenses to develop its launches into the Mexican and Japanese markets
in 2005. The estimated initial cost for entering into the Mexican market is $2 million to $3
million, and $5 million to $7 million for the Japanese market.
China is currently the Companys most important business development project. Direct selling,
or multi-level marketing, is currently prohibited in China. The Chinese government has agreed to
open the direct selling market and has published drafts of pertinent legislation. We are uncertain
as to when the draft legislation will be adopted. Before the formal adoption of direct selling
laws, many of the international direct selling companies have started to operate in China by
employing a retail format.
15
In June 2004, the Company obtained a business license in China. The license stipulates a
capital requirement of $12 million over a three-year period, including a $1.8 million initial
payment that the Company made in January 2005. In planning for retail operations, the Company
estimates that each experience center, where prospective distributors or consumers could sample
the Companys products, will cost approximately $50,000 to $100,000 to build out, plus
approximately $100,000 to $250,000 of annual lease costs. The Company opened its first experience
center in Guangzhou in July 2005 and is evaluating the number, location, timing and
format of up to three additional experience centers.
As part of the Companys plan to expand business in China, we are preparing for a
manufacturing facility in China with an expected opening during the second half of this year. The
Company has leased a factory building and a warehouse as well as purchased machinery in the second
quarter. Our current intention is to start with the finishing stage of the manufacturing process
needed to produce our products in China. In the future, we expect to add more early-stage
manufacturing processes. However, this is dependent upon the progress of our manufacturing
facility and the regulatory environment.
On April 12, 2004, an independent TV documentary show was aired on Chinese television, which
made allegations that the Company engaged in illegal acts and the distributors made false claims.
The show had adversely impacted the Companys Hong Kong based business in 2004. Since the airing of
the program, to the knowledge of the Company, the Chinese government has not initiated any
investigation of the Company or its independent distributors. Nevertheless the Company is also
unable to predict whether it will be successful in obtaining a direct selling license to operate in
China, and if it is successful, when it will be permitted to commence direct selling operations
there. Further, if the Company is successful in obtaining a direct selling license to do business
in China, it is uncertain as to whether the Company will generate profits from such operations.
The
Company launched a new product line, Gourmet Coffee Café, in the North American market in
the second quarter. The Company received approximately $1.4 million of orders as of June 30, 2005.
The Company has begun a preliminary evaluation of implementing an enterprise resources
planning (ERP) system. Internal business processes are mostly manual and do not link to the
MarketVision system, the Companys Internet-based distributor interface. At this point, the Company
does not know how much the ERP project might cost or when the implementation may start.
Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
The Company does not utilize off-balance sheet financing arrangements other than in the normal
course of business. The Company finances the use of certain facilities, office and computer
equipment, and automobiles under various operating lease agreements.
Forward Looking Statements
Certain statements contained in this report constitute forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements included in this report, other than statements of
historical facts, regarding our strategy, future operations, financial position, estimated
revenues, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives are forward-looking statements. When
used in this report, the words believe, anticipate, intend, estimate, expect, project,
could, would, may, plan, predict, pursue, continue, feel and similar expressions
are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements
contain these identifying words.
We cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements, and you
should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. Our actual results could differ
materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various
factors. Our forward-looking statements do not reflect the potential impact of any future
acquisitions, mergers, dispositions, joint ventures or strategic investments. In addition, any
forward-looking statements represent our expectation only as of the date of this report and should
not be relied on as representing our expectations as of any subsequent date. While we may elect to
update forward-looking statements at some point in the future, we specifically disclaim any
obligation to do so, even if our expectations change.
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in any of our forward-looking statements
are reasonable, actual results could differ materially from those projected or assumed in any of
our forward-looking statements. Our future financial condition and results of operations, as well
as any forward-looking statements, are subject to change and to inherent risks and uncertainties,
such as those disclosed in this report. Important factors that could cause our actual results,
performance and achievements, or industry results to differ materially from estimates or
projections contained in forward-looking statements include, among others, the following:
16
|
|
|
our relationship with our distributors; |
|
|
|
|
our need to continually recruit new distributors; |
|
|
|
|
our internal controls and accounting methods may require further modification; |
|
|
|
|
regulatory matters governing our products and network marketing system; |
|
|
|
|
our relationship with our majority owned subsidiary operating in Russia and other Eastern European countries; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to recruit and maintain key management; |
|
|
|
|
adverse publicity associated with our products or direct selling organizations; |
|
|
|
|
product liability claims; our reliance on outside manufacturers; |
|
|
|
|
risks associated with operating internationally, including foreign exchange risks; |
|
|
|
|
product concentration; |
|
|
|
|
dependence on increased penetration of existing markets; |
|
|
|
|
the competitive nature of our business; and |
|
|
|
|
our ability to generate sufficient cash to operate and expand our business. |
Item 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Foreign Currency Risk
In the first six months of 2005, approximately 10% of our revenue was recorded in United
States dollars. The Hong Kong dollar is pegged to the U.S. dollar and we purchase all inventories
in U.S. dollars. Therefore, our currency exposure, mainly to European euro, Korean won, Singapore
dollar, New Taiwan dollar and Australia dollar, represented approximately 28% of our revenue (18%
of that for euro) in the first six months of 2005.
In preparing our consolidated financial statements, we translate revenue and expenses in
foreign countries from their local currencies into U.S. dollars using the average exchange rates
for the period. The local currency of each subsidiarys primary markets is considered the
functional currency. The effect of the translation of the Companys foreign operations is included
in accumulated other comprehensive income within stockholders equity and does not impact the
statement of operations.
As currency rates change, translation of our foreign currency functional businesses into U.S.
dollars affects year-over-year comparability of equity. We do not plan to hedge translation risks
because cash flows from our international operations are generally reinvested locally. Changes in
the currency exchange rates that would have the largest impact on translating our international net
assets included European euro, Korean won, New Taiwan dollar and Australian dollar. Japanese yen
and Mexican peso are expected to be more significant as we enter those two markets in the second
half of 2005.
The Chinese government announced on July 21, 2005 that its currency will no longer be pegged
to the U.S. dollar. Instead, the exchange rates for the Chinese yuan, or RMB, will be determined by
a basket of foreign currencies. This change effected a de facto revaluation of the yuan to the U.S.
dollar from an 8.28 yuan to 8.11 yuan per U.S. dollar.
This change should have a very modest, potentially positive, effect on the Companys Hong Kong
business. The Company currently does not generate revenue in yuan. Revenue recorded in Hong Kong is
denominated in Hong Kong dollar, which is not impacted by the yuan revaluation and still pegged to
the U.S. dollar. But the Chinese consumers in purchasing the Companys products will now pay a
smaller amount of yuan to purchase our products, thus effectively a price decrease is implemented
for our Chinese consumers.
The Company does incur some expenses in yuan in China, and these expenses will be translated
into a greater amount of U.S. dollars in our financial statements. The expenses, approximately $393
thousand in the second quarter, were, and are expected to continue to be, immaterial.
If the Company determines to increase our capital formulation in China in the near future with
cash infusion, the yuan revaluation means that we will need to contribute a greater amount of U.S.
dollars. We currently have no plan to infuse more cash into our Chinese entity in the next few
months.
Hedging
Our exposure to foreign currency fluctuation is expected to increase when the Company
opens for business in Japan and Mexico. The Company currently has no specific plans but expects to
evaluate whether it should use forward or option contracts to hedge its foreign currency exposure.
17
Seasonality
In addition to general economic factors, the Companys revenue is slightly impacted by
seasonal factors and trends such as major cultural events and vacation patterns. For example, most
Asian markets celebrate their respective local New Year in the first quarter, which generally has a
negative impact on that quarter. We believe that direct selling in the United States and Europe is
also generally negatively impacted during the month of August, which is in our third quarter, when
many individuals, including our distributors, traditionally take time off for vacations.
The seasonality of the Companys spending in SG&A is significantly impacted by the timing of
major meetings, events, advertising, promotions and other marketing-related programs, which are
materially discretionary. For example, the marketing-related spending is generally less in the
first quarter when no major event is planned. The Company currently does not have a fixed calendar
for when these events are held.
Interest Rate Risk
As of June 30, 2005, we do not think the Company has any exposure to interest rate risk as the
Company has limited borrowings that are interest rate sensitive.
Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information
required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and
forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our
President and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow for timely decisions regarding
required disclosure. In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management
recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide
only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and management is required
to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and
procedures.
During its review of its financial statements for the quarter ended March 31, 2004, the
Company learned that commission and transportation-related expenses incurred as of December 31,
2003 were under-accrued by approximately $640,000 (on a pre-tax basis) for the quarter and year
ended December 31, 2003. Adjusting entries of approximately $640,000 were included as expenses in
the financial statements for the quarter ended March 31, 2004.
At that time, the Company concluded that the error was not material, and therefore, did not
warrant a restatement of the 2003 financial statements. Based upon the Companys pre-tax income of
approximately $4.0 million for the first quarter of 2004 combined with the Companys historical
sales and net income growth rates, the Company believed that the recording of $640,000 of pre-tax
expenses during the first quarter of 2004 would not have a material effect on the Companys net
income for the 2004 fiscal year.
However, while sales continued to grow significantly, net income for the 2004 fiscal year
declined substantially. As a consequence, the adjusting entries made in the first quarter of 2004
are now considered by management to materially affect the Companys net income for fiscal 2004.
During its review of its financial statements for the year ended December, 31, 2004, the
Company discovered that certain revenues not earned until 2004 were improperly recorded as revenue
by its Eastern European business, KGC Networks Ptd. Ltd., for the year ended December 31, 2003. The
amount of revenues that was over-stated for the 2003 fiscal year was approximately $310,000.
On March 23, 2005, the Audit Committee of the Companys Board of Directors determined that the
inclusion of the aforementioned two items in the financial statements for the quarter ended March
31, 2004 would materially affect the Companys net income for the year ended December 31, 2004, and
the Company believes that an amendment to its financial statements for the year ended December 31,
2003 is warranted.
The restatement of the financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2003 reduced the
Companys net sales by approximately $310,000, increased cost of sales by approximately $180,000,
increased distributor commission expense by approximately $460,000, reduced the minority interest
expense by approximately $300,000, and reduced after-tax net income by approximately $650,000 for
the quarter as well as the year ended December 31, 2003.
18
For the quarter ended March 31, 2004, the restatement increased the Companys net sales by
approximately $310,000, reduced cost of sales by approximately $180,000, reduced distributor
commission expense by approximately $460,000, increased the minority interest expense by
approximately $300,000, and increased after-tax net income by approximately $650,000 for the
quarter ended March 31, 2004.
The Company, after consultation with its Audit Committee, concluded that the consolidated
financial statements for the quarter and the year ended December 31, 2003 as well as the first
quarter of 2004 should no longer be relied upon, including the consolidated financial statements
and other financial information in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
December 31, 2003 and the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the first quarter ended March 31, 2004.
Although the financial statements for the three month periods ended June 30, 2004 and September 30,
2004 are unaffected by this error, the consolidated financial statements for the second and third
quarters of 2004 include inaccurate information on a year to date basis because they include the
erroneous information from the first quarter of 2004 which financial statements should not be
relied upon.
The Companys Audit Committee and management have discussed these matters with BDO Seidman LLP
(BDO), the Companys independent registered public accounting firm.
The Company recognizes that the improper accounting for commission and transportation-related
expenses and revenue recognition for the year ended December 31, 2003 reflected a material control
weakness in the Companys internal control over financial reporting that existed at December 31,
2003, such control weakness has been subsequently remedied during 2004.
At March 31, 2005, the Company determined a significant disclosure control weakness resulted
from an inaccurate tax provision calculation. Such control weakness was remedied during the second
quarter of 2005. The Company may elect to adopt additional procedures and controls related to the
tax provision calculation in the future if deemed necessary.
In December 2004, concerns were raised by management regarding certain of the Companys
controls and procedures involving related party transactions, personal expenses incurred by
management and inventory shipped to a Company subsidiary. The Companys Audit Committee had such
transactions, controls and procedures examined by a third party, and the Board of Directors of the
Company concluded in July 2005 that there was a lack of documentation with respect to certain
related party transactions, subsidiary operations and expense reimbursement procedures. In
addition, sufficient policies regarding loans to employees and third parties had not been adopted
or implemented. The transactions, taken in the aggregate, are considered by management as a
material control weakness.
An evaluation of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Section
13(a)-14(c) of the Exchange Act) as of June 30, 2005 was carried out under the supervision and with
the participation of the Companys President, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer and
other members of the Companys senior management. The Companys President, Chief Financial Officer
and Chief Accounting Officer concluded that, except for certain of the controls and procedures
identified in the preceding paragraph, the Companys disclosure controls and procedures as
currently in effect are effective in ensuring that the information required to be disclosed by the
Company in the reports it files or submits under the Exchange Act is (i) accumulated and
communicated to the Companys management (including the President and Chief Financial Officer) in a
timely manner, and (ii) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods
specified in the Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and forms.
Changes in Internal Controls
In 2004 and the first half of 2005, the Company made changes to improve its internal controls
over financial reporting with respect to (i) each of the Restatement Items, and (ii) monthly
financial reports provided to the Company by its subsidiaries. The Company hired a new Chief
Financial Officer in August 2004, a new Chief Accounting Officer in September 2004, a regional
Chief Financial Officer for Greater China and Southeast Asia in October 2004 and other additional
staff to upgrade our financial organization. In addition, the Company has commenced its
documentation required under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is developing additional policies
and procedures to further strengthen its international reporting, including the areas of revenue
recognition, sales and expense cut-off and sales returns. The Company hired a reporting specialist
in November 2004 to coordinate the world-wide Sarbanes-Oxley compliance work. In December 2004, the
Company hired a general counsel, who subsequently was given additional responsibilities as the
Chief Operating Officer, to enhance compliance and control.
In June 2005, the Company engaged the national accounting firm Grant Thornton to assist its
effort in designing and documenting controls over business processes, working toward compliance
with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Company is also evaluating whether to
implement additional controls and procedures, including but not limited to an enterprise resources
planning system to replace its present predominantly manual process, sufficient to accurately
report financial performance on a timely basis.
19
As a result of the examination concluded in July 2005, the Board of Directors formed a
Compliance Committee comprised of an independent director and several members of senior management
which are advised by outside, independent counsel. The purpose of the Compliance Committee is to
review the policies, programs and practices of the Company and its subsidiaries and to monitor the
adequacy of compliance systems with respect to foreign, federal and state laws. The Company also
appointed an Ethics and Compliance Officer (who is currently the Companys Chief Operating Officer
and General Counsel).
In light of the noted material weakness, we have instituted, and will continue to institute,
control improvements that we believe will reduce the likelihood of similar errors. If the remedial
policies and procedures we have implemented, and will continue to implement, are insufficient to
address the material weakness or if additional significant deficiencies or other conditions
relating to our internal controls are discovered in the future, we may fail to meet our future
reporting obligations, our financial statements may contain material misstatements and our
operating results may be adversely affected. Any such failure could also adversely affect the
results of the periodic management evaluations and annual auditor attestation reports regarding the
effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting, which will be required when the
SECs rules under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 become applicable to us beginning
with the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. Internal
control deficiencies could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial
information. Although we believe that we have addressed, or will address in the near future, our
material weakness in internal controls, we cannot guarantee that the measures we have taken to date
or any future measures will remediate the material weakness identified or that any additional
material weakness or significant deficiencies will not arise in the future due to a failure to
implement and maintain adequate internal controls over financial reporting.
The Company intends to continually review and evaluate the design and effectiveness of its
disclosure controls and procedures and to improve its controls and procedures over time and to
correct any deficiencies that it may discover in the future. The goal is to ensure that senior
management has timely access to all material financial and non-financial information concerning the
Companys business. Future events affecting its business may cause the Company to modify its
disclosure controls and procedures.
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
During the fall of 2003, the customs agency of the government of South Korea brought a charge
against LXK, Ltd. (LXK), the Companys wholly-owned subsidiary operating in South Korea, with
respect to the importation of the Companys Alura product. The customs agency alleges that Alura is
not a cosmetic product, but rather should be categorized and imported as a pharmaceutical product.
On February 18, 2005, the Seoul Central District Court ruled against LXK and fined it a total of
approximately $200,000. LXK also incurred related costs of approximately $40,000 as a result of the
judgment. The Company recorded a reserve for the entire $240,000 at December 31, 2004 and is
appealing the ruling. The failure to sell Alura in South Korea is not anticipated to have a
material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations, cash flow or business
prospects of LXK.
In May 2005 the Korea Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) asserted that certain product
literature produced by independent distributors made improper claims in violation of Korean law. In
June 2005, KFDA notified the Companys Korean subsidiary, LXK, Ltd., that it was required to cease
all operations for a fifteen-day period and destroy certain existing product inventory. The
Company denies responsibility for the actions of its independent distributors and intends to
contest imposition of any injunction or punishment.
On or around March 31, 2004, Lexxus International, Inc. (Lexxus U.S.) received a letter from
John Loghry, a former Lexxus distributor, alleging that Lexxus U.S. had wrongfully terminated an
alleged oral distributorship agreement with Mr. Loghry and that the Company had breached an alleged
oral agreement to issue shares of the Companys common stock to Mr. Loghry. After Mr. Loghry
threatened to commence suit against Lexxus U.S. and the Company in Nebraska, on May 13, 2004,
Lexxus U.S. and the Company filed an action for declaratory relief against Mr. Loghry in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Texas seeking, inter alia, a declaration that
Mr. Loghry was not wrongfully terminated and is not entitled to recover anything from Lexxus U.S.
or the Company. Mr. Loghry has filed counterclaims against the Company and Lexxus U.S. asserting
his previously articulated claims. In September 2004, Mr. Loghry filed third party claims against
certain officers of the Company and Lexxus U.S., including against Terry LaCore, the Chief
Executive Officer of Lexxus U.S. and a director of the Company, and Mark Woodburn, President of the
Company and a director, for fraud, LaCore, Woodburn, and a certain Lexxus distributor for
conspiracy to commit fraud and tortuous interference with contract. In February 2005, the court
dismissed all of Mr. Loghrys claims against the individual defendants, except the claims for fraud
and conspiracy to commit fraud. On June 2, 2005, after Mr. Loghry had filed amended counterclaims,
Lexxus U.S., the Company, and the individual defendants moved to dismiss the counterclaims on the
grounds that the claims were barred because Mr. Loghry had failed to disclose the existence of the
alleged claims when he filed for personal bankruptcy in September 2002. On June 23, 2005, the
court stayed discovery pending resolution of the pending motion to dismiss.
On November 1, 2004, Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha (d/b/a Toyota Motor Corporation) and
Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. filed a complaint against the Company and Lexxus U.S. in United States
District Court for the Central District of California (CV04-9028). The complaint alleges trademark
and service mark dilution, unfair competition, trademark and service mark infringement, and trade
name infringement, each with respect to Toyotas Lexus trademark. Toyota seeks to enjoin the
Company and Lexxus U.S. from using the Lexxus mark and otherwise competing unfairly with Toyota, to
transfer the ownership of the mylexxus.com and lexxusinternational.com internet sites to Toyota,
and reimbursement of costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by Toyota in connection with this
matter. The Company has reached a tentative settlement agreement under which the Company will
discontinue
20
use of the Lexxus name and mark and change the name of its Lexxus operations and domain names,
which could have a material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations, cash
flow or business prospects of the Company.
On November 12, 2004, Dorothy Porter filed a complaint against the Company in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois alleging that she sustained a brain
hemorrhage after taking Formula One, an ephedra-containing product marketed by Kaire
Nutraceuticals, Inc., a former subsidiary of the Company, and, thereafter, eKaire.com, Inc., a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. Ms. Porter has sued the Company for strict liability,
breach of warranty and negligence. The Company intends to defend this case vigorously and on
December 27, 2004 filed an answer denying the allegations contained in the complaint. The plaintiff
demanded $2 million in damages to settle the case. On March 7, 2005, a Notice of Tag-Along Action
was filed by Ms. Porter with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. It is anticipated that
this case will be placed on the next Conditional Transfer Order and, ultimately, transferred to the
consolidated Ephedra Products Liability proceedings in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York. The Company does not believe that the plaintiff can demonstrate that
its products caused the alleged injury and intends to vigorously defend this action.
On January 13, 2005, Natures Sunshine Products, Inc. and Natures Sunshine Products de Mexico
S.A. de C.V. (collectively Natures Sunshine) filed suit against the Company in the Fourth
Judicial District Court, Utah County, State of Utah seeking injunctive relief and unspecified
damages against the Company, Lexxus U.S., the Companys Mexican subsidiary, and the Companys
Mexico management team, Oscar de la Mora Romo and Jose Villarreal Patino, alleging among other
things that the Companys employment of De la Mora and Villarreal violated or could lead to the
violation of certain non-compete, non-solicitation, and confidentiality agreements allegedly in
effect between De la Mora and Villarreal and Natures Sunshine. Following repeated unsuccessful
attempts by Natures Sunshine to remand the case to state court, Natures Sunshine voluntarily
dismissed its lawsuit on May 5, 2005. On May 17, 2005, Oscar de la Mora, Jose Villarreal commenced
an action against Natures Sunshine in Utah federal district court seeking a declaration that the
non-compete agreement Natures Sunshine seeks to enforce violates Mexican law and public policy,
and is therefore unenforceable. On May 19, 2005, Natures Sunshine again filed suit in Utah state
court against De la Mora and Villarreal and on June 17, 2005 filed suit against Natural Health
Trends Corp. and related subsidiaries in federal court in Dallas, Texas. The Company has sought to
transfer the Dallas federal court case to federal court in Utah for consolidation with the
Companys previously filed declaratory judgment action. Natures Sunshine seeks injunctive relief
against the Company, including De la Mora and Villarreal and subsidiaries of the Company. The
Company intends to vigorously defend this case on its own behalf, to the extent the Company remains
a party, and on behalf of De la Mora and Villarreal. The Company believes the voluntary dismissal
is another attempt by Natures Sunshine to avoid federal court jurisdiction and that a case will be
re-filed against De la Mora and Villarreal in state court. If the Company or De la Mora and
Villarreal are unsuccessful in defending this action, the Company may be required to change its
Mexico management team, at least during the unexpired term of any enforceable non-compete period.
Currently, there is no other significant litigation pending against the Company other than as
disclosed in the paragraphs above. From time to time, the Company may become a party to litigation
and subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of the Companys business. Although the
results of such litigation and claims in the ordinary course of business cannot be predicted with
certainty, the Company believes that the final outcome of such matters will not have a material
adverse effect on the Companys business, results of operations or financial condition. Regardless
of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of defense costs,
diversion of management resources and other factors.
Item 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
In May 2005, the Company issued 51,600 shares of common stock in connection with the exercise
of common stock purchase warrants that were issued to an investor in October 2004. The exercise
price was $12.47 per share and the shares were issued pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended.
Item 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
Not applicable.
Item 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
On June 1, 2005, the Company held its Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The shareholders of the
Company approved each of the following proposals:
(a) Election of Directors. Sir Brian Wolfson, Mark D. Woodburn, Terry L. LaCore, Robert
Hesse, and Randall A. Mason were elected to the Board of Directors of the Company for a term of one
(1) year, each receiving not less than 3,963,119 votes in favor of his election (58.11% of the
shares outstanding).
(b) Ratification of the Appointment of Independent Accountants. The ratification of the
appointment of BDO Seidman, LLP as the Companys independent auditors for the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2005; was approved by the shareholders of the Company (3,964,590 votes for (58.13% of
the shares outstanding); 91,591 votes against; and 15 shares abstained).
(c) Approval of Amendments to the 2002 Stock Option Plan. Certain amendments to the Companys
2002 Stock Option Plan was approved by the shareholders of the Company (1,716,704 votes for (25.17%
of the shares outstanding); 274,638 shares against; and 11,317 shares abstained).
(d) Approval of the Companys Reincorporation in the State of Delaware. The reincorporation
of the Company from the State of Florida to the State of Delaware was approved by the shareholders
of the Company (3,646,608 votes for (53.47% of the shares outstanding); 251,156 votes against; and
12,787 shares abstained).
Item 5. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
Item 6. EXHIBITS
31.1 |
|
Certification of the President pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
31.2 |
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32.1 |
|
Certification of the President pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32.2 |
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
21
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
NATURAL HEALTH TRENDS CORP. |
|
|
|
Date: August 15, 2005
|
|
/s/ Mark D. Woodburn |
|
|
|
|
|
Mark D. Woodburn |
|
|
President |
|
|
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
Date: August 15, 2005
|
|
/s/ Chris Sharng |
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Sharng |
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
(Principal Financial Officer) |
22