FORM 10-K
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended April
30, 2007
|
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
001-33417
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
22-2535818
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
1590 REED ROAD
PENNINGTON, NJ 08534
(Address of principal executive
offices, including zip code)
Registrants telephone number, including area code
(609) 730-0400
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to
Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock, par value $0.001
|
|
The Nasdaq Global Market
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
(§ 229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be
contained, to the best of registrants knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by
reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated
filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large
accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act.
Large Accelerated
Filer o Accelerated
Filer o Non-Accelerated
Filer þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the common stock of the registrant
held by non-affiliates as of October 31, 2006, the last
business day of the registrants most recently completed
second fiscal quarter, was $49.5 million based on the
closing sale price of the registrants common stock on that
date as reported on the AIM market of the London Stock Exchange
plc. The registrants common stock was not publicly traded
in the United States on that date.
The number of shares outstanding of the registrants common
stock, as of June 30, 2007 was 10,190,604.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
|
|
|
Document
|
|
Part of the Form 10-K into Which Incorporated
|
|
Proxy Statement for the
registrants 2007 Annual Meeting of Stockholders
|
|
III
|
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
INDEX TO
REPORT ON
FORM 10-K
PowerBuoy®
is a registered trademark of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. The
Ocean Power Technologies logo,
CellBuoytm,
Talk on
Watertm
and Making Waves in
Powersm
are trademarks or service marks of Ocean Power Technologies,
Inc. All other trademarks appearing in this annual report are
the property of their respective holders.
Special
Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
We have made statements in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(the Annual Report) in, among other sections,
Item 1 Business,
Item 1A Risk Factors,
Item 3 Legal Proceedings, and
Item 7 Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
that are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements
convey our current expectations or forecasts of future events.
Forward-looking statements include statements regarding our
future financial position, business strategy, budgets, projected
costs, plans and objectives of management for future operations.
The words may, continue,
estimate, intend, plan,
will, believe, project,
expect, anticipate and similar
expressions may identify forward-looking statements, but the
absence of these words does not necessarily mean that a
statement is not forward-looking.
2
Any or all of our forward-looking statements in this Annual
Report may turn out to be inaccurate. We have based these
forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations
and projections about future events and financial trends that we
believe may affect our financial condition, results of
operations, business strategy and financial needs. They may be
affected by inaccurate assumptions we might make or unknown
risks and uncertainties, including the risks, uncertainties and
assumptions described in Item 1A Risk
Factors. In light of these risks, uncertainties and
assumptions, the forward-looking events and circumstances
discussed in this report may not occur as contemplated, and
actual results could differ materially from those anticipated or
implied by the forward-looking statements.
You should not unduly rely on these forward-looking statements,
which speak only as of the date of this filing. Unless required
by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise
any forward-looking statements to reflect new information or
future events or otherwise.
3
PART I
Overview
We develop and are commercializing proprietary systems that
generate electricity by harnessing the renewable energy of ocean
waves. The energy in ocean waves is predictable, and electricity
from wave energy can be produced on a consistent basis at
numerous sites located near major population centers worldwide.
Wave energy is an emerging segment of the renewable energy
market. Based on our proprietary technology, considerable ocean
experience, existing products and expanding commercial
relationships, we believe we are the leading wave energy company.
We currently offer two products as part of our line of
PowerBuoy®
systems: a utility PowerBuoy system and an autonomous PowerBuoy
system. Our PowerBuoy system is based on modular, ocean-going
buoys, which we have been ocean testing for nearly a decade. The
rising and falling of the waves moves the buoy-like structure
creating mechanical energy that our proprietary technologies
convert into electricity. We have tested and developed wave
power generation and control technology using proven equipment
and processes in novel applications. Our two products are
designed for the following applications:
|
|
|
|
|
Our utility PowerBuoy system is capable of supplying electricity
to a local or regional electric power grid. Our wave power
stations will be comprised of a single PowerBuoy system or an
integrated array of PowerBuoy systems, plus the remaining
components required to deliver electricity to a power grid. We
intend to sell our utility PowerBuoy system to utilities and
other electrical power producers seeking to add electricity
generated by wave energy to their existing electricity supply.
Our PowerBuoy interface with the electrical utility power grid
has been certified as compliant with international standards. An
independent laboratory provided testing and evaluation services
to certify that the OPT systems comply with designated national
and international standards. The PowerBuoy grid interface will
bear the Electrical Testing Laboratories (ETL) listing mark, and
can be connected to the utility grid.
|
|
|
|
Our autonomous PowerBuoy system is designed to generate power
for use independent of the power grid in remote locations. There
are a variety of potential applications for this system,
including sonar and radar surveillance, tsunami warning,
oceanographic data collection, offshore platforms and offshore
aquaculture.
|
From October 2005 to October 2006, we operated a demonstration
PowerBuoy system with a maximum peak, or rated, output of 40
kilowatts, or kW, off the coast of New Jersey under a contract
with the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities. This PowerBuoy
system was removed from the ocean in October 2006 and underwent
planned maintenance and diagnostic testing of the system. We are
currently awaiting delivery of replacement mooring lines for
this PowerBuoy system, after which we plan to immediately
redeploy the system.
Our product development and engineering efforts are focused on
increasing the maximum rated output of our utility PowerBuoy
system from the current 40kW to 150kW in 2007, then to 250kW in
2008 and ultimately to 500kW in 2010. We believe that by
increasing system output, we will be able to decrease the cost
per kW of our PowerBuoy system and the cost per kilowatt hour of
the energy generated. We have made substantial progress in the
design, analysis and commencement of fabrication of what we
believe to be the first utility-grade underwater substation, or
pod, for wave power. The pod serves as the point at which energy
generated by several PowerBuoys is aggregated and the voltage is
increased, prior to transmission ashore and being fed into the
power grid. The required switching and protection circuits for
the individual PowerBuoys are also included in the pod. In
addition, our 150kW PowerBuoy design effort is well underway.
The power conversion and controls system is substantially
complete for the 150kW PowerBuoy system, and we expect to
commence ocean testing in 2008.
In addition, we are focusing on expanding our key commercial
opportunities for both the utility and the autonomous PowerBuoy
systems. We currently have commercial relationships with the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
Iberdrola S.A., or Iberdrola, which is a large electric utility
company located in Spain and one of the largest renewable energy
producers in the world, Total S.A., or Total, which is one of
the worlds largest oil and gas companies, and two Spanish
governmental agencies for the first phase of the construction of
a 1.39
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
megawatt, or MW, wave power station off the coast of
Santoña, Spain. We currently plan for the initial 40kW
PowerBuoy system for this project to be ready for deployment by
late 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total and Iberdrola to evaluate the development of a wave power
station off the coast of France.
|
|
|
|
The United States Navy to develop and build wave power systems
at the US Marine Corps Base in Oahu. One PowerBuoy system was
installed in connection with this project for a total of eight
months over a two-year period. Another PowerBuoy system was
deployed in June 2007. After four weeks of initial testing and
operation, the system was returned to shore for diagnostic
analysis and repair. Work is currently in progress on the design
and construction of a third PowerBuoy system, which is expected
to be ready for deployment at the Marine Corps Base in Oahu by
the end of 2007.
|
|
|
|
Lockheed Martin Corporation to market cooperatively with us our
autonomous PowerBuoy system for use with Lockheed Martin
equipment. Lockheed Martin successfully completed an ocean test
of an autonomous PowerBuoy system in September 2004.
|
As part of our marketing efforts, we use demonstration wave
power stations to establish the feasibility of wave power
generation. In addition to the demonstration PowerBuoy system
operated off the coast of New Jersey, we plan to develop and
operate two additional demonstration wave power stations. Unlike
the New Jersey power system, these demonstration wave power
stations will, if approved and constructed as planned, be
connected to the local power grids.
In February 2006, we received approval from the South West of
England Regional Development Agency to install a 5MW
demonstration wave power station off the coast of Cornwall,
England.
In February 2007, the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
granted us a preliminary permit to evaluate the feasibility of a
location off the coast of Reedsport, Oregon for the proposed
construction and operation of a wave power station with an
anticipated maximum rated output of 50MW, of which up to the
first 5MW will be a demonstration wave power station. In
February 2007, we signed a cooperative agreement with a utility
partner, Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative, or PNGC, for
the development of a wave power station. In July 2007, we
filed a Pre-Application Document and Notice of Intent with the
US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for Reedsport, which
provides notice of our intent to seek a license for the
Reedsport wave park and information regarding the project. We
believe this is the first Pre-Application Document and Notice of
Intent filed by a wave power company, and is an important step
in the full licensing process for the Reedsport project.
We plan to generate revenue from the demonstration wave power
stations in Cornwall and Reedsport by selling electricity to
utilities.
In March 2007, we were awarded funding from the Scottish
Ministers Wave and Tidal Energy Support Scheme, managed by
the Scottish Executive. This funding is to support the design,
manufacture and installation of a single 150kW PowerBuoy system
in Orkney, Scotland.
In January 2007, we filed applications with the US Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission for preliminary permits to evaluate
the feasibility of two locations, off the coasts of Coos Bay,
Oregon and Newport, Oregon, for the proposed construction and
operation of wave power stations, each with an anticipated
maximum rated output of 100MW.
In June 2007, we received a $1.7 million contract from the
US Navy to provide our PowerBuoy technology to a unique program
for ocean data gathering. Under this
18-month
program, the Navy will conduct an ocean test of our autonomous
PowerBuoy as the power source for the Navys Deep Water
Acoustic Detection System.
We were incorporated under the laws of the State of New Jersey
in April 1984 and began commercial operations in 1994. On
April 23, 2007, we reincorporated in Delaware. Our
principal executive offices are located at 1590 Reed Road,
Pennington, New Jersey 08534, and our telephone number is
(609) 730-0400.
Our website address is www.oceanpowertechnologies.com.
The information on our website is not a part of this Annual
Report. Our common stock has been listed on the AIM market of
the London Stock Exchange plc since October 2003 and on the
NASDAQ Global Market since April 24, 2007, the date on
which we commenced our initial public offering in the
5
United States. In that offering, we sold 5,000,000 shares
of our common stock at a price to the public of $20.00 per share.
Our
Market
Global demand for electric power is expected to increase from
14.8 trillion kilowatt hours in 2003 to 30.1 trillion kilowatt
hours by 2030, according to the Energy Information
Administration, or the EIA. To meet this demand, the
International Energy Agency, or the IEA, estimates that
investments in new generating capacity will exceed $4 trillion
in the period from 2003 to 2030, of which $1.6 trillion will be
for new renewable energy generation equipment.
According to the IEA, fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural
gas generated over 60% of the worlds electricity in 2002.
However, a variety of factors are contributing to the increasing
development of renewable energy systems that capture energy from
replenishable natural resources, including ocean waves, flowing
water, wind and sunlight, and convert it into electricity.
|
|
|
|
|
Rising cost of fossil fuels. The cost of
fossil fuel used to generate electricity has been rising. From
2000 to 2005 in the United States, the cost of coal used for
electricity generation increased by 28%, the cost of natural gas
used for electricity generation increased by 91% and the cost of
oil used for electricity generation increased by 64%.
|
|
|
|
Dependence on energy from foreign
sources. Many countries, including the United
States, Japan and much of Europe, depend on foreign resources
for a majority of their domestic energy needs. Concerns over
political and economic instability in some of the leading energy
producing regions of the world are encouraging consuming
countries to diversify their sources of energy.
|
|
|
|
Environmental concerns. Environmental concerns
regarding the by-products of fossil fuels have led many
countries and several US states to agree to reduce emissions of
carbon dioxide and other gases associated with the use of fossil
fuels and to adopt policies promoting the development of cleaner
technologies.
|
|
|
|
Government incentives. Many countries have
adopted policies to provide incentives for the development and
use of renewable energy sources, such as subsidies to encourage
the commercialization of renewable energy power generation.
|
|
|
|
Infrastructure constraints. In many parts of
the world, the existing electricity infrastructure is
insufficient to meet projected, and in some places existing,
demand. Expansion of generating capacity from existing energy
sources is frequently hindered by significant regulatory,
political and economic constraints.
|
As a result of these and other factors, the EIA projects that
grid-connected generating capacity fueled by renewable energy
resources will continue to grow over the next 25 years.
Wave
Energy
The energy in ocean waves is a form of renewable energy that can
be harnessed to generate electricity. Ocean waves are created
when wind moves across the ocean surface. The interaction
between the wind and the ocean surface causes energy to be
exchanged. At first, small waves occur on the ocean surface. As
this process continues, the waves become larger and the distance
between the tops of the waves becomes longer. The size of the
waves, and the amount of energy contained in the waves, depends
on the wind speed, the time the wind blows over the waves and
the distance covered. The rising and falling of the waves moves
our PowerBuoy system creating mechanical energy that our
proprietary technologies convert into usable electricity.
There are a variety of benefits to using wave energy for
electricity generation.
|
|
|
|
|
Scalability within a small site area. Due to
the tremendous energy in ocean waves, wave power stations with
high capacity 50MW and above can be
installed in a relatively small area. We estimate that, upon
completion of the development of our 500kW PowerBuoy system, we
would be able to construct a wave power station that would
occupy less than one-tenth of the ocean surface occupied by an
offshore wind power station of equivalent capacity.
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
Predictability. The supply of electricity from
wave energy can be forecasted in advance. The amount of energy a
wave thousands of miles away will have when it arrives at a wave
power station days later can be calculated based on satellite
images and meteorological data with a high degree of accuracy.
Customers can use this information to develop sourcing plans to
meet their short-term electricity needs.
|
|
|
|
Constant Source of Energy. The annual flow of
waves at specific sites can be relatively constant. Based on our
studies and analysis of our target sites, we believe our wave
power stations will be able to produce usable electricity for
approximately 90% of all hours during a year.
|
There are currently several approaches, in different stages of
development, for capturing wave energy and converting it into
electricity. Methods for generating electricity from wave energy
can be divided into two general categories: onshore systems and
offshore systems. Our PowerBuoy system is an offshore system.
Offshore systems are typically located one to five miles
offshore and in water depths of between 100 and 200 feet.
The system can be above, on or below the ocean surface. Many
offshore systems utilize a floatation device to harness wave
energy. The heaving or pitching of the floatation device due to
the force of the waves creates mechanical energy, which is
converted into electricity by various technologies. Onshore
systems are located at the edge of the shore, often on a sea
cliff or a breakwater, and typically must concentrate the wave
energy first before using it to drive an electrical generator.
Although maintenance costs of onshore systems may be less than
those associated with offshore systems, there are a variety of
disadvantages with these systems. As waves approach the shore,
the energy in the waves decreases; therefore, onshore wave power
stations do not take full advantage of the amount of energy that
waves in deeper water produce. In addition, there are a limited
number of suitable sites for onshore systems and there are
environmental and possible aesthetic issues with these wave
power stations due to their size and location on the seashore.
The scalability, predictability, constancy and limited
environmental impact of offshore wave energy systems such as
ours compare favorably with many other renewable energy
technologies.
|
|
|
|
|
Hydroelectric power generates electricity by capturing energy
from flowing waters typically stored in and then released from
reservoirs. The expansion of hydroelectric power may be limited
due to the environmental and ecological impact of hydroelectric
power stations.
|
|
|
|
Wind power generates electricity by using wind turbines to
harness the energy produced as a result of the winds
motion and to convert it into electricity. Wind turbine
structures, which can be over 300 feet high and have blades
with a span over 200 feet wide, require locations with
plenty of open space and high average wind speeds. Due to the
perceived aesthetic impact of wind turbines, some local
governments have zoning restrictions prohibiting the
installation of wind farms. In addition, because they are often
close to the shore, offshore wind farms share some of the same
perceived aesthetic challenges as onshore wind farms.
|
|
|
|
Solar (photo-voltaic) power generates electricity from sunlight.
Since the suns energy is not always available and is
widely scattered, current solar power technology is not scalable
to create a large power station for supplying power to the grid.
|
|
|
|
Tidal power captures energy contained in moving water due to
tides and water current power captures energy contained in ocean
and river flows and non-tidal currents. Both of these
technologies require specific geographic characteristics for
installation, which limits the availability of suitable sites.
|
Our
Competitive Advantages
We believe that our technology for generating electricity from
wave energy and our commercial relationships give us several
potential competitive advantages in the renewable energy market.
|
|
|
|
|
Our PowerBuoy system uses an ocean-tested technology to
generate electricity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have been conducting ocean tests for a decade in order to
prove the viability of our technology. We initiated our first
ocean installation in 1997 and have had several deployments of
our systems for testing and operation since then, the longest of
which has lasted 12 months. Our PowerBuoy systems have
survived several hurricanes and winter storms while installed in
the ocean.
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
We had an operational demonstration PowerBuoy system off the
coast of New Jersey from October 2005 until October 2006 when
the system was removed from the ocean for planned maintenance
and diagnostic testing. We currently plan to build and deploy
two additional demonstration wave power stations that, unlike
the PowerBuoy system in New Jersey, will provide electricity to
the local power grids. In February 2006, we received approval
from the South West of England Regional Development Agency to
install a demonstration wave power station off the coast of
Cornwall, England and in February 2007, the US Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission granted us a preliminary permit to
evaluate the feasibility of a wave power station off the coast
of Reedsport, Oregon, a portion of which will be for
demonstration purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our PowerBuoy systems grid connection has been
certified.
|
|
|
|
|
|
On July 2, 2007, we announced that our PowerBuoy grid
connection system had been certified as compliant with
designated national and international standards. This qualifies
our technology for integration into utility grid systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our PowerBuoy system is efficient in harnessing wave
energy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our PowerBuoy system is designed to efficiently convert wave
energy into electricity by using onboard sensors to detect
actual wave conditions and then to automatically adjust the
performance of the generator using our proprietary electrical
and electronics-based control systems in response to that
information.
|
|
|
|
One measure of the efficiency of an electric power generation
system is load factor. The load factor is the percent of
kilowatt hours produced by a system in a given period as
compared to the maximum kilowatt hours that could be produced by
the system in that period. A high load factor indicates a high
degree of utilization of the capacity of the system and provides
a means to compare the efficiencies of different energy sources
to produce equivalent power outputs (without taking into account
the relative costs of constructing such systems). Since we have
not yet operated a wave power station, we do not have a measured
load factor. However, based on our research and analysis, we
believe the load factor for a PowerBuoy wave power station
located at most of our targeted sites would be in the range of
30% to 45%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our PowerBuoy system takes advantage of time-tested and
well-known technology.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our PowerBuoy system is designed to combine features of
ocean-going buoys with advanced electrical and electronics-based
systems. Since standard ocean-going buoys have been deployed in
maritime applications for decades, their survival and risk
profiles are known and proven. By using electrical, rather than
mechanical, engineering solutions whenever possible, we are able
to control materials, construction and other capital costs while
maintaining reliability.
|
|
|
|
Our PowerBuoy system can be built using easily sourced
components supplied by third parties. Due to the PowerBuoy
systems modular design, total construction time is
minimized as multiple components can be built simultaneously,
and generating capacity can be scaled up or down by
incrementally adding or subtracting groups of PowerBuoy units.
In addition, our PowerBuoy system can be deployed using common
maritime techniques.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerous potential sites for our wave power stations are
located near major population centers worldwide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our systems are designed to work in sites with average annual
wave energy of at least 20kW per meter of wave front, which can
be found in many coastal locations around the world. In
particular, we are targeting coastal North America, the west
coast of Europe, the coasts of Australia and the east coast of
Japan. These potential sites not only have appropriate natural
resources for harnessing wave energy, but they are also located
near large population centers with significant and increasing
electricity requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have significant commercial relationships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our current projects with Iberdrola and Total provide us with an
initial opportunity to sell our wave power stations to
utilities. By collaborating with leaders in renewable energy
development, we believe we are able to accelerate both our
in-house knowledge of the utility power generation market and
our reputation as a credible renewable energy equipment
supplier. If these projects are successful, we intend to
leverage
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
our experiences with the Spain and France projects to add wave
power stations, new customers and complementary revenue streams
from operations and maintenance contracts similar to the
agreement we have in connection with the Spain project.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For certain customers in need of electricity solutions
independent of the grid in defense and related markets, our
marketing relationship with Lockheed Martin will enable us to
offer a complete solution both equipment and power
generation for that equipment thereby maximizing the
marketability of our autonomous PowerBuoy system for these
remote applications.
|
|
|
|
With the funding from the US Navy, we have been able to refine
our PowerBuoy system while simultaneously preparing for
commercial deployment to address a particular customer need. If
we are able to successfully deploy PowerBuoy systems for the US
Navy, we believe our market visibility will be significantly
enhanced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our PowerBuoy system has the potential to offer a cost
competitive renewable energy power generation solution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our product development and engineering efforts are focused on
increasing the maximum rated output of our utility PowerBuoy
system from the current 40kW to 150kW in 2007, then to 250kW in
2008 and ultimately to 500kW in 2010. Assuming we are able to
reach manufacturing levels of at least 300 units of 500kW
PowerBuoy systems per year, we believe, based upon our research
and analysis, that the economies of scale we would have with our
fabricators would allow us to offer a renewable electricity
solution that competes on a non-subsidized basis with the price
of wholesale electricity in key markets. We expect to complete
development of our 500kW PowerBuoy system in 2010.
|
|
|
|
Prior to achieving full production levels of the 500kW PowerBuoy
system, if we achieve economies of scale for our 150kW or 250kW
PowerBuoy systems, we expect to be able to offer a renewable
electricity solution that competes with the price of electricity
from traditional sources in certain local markets where the
current retail price of electricity is relatively high or where
sufficient subsidies are available.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our systems are environmentally benign and aesthetically
non-intrusive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We believe that our PowerBuoy system does not present
significant risks to marine life and does not emit significant
levels of pollutants. In connection with our project at the US
Marine Corps Base in Hawaii, our customer, the US Navy, obtained
an independent environmental assessment of our PowerBuoy system
prior to installation, as required by the National Environmental
Policy Act. Although our project for the US Navy only
contemplates an array of up to six PowerBuoy systems in Hawaii,
we believe that PowerBuoy systems deployed in other geographic
locations, including larger PowerBuoy systems under development
and multiple-system wave power stations, would have minimal
environmental impact due to the physical similarities with the
tested system.
|
|
|
|
Since our PowerBuoy systems are typically located one to five
miles offshore, PowerBuoy wave power stations are usually not
visible from the shore. Visual impact is often cited as one of
the reasons that many communities have opposed plans to develop
power stations. Our PowerBuoy system has the distinct advantage
of having only a minimal visual profile. Only a small portion of
the unit is visible at close range, with the bulk of the unit
hidden below the water.
|
Our
Business Strategy
Our goal is to strengthen our leadership in developing wave
energy technologies and commercializing wave power stations and
related services. In order to achieve this goal, we are pursuing
the following business strategies:
|
|
|
|
|
Concentrate sales and marketing efforts on four geographic
markets. We are focusing our sales and marketing
efforts over the next three years on coastal North America, the
west coast of Europe, the coasts of Australia and the east coast
of Japan. We believe that each of these areas represents a
strong potential market for our PowerBuoy wave power stations
because they combine appropriate wave conditions, political and
economic stability, large population centers, high levels of
industrialization and significant and increasing electricity
requirements.
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
Continue to increase PowerBuoy system
output. Our product development and engineering
efforts are focused on increasing the output of our PowerBuoy
systems from 40kW to 500kW. We plan to increase the rated output
of our PowerBuoy system to 150kW in 2007, to 250kW in 2008 and
ultimately to 500kW in 2010. The key to increasing the rated
output of the PowerBuoy system is to increase the systems
efficiency as well as its diameter. If we increase the size of a
PowerBuoy system, we will be able to increase the amount of wave
energy the system can capture and, in turn, increase the output
of the system. For example, if we double the size of the
units diameter, we will approximately quadruple its power
capacity. We believe that by increasing system output, we will
be able to decrease the cost per kW of our PowerBuoy system and
the cost per kilowatt hour of the energy generated.
|
|
|
|
Construct demonstration wave power stations to encourage
market adoption of our wave power stations. Our
demonstration wave power stations are intended to allow us to
prove the viability of our PowerBuoy systems in a particular
region. By enabling customers to experience our technology
first-hand, we believe we will be able to facilitate our entry
into our target markets. In addition, demonstration wave power
stations provide us with the opportunity to test and refine our
technology in actual operating conditions. In February 2006, we
were approved by the South West of England Regional Development
Agency to install a 5MW demonstration wave power station off the
coast of Cornwall, England. In February 2007, the US Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission granted us a preliminary permit to
evaluate the feasibility of a location off the coast of
Reedsport, Oregon for the proposed construction and operation of
a wave power station with a maximum rated output of 50MW, of
which up to the first 5MW will be a demonstration wave power
station. We have also filed in July 2007 with the US Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission for the Reedsport project what we
believe to be the first Pre-Application Document and Notice of
Intent filed by a wave power company. This filing provides
notice to the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission of our
intent to seek a license for the Reedsport wave park, and
provides information regarding the project. The Cornwall and
Reedsport power stations will, if approved and constructed as
planned, be connected to local power grids.
|
|
|
|
Leverage customer relationships to enhance the commercial
acceptance of our utility PowerBuoy system. We
currently have commercial relationships with Iberdrola and Total
for two projects. We are in the first phase of the construction
of a 1.39MW wave power station off the coast of Santoña,
Spain, which phase is to be completed by June 30, 2008. We,
along with affiliates of Iberdrola and Total, are currently
assessing the viability of a 2 to 5MW power station off the
coast of France. In addition, we believe that our project at the
US Marine Corps Base in Oahu, Hawaii will serve as a prototype
wave power station for the installation of wave power stations
at other US Navy bases. We intend to build on these existing
commercial relationships both by expanding the number and size
of projects we have with our current customers and by entering
into new alliances and commercial relationships with other
utilities and independent power producers.
|
|
|
|
Expand revenue streams from our autonomous PowerBuoy
system. The autonomous PowerBuoy system addresses
specific power generation needs of customers requiring off-grid
electricity generation in remote locations in the open ocean.
Since our PowerBuoy systems are well suited for many of these
uses, we do not expect that they will require subsidies or other
price incentives for commercial acceptance. This equipment might
be used for powering sonar and radar surveillance, tsunami
warning, oceanographic data collection, offshore platforms and
offshore aquaculture. We have entered into a marketing
cooperation agreement with Lockheed Martin to identify marketing
opportunities for use of our autonomous PowerBuoy system to
power Lockheed Martin equipment in remote locations.
|
|
|
|
Maximize revenue opportunities with existing
customers. In January 2007, we entered into an
agreement under which we are responsible for the monitoring,
operation and maintenance of the 40kW PowerBuoy system and the
ocean-based substation and infrastructure to be manufactured and
deployed in connection with the first phase of the Spain
project. Under this agreement, we will be paid a fixed fee for
scheduled maintenance, ongoing operations and other routine
services and fees to be negotiated for unscheduled repairs. We
plan to pursue similar operations and maintenance contracts with
future customers, including for our France project, in order to
provide us with ongoing revenue streams.
|
10
Our
Products
We offer two types of PowerBuoy systems: our utility PowerBuoy
system, which is designed to supply electricity to a local or
regional electric power grid, and our autonomous PowerBuoy
system, which is designed to generate power for use independent
of the power grid in remote locations. Both products use the
same PowerBuoy technology.
Pictured below is our 40kW utility PowerBuoy system at our
facilities in New Jersey and installed in the ocean off the
coast of New Jersey.
Our PowerBuoy system consists of a floating buoy-like device
that is loosely moored to the seabed so that it can freely move
up and down in response to the rising and falling of the waves,
as well as a power take off device, an electrical generator, a
power electronics system and our control system, all of which
are sealed in the unit.
The power take off device converts the mechanical stroking
created by the movement of the unit caused by ocean waves into
rotational mechanical energy, which, in turn, drives the
electrical generator. The power electronics system then
conditions the output from the generator into usable
electricity. The operation of the PowerBuoy system is controlled
by our customized control system.
The control system uses sophisticated sensors and an onboard
computer to continuously monitor the PowerBuoy subsystems as
well as the height, frequency and shape of the waves interacting
with the PowerBuoy system. The control system collects data from
the sensors and uses proprietary algorithms to electrically
adjust the performance of the PowerBuoy system in real-time and
on a
wave-by-wave
basis. By making these electrical adjustments automatically, the
PowerBuoy system is able to maximize the amount of usable
electricity generated from each wave. We believe that this
ability to optimize the performance of the PowerBuoy system in
real-time is a significant advantage of our product.
In the event of storm waves larger than 23 feet, the
control system automatically locks down the PowerBuoy system and
electricity generation is suspended. When the wave heights
return to a normal operating range of 23 feet or less, the
control system automatically unlocks the PowerBuoy system and
electricity generation and transmission recommences. This safety
feature prevents the PowerBuoy system from being damaged by the
increased amount of energy in storm waves.
Our 40kW PowerBuoy system has a maximum diameter of 12 feet
near the surface, and is 52 feet long, with approximately
13 feet of the PowerBuoy system protruding above the
surface of the ocean. Larger PowerBuoy systems will be longer
and have a larger diameter. For example, our 500kW PowerBuoy
system, once developed and manufactured, is expected to have a
maximum diameter of approximately 62 feet and be
approximately 128 feet long with approximately 26 feet
protruding above the ocean surface.
11
Utility
PowerBuoy System
The utility PowerBuoy system is designed to transmit electricity
to shore by an underwater power cable, which would then be
connected to a power grid. Our utility PowerBuoy system
presently has a capacity of 40kW, which we are working to
increase to 150kW in 2007, to 250kW in 2008 and ultimately to
500kW in 2010. The utility PowerBuoy system is designed to be
positioned in water with a depth of 100 to 200 feet, which
can usually be found one to five miles offshore. This depth
allows the system to capture meaningful amounts of energy from
the waves, since decreasing water depth depletes the energy in
the waves.
The mooring system for keeping a utility PowerBuoy system in
position connects it by slack lines to three floats that, in
turn, are connected by slack lines to three anchors. This is a
well-established mooring system, referred to as three-point
mooring, which we have improved upon with various technologies
that reduce cost and deployment time.
We refer to the entire utility power generation system at one
location as a wave power station, which can either be comprised
of a single PowerBuoy system or an integrated array of PowerBuoy
systems connected to an underwater cable to transmit the
electricity to shore. Our system is designed to be scalable as
multiple PowerBuoy units can be integrated to create a wave
power station with a larger output capacity. An array of
PowerBuoy systems would typically be arranged in three staggered
rows parallel to the incoming wave front to form a long
rectangle. This staggered arrangement would maximize the level
of wave energy that the wave power station can capture. For
example, to create the planned 1.39MW station off the coast of
Santoña, Spain, we intend to use an array of one 40kW
PowerBuoy system and nine 150kW PowerBuoy systems arranged in
three staggered parallel rows of two or four PowerBuoy systems
each.
We are also exploring the use of our utility PowerBuoy systems
for applications that include generating electricity for
desalination of water, hydrogen production, water treatment and
natural resource processing. In these instances, the power
generated by the utility PowerBuoy system would bypass the grid
and be delivered directly to the point of electricity
consumption for these special applications.
Status of
Utility PowerBuoy Systems
We have made substantial progress in the design, analysis and
commencement of fabrication of what we believe to be the first
utility-grade underwater substation, or pod, for wave power. The
pod serves as the point at which energy generated by several
PowerBuoys is aggregated and the voltage is increased, prior to
transmission ashore and being fed into the power grid. The
required switching and protection circuits for the individual
PowerBuoys are also included in the pod.
In addition, our 150kW PowerBuoy design effort is well underway.
The power conversion and controls system is substantially
complete for the 150kW PowerBuoy system, and we expect to
commence ocean testing in 2008.
Our PowerBuoy interface with the electrical utility power grid
has been certified as compliant with international standards. An
independent laboratory provided testing and evaluation services
to certify that the OPT systems comply with designated national
and international standards. The PowerBuoy grid interface will
bear the ETL listing mark, and can be connected to the utility
grid.
Our projects in Spain, France and Hawaii are being conducted in
conjunction with third-party customers. We have completed the
planning phase for the wave power station to be located at
Santoña, Spain and currently have begun construction of a
40kW PowerBuoy system and the underwater infrastructure for the
wave power station. This infrastructure includes the underwater
substation (pod) designed by us and the undersea transmission
cables that allow the power station to be connected to the grid.
We are paid in connection with this project as we complete
milestones, which include deployment of a 40kW PowerBuoy system.
Under our agreement for this first phase of construction, our
revenues are limited to reimbursement for our construction costs
without any
mark-up and
we are required to bear the first 0.5 million, or
approximately $0.7 million, of any cost overruns and to
absorb certain other costs as set forth in the agreement. As of
April 30, 2007, we had recognized an anticipated loss of
approximately $1.3 million under this contract, which
includes costs incurred to date and our current estimate of
other amounts we may be required to bear under the agreement.
Consistent with our revenue recognition policies, each quarter
we evaluate if additional loss amounts need to be recognized. In
addition, the second phase of this
12
project contemplates deployment of nine additional 150kW
PowerBuoy systems and connection of the ten total PowerBuoy
systems in an integrated array. The economic and other terms
relating to the second phase of the project have not been
negotiated. We currently plan for the initial 40kW PowerBuoy
system for this project to be ready for deployment by late 2007
and we expect the remainder of the PowerBuoy systems to be
deployed during the summer of 2009.
The wave power station to be located off the west coast of
France is in the planning and development phase. We currently
anticipate extending the current development contract until June
2008. Before we begin construction of this wave power station,
we must enter into an additional agreement with affiliates of
Total and Iberdrola. We currently plan to enter into an
agreement for the construction of a wave power station prior to
the expiration of any extension of the current agreement in June
2008.
At the Marine Corps Base in Oahu, Hawaii, we had installed a
wave power system for a total of eight months over a two-year
period. Another PowerBuoy system was deployed in June 2007.
After four weeks of initial testing and operation, the system
was returned to shore for diagnostic analysis and repair. Work
is currently in progress on the design and construction of a
third PowerBuoy system, which is expected to be ready for
deployment at the Marine Corps Base in Oahu by the end of 2007.
The US Navy reimburses us for our costs and pays us a fixed fee
in connection with this project. Our current contract with the
US Navy expires in April 2008.
In February 2006, we received approval from the South West of
England Regional Development Agency to install a wave power
station off the coast of Cornwall, England, and this project is
currently being funded solely by us. We are currently in the
planning and development stage. This wave power station will
serve as a demonstration wave power station, which we intend to
operate as an independent power producer. We plan to collect
revenue from the sale of power to electrical utilities.
In February 2007, the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
granted us a preliminary permit to evaluate the feasibility of a
location off the coast of Reedsport, Oregon for the proposed
construction and operation of a wave power station with
anticipated capacity of 50MW. We plan to operate up to the first
5MW as an independent producer, whereby we would collect revenue
from the sale of power to electrical utilities. However, we
currently do not have any revenue-generating contracts in place
for the sale of energy with respect to this project. We plan to
construct the additional 45MW under a supply contract with a
third-party customer who, in turn, would own and operate the
wave power station. We have begun the planning and development
phase of the initial wave power station and have signed a
cooperative agreement with PNGC. We have also filed in July 2007
with the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission a
Pre-Application Document and Notice of Intent for Reedsport,
which provides notice of our intent to seek a license for the
Reedsport wave park, and provides information regarding the
project. This is an important step in the full licensing process
for the Reedsport project.
Also, in March 2007, we were awarded funding from the Scottish
Ministers Wave and Tidal Energy Support Scheme, managed by
the Scottish Executive. This funding is to support the design,
manufacture and installation of a 150kW PowerBuoy system in
Orkney, Scotland.
Autonomous
PowerBuoy System
The autonomous PowerBuoy system is based on the same technology
as the utility PowerBuoy system but is designed for electricity
generation of relatively low amounts of power for use
independent of the power grid in remote locations. The
autonomous PowerBuoy system currently has a maximum rated output
ranging from 300 watts to 40kW, depending on the application.
Our autonomous PowerBuoy system is designed to operate anywhere
in the ocean and in any depth of water.
We expect that autonomous PowerBuoy systems will generally be
suitable for use on a stand-alone basis for providing power for
specific applications, including sonar and radar surveillance,
tsunami warning, oceanographic data collection, offshore
platforms and offshore aquaculture.
Status of
Autonomous PowerBuoy Systems
Our PowerBuoy system off the coast of New Jersey was deployed
from October 2005 to October 2006 when it was removed from the
ocean for planned maintenance. We have conducted extensive
diagnostic tests on the system,
13
providing us with information about the effects of ocean
deployments, that will help us implement improvements in future
PowerBuoy systems. We have discovered no significant problems
with the system, and the system has required only routine
maintenance. This system was not designed to supply electricity
to the power grid, but rather to provide us with operational
data and marketing opportunities. We are awaiting delivery of
new mooring lines for this PowerBuoy system, after which we plan
to immediately redeploy the system. We were partially funded for
the construction of this PowerBuoy system by the New Jersey
Board of Public Utilities. We do not anticipate recognizing any
additional revenue in connection with this project, nor do we
expect to incur significant additional investment.
In June 2007, we received a $1.7 million contract from the
US Navy to provide our PowerBuoy technology to a unique program
for ocean data gathering. Under this
18-month
program, the Navy will conduct an ocean test of our autonomous
PowerBuoy as the power source for the Navys Deep Water
Acoustic Detection System.
In September 2004, Lockheed Martin completed testing of a
PowerBuoy system with a maximum rated output of 1kW for
distributed power use on location. Subsequently, we entered into
a marketing arrangement with Lockheed Martin whereby we have
agreed to market cooperatively our autonomous PowerBuoy system.
We expect to generate revenue after entering into agreements
with new customers.
Marketing
and Sales
We are developing our sales capabilities and have begun
commercial marketing and selling of our PowerBuoy systems. Our
marketing and sales efforts are currently led and coordinated by
Dr. George W. Taylor, our chief executive officer, and
Mr. Mark R. Draper, our chief operating officer and the
chief executive of Ocean Power Technologies Limited, our
wholly-owned subsidiary located in the United Kingdom. Because
our products use a new commercial technology, the decision
process of a customer requires substantial educational efforts,
in which many of our employees may participate. We are currently
seeking to hire a vice president of business development and
marketing.
In addition to our own direct sales, we will continue to enter
into development agreements and strategic alliances with
regional utility and energy companies committed to providing
electricity from renewable energy sources. We plan to leverage
these relationships to sell and market our PowerBuoy wave power
stations to these companies and their affiliates and to other
customers in the region. We plan to expand our relationships by
entering into long-term operations and maintenance contracts to
support completed wave power stations. For example, in January
2007, we entered into an agreement for the monitoring, operation
and maintenance of the 40kW PowerBuoy system and the ocean-based
substation and infrastructure to be manufactured and deployed in
connection with the first phase of the Spain project. Under this
operations and maintenance agreement, we are required to provide
services for two years following provisional acceptance of the
PowerBuoy system and substation and infrastructure. We are to be
paid a fixed fee for scheduled maintenance, ongoing operations
and other routine services, subject to adjustment for
unscheduled repairs.
In order to penetrate certain international markets, we plan to
implement marketing strategies that respond to local market
demands. In particular markets, we may grant licenses to local
businesses, including independent power producers, to sell,
manufacture or operate PowerBuoy wave power stations.
Utility
PowerBuoy System Marketing
We plan to market our utility PowerBuoy systems to utilities and
independent power producers interested in adding electricity
generated from renewable sources to their existing electricity
supply. We are currently targeting customers in coastal North
America, the west coast of Europe, the coasts of Australia and
the east coast of Japan. In addition, we are exploring the use
of our utility PowerBuoy systems for applications that include
desalination of water, hydrogen production, water treatment and
natural resource processing. In these instances, the power
generated by the utility PowerBuoy system would bypass the grid
and be delivered directly to the point of electricity
consumption for these special applications.
14
Subsidies
and Incentives
Countries in Europe and Asia and several states in the United
States have adopted a variety of government subsidies to allow
renewable sources of electricity to compete with conventional
sources of electricity, such as fossil fuels. Government
subsidies and incentives generally focus on grid-connected
systems and take several forms, including tariff subsidies,
renewable portfolio standards, rebates, tax incentives and low
interest loans. In addition, the adoption by governments of
limits on carbon dioxide emissions and targets for renewable
energy production has spurred a market for trading of surplus
carbon credits and renewable energy certificates.
We expect to be able to use the availability of subsidies and
other incentives to market the electricity generated by wave
power stations as an alternative to fossil fuel generated
electricity. We plan to educate potential customers on the
availability of these incentives and, where appropriate, work
with them to prepare and file the necessary applications, select
sites to meet program requirements and take advantage of these
incentives.
Demonstration
Wave Power Stations
We use demonstration PowerBuoy systems to establish the
feasibility of providing wave-generated electricity to
customers. Demonstration wave power stations allow potential
customers to see first-hand the viability of wave energy as a
significant source of electricity. From October 2005 through
October 2006, we operated a demonstration PowerBuoy system off
the coast of New Jersey, which allowed us to continuously
monitor the system and evaluate its performance in actual wave
conditions. This PowerBuoy system was removed from the ocean for
maintenance and diagnostic testing in October 2006. Although the
system did not supply electricity to the power grid, it provided
us with valuable operational data as well as important marketing
opportunities.
We have identified a site off the coast of the United Kingdom to
install a demonstration wave power station of up to 5MW that
will connect to the power grid in Cornwall, England. In
connection with the development of this wave power station, we
are planning to take advantage of incentives offered in the
United Kingdom to encourage growth in power derived from
renewable sources.
The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has granted us a
preliminary permit to develop a 50MW PowerBuoy wave power
station off the coast of Oregon that will be connected to the
local power grid, the first phase of which is expected to be a 2
to 5MW demonstration wave power station. In July 2007, we filed
with the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission a
Pre-Application Document and Notice of Intent for the Reedsport
project. This provides notice to the US Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission of our intent to seek a license for the
Reedsport wave park, and provides information regarding the
project. We will need additional authorization from the US
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to sell electric power
generated from the Oregon wave power station into the wholesale
or retail markets.
Autonomous
PowerBuoy System Marketing
There are a variety of potential customers, such as the US
Department of Homeland Security, that have specific needs for
off-grid power generation that can be supplied by our autonomous
PowerBuoy. Potential applications for off-grid power supply
include sonar and radar surveillance, tsunami warning,
oceanographic data collection, offshore platforms and offshore
aquaculture.
In September 2006, we entered into a marketing cooperation
agreement with Lockheed Martin under which Lockheed
Martins Maritime Systems and Sensory business unit and we
will work together to identify marketing opportunities for our
autonomous PowerBuoy system. For each marketing opportunity
Lockheed Martin and we agree to pursue, a subsequent agreement
will need to be entered into setting forth the terms of the
specific arrangement. The marketing cooperation agreement
terminates in September 2009, and either Lockheed Martin or we
may terminate the agreement earlier upon 30 days prior
written notice.
15
Customers
The table below shows the percentage of our revenue we derived
from significant customers for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
Customer
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
US Navy
|
|
|
57
|
%
|
|
|
61
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
New Jersey Board of Public
Utilities
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Iberdrola and Total
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
Lockheed Martin
|
|
|
32
|
%
|
|
|
22
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
The US Navy accounted for a substantial portion of our revenue
in fiscal 2007, but its relative contribution as a percentage of
revenues is expected to decrease in future years.
Our potential customer base for our utility PowerBuoy systems
consists of public utilities, independent power producers and
other governmental entities and agencies. Our potential customer
base for our autonomous PowerBuoy systems consists of different
public and private entities who use electricity in and near the
ocean. Our efforts to identify new customers are concentrated on
four geographic markets: coastal North America, the west coast
of Europe, the coasts of Australia and the east coast of Japan.
Our efforts to identify new customers are currently led and
coordinated by Dr. George W. Taylor, our chief executive
officer, and Mr. Mark R. Draper, our chief operating
officer and the chief executive of Ocean Power Technologies
Ltd., our wholly-owned subsidiary located in the United Kingdom.
We also use consultants and other personnel to assist us in
locating potential customers.
Spain
Project
In July 2004, we entered into a development agreement, which we
refer to as the Spain development agreement, with Iberdrola
Energias Renovables II, S.A., an affiliate of Iberdrola,
Sociedad para el Desarrollo Regional de Cantabria, S.A., or
SODERCAN, which is the industrial development agency of the
Spanish region of Cantabria, and Instituto para la
Diversificacion y Ahorro de la Energia, S.A., or IDAE, a Spanish
government agency dedicated to energy conservation and
diversification efforts, to jointly study the possibility of
developing a wave power station off the coast of Santoña
located in the Cantabria region in northern Spain. Total Eolica
S.A., an affiliate of Total, joined the development agreement in
June 2005. In January 2006, we completed the assessment phase of
the project, which included an assessment of wave energy
resources at the site, feasibility analysis for deployment at
the site, determination of capacity and design, and an
estimation of investments needed for the project as well as
anticipated costs for operation, maintenance and repairs.
Expenses associated with this phase were shared among the
parties to the agreement based on agreed upon percentages. As of
April 30, 2007, we had invested less than $0.1 million
for our share of the assessment phase funding, and had
recognized revenue of approximately $0.3 million under the
assessment phase.
In July 2006, Iberdrola Energias Marinas de Cantabria, S.A., or
Iberdrola Cantabria, was formed for the purpose of constructing
and operating a wave power station off the coast of
Santoña, Spain. Iberdrola Energias is the largest
shareholder of Iberdrola Cantabria. Total Eolica, SODERCAN, IDAE
and we each have minority ownership positions. Expenses will be
shared among the parties to the agreement based on agreed upon
percentages. We own 10% of Iberdrola Cantabria.
In July 2006, we entered into a construction agreement with
Iberdrola Cantabria, which we refer to as the Spain construction
agreement. Under this agreement, we have agreed to complete the
first phase of the construction of a 1.39MW wave power station.
This phase of construction includes the manufacturing and
deployment of one 40kW PowerBuoy system, installation of the
underwater power transmission cable and the deployment of the
underwater substation required for connecting the 40kW PowerBuoy
system with nine additional 150kW PowerBuoy systems that
together are contemplated to constitute the 1.39MW wave power
station. Under the Spain construction agreement, our revenues
are limited to reimbursement for our construction costs without
any mark-up
and we are required to bear the first 0.5 million of
any cost overruns and to absorb certain other costs as set forth
in the agreement. The Spain construction agreement does not
cover the terms for the second phase of the 1.39MW wave
16
power station project, which encompasses the deployment of the
nine additional 150kW PowerBuoy systems. We will need to agree
to the terms for the second phase of this project and enter into
a subsequent contract with Iberdrola Cantabria before we can
complete the construction of the full wave power station. We
currently plan for the initial 40kW PowerBuoy system for this
project to be ready for deployment by late 2007, and, if we can
reach agreement as to the second phase of the project, we plan
to deploy the remainder of the PowerBuoy systems during the
summer of 2009.
We are paid under the Spain construction agreement as we
complete certain milestones for a total potential payment for
the first phase of construction of approximately
2.7 million. As of April 30, 2007, we had
recognized revenue of approximately $0.8 million and an
anticipated loss of $1.3 million under the Spain
construction agreement. The loss was recognized based on a
change in estimated costs associated with the Spain construction
agreement, which include costs incurred to date and our current
estimate of other amounts we may be required to bear under the
agreement. Our estimates of the projects costs may
increase in the future, and we may be required to seek customer
approval for additional increases in the construction budget for
the project. If the construction budget is not increased, we may
elect to incur the additional costs and continue the project, to
seek other suppliers for the materials or services related to
the cost increases or to terminate the agreement. Any of such
outcomes may have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition and results of operations. We have recently requested
our customer to approve an increase in the construction budget
for this project beyond the initial 2.7 million value
of the contract.
France
Project
In June 2005, we entered into a development agreement, which we
refer to as the France development agreement, with Total Energie
Development S.A., an affiliate of Total, and Iberdrola Energias
Renovables II, S.A., an affiliate of Iberdrola, to study and
assess the feasibility of a 2 to 5MW wave power station off the
coast of France. Pursuant to the France development agreement,
the parties have agreed to extend the current phase until June
2008. Expenses are shared among the parties based on agreed upon
percentages, which also reflect the parties anticipated
ownership interest in the wave power station. Iberdrola Energias
has a majority interest, while Total Energie and we have
minority interests, with our interest being 10%.
If upon completion of the feasibility study, Iberdrola Energias,
Total Energie and we unanimously conclude that the operation of
a wave power station off the coast of France is economically,
technically and financially feasible, we will meet to discuss
whether and how the wave power station should be implemented. If
we proceed, Iberdrola Energias, Total Energie and we will form a
company for the purpose of constructing and operating the wave
power station. Each party will be entitled to retain its current
percentage interest by making a proportionate capital
investment. Regardless of our participation in the new company,
we will supply and install equipment on market terms so that the
new company can operate the wave power station. Specific terms,
including price and schedule, for these supply and installation
agreements are not included in the France development agreement.
Iberdrola Energias and Total Energie may withdraw from the
France development agreement without any further obligation. If
we withdraw, however, we will remain bound by our supply and
installation agreements under the contract.
As of April 30, 2007, we had contributed approximately
$12,500 for expenses and had recognized revenue of approximately
$0.1 million under the France development agreement.
US
Navy
Since September 2001, we have entered into a series of contracts
with the United States Office of Naval Research for the
development and construction of wave power systems at the Marine
Corps Base in Oahu, Hawaii. Under the contract for the current
phase of the project, which was entered into in September 2005
and expires in April 2008, we are reimbursed for costs and paid
a fixed fee for total potential revenue of $2.8 million.
In June 2007, we received a $1.7 million contract from the
US Navy to provide our PowerBuoy technology to a unique program
for ocean data gathering. Under this
18-month
program, the Navy will conduct an ocean test of our autonomous
PowerBuoy as the power source for the Navys Deep Water
Acoustic Detection System.
17
Backlog
Our contract backlog consists of the aggregate anticipated
revenue remaining to be earned at a given time from the
uncompleted portions of our existing customer contracts. As of
April 30, 2007, our contract backlog was $5.2 million
as compared to $2.6 million as of April 30, 2006. We
anticipate that a majority of our backlog will be recognized as
revenue over the next 12 months.
The amount of contract backlog is not necessarily indicative of
future revenue because modifications to or terminations of
present contracts and production delays can provide additional
revenue or reduce anticipated revenue. A substantial majority of
our revenue is recognised using the percentage-of-completion
method, and changes in estimates from time to time may have a
significant effect on revenue and backlog. Our backlog is also
typically subject to large variations from time to time due to
the timing of new awards.
Manufacturing
and Deployment
Manufacturing
and Raw Materials
We engage in two types of manufacturing activities: the
manufacturing of the high value-added components, or modules,
for systems control, power generation and power conversion for
each PowerBuoy system, and the contracting and fabrication of
the buoy-like structure, anchoring and mooring, and cabling.
Our core in-house manufacturing activity is the assembly and
testing of the power generation and control modules at our
Pennington, New Jersey facility. The power generation and
control modules include the critical electrical and electronic
systems that convert the mechanical energy into usable
electrical energy. The sensors and control systems use
sophisticated technology to monitor ocean conditions and
automatically optimize the performance of the PowerBuoy system
in response to those changing conditions. We have several
patents, including those that cover our power generation, power
conversion and control technologies. Due to the critical and
proprietary nature of these systems, we do not outsource their
assembly and testing. After a generator and control module
passes our rigorous quality control procedures, it is
transported as a ready-to-install component to the project site.
We currently employ thirteen employees who are responsible for
manufacturing and testing our generators and control systems. In
order to meet our growth objectives, we will need to increase
our engineering and manufacturing staff by over 120 people
by the end of fiscal 2010. In addition to adding engineers with
various specialties, we plan to hire a manager of our production
manufacturing and a manager of our supply chain by the end of
fiscal 2008.
We purchase the remaining components of and raw materials for
each PowerBuoy system from various vendors. Currently, we
contract for these components on a
project-by-project
basis. We conduct a bidding process to select a supplier with
the optimal combination of price, delivery terms and quality.
Our goal is to develop ongoing relationships with select vendors
centrally located in different regions, which will allow us to
reduce unit costs as our volume increases. We provide
specifications to each vendor who is responsible for performing
quality analysis and quality control over the course of
construction, subject to our review of the quality test
procedures and results. After each vendor completes testing of
the component, it is transported ready-to-install to the project
site.
Upon arrival at the project site, the generator and control
modules are integrated with the balance of the components of the
PowerBuoy system. We are highly dependent on our third-party
suppliers; however, we actively manage key steps in the supply
chain. We act as the general contractor, and retain the ultimate
responsibility for building the PowerBuoy wave power station,
and installing, testing and deploying the complete wave power
station at the project site. This process requires significant
project and contract management by us. We currently employ
individuals who have experience with all aspects of both the
manufacturing and engineering contracting processes, and
demonstrated organizational capabilities in these critical areas.
Deployment
For our existing and currently planned deployments, we purchase
from subcontractors the mooring system and cables needed to
install the PowerBuoy system and connect it to either the power
grid or a remote power site. The vendor usually transports these
components to the project site.
18
Each step in the deployment process for our existing and
currently planned deployments is outsourced to subcontractors
located near the project site. First the mooring system,
consisting of floats, anchors and chains, are brought to the
wave power stations ultimate ocean location by workboats.
At the same time, the cable to transmit the generated
electricity is laid by a subcontractor. Next, the PowerBuoy
system is towed to the ocean location and fixed to the mooring
system. The PowerBuoy system would then be connected to the
transmission cable, which would then be connected to the grid or
the distributed power site. At this point, we would have a fully
assembled PowerBuoy wave power station, which, subject to final
testing, would be ready for operation. An array of PowerBuoy
systems would be installed using a similar approach.
We expect that the subcontractor services required for
deployment of a wave power station will be readily available in
the locations where we currently plan to deploy our systems,
although we are dependent on third parties for the entire
process. We actively manage each step with personnel who have
significant project management and deployment experience.
Research
and Development
Our research and development team consists of employees with a
broad range of experience in mechanical engineering, electrical
engineering, hydrodynamics and systems engineering. We engage in
extensive research and development efforts to improve PowerBuoy
efficiency and power output and to reduce manufacturing cost and
complexity. Our research and development efforts are currently
focused on product development, in particular increasing the
output of our utility PowerBuoy system. We are also conducting
research on improvements to our current technology, including
alternative power generation and power take off systems.
Research and development expenses are reflected on our
consolidated statements of operations as product development
costs. Our company-sponsored research and development expenses
were approximately $0.9 million for fiscal 2005,
$4.2 million for fiscal 2006 and $6.2 million for
fiscal 2007. In addition, while we have in the past self-funded
the majority of our research and development expenditures, we
also have customer-sponsored research and development expenses
of approximately $0.2 million for fiscal 2005,
$0.1 million for fiscal 2006 and $0.1 million for
fiscal 2007.
We currently plan to increase the maximum rated output of our
utility PowerBuoy system to 150kW in 2007, to 250kW in 2008 and
ultimately to 500kW in 2010. The key to increasing the rated
output of the PowerBuoy system is to increase the systems
efficiency as well as its diameter. If we increase the size of a
PowerBuoy system, we will be able to increase the amount of wave
energy the system can capture and, in turn, increase the output
of the system. For example, if we double the size of the
units diameter, we will approximately quadruple its power
capacity. We believe that we will be able to increase the output
capacity of the PowerBuoy system using technology that we have
already developed, so our focus is on the design, manufacture,
testing and deployment of the higher capacity systems. We are
exploring design and construction techniques that will enable
the larger PowerBuoy systems to be deployed cost effectively and
without damage. For example, our 40kW PowerBuoy systems are
transported to the onshore deployment sites using standard
flatbed trucks. However, the assembled 150kW PowerBuoy systems
will be too large for these trucks and will need to be
transported in modules and assembled
on-site. In
addition, we may need to adjust the mooring system to account
for the larger-sized PowerBuoy systems.
We have made substantial progress in the design, analysis and
commencement of fabrication of what we believe to be the first
utility-grade underwater substation, or pod, for wave power. The
pod serves as the point at which energy generated by several
PowerBuoys is aggregated and the voltage is increased, prior to
transmission ashore and being fed into the power grid. The
required switching and protection circuits for the individual
PowerBuoys are also included in the pod. In addition, our 150kW
PowerBuoy design effort is well underway. The power conversion
and controls system is substantially complete for the 150kW
PowerBuoy system, and we expect to commence ocean testing in
2008.
We also plan to continue our technology development of specific
applications for our PowerBuoy systems to expand our growth
opportunities. For example, we are exploring applications that
include desalination of water, hydrogen production, water
treatment and natural resource processing.
19
We expect our research and development expenses to continue to
rise in the next several years, with our product development
expenses increasing more rapidly than our research expenses.
Intellectual
Property
We believe that our technology differentiates us from other
providers of wave and other renewable energy technologies. As a
result, our success depends in part on our ability to obtain and
maintain proprietary protection for our products, technology and
know-how, to operate without infringing the proprietary rights
of others and to prevent others from infringing our proprietary
rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary
position by, among other methods, filing United States and
foreign patent applications related to our proprietary
technology, inventions and improvements that are important to
the development of our business. We also rely on trade secrets,
know-how, and continuing technological innovation and may rely
on in-licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our
proprietary position.
As of April 30, 2007, we owned a total of 31 issued United
States patents and 16 United States patent applications. We have
pending foreign counterparts to nine of our issued patents and
11 of our pending non-provisional patent applications.
Our patent portfolio includes patents and patent applications
with claims directed to:
|
|
|
|
|
system design;
|
|
|
|
control systems;
|
|
|
|
power conversion;
|
|
|
|
anchoring and mooring; and
|
|
|
|
wave farm architecture.
|
The expiration dates for our issued United States patents range
from 2015 to 2023. We do not consider any single patent or
patent application that we hold to be material to our business.
The patent positions of companies like ours are generally
uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. Our
ability to maintain and solidify our proprietary position for
our technology will depend on our success in obtaining effective
patent claims and enforcing those claims once granted. In
addition, certain technologies that we developed with US federal
government funding are subject to certain government rights as
described in Risk Factors Risks Relating to
Our Business.
We use trademarks on nearly all of our products and believe that
having distinctive marks is an important factor in marketing our
products. We have registered our
PowerBuoy®
mark and filed applications to register our
CellBuoytm
and Talk on
Watertm
marks for a cellular telephone service application of our
autonomous PowerBuoy system and our Making Waves in
Powersm
service mark in the United States.
Competition
We compete and will compete with power generation equipment
suppliers in all segments of the electric power industry,
including wave energy, other forms of renewable energy and
traditional fossil fuel. The renewable energy industry is both
highly competitive and continually evolving as participants
strive to distinguish themselves within their markets and
compete within the larger electric power industry. Many of our
competitors in certain of these segments have established a
stronger market position than ours and have greater resources
and name recognition than we have. In addition, there are many
companies, including some of the largest multinational energy
companies, that are developing or sponsoring innovative
technologies for renewable energy production. Accordingly, our
success depends in part on developing and demonstrating the
commercial viability of wave energy solutions and identifying
markets for and applications of our PowerBuoy systems and
technology.
Although the market for equipment that generates electricity
from wave energy is in its early stage of commercial
development, there are a number of private companies, some with
institutional funding, developing technologies to generate
electricity from wave energy, and we compete or will compete
with them. We believe there are 20 to 30 companies
worldwide developing wave energy technologies. Most of these
companies are located in the
20
United Kingdom, continental Europe, the United States and
Australia, and almost all are focused on offshore systems. Only
a few of these companies have conducted ocean testing of their
systems, which is the critical factor in proving the
survivability and performance of any wave energy system.
Sixteen companies expressed an interest to the South West of
England Regional Development Agency in participating in the
development of a new Wave Hub power station project off the
coast of Cornwall, England. Four companies were ultimately
selected: Ocean Prospect Ltd., a subsidiary of the Wind Prospect
group, Fred.Olsen Ltd., Oceanlinx and us.
Ocean Prospect Ltd. has stated that it will deploy the Pelamis
device developed by Ocean Power Delivery at the Cornwall site.
The Pelamis system is a semi-submerged, articulated structure
composed of cylindrical sections linked by hinged joints. The
wave-induced motion of these cylinders relative to each other is
used to pump hydraulic power take off systems, providing the
mechanical power to turn the generators to produce electricity.
Fred.Olsen, a ship and offshore platform builder, intends to
deploy a multiple point-absorber system comprised of a number of
floating buoys attached to a stable floating platform. Oceanlinx
intends to deploy a large floating system which is based on an
oscillating water column and proprietary turbine. Additional
competitors may enter the market, and we are likely to compete
with new companies in the future.
To compete effectively, we have to demonstrate that our
PowerBuoy systems are attractive, compared to other wave energy
systems and other renewable energy systems, by differentiating
our systems on the basis of performance, survivability in
operation and storm wave conditions, cost effectiveness and the
operations and maintenance services that we provide. We believe
that we perform favorably to our competition with respect to
each of these factors.
Government
Regulation
The electric power industry is subject to extensive regulation,
which varies by jurisdiction. For example, the electricity
industry in the United States is governed by both federal and
state laws and regulations, with the federal government having
jurisdiction over the sale and transmission of electricity at
the wholesale level in interstate commerce, and the states
having jurisdiction over the sale and distribution of
electricity at the retail level. The electricity industry in the
European Union, or the EU, is primarily governed by national
law, but a number of EU-level regulations impose obligations on
member states, notably with respect to the liberalization of the
electricity markets.
The renewable energy industry has also been subject to
increasing regulation, however none of the countries in which we
are currently marketing our PowerBuoy systems have comprehensive
regulatory schemes tailored to wave energy. As the renewable
energy industry continues to evolve and as the wave energy
industry in particular develops, we anticipate that wave energy
technology and our PowerBuoy systems and their deployment will
be subject to increased oversight and regulation in accordance
with international, national and local regulations relating to
safety, sites, environmental protection, utility interconnection
and metering and related matters.
Our PowerBuoy wave power stations currently face regulation in
the US and in foreign jurisdictions concerning, among other
areas, the sale and transmission of electricity, site approval
and environmental approval and compliance. In order to encourage
the adoption of renewable energy systems, many governments offer
subsidies and other financial incentives and have mandated
renewable energy targets. These subsidies, incentives and
targets may not be applicable to our wave energy technology and
therefore may not be available for us or our customers.
Sale
and Transmission of Electricity
The US government regulates the electricity wholesale and
transmission business through the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, or FERC. FERC regulates the rates and terms for
sales of electricity at the wholesale level, and the
organization, governance and financing of the companies engaged
in electricity sales. As a result, FERC regulates the rates
charged for sales of electric power from a wave power station
into the wholesale market, although it is possible to obtain an
exemption from FERC that would allow those sales to occur at
market-based rates. FERC also regulates the construction,
operation and maintenance of any dam, water conduit, reservoir
or powerhouse
21
along or in any of the navigable waters of the United States for
the purpose of generating electric power. As a result, the
construction and operation of a wave power station in the United
States requires the issuance of a license by FERC. We have been
granted a preliminary permit by FERC to evaluate the feasibility
of a 50MW wave power station off the coast of Oregon. An
application to FERC was not required for the current project in
New Jersey because the system is not grid-connected and is for
demonstration purposes.
Under Spanish law, each of the Spanish Autonomous Regions,
including the Cantabria region, has the power to issue
administrative authorizations for the construction and
exploitation of installations for the production of renewable
energy, including installations that use the energy of waves.
Site
Approval
Generally, we expect that we will deploy our PowerBuoy systems
in the range of one to five miles from the shore, subject to
water depth and overall wave heights. Although regulations
regarding the use of ocean space vary around the world, we do
not expect significant delay in obtaining site approvals, as
governments have to date encouraged the use of renewable energy
sources. Our customers for the Spain and France projects and the
South West of England Regional Development Agency for the
Cornwall, England project are responsible for obtaining the
necessary siting permits for their projects.
In the United States, federal agencies regulate the siting of
renewable energy and related-uses located on the outer
continental shelf, which is generally more than three miles
offshore. For projects located within three miles of the US
shore, the adjacent state would be responsible for issuing a
lease and other required authorizations for the location of the
project. In either case an assessment of the potential
environmental impact of the project would be conducted in
addition to other requirements. In Spain, the owner of the wave
power station will be required to pay rent to the Spanish
government, which will be negotiated prior to installation.
Environmental
Approval and Compliance
We are subject to various foreign, federal, state and local
environmental protection and health and safety laws and
regulations governing, among other things: the generation,
storage, handling, use and transportation of hazardous
materials; the emission and discharge of hazardous materials
into the ground, air or water; and the health and safety of our
employees. In addition, in the United States, the construction
and operation of a power system offshore would require permits
and approvals from FERC, the Coast Guard, the Army Corps of
Engineers and other governmental authorities. These required
permits and approvals evaluate, among other things, whether the
proposed project is in the public interest and ensure that the
project would not create a hazard to navigation. Other foreign
and international laws may require similar approvals. Each
PowerBuoy system installed within Spanish territorial waters
must be approved and authorized by the Spanish Ministry of
Environment. In addition, we anticipate that our PowerBuoy
systems will be subject to EU law on the protection of the
environment and environmental assessments of development
projects including the Environmental Impact Assessment and
Strategic Environmental Assessment Directives.
We believe that a significant advantage of our PowerBuoy systems
is that they do not present significant environmental risks when
compared to traditional power generation technologies, as there
is no significant visual or audible impact and such systems have
not been shown to have a significant negative effect on fish or
sea mammals. We are not aware of any liabilities in connection
with compliance with such laws, regulations, permits and
approvals that would have a material adverse effect on our
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Subsidies
and Incentives
Several governments have enacted subsidies and incentives
designed to encourage the development of renewable energy
resources. Because of the relative novelty of wave energy
generation, these government programs generally do not apply
specifically to wave energy generation, and so these programs
may not be available to our customers or us in all cases.
Under a tariff subsidy, the government sets price subsidies to
be paid to electricity producers for renewable electricity
generated by them. The prices are set above market rates and may
be differentiated based on system size
22
or application. Under a renewable portfolio standard, the
government requires regulated utilities to supply a portion of
their total electricity in the form of renewable electricity.
Some programs further specify that a portion of the renewable
energy quota must be from a particular renewable energy source,
although none have specific quotas for wave energy.
Tax incentive programs for renewable energy exist in the United
States at both the federal and state level and can take the form
of investment tax credits, accelerated depreciation and property
tax exemptions. Several governments also facilitate low interest
loans for renewable energy systems, either through direct
lending, credit enhancement or other programs.
Each of the member states of the EU has a country-specific
target for the level of consumption of electricity from
renewable sources that it should attain by 2010. The United
Kingdom Renewables Obligation of April 2002 included a target of
10% of electricity generation to come from renewable sources by
2010 and 15% by 2016, which will continue until 2027.
Electricity suppliers that are unable to otherwise meet their
renewables obligation have to pay a buy-out price (currently
£0.033 per kilowatt hour) or purchase Renewables Obligation
Certificates from companies that generate electricity from
renewable resources. The United Kingdom Department of Trade and
Industry has established a £50 million Marine
Renewables Deployment Fund of which £42 million is
allocated to provide a maximum seven-year benefit to any one
marine power technology of £9 million, in the form of
a 25% capital grant and a tariff supplement of £0.10 per
kilowatt-hour
generated.
Many countries and other local jurisdictions have established
limits on carbon dioxide emissions. In particular, a key
component of the Kyoto Protocol is the commitments made by
certain countries to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The
country, locality or companies within the jurisdiction are given
carbon emission allowances, or carbon credits, which represent
the right to emit a specific amount of carbon dioxide. A
country, locality or company having emissions that exceed its
allocated carbon credits may purchase unused carbon credits from
a country, locality or company that has reduced its emissions
beyond its requirements to do so. The carbon dioxide emissions
from a PowerBuoy wave power station are far lower than the
emissions from a fossil fuel power station of the same capacity.
Therefore, a PowerBuoy wave power station may generate carbon
credits that could be used and sold.
In 2000, we entered into an agreement with Woodside Sustainable
Energy Solutions Pty. Ltd., or Woodside, under which we received
$0.6 million in exchange for granting Woodside an option to
purchase, at a 30% discount from the then-prevailing market
rate, up to 500,000 metric tons of carbon emission credits we
generate during the years 2008 through 2012. If by
December 31, 2012 we do not sell to Woodside the full
amount of emission credits covered by the option, we may be
obligated to return all or a portion of the option fee and, in
certain circumstances, pay additional amounts to Woodside.
Employees
As of April 30, 2007, we had 37 employees, including
13 employees in manufacturing, 14 in research, development
and engineering functions and ten employees in selling, general
and administrative functions. Of these employees, 30 are located
in Pennington, New Jersey and seven are located in Warwick, UK.
We believe that our future success will depend in part on our
continued ability to attract, hire and retain qualified
personnel. None of our employees is represented by a labor
union, and we believe our employee relations are good.
In order to meet our short-term goals, we plan to add
approximately 15 employees, including a vice president of
business development and engineers with varying levels and areas
of expertise by the end of 2007. By the end of fiscal 2010, we
will need to increase our staff by nearly six times in order to
meet our current manufacturing targets. The majority of our new
hires will be engineers with varying levels and areas of
expertise, project managers and manufacturing personnel.
Product
Insurance
We currently have a property and liability insurance policy
underwritten by Lloyds Underwriters that covers our
PowerBuoy systems in Hawaii and New Jersey, and that can be
expanded to cover our PowerBuoy systems to be
23
deployed off the coasts of Santoña, Spain, Cornwall,
England and France. We have not claimed any losses under this
policy.
You should carefully consider the risks described below with all
of the other information included in this Annual Report before
deciding to invest in our common stock. If any of the following
risks actually occur, they may materially harm our business and
our financial condition and results of operations. In this
event, the market price of our common stock could decline and
your investment could be lost.
Risks
Relating to Our Business
We
have a history of operating losses and may never achieve or
maintain profitability.
We have incurred net losses since we began operations in 1994,
including net losses of $0.4 million in fiscal 2005,
$7.1 million in fiscal 2006 and $9.6 million in fiscal
2007. As of April 30, 2007, we had an accumulated deficit
of approximately $38.3 million. These losses have resulted
primarily from costs incurred in our research and development
programs and from our selling, general and administrative costs.
We expect to increase our operating expenses significantly as we
continue to expand our infrastructure, research and development
programs and commercialization activities. As a result, we will
need to generate significant revenues to cover these costs and
achieve profitability.
We have entered into an agreement for the first phase of
construction of a wave power station off the coast of
Santoña, Spain, as well as an operations and maintenance
contract for the equipment to be installed in this first phase.
Under both contracts, our potential profitability is limited.
Under the construction contract, our revenues are limited to
reimbursement for our construction costs without any
mark-up and
we are required to bear the first 0.5 million of any
cost overruns and to absorb certain other costs as set forth in
the agreement. Our estimates of the projects costs may
increase in the future, and we may be required to seek customer
approval for additional increases in the construction budget for
the project. If the construction budget is not increased, we may
elect to incur the additional costs and continue the project, to
seek other suppliers for the materials or services related to
the cost increases or to terminate the agreement. Any of such
outcomes may have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition and results of operations. We have recently requested
our customer to approve an increase in the construction budget
for this project beyond the intitial 2.7 million
value of the contract. Under the operations and maintenance
contract, we are paid a fixed fee for scheduled maintenance, the
profits on which are required to be refunded to cover any
unscheduled maintenance fees we receive during the term of the
agreement.
We do not know whether or when we will become profitable because
of the significant uncertainties with respect to our ability to
successfully commercialize our PowerBuoy systems in the emerging
renewable energy market. Even if we do achieve profitability, we
may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a
quarterly or annual basis. If we are unable to achieve and then
maintain profitability, the market value of our common stock may
decline.
Wave
energy technology may not gain broad commercial acceptance, and
therefore our revenues may not increase, and we may be unable to
achieve and then sustain profitability.
Wave energy technology is at an early stage of development, and
the extent to which wave energy power generation will be
commercially viable is uncertain. Many factors may affect the
commercial acceptance of wave energy technology, including the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
performance, reliability and cost-effectiveness of wave energy
technology compared to conventional and other renewable energy
sources and products;
|
|
|
|
developments relating to other renewable energy generation
technologies;
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in economic and market conditions that affect the
cost or viability of conventional and renewable energy sources,
such as increases or decreases in the prices of oil and other
fossil fuels;
|
|
|
|
overall growth in the renewable energy equipment market;
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
availability and terms of government subsidies and incentives to
support the development of renewable energy sources, including
wave energy;
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in capital expenditures by utilities and
independent power producers, which tend to decrease when the
economy slows and interest rates increase; and
|
|
|
|
the development of new and profitable applications requiring the
type of remote electric power provided by our autonomous wave
energy systems.
|
If wave energy technology does not gain broad commercial
acceptance, our business will be materially harmed and we may
need to curtail or cease operations.
If
sufficient demand for our PowerBuoy systems does not develop or
takes longer to develop than we anticipate, our revenues may
decline, and we may be unable to achieve and then sustain
profitability.
Even if wave energy technology achieves broad commercial
acceptance, our PowerBuoy systems may not prove to be a
commercially viable technology for generating electricity from
ocean waves. We have invested a significant portion of our time
and financial resources since our inception in the development
of our PowerBuoy systems. To date, we have not yet manufactured
and deployed any PowerBuoy systems for commercial use. As we
begin to manufacture, market, sell and deploy our PowerBuoy
systems in greater quantities, unforeseen hurdles may be
encountered that would limit the commercial viability of our
PowerBuoy systems, including unanticipated manufacturing,
deployment, operating, maintenance and other costs. Our target
customers and we may also encounter technical obstacles to
deploying, operating and maintaining PowerBuoy systems in
quantities necessary to generate competitively-priced
electricity.
If demand for our PowerBuoy systems fails to develop
sufficiently, we may be unable to grow our business or generate
sufficient revenues to achieve and then sustain profitability.
In addition, demand for PowerBuoy systems in our presently
targeted markets, including coastal North America, the west
coast of Europe, the coasts of Australia and the east coast of
Japan, may not develop or may develop to a lesser extent than we
anticipate.
If we are not successful in commercializing our PowerBuoy
system, or are significantly delayed in doing so, our business,
financial condition and results of operations could be adversely
affected.
The
reduction or elimination of government subsidies and economic
incentives for renewable energy sources could prevent demand for
our PowerBuoy systems from developing, which in turn would
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
Federal, state and local governmental bodies in many countries,
most notably France, Spain, the United Kingdom, Australia,
Japan and the United States, have provided subsidies in the form
of tariff subsidies, rebates, tax credits and other incentives
to utilities, power generators and distributors using renewable
energy. However, these incentives and subsidies generally
decline over time, and many incentive and subsidy programs have
specific expiration dates. Moreover, because the market for
electricity generated from wave energy is at an early stage of
development, some of the programs may not include wave energy as
a renewable energy source eligible for the incentives and
subsidies.
Currently, the cost of electricity generated from wave energy,
without the benefit of subsidies or other economic incentives,
substantially exceeds the price of electricity in most
significant markets in the world. As a result, the near-term
growth of the market for our utility PowerBuoy systems, which
are designed to feed electricity into a local or regional power
grid, depends significantly on the availability and size of
government incentives and subsidies for wave energy. As
renewable energy becomes more of a competitive threat to
conventional energy providers, companies active in the
conventional energy business may increase their lobbying efforts
in order to encourage governments to stop providing subsidies
for renewable energy, including wave energy. We cannot predict
the level of any such efforts, or how governments may react to
such efforts. The reduction, elimination or expiration of
government incentives and subsidies, or the exclusion of wave
energy technology from those incentives and subsidies, may
result in the diminished competitiveness of wave energy relative
to conventional and non-wave energy renewable sources of energy.
Such diminished competitiveness could materially and adversely
affect the
25
growth of the wave energy industry, which could in turn
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
In 2000, we entered into an agreement with Woodside, under which
we received $0.6 million in exchange for granting Woodside
an option to purchase, at a 30% discount from the
then-prevailing market rate, up to 500,000 metric tons of carbon
emission credits we generate during the years 2008 through 2012.
However, if by December 31, 2012 we do not become entitled
under applicable laws to the full amount of emission credits
covered by the option, we are obligated to return the option fee
of $0.6 million, less the aggregate discount on any
emission credits sold to Woodside prior to such date. If we
receive emission credits under applicable laws and fail to sell
to Woodside the credits up to the full amount of emission
credits covered by the option, Woodside is entitled to
liquidated damages equal to 30% of the aggregate market value of
the shortfall in emission credits (subject to a limit on the
market price of emission credits).
Our
product development costs have been steadily increasing and are
likely to increase significantly over the next several
years.
Our product development costs primarily relate to our efforts to
increase the maximum rated output of our current 40kW utility
PowerBuoy system in successive stages to 500kW in 2010. Our
product development costs were $0.9 million in fiscal 2005
as compared to $4.2 million in fiscal 2006 and
$6.2 million in fiscal 2007. We anticipate that our product
development costs related to the planned increase in the output
of our utility PowerBuoy system will increase significantly over
the next several years.
We
have invested, and will continue to invest, funds to construct
demonstration wave power stations that may generate little or no
direct revenue.
We have constructed, and plan to construct in the future,
demonstration wave power stations to establish the feasibility
of wave energy technology and to encourage the market adoption
of our wave power stations. Demonstration wave power stations
allow potential customers to see first-hand the viability of
wave energy technology as a source of electricity. We incur
significant costs in constructing and maintaining these
demonstration wave power stations, and we may generate little or
no direct revenue from them.
Our
PowerBuoy systems do not have a sufficient operating history to
confirm how they will perform over their estimated
30-year
useful life.
We began developing and testing wave energy technology ten years
ago. However, to date we have only manufactured nine PowerBuoy
systems for use in testing and development. The longest
continuous in-ocean deployment of our PowerBuoy system has been
for 12 months. As a result, our PowerBuoy systems do not
have a sufficient operating history to confirm how they will
perform over their estimated
30-year
useful life. Our technology has not been deployed commercially
and we have not yet demonstrated that our engineering and test
results can be duplicated in commercial production. We have
conducted and plan to continue to conduct practical testing of
our PowerBuoy system. If our PowerBuoy system ultimately proves
ineffective or unfeasible, we may not be able to engage in
commercial production of our products or we may become liable to
our customers for quantities we are obligated but are unable to
produce. If our PowerBuoy systems perform below expectations, we
could lose customers and face substantial repair and replacement
expense which could in turn adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Our
future success depends on our ability to increase the maximum
rated power output of our utility PowerBuoy system. If we are
unable to increase the maximum rated output of our utility
PowerBuoy system, the commercial prospects for our utility
PowerBuoy system would be adversely affected.
One of our goals is to increase the maximum rated output of our
utility PowerBuoy system, which is currently 40kW, to 150kW in
2007, then to 250kW in 2008 and ultimately to 500kW in 2010. Our
success in meeting this objective depends on our ability to
significantly increase the power output of our PowerBuoy system
in a cost-effective and timely manner and our ability to
overcome the engineering and deployment hurdles that we face,
including developing design and construction techniques that
will enable the larger PowerBuoy systems to be
26
deployed cost effectively and without damage, and developing
adjustments to the mooring system to account for the
larger-sized PowerBuoy systems. We have experienced delays in
the development and deployment of our PowerBuoy system in the
past, and could experience similar delays or other difficulties
in the future. If we cannot increase the power output of the
PowerBuoy system, or if it takes us longer to do so than we
anticipate, we may be unable to expand our business, maintain
our competitive position, satisfy our contractual obligations or
become profitable. In addition, if the cost associated with
these development efforts exceeds our projections, our results
of operations will be adversely affected.
If we
do not reach full commercial scale, we may not be able to offer
a cost competitive power station and the commercial prospects of
our utility PowerBuoy system would be adversely
affected.
Unless we reach full commercial scale, which we estimate to be
manufacturing levels of at least 300 units of 500kW
PowerBuoy systems per year, we may not be able to offer an
electricity solution that competes on a non-subsidized basis
with todays price of wholesale electricity in key markets
in the United States, Europe, Japan and Australia. If we do not
reach full commercial scale, the commercial prospects for our
utility PowerBuoy system would be adversely affected.
We
have not yet deployed a wave power station consisting of an
array of two or more PowerBuoy systems. If we are unable to
deploy a multiple-system wave power station, our revenues may
not increase, and we may be unable to achieve and then maintain
profitability.
We have not yet deployed a wave power station consisting of an
array of two or more PowerBuoy systems. Our success in
developing and deploying a wave power station consisting of an
array of two or more PowerBuoy systems is contingent upon, among
other things, receipt of required governmental permits,
obtaining adequate financing, successful array design
implementation and finally, successful deployment and connection
of the PowerBuoy systems.
We have not conducted ocean testing or otherwise installed in
the ocean a multiple-system wave power station. In particular,
unlike single-system wave power stations, multiple-system wave
power stations require use of an underwater substation to
connect the cables from, and collect the electricity generated
by, each PowerBuoy system in the array. If our underwater
substation does not work as we anticipate, we will need to
design an alternative system, which could delay our business
plans. In addition, unanticipated issues may arise with the
logistics and mechanics of deploying and maintaining multiple
PowerBuoy systems at a single site and the additional equipment
associated with these multiple-system wave power stations.
We may be unsuccessful in accomplishing any of these tasks or
doing so on a timely basis. The development and deployment of an
array of PowerBuoy systems may require us to incur significant
expenses for preliminary engineering, permitting and legal and
other expenses before we can determine whether a project is
feasible, economically attractive or capable of being financed.
If we
are unable to deploy larger PowerBuoy systems cost effectively
and without damage to the systems, we may be unable to compete
effectively.
We will need to build larger buoys in order to increase the
output of our current PowerBuoy systems. The larger buoys will
be more difficult than our current buoys to deploy cost
effectively and without damage. Our current deployment
methodologies, including transportation to the installation site
and the mooring of the PowerBuoy systems, will need to be
revised for PowerBuoy systems with greater output. If we cannot
develop cost effective methodologies for deployment of the
larger PowerBuoy systems, or if it takes us longer to do so than
we anticipate, we may not be able to deploy such systems in the
time we anticipate or at all. Therefore, even if we succeed in
increasing the output of our PowerBuoy systems above 40kW, if we
are unable to deploy these larger PowerBuoy systems or encounter
problems in doing so, we may be unable to expand our business,
maintain our competitive position, satisfy our contractual
obligations or become profitable.
27
If we
are not successful in completing the development of wave power
stations in Spain or France, it would materially harm our
business, financial condition and results of
operations.
In July 2006, we entered into an agreement for the first phase
of the construction of a wave power station off the coast of
Santoña, Spain, with our customer, Iberdrola Energias
Marinas de Cantabria, S.A., or Iberdrola Cantabria. We refer to
this agreement as the Spain construction agreement. Iberdrola
Cantabria was formed by affiliates of Iberdrola and Total, two
Spanish governmental agencies and us for the purpose of
constructing and operating a wave power station off the coast of
Spain. Under the Spain construction agreement, we have agreed to
manufacture and deploy by no later than December 31, 2009
one 40kW PowerBuoy system and the ocean-based substation and
infrastructure required to connect nine additional 150kW
PowerBuoy systems that together are contemplated to constitute a
1.39MW wave power station. Under the terms of the agreement, our
revenues are limited to reimbursement for our construction costs
without any
mark-up. In
addition, we are required to bear the first
0.5 million of any cost overruns and to absorb
certain other costs as set forth in the agreement. Our estimates
of the projects costs may increase in the future, and we
may be required to seek customer approval for additional
increases in the construction budget for the project. If the
construction budget is not increased, we may elect to incur the
additional costs and continue the project, to seek other
suppliers for the materials or services related to the cost
increases or to terminate the agreement. Any of such outcomes
may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition
and results of operations. We have recently requested our
customer to approve an increase in the construction budget for
this project beyond the intitial 2.7 million value of
the contract. As of April 30, 2007, we had recognized an
anticipated loss of $1.3 million under the Spain
construction agreement, which includes costs incurred to date
and our current estimate of other amounts we may be required to
bear under the agreement.
In addition, because the Spain construction agreement does not
cover the terms for deployment of all ten PowerBuoy units, we
will need to enter into a subsequent contract with Iberdrola
Cantabria before we complete construction of the full wave power
station. If we are unable to successfully manufacture all ten
PowerBuoy units or meet the terms of the Spain construction
agreement, or if we are not able to successfully negotiate a
subsequent contract with Iberdrola Cantabria for the deployment
of the nine additional PowerBuoy units, we may lose a material
component of our current and anticipated revenue stream.
Iberdrola Cantabria has the right to terminate the agreement if
we interrupt our services for more than 180 days and do not
resume within a
30-day
period or if the first phase of construction is not complete by
December 31, 2009 for reasons attributable to us, or for a
serious and repeated breach of a major obligation that is not
cured within a
30-day
period after we receive notice of the breach. If Iberdrola
Cantabria were to terminate the Spain construction agreement for
any of these reasons, we may not be able to find another company
to fund development of the wave power station. In addition, we
have made guarantees to Iberdrola Cantabria associated with the
first phase of construction in respect of the quality, repair
and replacement of the 40kW PowerBuoy system and
ocean-based
substation and the level of power output of the 40kW PowerBuoy
system.
Under our agreement with affiliates of Iberdrola and Total to
study and assess the feasibility of a wave power station off the
coast of France, either of Iberdrola or Total may withdraw
without further obligation. In addition, in order to proceed
with development of the France wave power station, all three
parties must conclude that development is feasible. If we
proceed, Iberdrola, Total and we will form a new company for the
purpose of constructing and operating the wave power station. If
either Iberdrola or Total withdraws or does not agree that
development of the wave power station is feasible, we may not be
able to proceed with development of the wave power station. In
addition, if we withdraw from the France project, we will remain
obligated to supply and install equipment and provide the new
company with assistance and information so that a new company
can operate the wave power station. In addition, pursuant to the
France development agreement, we are restricted from developing
or building, or supplying equipment for use in, a PowerBuoy
system to any other customer in France until December 2008.
If either of the Spain or France projects were cancelled or
otherwise interrupted, it would adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
28
If we
are unable to successfully negotiate and enter into operations
and maintenance contracts with our customers on terms that are
acceptable to us, our ability to diversify our revenue stream
will be impaired.
An important element of our business strategy is to maximize our
revenue opportunities with our existing and future customers by
seeking to enter into operations and maintenance contracts with
them under which we would be paid fees for operating and
maintaining wave power stations that they have purchased from
us. Even if customers purchase our PowerBuoy systems, they may
not enter into operations and maintenance contracts with us. We
may not be able to negotiate operations and maintenance
contracts that provide us with any profit opportunities. Even if
we successfully negotiate and enter into such operations and
maintenance contracts, our customers may terminate them
prematurely or they may not be profitable for a variety of
reasons, including the presence of unforeseen hurdles or costs.
In addition, our inability to perform adequately under such
operations and maintenance contracts could impair our efforts to
successfully market the PowerBuoy systems. Any one of these
outcomes could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
If we
are unable to fulfill our obligations under our current
operations and maintenance contract in a cost effective manner,
our financial condition and results of operations could be
adversely affected.
In January 2007, we entered into an agreement with Iberdrola
Cantabria for the monitoring, operation and maintenance of the
40kW PowerBuoy system and the ocean-based substation and
infrastructure to be manufactured and deployed under the Spain
construction agreement. Under this operations and maintenance
agreement, we are required to provide services for two years
following provisional acceptance of the PowerBuoy system and
substation and infrastructure. We are to be paid a fixed fee for
scheduled maintenance, ongoing operations and other routine
services. In connection with any unscheduled repairs we perform
under the operations and maintenance agreement, Iberdrola
Cantabria and we will agree on the fees, if any, and timing, for
those services. To the extent we would otherwise have profits
from the fixed fee at the end of the two-year initial term of
the agreement, we are obligated to reimburse Iberdrola Cantabria
for any fees paid to us for unscheduled repairs. If the costs we
actually incur in connection with providing services under the
operations and maintenance agreement exceed the fees we receive,
we will incur a loss in connection with these services, which
could adversely affect our financial condition and results of
operations.
Our
inability to effectively manage our growth could adversely
affect our business and operations.
The scope of our operations to date has been limited, and we do
not have experience operating on the scale that we believe will
be necessary to achieve profitable operations. Our current
personnel, facilities, systems and internal procedures and
controls are not adequate to support our future growth. We plan
to add sales, marketing and engineering offices in additional
locations, including Australia, Japan, continental Europe and
the west coast of the United States. We currently estimate that
we will need to add approximately 90,000 square feet of
leased space by the end of fiscal 2010 for sales, marketing,
engineering, assembly and testing in order to meet our current
manufacturing targets.
To manage the expansion of our operations, we will be required
to improve our operational and financial systems, procedures and
controls, increase our manufacturing capacity and throughput and
expand, train and manage our employee base, which must increase
significantly if we are to be able to fulfill our current
manufacturing and growth plans. Our management will also be
required to maintain and expand our relationships with
customers, suppliers and other third parties, as well as attract
new customers and suppliers. If we do not meet these challenges,
we may be unable to take advantage of market opportunities,
execute our business strategies or respond to competitive
pressures.
Problems
with the quality or performance of our PowerBuoy systems could
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
Our agreements with customers will generally include guarantees
with respect to the quality and performance of our PowerBuoy
systems. For example, our agreement to complete the first phase
of the construction of a 1.39MW wave power station off the coast
of Santoña, Spain contains guarantees associated with this
first phase regarding the
29
quality, replacement and repair of the 40kW PowerBuoy system and
ocean-based substation and the level of power output of the 40kW
PowerBuoy system.
Because of the limited operating history of our PowerBuoy
systems, we have been required to make assumptions regarding the
durability, reliability and performance of the systems, and we
cannot predict whether and to what extent we may be required to
perform under the guarantees that we expect to give our
customers. Our assumptions could prove to be materially
different from the actual performance of our PowerBuoy systems,
causing us to incur substantial expense to repair or replace
defective systems in the future. We will bear the risk of claims
long after we have sold our PowerBuoy systems and recognized
revenue. Moreover, any widespread product failures could
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
We
currently depend on a limited number of customers for
substantially all of our revenues. The loss of, or a significant
reduction in revenues from, any of these customers could
significantly reduce our revenues and harm our operating
results.
In fiscal 2007, we generated substantially all of our revenues
from three entities. The US Navy, our largest customer,
accounted for approximately 54% of our revenues during fiscal
2007, while Iberdrola and Total accounted for 35% of our
revenues. In fiscal 2006, revenues from the US Navy accounted
for approximately 61% of our total revenues. Our current
contract with the US Navy expires in April 2008. We will be
required to enter into additional contracts with the US Navy,
which will require appropriation by the US Congress and the US
Navy in order to receive additional funding. Additional funding
for our project with the US Navy may not be approved or we may
not be able to negotiate future agreements with the US Navy on
acceptable terms, if at all.
Generally, we recognize revenue on the percentage-of-completion
method based on the ratio of costs incurred to total estimated
costs at completion. In certain circumstances, revenue under
contracts that have specified milestones or other performance
criteria may be recognized only when our customer acknowledges
that such criteria have been satisfied. In addition, recognition
of revenue (and the related costs) may be deferred for
fixed-price contracts until contract completion if we are unable
to reasonably estimate the total costs of the project prior to
completion.
Because we currently have a small number of customers and
contracts, problems with a single contract can adversely affect
our business, financial condition and results of operations. For
example, our revenues in fiscal 2006 decreased significantly
from fiscal 2005 primarily as a result of unanticipated delays
in our contract with the US Navy.
Historically, we have relied on a small group of customers for
substantially all of our revenue, and such concentration will
continue for the foreseeable future. The loss of any of our
customers or their default in payment could adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our
relationships with our alliance partners may not be successful
and we may not be successful in establishing additional
relationships, which could adversely affect our ability to
commercialize our products and services.
An important element of our business strategy is to enter into
development agreements and strategic alliances with regional
utility and energy companies committed to providing electricity
from renewable energy sources. If we are unable to reach
agreements with suitable alliance partners, we may fail to meet
our business objectives for the commercialization of our
PowerBuoy system. We may face significant competition in seeking
appropriate alliance partners. Moreover, these development
agreements and strategic alliances are complex to negotiate and
time consuming to document. We may not be successful in our
efforts to establish additional strategic relationships or other
alternative arrangements. The terms of any additional strategic
relationships or other arrangements that we establish may not be
favorable to us. In addition, these relationships may not be
successful, and we may be unable to sell and market our
PowerBuoy systems to these companies and their affiliates and
customers in the future, or growth opportunities may not
materialize, any of which could adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
30
Our
investments in joint ventures could be adversely affected by our
lack of sole decision-making authority, our reliance on a
co-venturers financial condition and disputes between us
and our
co-venturers.
It is part of our strategy to co-invest in wave power projects
with third parties through joint ventures by acquiring
non-controlling interests in special purpose entities. In these
situations, we will not be in a position to exercise sole
decision-making authority regarding the joint venture.
Investments in joint ventures involve risks that would not be
present were a third party not involved, including the
possibility that our co-venturers might become bankrupt or fail
to fund their share of required capital contributions. Our
co-venturers may have economic or other business interests or
goals that are inconsistent with our business interests or
goals, and may be in a position to take actions that are
contrary to our policies or objectives. Disputes between us and
our co-venturers may result in litigation or arbitration that
would increase our expenses and prevent our officers
and/or
directors from focusing their time and effort on our business.
Consequently, actions by, or disputes with, partners or
co-venturers might result in subjecting wave power projects
undertaken by the joint venture to additional risk.
Our
targeted markets are highly competitive. We compete with other
renewable energy companies and may have to compete with larger
companies that enter into the renewable energy business. If we
are unable to compete effectively, we may be unable to increase
our revenues and achieve or maintain
profitability.
The renewable energy industry, particularly in our targeted
markets of coastal North America, the west coast of Europe, the
coasts of Australia and the east coast of Japan, is highly
competitive and continually evolving as participants strive to
distinguish themselves and compete with the larger electric
power industry. Competition in the renewable energy industry is
likely to continue to increase with the advent of several
renewable energy technologies, including tidal and ocean current
technologies. If we are not successful in manufacturing systems
that generate competitively priced electricity, we will not be
able to respond effectively to competitive pressures from other
renewable energy technologies.
Moreover, the success of renewable energy generation
technologies may cause larger electric utility and other energy
companies with substantial financial resources to enter into the
renewable energy industry. These companies, due to their greater
capital resources and substantial technical expertise, may be
better positioned to develop new technologies.
Our inability to respond effectively to such competition could
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
We
have limited manufacturing experience. If we are unable to
increase our manufacturing capacity in a cost-effective manner,
our business will be materially harmed.
We plan to manufacture key components of our PowerBuoy systems,
including the advanced control and generation systems. However,
we have only manufactured our PowerBuoy systems in limited
quantities for use in development and testing and have little
commercial manufacturing experience. Our future success depends
on our ability to significantly increase both our manufacturing
capacity and production throughput in a cost-effective and
efficient manner. In order to meet our growth objectives, we
will need to increase our engineering and manufacturing staff by
over 120 people by the end of fiscal 2010. There is intense
competition for hiring qualified technical and engineering
personnel, and we may not be able to hire a sufficient number of
qualified engineers to allow us to meet our growth objectives.
We may be unable to develop efficient, low-cost manufacturing
capabilities and processes that will enable us to meet the
quality, price, engineering, design and production standards or
production volumes necessary to successfully commercialize our
PowerBuoy systems. If we cannot do so, we may be unable to
expand our business, satisfy our contractual obligations or
become profitable. Even if we are successful in developing our
manufacturing capabilities and processes, we may not be able to
do so in time to meet our commercialization schedule or satisfy
the requirements of our customers.
31
Failure
by third parties to supply or manufacture components of our
products or to deploy our systems timely or properly could
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
We are highly dependent on third parties to supply or
manufacture components of our PowerBuoy systems. If, for any
reason, our third-party manufacturers or vendors are not willing
or able to provide us with components or supplies in a timely
fashion, or at all, our ability to manufacture and sell many of
our products could be impaired.
We do not have long-term contracts with our third-party
manufacturers or vendors. If we do not develop ongoing
relationships with vendors located in different regions, we may
not be successful at controlling unit costs as our manufacturing
volume increases. We may not be able to negotiate new
arrangements with these third parties on acceptable terms, if at
all.
In addition, we rely on third parties, under our oversight, for
the deployment and mooring of our PowerBuoy systems. We have
utilized several different deployment methods, including towing
the PowerBuoy system to the deployment location, and
transporting the PowerBuoy system to the deployment location by
barge or ocean workboat. If these third parties do not properly
deploy our systems, cannot effectively deploy the PowerBuoy
system on a large, commercial scale or otherwise do not perform
adequately, or if we fail to recruit and retain third parties to
deploy our systems in particular geographic areas, our business,
financial condition and results of operations could be adversely
affected.
Business
activities conducted by our third-party contractors and us
involve the use of hazardous materials, which require compliance
with environmental and occupational safety laws regulating the
use of such materials. If we violate these laws, we could be
subject to significant fines, liabilities or other adverse
consequences.
Our manufacturing operations, in particular some of the
activities undertaken by our third-party suppliers and
manufacturers, involve the controlled use of hazardous
materials. Accordingly, our third-party contractors and we are
subject to foreign, federal, state and local laws governing the
protection of the environment and human health and safety,
including those relating to the use, handling and disposal of
these materials. We cannot completely eliminate the risk of
accidental contamination or injury from these hazardous
materials. In the event of an accident or failure to comply with
environmental or health and safety laws and regulations, we
could be held liable for resulting damages, including damages to
natural resources, fines and penalties, and any such liability
could adversely affect our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
Environmental laws and regulations are complex, change
frequently and have tended to become more stringent over time.
While we have budgeted for future capital and operating
expenditures to maintain compliance, we cannot assure you that
environmental laws and regulations will not change or become
more stringent in the future. Therefore, we cannot assure you
that our costs of complying with current and future
environmental and health and safety laws, and any liabilities
arising from past or future releases of, or exposure to,
hazardous substances will not adversely affect our business,
financial condition or results of operations.
If we
become ineligible for or are otherwise unable to replace any
contract with the US federal government that is not extended or
is terminated, our business, financial condition and results of
operations will be adversely affected.
We derive a significant portion of our revenue from US federal
government contracts, which are subject to special funding
restrictions, regulatory requirements and eligibility standards
and which the government may terminate at any time or determine
not to extend after their scheduled expiration. During fiscal
2006 and fiscal 2007, we derived approximately 61% and 54%,
respectively, of our total revenue from contracts with the US
Navy.
US federal government contracts are also subject to contractual
and regulatory requirements that may increase our costs of doing
business and could expose us to substantial contractual damages,
civil fines and criminal penalties for noncompliance. These
requirements include business ethics, equal employment
opportunity, environmental, foreign purchasing, most-favored
pricing and accounting provisions, among others. Payments that
we receive under US federal government contracts are subject to
audit and potential refunds for at least three years after the
final contract payment is received.
32
The
loss of federal funding designed to promote innovative research
by small businesses may adversely affect our research and
development costs and revenues.
Most of our federal contracts were awarded through a special US
government program called Small Business Innovation Research, or
SBIR, that is designed to promote innovative research by small
businesses. The SBIR program provides funds to qualified small
businesses to further their technological research and
development activities and provides incentives to these
companies to profit from commercialization of their technology.
SBIR funding represents both revenues and outside research and
development investment dollars for companies that receive it.
The program is open to companies that are majority owned and
controlled by individual US citizens or permanent resident
aliens, or by a parent entity that meets this standard. Our
revenues from the SBIR program were approximately
$1.1 million for fiscal 2006 and approximately
$1.5 million for fiscal 2007.
As a result of the increased institutional, corporate and
foreign ownership following our recent initial public offering
in the US, we are no longer eligible for the SBIR program, which
may adversely affect our ability to win future government
contracts. We intend to continue to seek research and
development funding from other sources, including funding from
existing government customers under non-SBIR programs. Our
inability to replace SBIR contracts with funds from other
sources could result in reduced revenues and higher internal
research and development costs, and therefore adversely affect
our operating results.
We
market and sell, and plan to market and sell, our products in
numerous international markets. If we are unable to manage our
international operations effectively, our business, financial
condition and results of operations could be adversely
affected.
We market and sell, and plan to market and sell, our products in
a number of foreign countries, including France, Spain, the
United Kingdom, Australia and Japan, and we are therefore
subject to risks associated with having international
operations. International customers accounted for 4% of our
revenues in fiscal 2005, 9% of our revenues in fiscal 2006 and
41% of our revenues in fiscal 2007. Risks inherent in
international operations include, but are not limited to, the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in general economic and political conditions in the
countries in which we operate;
|
|
|
|
unexpected adverse changes in foreign laws or regulatory
requirements, including those with respect to renewable energy,
environmental protection, permitting, export duties and quotas;
|
|
|
|
trade barriers such as export requirements, tariffs, taxes and
other restrictions and expenses, which could increase the prices
of our PowerBuoy systems and make us less competitive in some
countries;
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in exchange rates may affect demand for our
PowerBuoy systems and may adversely affect our profitability in
US dollars to the extent the price of our PowerBuoy systems and
cost of raw materials and labor are denominated in a foreign
currency;
|
|
|
|
difficulty with staffing and managing widespread operations;
|
|
|
|
difficulty of, and costs relating to compliance with, the
different commercial and legal requirements of the overseas
markets in which we offer and sell our PowerBuoy systems;
|
|
|
|
inability to obtain, maintain or enforce intellectual property
rights; and
|
|
|
|
difficulty in enforcing agreements in foreign legal systems.
|
Our business in foreign markets requires us to respond to rapid
changes in market conditions in these countries. Our overall
success as a global business depends, in part, on our ability to
succeed in differing legal, regulatory, economic, social and
political conditions. We may not be able to develop and
implement policies and strategies that will be effective in each
location where we do business, which in turn could adversely
affect our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
33
We may
not be able to raise sufficient capital to grow our
business.
We have in the past needed to raise funds to operate our
business, and we may need to raise additional funds to
manufacture our PowerBuoy systems in commercial quantities. If
we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, our ability
to operate and grow our business could be impaired. We do not
know whether we will be able to secure additional funding or
funding on terms favorable to us. Our ability to obtain
additional funding will be subject to a number of factors,
including market conditions, our operating performance and
investor sentiment. These factors may make the timing, amount,
terms and conditions of additional funding unattractive. If we
issue additional equity securities, our existing stockholders
may experience dilution or be subordinated to any rights,
preferences or privileges granted to the new equity holders.
Our
financial results may fluctuate from quarter to quarter, which
may make it difficult to predict our future
performance.
Our financial results may fluctuate as a result of a number of
factors, many of which are outside of our control. For these
reasons, comparing our financial results on a period-to-period
basis may not be meaningful, and you should not rely on our past
results as an indication of our future performance. Our future
quarterly and annual expenses as a percentage of our revenues
may be significantly different from those we have recorded in
the past or which we expect for the future. Our financial
results in some quarters may fall below expectations. Any of
these events could cause our stock price to fall. Each of the
risk factors listed in this Risk Factors section,
including the following factors, may adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of operations:
|
|
|
|
|
delays in permitting or acquiring necessary regulatory consents;
|
|
|
|
delays in the timing of contract awards and determinations of
work scope;
|
|
|
|
delays in funding for or deployment of wave energy projects;
|
|
|
|
changes in cost estimates relating to wave energy project
completion, which under percentage of completion accounting
principles could lead to significant changes to previously
recognized revenue or to changes in the timing of our
recognition of revenue from those projects;
|
|
|
|
delays in meeting specified contractual milestones or other
performance criteria under project contracts or in completing
project contracts that could delay the recognition of revenue
that would otherwise be earned;
|
|
|
|
reductions in the availability or level of subsidies and
incentives for renewable energy sources;
|
|
|
|
decisions made by parties with whom we have commercial
relationships not to proceed with anticipated projects;
|
|
|
|
increases in the length of our sales cycle; and
|
|
|
|
reductions in the efficiency of our manufacturing processes.
|
Currency
translation and transaction risk may adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of
operations.
Our reporting currency is the US dollar, and we conduct our
business and incur costs in the local currency of most countries
in which we operate. As a result, we are subject to currency
translation risk. In fiscal 2006, approximately 9% of our
revenues were generated from customers outside the United States
and denominated in Euros and in fiscal 2007, 35% of our revenues
were generated from customers outside the United States and
denominated in Euros, 4% of our revenues were generated from
customers outside the United States and denominated in British
pounds sterling and 2% of our revenues were generated from
customers outside the United States and denominated in
Australian dollars. We expect a large percentage of our revenues
to be generated outside the United States and denominated in
foreign currencies in the future. Changes in exchange rates
between foreign currencies and the US dollar could affect our
revenues and cost of revenues, and could result in exchange
losses. In addition, we incur currency transaction risk whenever
one of our operating subsidiaries enters into either a purchase
or a sales transaction using a different currency from our
reporting currency. For example, our agreement with Iberdrola
Cantabria for the first phase of the construction of a wave
power station off the coast of Santoña,
34
Spain is denominated in Euros, and we expect that we will enter
into a number of purchase and supply contracts with local
Spanish companies also denominated in Euros in connection with
the project. We cannot accurately predict the impact of future
exchange rate fluctuations on our results of operations.
Currently, we do not engage in any exchange rate hedging
activities and, as a result, any volatility in currency exchange
rates may have an immediate adverse effect on our business,
results of operations and financial condition.
Existing
regulations and policies and changes to these or new regulations
and policies may present technical, regulatory and economic
barriers to the use of wave energy technology, which may
significantly reduce demand for our PowerBuoy
systems.
The market for electricity generation equipment is heavily
influenced by foreign, federal, state and local government
regulations and policies concerning the electric utility
industry, as well as policies promulgated by electric utilities.
These regulations and policies often relate to electricity
pricing and connection to the power grid. In the United States
and in a number of other countries, these regulations and
policies currently are being modified and may be modified again
in the future. Utility company and independent power producer
purchases of, or further investment in the research and
development of, alternative energy sources, including wave
energy technology, could be deterred by these regulations and
policies, which could result in a significant reduction in the
potential demand for our PowerBuoy systems.
As the renewable energy industry continues to develop and as the
generation of power from wave energy in particular achieves
commercial acceptance, we anticipate that wave energy technology
and our PowerBuoy systems and their deployment will be subject
to increased oversight and regulation. We are unable to predict
the nature or extent of regulations that may be imposed or
adopted. Any new government regulations or utility policies
pertaining to wave energy or our PowerBuoy systems may result in
significant additional expenses to us and our customers and, as
a result, could adversely affect our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
If we
are unable to obtain all necessary regulatory permits and
approvals, we will not be able to implement our planned
projects.
Offshore development of electric power generating facilities is
heavily regulated. Each of our planned projects is subject to
multiple permitting and approval requirements. With respect to
our projects in Spain and France, we are dependent upon our
customers to obtain any necessary permits and approvals, and
with respect to our project in Cornwall, England, we are
dependent on a regional government agency for such permits and
approvals. Due to the unique nature of large scale commercial
wave power stations, we would expect our projects to receive
close scrutiny by permitting agencies, approval authorities and
the public, which could result in substantial delay in the
permitting process. Successful challenges by any parties opposed
to our planned projects could result in conditions limiting the
project size or in the denial of necessary permits and approvals.
If we are unable to obtain necessary permits and approvals in
connection with any or all of our projects, those projects would
not be implemented and our business, financial condition and
results of operations would be adversely affected. Further, we
cannot assure you that we have been or will be at all times in
complete compliance with all such permits and approvals. If we
violate or fail to comply with these permits and approvals, we
could be fined or otherwise sanctioned by regulators.
We
face hurricane- and storm-related risks and other risks typical
of a marine environment which could adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of
operations.
Our PowerBuoy systems are deployed in the ocean where they are
subject to many hazards including severe storms and hurricanes,
which could damage them and result in service interruptions. Our
systems are also subject to more frequent lock-downs caused by
higher waves during winter storm and hurricane seasons, which
will reduce annual energy output. We cannot predict whether we
will be able to recover from our insurance providers the
additional costs that we may incur due to damage caused to our
PowerBuoy systems, or whether we will continue to be able to
obtain insurance for hurricane- and storm-related damages or, if
obtainable and carried, whether this insurance will be adequate
to cover our liabilities. Any future hurricane-or storm-related
costs could adversely affect our business, financial condition
and results of operations.
35
Since
our PowerBuoy systems can only be deployed in certain geographic
locations, our ability to grow our business could be adversely
affected.
Our systems are designed to work in sites with average annual
wave energy of at least 20kW per meter of wave front. Not all
coastal areas worldwide have appropriate natural resources for
our PowerBuoy systems to harness wave energy. Seasonal and local
variations, water depth and the effect of particular locations
of islands and other geographical features may limit our ability
to deploy our PowerBuoy systems in coastal areas. If we are
unable to identify and deploy PowerBuoy systems at sufficient
sites near major population centers, our ability to grow our
business could be adversely affected.
If we
are unable to attract and retain management and other qualified
personnel, we may not be able to achieve our business
objectives.
Our success depends on the skills, experience and efforts of our
senior management and other key development, manufacturing, and
sales and marketing employees. We cannot be certain that we will
be able to attract, retain and motivate such employees. The loss
of the services of one or more of these employees could have a
material adverse effect on our business. There is a risk that we
will not be able to retain or replace these key employees. We
have entered into employment agreements with Dr. George
Taylor, our chief executive officer, Charles Dunleavy, our
senior vice president and chief financial officer, Mark Draper,
our chief operating officer and the chief executive officer of
our UK subsidiary, and John Baylouny, our senior vice president,
engineering; however, the agreements permit the employees to
terminate their employment with little notice. Implementation of
our expansion plans will be highly dependent upon our ability to
hire and retain additional senior executives.
In addition, our anticipated growth will require us to hire a
significant number of qualified technical, commercial and
administrative personnel. In order to meet our short-term goals,
we plan to add approximately 15 employees, including a vice
president of business development by the end of 2007. The
remainder will primarily be engineers with varying areas of
expertise. By the end of fiscal 2010, we will need to increase
our staff by nearly six times in order to meet our current
manufacturing targets. The majority of our new hires will be
engineers with varying levels and areas of expertise, project
managers and manufacturing personnel. There is intense
competition from other companies and research and academic
institutions for qualified personnel in the areas of our
activities. If we cannot continue to attract and retain, on
acceptable terms, the qualified personnel necessary for the
continued development of our business, we may not be able to
sustain our operations or grow at a competitive pace.
Any
acquisitions that we make or joint venture agreements that we
enter into, or any failure to identify appropriate acquisition
or joint venture candidates, could adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of
operations.
From time to time, we evaluate potential strategic acquisitions
of complementary businesses, products or technologies, as well
as consider joint ventures and other collaborative projects. We
may not be able to identify appropriate acquisition candidates
or strategic partners, or successfully negotiate, finance or
integrate any businesses, products or technologies that we
acquire. We do not have any experience with acquiring companies
or products. Any acquisition we pursue could diminish the
capital resources otherwise available to us for other uses or be
dilutive to our stockholders, and could divert managements
time and resources from our core operations.
Strategic acquisitions, investments and alliances with third
parties could subject us to a number of risks, including risks
associated with sharing proprietary information and loss of
control of operations that are material to our business. In
addition, strategic acquisitions, investments and alliances may
be expensive to implement. For example, under the France
project, our entitlement to retain our current percentage
interest is subject to our ability to make a proportionate
capital investment, which we may be unable to finance. Moreover,
strategic acquisitions, investments and alliances subject us to
the risk of non-performance by a counterparty, which may in turn
lead to monetary losses that materially and adversely affect our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
36
Section 404
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 will require us to document
and assess our internal control over financial reporting for
fiscal 2008 and beyond and will require an independent
registered public accounting firm to report on the effectiveness
of these controls. Any delays or difficulty in satisfying these
requirements could adversely affect our future results of
operations and our stock price.
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 will require
us to document and assess the effectiveness of our internal
control over financial reporting in accordance with an
established internal control framework and to report on our
conclusion as to the effectiveness of our internal controls. It
will also require an independent registered public accounting
firm to test our internal control over financial reporting and
report on the effectiveness of such controls for our fiscal year
ending April 30, 2008 and subsequent years. In addition, we
are required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to
maintain disclosure controls and procedures and internal control
over financial reporting. Moreover, it may cost us more than we
expect to comply with these control- and procedure-related
requirements.
We may in the future discover areas of our internal controls
that need improvement, particularly with respect to businesses
that we may acquire. We cannot be certain that any remedial
measures we take will ensure that we implement and maintain
adequate internal controls over our financial processes and
reporting in the future. Any failure to implement required new
or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their
implementation, could harm our operating results or cause us to
fail to meet our reporting obligations. If we are unable to
conclude that we have effective internal control over financial
reporting, or if our independent registered public accounting
firm is unable to provide us with an unqualified opinion
regarding the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting as of April 30, 2008 and in future
periods as required by Section 404, investors could lose
confidence in the reliability of our consolidated financial
statements, which could result in a decrease in the value of our
common stock. Failure to comply with Section 404 could
potentially subject us to sanctions or investigations by the
SEC, The Nasdaq Stock Market or other regulatory authorities.
Risks
Related to Intellectual Property
If we
are unable to obtain or maintain intellectual property rights
relating to our technology and products, the commercial value of
our technology and products may be adversely affected, which
could in turn adversely affect our business, financial condition
and results of operations.
Our success and ability to compete depends in part upon our
ability to obtain protection in the United States and other
countries for our products by establishing and maintaining
intellectual property rights relating to or incorporated into
our technology and products. We own a variety of patents and
patent applications in the United States and corresponding
patents and patent applications in several foreign
jurisdictions. However, we have not obtained patent protection
in each market in which we plan to compete. In addition, we do
not know how successful we would be should we choose to assert
our patents against suspected infringers. Our pending and future
patent applications may not issue as patents or, if issued, may
not issue in a form that will be advantageous to us. Even if
issued, patents may be challenged, narrowed, invalidated or
circumvented, which could limit our ability to stop competitors
from marketing similar products or limit the length of term of
patent protection we may have for our products. Changes in
either patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the
United States and other countries may diminish the value of our
intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent
protection, which could in turn adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Our
contracts with the government could negatively affect our
intellectual property rights, and our ability to commercialize
our products could be impaired.
Our agreements with the US Navy help fund research and
development of our PowerBuoy system. When new technologies are
developed with US federal government funding, the government
obtains certain rights in any resulting patents, technical data
and software, generally including, at a minimum, a nonexclusive
license authorizing the government to use the invention,
technical data or software for non-commercial purposes. These
rights may permit the government to disclose our confidential
information to third parties and to exercise
march-in rights. March-in rights refer to the right
of the US government to require us to grant a license to the
technology to a responsible applicant or, if we refuse, the
government may grant the license itself. US government-funded
37
inventions must be reported to the government. US government
funding must be disclosed in any resulting patent applications,
and our rights in such inventions will normally be subject to
government license rights, periodic post-contract utilization
reporting, foreign manufacturing restrictions and march-in
rights.
The government can exercise its march-in rights if it determines
that action is necessary because we fail to achieve practical
application of the technology or because action is necessary to
alleviate health or safety needs, to meet requirements of
federal regulations or to give preference to US industry. Our
government-sponsored research contracts are subject to audit and
require that we provide regular written technical updates on a
monthly, quarterly or annual basis, and, at the conclusion of
the research contract, a final report on the results of our
technical research. Because these reports are generally
available to the public, third parties may obtain some aspects
of our sensitive confidential information. Moreover, if we fail
to provide these reports or to provide accurate or complete
reports, the government may obtain rights to any intellectual
property arising from the related research. Funding from
government contracts also may limit when and how we can deploy
our technology developed under those contracts.
If we
are unable to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary
information and know-how, the value of our technology and
products could be adversely affected, which could in turn
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
In addition to patented technology, we rely upon unpatented
proprietary technology, processes and know-how, particularly
with respect to our PowerBuoy control and electricity generating
systems. We generally seek to protect this information in part
by confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants
and third parties. These agreements may be breached, and we may
not have adequate remedies for any such breach. In addition, our
trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently
developed by competitors.
If we
infringe or are alleged to infringe intellectual property rights
of third parties, our business, financial condition and results
of operations could be adversely affected.
Our products may infringe, or be claimed to infringe, patents or
patent applications under which we do not hold licenses or other
rights. Third parties may own or control these patents and
patent applications in the United States and abroad. From time
to time, we receive correspondence from third parties offering
to license patents to us. Correspondence of this nature might be
used to establish that we received notice of certain patents in
the event of subsequent patent infringement litigation. Third
parties could bring claims against us that would cause us to
incur substantial expenses and, if successfully asserted against
us, could cause us to pay substantial damages. Further, if a
patent infringement suit were brought against us, we could be
forced to stop or delay manufacturing or sales of the product or
component that is the subject of the suit.
As a result of patent infringement claims, or in order to avoid
potential claims, we may choose or be required to seek a license
from the third party and be required to pay license fees or
royalties or both. These licenses may not be available on
acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a
license, the rights may be nonexclusive, which could result in
our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual
property. Ultimately, we could be forced to cease some aspect of
our business operations if, as a result of actual or threatened
patent infringement claims, we are unable to enter into licenses
on acceptable terms. This could significantly and adversely
affect our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
In addition to infringement claims against us, we may become a
party to other types of patent litigation and other proceedings,
including interference proceedings declared by the United States
Patent and Trademark Office and opposition proceedings in the
European Patent Office, regarding intellectual property rights
with respect to our products and technology. The cost to us of
any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in
our favor, could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be
able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more
effectively than we can because of their greater financial
resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and
continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could
have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the
marketplace. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also
absorb significant management time.
38
Risks
Related to our Common Stock
Provisions
in our corporate charter documents and under Delaware law may
delay or prevent attempts by our stockholders to change our
management and hinder efforts to acquire a controlling interest
in us.
As a result of our reincorporation in Delaware in April 2007,
provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may
discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other
change in control that stockholders may consider favorable,
including transactions in which our stockholders might otherwise
receive a premium for their shares. These provisions may also
prevent or frustrate attempts by our stockholders to replace or
remove our management. These provisions include:
|
|
|
|
|
advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals and
nominations;
|
|
|
|
the inability of stockholders to act by written consent or to
call special meetings; and
|
|
|
|
the ability of our board of directors to designate the terms of
and issue new series of preferred stock without stockholder
approval, which could be used to institute a poison
pill that would work to dilute the stock ownership of a
potential hostile acquirer, effectively preventing acquisitions
that have not been approved by our board of directors.
|
The affirmative vote of the holders of at least 75% of our
shares of capital stock entitled to vote is necessary to amend
or repeal the above provisions of our certificate of
incorporation. In addition, absent approval of our board of
directors, our bylaws may only be amended or repealed by the
affirmative vote of the holders of at least 75% of our shares of
capital stock entitled to vote.
In addition, Section 203 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation
from engaging in a business combination with an interested
stockholder, which is generally a person which together with its
affiliates owns or within the last three years has owned 15% of
our voting stock, for a period of three years after the date of
the transaction in which the person became an interested
stockholder, unless the business combination is approved in a
prescribed manner. Accordingly, Section 203 may discourage,
delay or prevent a change in control of our company.
We
have never paid cash dividends on our common stock, and we do
not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable
future.
We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock to date.
We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, to
fund the development and growth of our business. In addition,
the terms of any future debt agreements may preclude us from
paying dividends. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of
our common stock will be the sole source of gain for our
stockholders for the foreseeable future.
|
|
ITEM 1B.
|
UNRESOLVED
STAFF COMMENTS
|
Not applicable.
Our corporate headquarters are located in Pennington, New
Jersey, where we occupy approximately 22,000 square feet
under a lease expiring on April 30, 2013. We use these
facilities for administration, research and development, as well
as assembly and testing of the generators and control models.
We also have an office in Warwick, United Kingdom, where we
occupy 1,390 square feet under a lease expiring on
January 1, 2009. Seven employees, all members of the
executive, engineering, administration and business development
teams, operate out of this office, which serves as a hub for our
European presence.
We plan to add sales, marketing and engineering offices in
additional locations, including Australia, Japan, continental
Europe and the west coast of the United States. We currently
estimate that we will need to add approximately
90,000 square feet of leased space by the end of fiscal
2010 for sales, marketing, engineering, assembly and testing in
order to meet our current manufacturing targets.
39
|
|
ITEM 3.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
We are subject to legal proceedings, claims and litigation
arising in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of
these matters is currently not determinable, we do not expect
that the ultimate costs to resolve these matters will have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
|
|
ITEM 4.
|
SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
|
Not applicable.
PART II
|
|
ITEM 5.
|
MARKET
FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
Stock
Price Information and Stockholders
Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Global Market
since April 24, 2007 under the symbol OPTT and
on the AIM market of the London Stock Exchange since October
2003 under the symbol OPT. As of June 30, 2007,
there were 611 registered holders of our common stock.
The following table sets forth the high and the low sale prices
of our common stock as quoted by the Nasdaq Global Market for
the period indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nasdaq Global Market
|
|
Year Ended April 30, 2007
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
$
|
20.00
|
|
|
$
|
14.25
|
|
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the
high and low closing sale prices for our common stock on the AIM
market as reported by the London Stock Exchange. The sales
prices have been adjusted to give effect to a one-for-ten
reverse stock split of our common stock that was effected on
April 20, 2007. The sales prices for our shares of common
stock on the AIM market are quoted in pound sterling (£),
the lawful currency of the United Kingdom. The following table
also shows the high and low closing sales price of our common
stock (as adjusted to give effect to a one-for-ten reverse split
that was effected on April 20, 2007) expressed in
dollars based upon the average noon buying rate for pound
sterling for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AIM Market
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Year ended April 30,
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
£
|
8.45
|
|
|
£
|
6.55
|
|
|
$
|
15.29
|
|
|
$
|
11.86
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
£
|
10.75
|
|
|
£
|
7.75
|
|
|
$
|
19.24
|
|
|
$
|
13.87
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
£
|
9.25
|
|
|
£
|
7.15
|
|
|
$
|
16.19
|
|
|
$
|
12.51
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
£
|
10.70
|
|
|
£
|
6.80
|
|
|
$
|
18.73
|
|
|
$
|
11.90
|
|
Year ended April 30,
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
£
|
10.00
|
|
|
£
|
6.60
|
|
|
$
|
18.50
|
|
|
$
|
12.21
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
£
|
8.90
|
|
|
£
|
6.15
|
|
|
$
|
16.82
|
|
|
$
|
11.62
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
£
|
9.05
|
|
|
£
|
5.35
|
|
|
$
|
17.56
|
|
|
$
|
10.38
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
£
|
12.35
|
|
|
£
|
8.05
|
|
|
$
|
24.21
|
|
|
$
|
15.78
|
|
40
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the
high, low, average and period end noon buying rate for pound
sterling, expressed in dollars per pound sterling in New York
City as certified for customs purposes by the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Period End
|
|
|
Year ended April 30,
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
$
|
1.90
|
|
|
$
|
1.73
|
|
|
$
|
1.81
|
|
|
$
|
1.76
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
$
|
1.84
|
|
|
$
|
1.75
|
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
$
|
1.77
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
$
|
1.71
|
|
|
$
|
1.75
|
|
|
$
|
1.78
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
$
|
1.82
|
|
|
$
|
1.73
|
|
|
$
|
1.75
|
|
|
$
|
1.82
|
|
Year ended April 30,
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
$
|
1.89
|
|
|
$
|
1.81
|
|
|
$
|
1.85
|
|
|
$
|
1.87
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
$
|
1.91
|
|
|
$
|
1.85
|
|
|
$
|
1.89
|
|
|
$
|
1.91
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
$
|
1.98
|
|
|
$
|
1.89
|
|
|
$
|
1.94
|
|
|
$
|
1.96
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
$
|
2.01
|
|
|
$
|
1.92
|
|
|
$
|
1.96
|
|
|
$
|
2.00
|
|
Dividend
Policy
We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common
stock, and we do not currently anticipate declaring or paying
cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. We
currently intend to retain all of our future earnings, if any,
to finance the growth and development of our business. Any
future determination relating to our dividend policy will be
made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend
on a number of factors, including future earnings, capital
requirements, financial conditions, future prospects,
contractual restrictions and covenants and other factors that
our board of directors may deem relevant.
Recent
Sales of Unregistered Securities
Set forth below is information regarding shares of common stock
issued, and options granted, by us since May 1, 2006 that
were not registered under the Securities Act. Also included is
the consideration, if any, we received for such shares and
options and information relating to the section of the
Securities Act, or rule of the SEC, under which exemption from
registration was claimed. The share numbers below reflect the
one-for-ten reverse stock split of our common stock, which was
effected on April 20, 2007.
1. From the period beginning May 1, 2006 through
April 30, 2007, we granted stock options under our stock
option plans for an aggregate of 196,120 shares of common
stock (net of exercises, expirations and cancellations) at
exercise prices ranging from $13.00 to $13.80 per share. Options
to purchase 22,600 shares of common stock granted under our
stock option plans were exercised during that same time period.
The consideration for the exercise of these options was
approximately $66,000 in cash and the tendering of
7,456 shares valued at $128,000, which such shares were
previously held by one individual who exercised options.
2. From the period beginning May 1, 2006 through
April 30, 2007, we did not grant stock options outside our
stock option plans, nor were there any exercises.
No general solicitation was made in the United States by us or
any person acting on our behalf; the securities sold are subject
to transfer restrictions; and certificates for the shares
contain appropriate legends stating that such securities have
not been registered under the Securities Act and may not be
offered or sold absent registration or pursuant to an exemption
therefrom. The securities described in paragraphs 1 and 2
above were issued in transactions that were exempt from
registration pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act
or Regulation S promulgated thereunder with respect to the
securities offered and sold outside the United States to
investors who were neither citizens nor residents of the United
States.
Use of
Proceeds
On April 30, 2007, we sold 5,000,000 shares of our
common stock in our initial public offering in the
United States at a price of $20.00 per share, pursuant to a
registration statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-138595),
41
which was declared effective by the SEC on April 24, 2007.
The managing underwriters in the offering were UBS Securities
LLC, Banc of America Securities LLC, and Bear,
Stearns & Co., Inc. The underwriting discounts and
commissions and offering expenses payable by us aggregated
$10.1 million, resulting in net proceeds to us of
$89.9 million.
The net proceeds are being used to construct demonstration wave
power stations and to fund minority investments in wave station
projects to encourage market adoption of our wave power
stations; to fund the continued development and
commercialization of our PowerBuoy system, including increases
in system output; to expand our international sales and
marketing capabilities; and for working capital and general
corporate purposes, including potential acquisitions of
complementary businesses, products or technologies. We intend to
use the net proceeds of the offering as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
approximately $25.0 million to construct demonstration wave
power stations and approximately $25.0 million to fund
minority investments in wave station projects to encourage
market adoption of our wave power stations;
|
|
|
|
approximately $10.5 million to fund the continued
development and commercialization of our PowerBuoy system,
including increases in system output;
|
|
|
|
approximately $7.5 million to fund the expansion of
assembly, test and field service facilities;
|
|
|
|
approximately $4.0 million to expand our international
sales and marketing capabilities; and
|
|
|
|
the balance for working capital and other general corporate
purposes.
|
We may also use a portion of the net proceeds of the offering to
acquire complementary products, technologies or businesses,
although we currently have no agreements or commitments with
respect to any such transactions.
The amounts and timing of our actual expenditures may vary
significantly from our expectations depending upon numerous
factors, including our development and commercialization
efforts, our operating costs and capital expenditures, our
future revenues and cash generated by operations. Accordingly,
we will retain broad discretion to allocate our capital
resources among the identified uses described above, and we
reserve the right to change the allocation of our capital
resources.
42
|
|
ITEM 6.
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
|
You should read the following selected consolidated financial
data in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements
and the related notes appearing at the end of this Annual Report
and the Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations section of
this Annual Report. The selected consolidated financial data
have been derived from our audited consolidated financial
statements which are included elsewhere in this Annual Report,
or from audited consolidated financial statements not included
in this Annual Report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of
Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
2,548,294
|
|
|
$
|
4,713,202
|
|
|
$
|
5,365,235
|
|
|
$
|
1,747,715
|
|
|
$
|
2,531,315
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
2,555,267
|
|
|
|
4,319,850
|
|
|
|
5,170,521
|
|
|
|
2,059,318
|
|
|
|
3,983,742
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit (loss)
|
|
|
(6,973
|
)
|
|
|
393,352
|
|
|
|
194,714
|
|
|
|
(311,603
|
)
|
|
|
(1,452,427
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development costs
|
|
|
180,403
|
|
|
|
255,958
|
|
|
|
904,618
|
|
|
|
4,224,997
|
|
|
|
6,219,893
|
|
Selling, general and
administrative costs
|
|
|
818,596
|
|
|
|
1,745,955
|
|
|
|
2,553,911
|
|
|
|
3,190,687
|
|
|
|
4,893,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
998,999
|
|
|
|
2,001,913
|
|
|
|
3,458,529
|
|
|
|
7,415,684
|
|
|
|
11,113,473
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(1,005,972
|
)
|
|
|
(1,608,561
|
)
|
|
|
(3,263,815
|
)
|
|
|
(7,727,287
|
)
|
|
|
(12,565,900
|
)
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income, net
|
|
|
38,441
|
|
|
|
555,717
|
|
|
|
1,297,156
|
|
|
|
1,408,361
|
|
|
|
1,389,702
|
|
Other income (expense)
|
|
|
473
|
|
|
|
(3,500,096
|
)(1)
|
|
|
1,545
|
|
|
|
74,294
|
|
|
|
13,906
|
|
Foreign exchange gain (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,585,345
|
|
|
|
1,507,145
|
|
|
|
(978,242
|
)
|
|
|
1,523,527
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before incomes taxes
|
|
|
(967,058
|
)
|
|
|
(2,967,595
|
)
|
|
|
(457,969
|
)
|
|
|
(7,222,874
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
146,853
|
|
|
|
118,119
|
|
|
|
29,335
|
|
|
|
143,963
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(820,205
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,849,476
|
)
|
|
$
|
(428,634
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share
|
|
$
|
(0.27
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.71
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.37
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.83
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted average
shares outstanding
|
|
|
3,017,422
|
|
|
|
4,037,501
|
|
|
|
5,135,550
|
|
|
|
5,162,340
|
|
|
|
5,260,794
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of April 30,
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet
Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and
certificates of deposit
|
|
$
|
2,246,175
|
|
|
$
|
39,565,574
|
(2)
|
|
$
|
38,787,176
|
|
|
$
|
32,439,365
|
|
|
$
|
115,895,619
|
(3)
|
Working capital
|
|
|
1,177,789
|
|
|
|
38,422,395
|
|
|
|
37,903,207
|
|
|
|
30,886,029
|
|
|
|
111,187,195
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
2,878,947
|
|
|
|
40,747,479
|
|
|
|
41,596,387
|
|
|
|
33,996,138
|
|
|
|
119,711,546
|
|
Long-term debt, net of current
portion
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
245,844
|
|
|
|
233,959
|
|
|
|
231,585
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(18,275,132
|
)
|
|
|
(21,124,608
|
)
|
|
|
(21,553,242
|
)
|
|
|
(28,632,153
|
)
|
|
|
(38,270,918
|
)
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
490,785
|
|
|
|
37,853,246
|
|
|
|
37,836,531
|
|
|
|
31,066,704
|
|
|
|
112,541,209
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Other expense in fiscal 2004 resulted from a one time charge
incurred at the time of our stock offering on the AIM market in
October 2003 relating to a 1999 agreement between us and Tyco
Electronics Corp. |
43
|
|
|
(2) |
|
On October 31, 2003, we completed our offering on the AIM
market resulting in net proceeds to us of $38.3 million. |
|
(3) |
|
On April 30, 2007, we completed our initial public offering
in the United States resulting in net proceeds to us of
$89.9 million. |
|
|
ITEM 7.
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
You should read the following discussion and analysis of our
financial condition and results of operations together with our
consolidated financial statements and the related notes and
other financial information included elsewhere in this Annual
Report. Some of the information contained in this discussion and
analysis or set forth elsewhere in this Annual Report, including
information with respect to our plans and strategy for our
business and related financing, includes forward-looking
statements that involve risks and uncertainties. You should
review the Risk Factors section of this Annual
Report for a discussion of important factors that could cause
actual results to differ materially from the results described
in or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in the
following discussion and analysis.
Overview
We develop and are commercializing proprietary systems that
generate electricity by harnessing the renewable energy of ocean
waves. Our PowerBuoy systems use proprietary technologies to
convert the mechanical energy created by the rising and falling
of ocean waves into electricity. We currently offer two
PowerBuoy products, which consist of our utility PowerBuoy
system and our autonomous PowerBuoy system.
We market our utility PowerBuoy system, which is designed to
supply electricity to a local or regional power grid, to
utilities and other electrical power producers seeking to add
electricity generated by wave energy to their existing
electricity supply. We market our autonomous PowerBuoy system,
which is designed to generate power for use independent of the
power grid, to customers that require electricity in remote
locations. We believe there are a variety of potential
applications for our autonomous PowerBuoy system, including
sonar and radar surveillance, tsunami warning, oceanographic
data collection, offshore platforms and offshore aquaculture. We
also offer our customers operations and maintenance services for
our PowerBuoy systems, which are expected to provide a source of
recurring revenues.
We were incorporated in New Jersey in April 1984, began
commercial operations in 1994, and were re-incorporated in
Delaware in 2007. We currently have five wholly owned
subsidiaries, which include Ocean Power Technologies Ltd.,
Reedsport OPT Wave Park LLC, Oregon Wave Energy Partners I,
LLC, Oregon Wave Energy Partners II, LLC and Fairhaven OPT Ocean
Power LLC, and we own approximately 88% of the ordinary shares
of Ocean Power Technologies (Australasia) Pty Ltd. Our revenues
have been generated from research contracts and development and
construction contracts relating to our wave energy technology.
The development of our technology has been funded by capital we
raised and by development engineering contracts we received
starting in fiscal 1995. In fiscal 1996, we received the first
of several research contracts with the US Navy to study the
feasibility of wave energy. As a result of those research
contracts, we entered into our first development and
construction contract with the US Navy in fiscal 2002 under a
still on-going project for the development and construction of a
grid-connected wave power station at the US Marine Corps Base in
Oahu, Hawaii. We generated our first revenue relating to our
autonomous PowerBuoy system from contracts with Lockheed Martin
Corporation in fiscal 2003, and we entered into our first
development and construction contract with Lockheed Martin in
fiscal 2004 for the development and construction of a prototype
demonstration autonomous PowerBuoy system. In fiscal 2005, we
entered into a development agreement with an affiliate of
Iberdrola S.A., a large electric utility company located in
Spain and one of the largest renewable energy producers in the
world, and other parties to jointly study the possibility of
developing a wave power station off the coast of northern Spain.
An affiliate of Total S.A., which is one of the worlds
largest oil and gas companies, joined the development agreement
in June 2005. In January 2006, we completed the assessment phase
of the project, and in July 2006 we entered into an agreement
with Iberdrola Energias Marinas de Cantabria, S.A. to complete
the first phase of the construction of a 1.39MW wave power
station. In addition, we have entered into a contract with
affiliates of Iberdrola and Total to assess the viability of a 2
to 5MW power station off the coast of France.
44
Our fiscal year ends on April 30. For fiscal 2007, we
generated revenues of $2.5 million and incurred a net loss
of $9.6 million, and for fiscal 2006 we generated revenues
of $1.7 million and incurred a net loss of
$7.1 million. As of April 30, 2007, our accumulated
deficit was $38.3 million. We have not been profitable
since inception, and we do not know whether or when we will
become profitable because of the significant uncertainties with
respect to our ability to successfully commercialize our
PowerBuoy systems in the emerging renewable energy market. Since
fiscal 2002, the US Navy has accounted for a significant portion
of our revenues. We expect that over time, revenues derived from
utilities and other non-government commercial customers will
increase more rapidly than sales to government customers and
will, within a few years, represent the majority of our revenues.
Financial
Operations Overview
The following describes certain line items in our statement of
operations and some of the factors that affect our operating
results.
Revenues
We have historically generated revenues primarily from the
development and construction of our PowerBuoy systems for
demonstration purposes and, to a lesser extent, from
customer-sponsored research and development. For both fiscal
2006 and fiscal 2007, we derived approximately 96% of our
revenues from government and commercial development and
construction contracts and 4% of our revenues from
customer-sponsored research and development. Generally, we
recognize revenue on the percentage-of-completion method based
on the ratio of costs incurred to total estimated costs at
completion. In certain circumstances, revenue under contracts
that have specified milestones or other performance criteria may
be recognized only when our customer acknowledges that such
criteria have been satisfied. In addition, recognition of
revenue (and the related costs) may be deferred for fixed-price
contracts until contract completion if we are unable to
reasonably estimate the total costs of the project prior to
completion. Because we have a small number of contracts,
revisions to the percentage of completion determination or
delays in meeting performance criteria or in completing projects
may have a significant effect on our revenue for the periods
involved. Under our agreement for the first phase of
construction of a wave power station off the coast of
Santoña, Spain, our revenues are limited to reimbursement
for our construction costs without any
mark-up and
we are required to bear the first 0.5 million of any
cost overruns and to absorb certain other costs as set forth in
the agreement. We have recently requested our customer to
approve an increase in the construction budget for this project
beyond the initial 2.7 million value of the contract.
Our revenues increased in each of fiscal 2003, 2004 and 2005,
but decreased significantly in fiscal 2006 as a result of delays
in the timing of contract award and in the approval of the scope
of work relating to our project for the US Navy for the
development and construction of a wave power station in Hawaii,
and the determination by Lockheed Martin and some of its
subcontractors not to proceed with a project under consideration
that would have utilized our autonomous PowerBuoy system. The
increase in revenues in fiscal 2007 reflected a higher level of
activity in connection with our Spain construction contract as
well as our US Navy contract for the installation of PowerBuoys
in Hawaii.
The US Navy has been our largest customer since fiscal 2002. The
US Navy accounted for approximately 54% of our revenues in
fiscal 2007, approximately 61% of our revenues in fiscal 2006
and approximately 57% of our revenues in fiscal 2005. We
anticipate that, if our commercialization efforts are
successful, the relative contribution of the US Navy to our
revenue will decline in the future. Lockheed Martin was also a
significant customer in fiscal 2006 and 2005, accounting for
approximately 22% of our revenues in fiscal 2006 and
approximately 32% of our revenues in fiscal 2005.
We currently focus our sales and marketing efforts on coastal
North America, the west coast of Europe, the coasts of Australia
and the east coast of Japan. In fiscal 2006, we derived 9%, and
in fiscal 2007, we derived 41%, of
45
our revenues from outside the United States. The following table
provides information regarding the breakdown of our revenues by
geographical location of our customers for fiscal years 2005,
2006 and 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of Revenues
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
Customer Location
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
United States
|
|
|
96
|
%
|
|
|
91
|
%
|
|
|
59
|
%
|
Europe
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of revenues
Our cost of revenues consists primarily of material, labor and
manufacturing overhead expenses, such as engineering expense,
equipment depreciation and maintenance and facility related
expenses, and includes the cost of PowerBuoy parts and services
supplied by third-party suppliers. Cost of revenues also
includes PowerBuoy system delivery and deployment expenses.
In fiscal 2007, we operated at a gross loss of
$1.5 million, while in fiscal 2006 we operated at a gross
loss of $0.3 million and in fiscal 2005 we operated at a
gross profit of $0.2 million. Our ability to operate at a
gross profit will depend on our success at increasing sales of
our PowerBuoy systems and on our ability to manage costs
incurred on fixed price commercial contracts.
Product
development costs
Our product development costs consist of salaries and other
personnel-related costs and the costs of products, materials and
outside services used in our product development and research
activities. Our product development costs primarily relate to
our efforts to increase the output of our current 40kW utility
PowerBuoy system to 150kW in 2007, then to 250kW in 2008 and
ultimately to 500kW in 2010 and, to a lesser extent, to our
research and development of new products, product applications
and complementary technologies. We expense all of our product
development costs as incurred, except for external patent costs,
which we amortize over a
17-year
period commencing with the issuance date of each patent.
Our product development costs increased significantly in each of
fiscal 2005, 2006 and 2007 as a result of the development of our
current 40kW utility PowerBuoy system, which was introduced in
fiscal 2006, and development of our 150kW PowerBuoy in 2007. We
expect our product development costs to increase in absolute
dollars as we continue to increase the output and efficiency of
our PowerBuoy systems.
During fiscal 2006, we refocused many of our engineering and
development resources that had previously been deployed on our
commercial research or product development contracts on the
development effort for our current 40kW PowerBuoy system,
including the development of the buoy structure, the power take
off system and the power grid connection. We introduced our
current 40kW PowerBuoy system in fiscal 2006. One system was
deployed off the coast of New Jersey from October 2005 to
October 2006, when it was removed from the ocean for routine
maintenance and diagnostic testing. We are currently awaiting
delivery of replacement mooring lines for this PowerBuoy system,
after which we plan to immediately redeploy the system. Another
system was deployed in Hawaii for the US Navy project in June
2007. After four weeks of initial testing and operation, the
system was returned to shore for diagnostic analysis and repair.
Work is currently in progress on the design and construction of
a third PowerBuoy system, which is expected to be ready for
deployment at the Marine Corps Base in Oahu by the end of 2007.
In fiscal 2007, we have accelerated development activity in
connection with our 150kW PowerBuoy system and expect to
commence ocean testing of that system in 2008.
Selling,
general and administrative costs
Our selling, general and administrative costs consist primarily
of salaries and other personnel-related costs for employees
engaged in sales and marketing and support of our PowerBuoy
systems, promotional and public
46
relations expenses and management and administration expenses in
support of sales and marketing, as well as costs for executive,
accounting and administrative personnel, professional fees and
other general corporate expenses.
We expect our selling, general and administrative costs to
increase as we expand our sales and marketing capabilities,
including increased headcount, and as a result of our becoming a
public company in the United States.
Interest
income, net
Interest income, net consists primarily of interest received on
cash and cash equivalents and investments in commercial
bank-issued certificates of deposit. Prior to April 30,
2007, most of our cash, cash equivalents and bank-issued
certificates of deposit resulted from the remaining proceeds of
our October 2003 offering on the AIM market. On April 30,
2007, we completed our initial public offering in the United
States, which produced net proceeds of $89.9 million. Total
cash, cash equivalents and certificates of deposit were
$115.9 million as of April 30, 2007,
$32.4 million as of April 30, 2006 and
$38.8 million as of April 30, 2005. We anticipate that
our interest income will increase significantly in the near term
as a result of the investment of the proceeds from our United
States offering.
Foreign
exchange gain (loss)
We transact business in various countries and have exposure to
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates. Foreign
exchange gains and losses arise in the translation of
foreign-denominated assets and liabilities, which may result in
realized and unrealized gains or losses from exchange rate
fluctuations. Since we conduct our business in US dollars and
our functional currency is the US dollar, our main foreign
exchange exposure, if any, results from changes in the exchange
rate between the US dollar and the British pound sterling, the
Euro and the Australian dollar.
We invest in certificates of deposit and maintain cash accounts
that are denominated in British pounds, Euros and Australian
dollars. These foreign denominated certificates of deposit and
cash accounts had a balance of $15.6 million as of
April 30, 2007 and $16.7 million as of April 30,
2006, compared to our total certificates of deposits and cash
account balances of $115.9 million as of April 30,
2007 and $32.4 million as of April 30, 2006. These
foreign currency balances are translated at each month end to
our functional currency, the US dollar, and any resulting gain
or loss is recognized in our results of operations.
In addition, a portion of our operations is conducted through
our subsidiaries in countries other than the United States,
specifically Ocean Power Technologies Ltd. in the United
Kingdom, the functional currency of which is the British pound
sterling, and Ocean Power Technologies (Australasia) Pty Ltd. in
Australia, the functional currency of which is the Australian
dollar. Both of these subsidiaries have foreign exchange
exposure that results from changes in the exchange rate between
their functional currency and other foreign currencies in which
they conduct business. All of our international revenues for the
years ended April 30, 2006 and 2007 were recorded in Euros,
British pounds or Australian dollars.
We currently do not hedge our exchange rate exposure. However,
we assess the anticipated foreign currency working capital
requirements and capital asset acquisitions of our foreign
operations and attempt to maintain a portion of our cash, cash
equivalents and certificates of deposit denominated in foreign
currencies sufficient to satisfy these anticipated requirements.
We also assess the need and cost to utilize financial
instruments to hedge currency exposures on an ongoing basis and
may hedge against exchange rate exposure in the future.
Income
tax benefit
As of April 30, 2007, we had federal research and
development tax credits of $0.8 million and federal net
operating losses of $24.2 million to offset future federal
taxable income. If not utilized, the credit carryforwards will
expire at various dates through 2027, and the net operating loss
carryforwards will expire at various dates through 2027. We may
not achieve profitability in time to utilize the tax credit and
net operating loss carryforwards in full or at all. In addition,
the future utilization of our net operating loss carryforwards
may be limited based upon changes in ownership, including
changes resulting from our United States offering in April 2007
and the AIM offering in 2003, pursuant to regulations
promulgated under the Internal Revenue Code. These limitations
may result in the expiration of net operating losses and credits
prior to utilization. As discussed in Note 12 to our
consolidated
47
financial statements included in this Annual Report, we have
established valuation allowances for the full value of our
deferred tax assets, which was $10.1 million as of
April 30, 2006 and $13.2 million as of April 30,
2007.
In fiscal 2005 and 2006, we sold a portion of our New Jersey
state net operating losses and our New Jersey research and
development credits under a program offered by the State of New
Jersey, and recognized income tax benefits of approximately
$29,000 in fiscal 2005 and approximately $0.1 million in
fiscal 2006. Because we believe we are no longer eligible to
participate in this program, we did not sell in fiscal 2007 and
do not in the future expect to sell any additional New Jersey
state net operating losses or research and development credits.
Results
of Operations
Fiscal
Years Ended April 30, 2006 and 2007
The following table contains selected statement of operations
information, which serves as the basis of the discussion of our
results of operations for the years ended April 30, 2006
and 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Change 2007 Period
|
|
|
|
April 30, 2006
|
|
|
April 30, 2007
|
|
|
to 2006 Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
1,747,715
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
2,531,315
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
783,600
|
|
|
|
45
|
%
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
2,059,318
|
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
3,983,742
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
1,924,424
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross loss
|
|
|
(311,603
|
)
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
(1,452,427
|
)
|
|
|
(57
|
)
|
|
|
(1,140,824
|
)
|
|
|
366
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development costs
|
|
|
4,224,997
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
6,219,893
|
|
|
|
246
|
|
|
|
1,994,896
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
Selling, general and
administrative costs
|
|
|
3,190,687
|
|
|
|
183
|
|
|
|
4,893,580
|
|
|
|
193
|
|
|
|
1,702,893
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
7,415,684
|
|
|
|
425
|
|
|
|
11,113,473
|
|
|
|
439
|
|
|
|
3,697,789
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(7,727,287
|
)
|
|
|
(442
|
)
|
|
|
(12,565,900
|
)
|
|
|
(496
|
)
|
|
|
(4,838,613
|
)
|
|
|
63
|
|
Interest income, net
|
|
|
1,408,361
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
1,389,702
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
(18,659
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Other income
|
|
|
74,294
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
13,906
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(60,388
|
)
|
|
|
(81
|
)
|
Foreign exchange (loss) gain
|
|
|
(978,242
|
)
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
|
|
1,523,527
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
2,501,769
|
|
|
|
256
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(7,222,874
|
)
|
|
|
(413
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
|
(380
|
)
|
|
|
(2,415,891
|
)
|
|
|
33
|
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
143,963
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(143,963
|
)
|
|
|
(100
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
|
|
(405
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
|
(380
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(2,559,854
|
)
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
Revenues increased by $0.8 million in fiscal 2007, or 45%,
to $2.5 million as compared to $1.7 million in fiscal
2006. The increase in revenues was primarily attributable to the
following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues relating to our utility PowerBuoy system increased by
approximately $1.1 million due to work that commenced on
the first phase of construction of a 1.39MW wave power station
off the coast of Spain, increased revenues relating to our US
Navy project in Hawaii from a higher activity level, and work
that commenced on the design, manufacture and installation of an
OPT wave power station consisting of a single PB150 (150kW)
PowerBuoy device in Orkney, Scotland.
|
|
|
|
Revenues relating to our autonomous PowerBuoy system decreased
by approximately $0.3 million primarily as a result of the
completion of a development and construction contract with
Lockheed Martin in the fiscal year ended April 30, 2006.
|
48
Cost of
revenues
Cost of revenues increased by $1.9 million, or 93%, to
$4.0 million in fiscal 2007, as compared to
$2.1 million in fiscal 2006. The decrease in gross profit
in fiscal 2007 was primarily due to an anticipated loss of
$1.3 million that was recognized in fiscal 2007 on our
contract for a wave power station off the coast of Spain,
partially offset by an increase in gross profit recognized in
connection with our US Navy project in Hawaii. The anticipated
loss of $1.3 million was recognized based on a change in
estimated costs associated with this contract. In addition,
approximately $0.3 million of compensation expense was
recorded as cost of revenues under Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards, or SFAS, No. 123(R), Share-Based
Payment, or SFAS 123(R), which requires companies to
recognize compensation expense for all stock-based payments to
employees. Because we adopted SFAS 123(R) effective
May 1, 2006, we did not record similar compensation expense
in fiscal 2006.
Product
development costs
Product development costs increased $2.0 million, or 47%,
to $6.2 million in fiscal 2007, as compared to
$4.2 million in fiscal 2006. The substantial increase in
product development costs was primarily attributable to our
efforts to increase the power output of our utility PowerBuoy
system, including the 150kW PowerBuoy system. In addition, we
recorded approximately $0.3 million of compensation expense
as product development costs under SFAS 123(R). Because we
adopted SFAS 123(R) effective May 1, 2006, we did not
record similar compensation expense in fiscal 2006. As a
percentage of revenues, product development costs increased
slightly to 246% in fiscal 2007 from 242% in fiscal 2006. We
anticipate that our product development costs related to the
planned increase in the output of our utility PowerBuoy system
will increase significantly over the next several years and that
the amount of these expenditures will not necessarily be
affected by the level of revenue generated over that time
period. Accordingly, comparisons of product development costs as
a percentage of revenue may not be meaningful.
Selling,
general and administrative costs
Selling, general and administrative costs increased
$1.7 million, or 53%, to $4.9 million in fiscal 2007,
as compared to $3.2 million in fiscal 2006. The increase
was primarily attributable to an increase of $0.4 million
related to additional marketing expenses and consulting costs,
$0.3 million in professional fees, $0.5 million in
employee incentive-based compensation and $0.5 million of
compensation expense recorded under SFAS 123(R). Because we
adopted SFAS 123(R) effective May 1, 2006, we did not
record similar compensation expense in fiscal 2006.
Interest
income, net
Interest income, net remained relatively flat at
$1.4 million in fiscal 2007, compared to fiscal 2006, due
to a reduction in the balance of our cash, cash equivalents and
certificates of deposit between the two periods (before giving
effect to the receipt of the net proceeds of our United States
initial public offering on April 30, 2007), offset by
higher interest rates during fiscal 2007.
Foreign
exchange (loss) gain
Foreign exchange gain was $1.5 million in fiscal 2007,
compared to a foreign exchange loss of $1.0 million in
fiscal 2006. The difference was primarily attributable to the
appreciation of the British pound compared to the US dollar
between the two periods.
Income
tax benefit
During fiscal 2007, we recorded no income tax benefit, compared
to an income tax benefit of $0.1 million recorded in fiscal
2006. The income tax benefit recorded in fiscal 2006 resulted
from our sale of New Jersey state net operating losses and
research and development credits under a program offered by the
State of New Jersey. Because we believe we are no longer
eligible to participate in this program, we did not sell any New
Jersey state net operating losses or research and development
credits in fiscal 2007, nor do we expect to sell any in the
future.
49
Fiscal
Years Ended April 30, 2005 and 2006
The following table contains selected statement of operations
information, which serves as the basis of the discussion of our
results of operations for the years ended April 30, 2005
and 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Change 2006
|
|
|
|
April 30, 2005
|
|
|
April 30, 2006
|
|
|
Period to 2005 Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
5,365,235
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,747,715
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
(3,617,520
|
)
|
|
|
(67
|
)%
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
5,170,521
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
2,059,318
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
(3,111,203
|
)
|
|
|
(60
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit (loss)
|
|
|
194,714
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
(311,603
|
)
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
(506,317
|
)
|
|
|
(260
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development costs
|
|
|
904,618
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
4,224,997
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
3,320,379
|
|
|
|
367
|
|
Selling, general and
administrative costs
|
|
|
2,553,911
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
3,190,687
|
|
|
|
183
|
|
|
|
636,776
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
3,458,529
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
7,415,684
|
|
|
|
424
|
|
|
|
3,957,155
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(3,263,815
|
)
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
|
|
(7,727,287
|
)
|
|
|
(442
|
)
|
|
|
(4,463,472
|
)
|
|
|
137
|
|
Interest income, net
|
|
|
1,297,156
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
1,408,361
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
111,205
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
1,545
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,294
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
72,749
|
|
|
|
4,709
|
|
Foreign exchange gain (loss)
|
|
|
1,507,145
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
(978,242
|
)
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
|
|
(2,485,387
|
)
|
|
|
(165
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(457,969
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(7,222,874
|
)
|
|
|
(413
|
)
|
|
|
(6,764,905
|
)
|
|
|
1,477
|
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
29,335
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
143,963
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
114,628
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(428,634
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
|
|
(405
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(6,650,277
|
)
|
|
|
1,552
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
Revenues decreased by $3.6 million in fiscal 2006, or 67%,
to $1.7 million as compared to $5.4 million in fiscal
2005. The decrease in revenues was primarily attributable to the
following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues from our US Navy wave power station project in Hawaii
decreased by approximately $1.8 million as a result of
delays in the timing of contract award and in the approval of
the scope of development and construction of the wave power
station.
|
|
|
|
Revenues related to our autonomous PowerBuoy system decreased by
approximately $1.3 million as a result of the completion of
a development and construction contract with Lockheed Martin in
the first quarter of fiscal 2006, and the determination by
Lockheed Martin and some of its subcontractors not to proceed
with an anticipated defense application project that would have
utilized our autonomous PowerBuoy system, partially offset by
revenues of approximately $61,000 from a contract with the US
Department of Homeland Security to design and study an
autonomous PowerBuoy system for offshore marine surveillance.
|
|
|
|
Revenues decreased by approximately $0.3 million as a
result of the completion early in fiscal 2006 of the
demonstration wave power station that was deployed off the coast
of New Jersey under a contract with the New Jersey Board of
Public Utilities.
|
Cost of
revenues
Cost of revenues decreased by $3.1 million, or 60%, to
$2.1 million in fiscal 2006 as compared to
$5.2 million in fiscal 2005. The decrease in the cost of
revenues was primarily attributable to the reduction in revenue
during fiscal 2006. Gross loss on revenues in fiscal 2006
primarily reflected discretionary costs incurred by us in
connection with the deployment of the first PowerBuoy system in
Hawaii that were not reimbursed under our agreement with the US
Navy.
50
Product
development costs
Product development costs increased $3.3 million, or 367%,
to $4.2 million in fiscal 2006, as compared to
$0.9 million in fiscal 2005. The substantial increase in
product development costs was primarily attributable to the
development of our current 40kW PowerBuoy system, which was
deployed in October 2005 off the coast of New Jersey.
As discussed above, in fiscal 2006 we experienced a reduction in
revenues from $5.4 million in fiscal 2005 to
$1.7 million in fiscal 2006. In response to this reduction
in revenues, during fiscal 2006 we refocused many of our
engineering and development resources that had previously been
deployed on our commercial research or development contracts on
the product development effort for our current 40kW PowerBuoy
system, including the development of the buoy structure, the
power take off system and the power grid connection. We also
began our efforts to increase the maximum rated output of our
utility PowerBuoy system to 150kW.
Selling,
general and administrative costs
Selling, general and administrative costs increased
$0.6 million, or 25%, to $3.2 million in fiscal 2006,
as compared to $2.6 million in fiscal 2005. The increase
was primarily attributable to a $0.5 million increase in
marketing expenses, including additional marketing personnel,
and to increased professional fees.
Interest
income, net
Interest income, net increased $0.1 million, or 9%, to
$1.4 million in fiscal 2006, as compared to
$1.3 million in fiscal 2005. The increase was attributable
to higher interest rates in fiscal 2006, which were partially
offset by a reduction of our cash, cash equivalents and
bank-issued certificates of deposit balances between the two
periods of $6.3 million.
Other
income
Other income in fiscal 2006 included the recognition of a
one-time payment of $0.1 million in fiscal 2006 in
connection with the termination of a license development
agreement entered into in April 2003. See Note 8 to our
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
Annual Report.
Foreign
exchange gain (loss)
In fiscal 2006, we had a foreign exchange loss of
$1.0 million, as compared to a foreign exchange gain of
$1.5 million in fiscal 2005. The difference was primarily
attributable to the appreciation of the US dollar compared to
the British pound between the two periods.
Income
tax benefit
During fiscal 2006, we recorded an income tax benefit of
approximately $0.1 million compared to an income tax
benefit of approximately $29,000 recorded in fiscal 2005. The
income tax benefit recorded in both periods resulted from our
sale of New Jersey state net operating losses under a program
offered by the State of New Jersey, and the increase from fiscal
2005 to fiscal 2006 reflected the sale of more state net
operating losses in fiscal 2006 than in fiscal 2005. Because we
believe we are no longer eligible to participate in this
program, we do not expect to sell any additional New Jersey
state net operating losses or research and development credits
in the future.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Since our inception, the cash flows from customer revenues have
not been sufficient to fund our operations and provide the
capital resources for the planned growth of our business. For
the three years ended April 30, 2007, our revenues were
$9.6 million, our net losses were $17.1 million and
our net cash used in operating activities was
$13.5 million. Over that same period, we raised
$90.3 million in financing activities, including
$89.9 million from the closing of our United States initial
public offering on April 30, 2007.
51
At April 30, 2007, our total cash, cash equivalents and
certificates of deposit were $115.9 million. Our cash and
cash equivalents are highly liquid investments with maturities
of three months or less at the date of purchase and consist
primarily of time deposits with large commercial banks and an
investment in a money market fund. Our certificates of deposit
as of April 30, 2007 are denominated in British pounds. The
certificates of deposit generally have a fixed maturity date of
more than 90 days but less than one year from the date of
purchase.
The primary drivers of our cash flows have been our ability to
generate revenues and decrease losses related to our contracts,
as well as our ability to obtain and invest the capital
resources needed to fund our development.
Net cash used in operating activities was $7.5 million for
fiscal 2007. This primarily resulted from a net loss for the
period of $9.6 million, decreased by a $1.2 million
increase in our accounts payable, a $2.1 million increase
in our accrued expenses and non-cash charges of
$0.3 million in depreciation and amortization and
$1.2 million of compensation expense related to stock
option grants. This was partially offset by a $0.9 million
increase in our accounts receivable and unbilled receivables and
a non-cash foreign exchange gain of $1.5 million. The
increase in receivables was due to the increase in our revenues
in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007 compared to the fourth
quarter of fiscal 2006. The non-cash foreign exchange gain
reflected our significant holdings of sterling-denominated
certificates of deposit, which were impacted by the depreciation
of the dollar against the British pound during fiscal 2007.
Increases in accounts payable and accrued expenses in fiscal
2007 resulted from increases in the loss reserve for a contract
and accruals for incentive payments to employees. Net cash used
in investing activities was $9.3 million for fiscal 2007
resulting primarily from $55.2 million in purchases of
certificates of deposit, partially offset by $47.3 million
in maturities of certificates of deposit, a $1.0 million
restricted cash balance related to a bank credit facility for
Ocean Power Technologies Limited and $0.3 million in
purchases of equipment and patent costs, as we invested in
expanding our assembly and test facilities and developed several
new patent applications as part of our ongoing investment in
technology development. Net cash provided by financing
activities was $90.8 million for fiscal 2007 resulting
primarily from our initial public offering in the United States.
We expect to devote substantial resources to continue our
development efforts for our PowerBuoy systems and to expand our
sales, marketing and manufacturing programs associated with the
commercialization of the PowerBuoy system. Our future capital
requirements will depend on a number of factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the success of our commercial relationships with Iberdrola,
Total, the US Navy and Lockheed Martin;
|
|
|
|
the cost of manufacturing activities;
|
|
|
|
the cost of commercialization activities, including
demonstration projects, product marketing and sales;
|
|
|
|
our ability to establish and maintain additional commercial
relationships;
|
|
|
|
the implementation of our expansion plans, including the hiring
of new employees;
|
|
|
|
potential acquisitions of other products or
technologies; and
|
|
|
|
the costs involved in preparing, filing, prosecuting,
maintaining and enforcing patent claims and other patent-related
costs.
|
We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents and
certificates of deposit will be sufficient to meet our
anticipated cash needs for working capital and capital
expenditures at least through fiscal 2008. If existing resources
are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements or if we
acquire or license rights to additional product technologies, we
may seek to sell additional equity or debt securities or obtain
a credit facility. The sale of additional equity or convertible
securities could result in dilution to our stockholders. If
additional funds are raised through the issuance of debt
securities, these securities could have rights senior to those
associated with our common stock and could contain covenants
that would restrict our operations. Financing may not be
available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us. If we are
unable to obtain required financing, we may be required to
reduce the scope of our planned product development and
marketing efforts, which could harm our financial condition and
operating results.
52
Contractual
Obligations
Our major outstanding contractual obligations relate to our
facilities leases. We have summarized in the table below our
fixed contractual cash obligations as of April 30, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
One to
|
|
|
Four to
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
One Year
|
|
|
Three Years
|
|
|
Five Years
|
|
|
Five Years
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
234,000
|
|
|
$
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Operating leases
|
|
$
|
1,324,000
|
|
|
$
|
257,000
|
|
|
$
|
447,000
|
|
|
$
|
414,000
|
|
|
$
|
206,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Our long-term debt consists of an interest-free loan from the
New Jersey Commission on Science and Technology. The amounts to
be repaid each year are determined as a percentage of revenues
we receive in that year from our customer contracts that meet
criteria specified in the loan agreement, with any remaining
amount due on January 15, 2012. |
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
Since inception we have not engaged in any off-balance sheet
financing activities.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and
results of operations set forth above are based on our
consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in
accordance with US generally accepted accounting principles. The
preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires
us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported
amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. On an
ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments,
including those described below. We base our estimates on
historical experience and on various other assumptions that we
believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. These
estimates and assumptions form the basis for making judgments
about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not
readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ
from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
We believe the following accounting policies require significant
judgment and estimates by us in the preparation of our
consolidated financial statements.
Revenue
recognition and unearned revenues
Generally, we recognize revenue on the percentage-of-completion
method based on the ratio of costs incurred to total estimated
costs at completion. In certain circumstances, revenue under
contracts that have specified milestones or other performance
criteria may be recognized only when our customer acknowledges
that such criteria have been satisfied. In addition, recognition
of revenue (and the related costs) may be deferred for
fixed-price contracts until contract completion if we are unable
to reasonably estimate the total costs of the project prior to
completion. Because we have a small number of contracts,
revisions to the percentage of completion estimate or delays in
meeting performance criteria or in completing projects may have
a significant effect on our revenue for the periods involved.
Upon anticipating a loss on a contract, we recognize the full
amount of the anticipated loss in the current period. We had
loss reserves of $1.8 million as of April 30, 2007
related to two contracts and $0.8 million as of
April 30, 2006 related to one contract. In fiscal 2007, we
recognized a loss of $1.3 million on our contract for a
wave power station off the coast of Spain, due to a change in
estimated costs.
Unbilled receivables represent expenditures on contracts, plus
applicable profit margin, not yet billed. Unbilled receivables
are normally billed and collected within one year. Billings made
on contracts are recorded as a reduction in unbilled
receivables, and to the extent that those billings exceed costs
incurred plus applicable profit margin, they are recorded as
unearned revenues.
53
Stock-based
compensation
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or
FASB, issued SFAS 123(R), which requires companies to
recognize compensation expense for all stock-based payments to
employees, including grants of employee stock options, in their
statement of operations based on the fair value of the awards.
We adopted SFAS 123(R) effective May 1, 2006 using the
modified prospective method. Under this method, compensation
cost is recognized for all share-based payments granted
subsequent to April 30, 2006, awards modified after
April 30, 2006, and the remaining portion of the fair value
of unvested awards at April 30, 2006. Prior to May 1,
2006, we used the intrinsic value method to determine values
used in our pro forma stock-based compensation disclosures.
In March 2005, the SEC issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 107, or SAB 107, which provides
guidance regarding the implementation of SFAS 123(R). In
particular, SAB 107 provides guidance regarding calculating
assumptions used in stock-based compensation valuation models,
the classification of stock-based compensation expense, the
capitalization of stock-based compensation costs and disclosures
in filings with the SEC.
Determining the appropriate fair-value model and calculating the
fair value of stock-based awards at the date of grant using any
valuation model requires judgment. We use the Black-Scholes
option pricing model to estimate the fair value of employee
stock options, as permitted by the provisions of
SFAS 123(R). Option pricing models, including the
Black-Scholes model, require the use of input assumptions,
including expected volatility, expected term and the expected
dividend rate. Because our stock has been publicly traded in the
United States only since April 2007, we do not have an
observable share-price volatility for the United States capital
markets; therefore, we estimate our expected volatility based on
that of what we consider to be similar publicly-traded companies
and expect to continue to do so until such time as we have
adequate historical data from our traded share price in the
United States. We did not estimate our expected volatility based
on the price of our common stock on the AIM market of the London
Stock Exchange on which our shares have traded since October
2003, because we do not believe, based on the historically low
trading volume of our shares on that market, that the volatility
of our common stock on the AIM market is an appropriate
indicator of the expected volatility of our common stock. Prior
to fiscal 2007, we estimated the expected term of our options
using our best estimate of the period of time from the grant
date that we expect the options to remain outstanding. Beginning
in fiscal 2007, we estimate the expected term using the average
midpoint between the vesting terms and the contractual terms of
our options as permitted by SAB 107. If we determine
another method to estimate expected volatility or expected term
is more reasonable than our current methods, or if another
method for calculating these input assumptions is prescribed by
authoritative guidance, the fair value calculated for future
stock-based awards could change significantly. Higher volatility
and longer expected terms have a significant impact on the value
of stock-based compensation determined at the date of grant. The
expected dividend rate is not as significant to the calculation
of fair value of our stock-based awards.
In addition, SFAS 123(R) requires us to develop an estimate
of the number of stock-based awards that will be forfeited due
to employee turnover. Quarterly changes in the estimated
forfeiture rate can have a significant effect on reported
stock-based compensation. If the actual forfeiture rate is
higher than the estimated forfeiture rate, then an adjustment is
made to increase the estimated forfeiture rate, which will
result in a decrease to the expense recognized in the
consolidated financial statements during the quarter of the
change. If the actual forfeiture rate is lower than the
estimated forfeiture rate, then an adjustment is made to
decrease the estimated forfeiture rate, which will result in an
increase to the expense recognized in the consolidated financial
statements. These adjustments affect our cost of revenues,
product development costs and selling, general and
administrative costs. Through the year ended April 30,
2007, the effect of forfeiture adjustments on our consolidated
financial statements has been insignificant. The expense we
recognize in future periods could differ significantly from the
current period
and/or our
forecasts due to adjustments in the assumed forfeiture rates.
As a result of the adoption of SFAS 123(R), we recorded
stock compensation expense of $1.1 million in fiscal 2007.
Income
taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income, or
SFAS 109. Under this method, we determine deferred tax
assets and liabilities based upon the differences between the
financial statement carrying amounts and the tax bases of assets
and liabilities, as well as credit and net operating loss
54
carryforwards, using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in
which such items are expected to affect taxable income. The tax
consequences of most events recognized in the current
years financial statements are included in determining
income taxes currently payable. However, because tax laws and
financial accounting standards differ in their recognition and
measurement of assets, liabilities, equity, revenues, expenses,
gains and losses, differences arise between the amount of
taxable income and pretax financial income for a year and
between the tax bases of assets or liabilities and their
reported amounts in the financial statements. Because we assume
that the reported amounts of assets and liabilities will be
recovered and settled, respectively, a difference between the
tax basis of an asset or a liability and its reported amount in
the balance sheet will result in a taxable or a deductible
amount in some future years when the related liabilities are
settled or the reported amounts of the assets are recovered,
giving rise to a deferred tax asset or deferred tax liability.
We then assess the likelihood that our deferred tax assets will
be recovered from future taxable income and, to the extent we
believe that recovery is not likely, we establish a valuation
allowance. As discussed in Note 12 to our consolidated
financial statements included in this Annual Report, we have
established valuation allowances for the full value of our net
deferred tax assets, which were $10.1 million as of
April 30, 2006 and $13.2 million as of April 30,
2007.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154,
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, or
SFAS 154, which requires entities that voluntarily make a
change in accounting principle to apply that change
retrospectively to prior periods financial statements,
unless this would be impracticable. SFAS 154 supersedes
Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 20, Accounting
Changes, which previously required that most voluntary
changes in accounting principles be recognized by including the
cumulative effect of changing to the new accounting principle in
the current periods net income or loss. SFAS 154 also
makes a distinction between retrospective
application of an accounting principle and the
restatement of financial statements to reflect the
correction of an error. Another significant change in practice
under SFAS 154 will be that if an entity changes its method
of depreciation, amortization or depletion for long-lived,
non-financial assets, the change must be accounted for as a
change in accounting estimate. Under Accounting Principles Board
Opinion No. 20, such a change would have been reported as a
change in accounting principle. SFAS 154 is effective for
accounting changes and corrections of errors made in fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2005. Adoption of
SFAS 154 did not have any effect on our financial position
or results of operations.
In July 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, or
FIN 48. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprises
financial statements in accordance with SFAS 109.
FIN 48 prescribes a recognition and measurement method for
tax positions taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.
FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition,
classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim
periods, disclosures and transitions. FIN 48 is effective
for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. We are
currently analyzing the effects of FIN 48 but do not expect
it to have a material effect on our financial position or
results of operations.
In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 108, Considering the Effects of Prior
Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current
Year Financial Statements, or SAB 108. SAB 108
provides guidance on how prior year misstatements should be
taken into consideration when quantifying misstatements in
current year financial statements for purposes of determining
whether the current years financial statements are
materially misstated. SAB 108 was effective for our year
ended April 30, 2007. The adoption of SAB 108 did not
have any impact on our consolidated financial statements.
|
|
ITEM 7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
|
Our primary exposure to market risk is currently confined to our
cash, cash equivalents and certificates of deposit. None of
these items that we hold have maturities that exceed one year.
We currently do not hedge interest rate exposure. We have not
used derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading
purposes. Because the maturities of our cash equivalents and
certificates of deposit do not exceed one year, we do not
believe that a change in market rates would have any significant
impact on the realized value of our investments. We do not have
market risk exposure on our long-term debt because it consists
of an interest-free loan from the New Jersey Board of Public
Utilities.
55
Management estimates that had the average yield on our cash,
cash equivalents and certificates of deposit decreased by 100
basis points, our interest income for the year ended
April 30, 2007 would have decreased by approximately
$0.3 million. This estimate assumes that the decrease
occurred on the first day of fiscal 2007 and reduced the yield
of each investment by 100 basis points. The impact on our future
interest income of future changes in investment yields will
depend largely on the gross amount of our cash, cash
equivalents, and investments.
We transact business in various countries and have exposure to
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates. Foreign
exchange gains and losses arise in the translation of
foreign-denominated assets and liabilities, which may result in
realized and unrealized gains or losses from exchange rate
fluctuations. Since we conduct our business in US dollars and
our functional currency is the US dollar, our main foreign
exchange exposure, if any, results from changes in the exchange
rate between the US dollar and the British pound sterling, the
Euro and the Australian dollar.
We invest in certificates of deposit and maintain cash accounts
that are denominated in British pounds, Euros and Australian
dollars. These foreign denominated certificates of deposit and
cash accounts had a balance of $15.6 million as of
April 30, 2007 and $16.7 million as of April 30,
2006, compared to our total certificates of deposits and cash
account balances of $115.9 million as of April 30,
2007 and $32.4 million as of April 30, 2006. These
foreign currency balances are translated at each month end to
our functional currency, the US dollar, and any resulting gain
or loss is recognized in our results of operations.
In addition, a portion of our operations is conducted through
our subsidiaries in countries other than the United States,
specifically Ocean Power Technologies Ltd. in the United
Kingdom, the functional currency of which is the British pound
sterling, and Ocean Power Technologies (Australasia) Pty Ltd. in
Australia, the functional currency of which is the Australian
dollar. Both of these subsidiaries have foreign exchange
exposure that results from changes in the exchange rate between
their functional currency and other foreign currencies in which
they conduct business. All of our international revenues for the
year ended April 30, 2007 were recorded in Euros, British
pounds or Australian dollars. If the foreign currency exchange
rates had fluctuated by 10% as of April 30, 2007, our
foreign exchange gain would have changed by approximately
$1.7 million.
We currently do not hedge exchange rate exposure. However, we
assess the anticipated foreign currency working capital
requirements and capital asset acquisitions of our foreign
operations and attempt to maintain a portion of our cash, cash
equivalents and certificates of deposit denominated in foreign
currencies sufficient to satisfy these anticipated requirements.
We also assess the need and cost to utilize financial
instruments to hedge currency exposures on an ongoing basis and
may hedge against exchange rate exposure in the future.
|
|
ITEM 8.
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
|
The financial statements and supplementary data required by this
item are listed in Item 15 Exhibits and
Financial Statement Schedules of this Annual Report.
|
|
ITEM 9.
|
CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|
Not applicable.
|
|
ITEM 9A.
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES
|
Disclosure controls and procedures are our controls and other
procedures that are designed to ensure that information required
to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act,
is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time
periods specified in the SECs rules and forms. Disclosure
controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls
and procedures designed to ensure that information required to
be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under
the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure.
As of the end of the period covered by this report, we carried
out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the
design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures
pursuant to Exchange Act
56
Rule 13a-15(b). Based upon that evaluation, as of
April 30, 2007, our Chief Executive Officer along with the
Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls
and procedures are effective in timely alerting them to material
information relating to the company required to be included in
our periodic SEC filings.
This Annual Report does not include a report of
managements assessment regarding internal control over
financial reporting or an attestation report of our independent
registered public accounting firm due to a transition period
established by the rules of the SEC for newly public companies.
|
|
ITEM 9B.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
Not applicable.
PART III
|
|
ITEM 10.
|
DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement for the 2007
Annual Meeting of Stockholders, or the Proxy Statement, is
incorporated herein by reference. The Proxy Statement will be
filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of the
fiscal year covered by this
Form 10-K.
|
|
ITEM 11.
|
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement is incorporated
herein by reference. The Proxy Statement will be filed with the
SEC within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year
covered by this
Form 10-K.
|
|
ITEM 12.
|
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement is incorporated
herein by reference. The Proxy Statement will be filed with the
SEC within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year
covered by this
Form 10-K.
|
|
ITEM 13.
|
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement is incorporated
herein by reference. The Proxy Statement will be filed with the
SEC within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year
covered by this
Form 10-K.
|
|
ITEM 14.
|
PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement is incorporated
herein by reference. The Proxy Statement will be filed with the
SEC within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year
covered by this
Form 10-K.
PART IV
|
|
ITEM 15.
|
EXHIBITS AND
FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
(a) (1) Financial Statements: See Index to
Consolidated Financial Statements on
page F-1.
(3) Exhibits: See Exhibits Index on pages 59 to
60.
57
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.
OCEAN POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INCORPORATED
Date: July 27, 2007
George W. Taylor
Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ George
W.
Taylor George
W. Taylor
|
|
Director, Chief Executive
Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
July 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Seymour
S. Preston
III Seymour
S. Preston III
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors
|
|
July 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Charles
F.
Dunleavy Charles
F. Dunleavy
|
|
Director, Chief Financial
Officer,
Senior Vice President, Treasurer and
Secretary (Principal Financial Officer
and Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
July 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Eric
A.
Ash Eric
A. Ash
|
|
Director
|
|
July 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas
J.
Meaney Thomas
J. Meaney
|
|
Director
|
|
July 27, 2007
|
58
Exhibits Index
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation of
the Registrant, as amended (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 3.1 to Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Form of Restated Certificate of
Incorporation of the Registrant which became effective prior to
the initial public offering (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 3.2 to Form S-1/A filed March 19, 2007)
|
|
3
|
.3
|
|
Bylaws of the Registrant
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.3 to
Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
3
|
.4
|
|
Form of Amended and Restated
Bylaws of the Registrant, which became effective prior to the
closing of the initial public offering (incorporated by
reference from Exhibit 3.4 to Form S-1/A filed
March 19, 2007)
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
Specimen certificate of common
stock (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 4.1 to
Form S-1/A filed March 19, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.1+
|
|
Engineering, Procurement and
Construction of a Wave Energy Power Plant at Punta del
Pescador (Santoña, Spain), dated July 27, 2006,
between Iberdrola Energias Marinas de Cantabria, S.A. and Ocean
Powers Technologies Limited (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.1 to Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
10
|
.2+
|
|
Contract Number N00014-05-C-0384,
dated September 20, 2005, between the Office of Naval
Research, U.S. Navy and Ocean Power Technologies, Inc., as
amended by the Amendment of Solicitation/ Modification of
Contract dated March 22, 2007 (incorporated by reference
from Exhibit 10.2 to Form S-1 filed November 13,
2006)
|
|
10
|
.3+
|
|
Contract Number N00014-02-C-0053,
dated February 8, 2002, between the Office of Naval
Research, U.S. Navy and Ocean Power Technologies Inc., as
modified (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3 to
Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
10
|
.4
|
|
Option Agreement for Purchase of
Emissions Credits, dated November 24, 2000 between Ocean
Power Technologies, Inc. and its affiliates and Woodside
Sustainable Energy Solutions Pty. Ltd. (incorporated by
reference from Exhibit 10.4 to Form S-1 filed
November 13, 2006)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
1994 Stock Option Plan
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.4 to
Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)*
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Incentive Stock Option Plan
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.6 to
Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)*
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
2001 Stock Plan (incorporated by
reference from Exhibit 10.7 to Form S-1 filed
November 13, 2006)*
|
|
10
|
.8
|
|
2006 Stock Incentive Plan
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.8 to
Form S-1/A filed March 19, 2007)*
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
Amended and Restated Voting and
Right of First Refusal Agreement, dated April 18, 2005,
between Ocean Power Technologies, Inc., George W. Taylor and
JoAnne E. Burns (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.9 to Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
Agreement to Refinance, dated
November 14, 1993 between Joseph R. Burns, Michael Y.
Epstein, George W. Taylor and Ocean Powers
Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.10 to Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated
October 23, 2003, between Charles F. Dunleavy and Ocean
Power Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.11 to Form S-1 filed November 13,
2006)*
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated
October 23, 2003, between George W. Taylor and Ocean Power
Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.12 to Form S-1 filed November 13,
2006)*
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
Consultant Agreement, dated
August 1, 1999, between Thomas J. Meaney and Ocean Power
Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.13 to Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated
September 9, 2004, between Mark R. Draper and Ocean Power
Technologies Ltd. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.14 to Form S-1 filed November 13,
2006)*
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated
September 30, 2005, between John A. Baylouny and Ocean
Power Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.15 to Form S-1 filed November 13,
2006)*
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
Lease Agreement, dated
August 30, 2005 between Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and
Reed Road Industrial Park LLC #1, as amended on January 27,
2006 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.16 to
Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
Lease, dated January 15,
2007, between University of Warwick Science Park Innovation
Centre Limited and Ocean Power Technologies Ltd. (incorporated
by reference from Exhibit 10.17 to Form S-1/A filed
March 19, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
Agreement for Renewable Energy
Economic Development Grants, dated November 3, 2003,
between State of New Jersey Board of Public Utilities and Ocean
Power Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.18 to Form S-1/A filed March 19, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.19+
|
|
Contract for the Development and
Application of a Sea Wave Energy Generation System in France,
dated as of June 17, 2005, between Iberdrola Energias
Renovables II, S.A. Sociedad Unipersonal, Total Energie
Development SA, Ocean Power Technologies Ltd. and Ocean Power
Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.19 to Form S-1/A filed March 19, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.20
|
|
Contract Number DM259735, dated
September 17, 2005 between Lockheed Martin Corporation
Maritime Systems and Sensors (MS2) and Ocean Power Technologies,
Inc., as modified (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.20 to Form S-1/A filed March 19, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
Marketing Cooperation Agreement,
dated September 9, 2006, between Ocean Power Technologies,
Inc. and Lockheed Martin Corporation through its Maritime
Systems and Sensors business unit (incorporated by reference
from Exhibit 10.21 to
Form S-1/A
filed April 10, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.22+
|
|
Contract Number N00014-07-C-0617,
dated May 24, 2007, between the Office of Naval Research,
U.S. Navy and Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by
reference from Exhibit 99.1+ to Form 8K filed
June 8, 2007)
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 21.1 to
Form S-1/A filed March 19, 2007)
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of KPMG LLP
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
|
|
+ |
|
Confidential treatment requested as to certain portions, which
portions have been omitted and filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. |
|
* |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement |
60
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Index to
Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
F-2
|
|
|
|
|
F-3
|
|
|
|
|
F-4
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
F-6
|
|
|
|
|
F-7
|
|
F-1
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
April 30, 2006 and 2007, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders equity and
comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended April 30, 2007. These consolidated
financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our
audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred
to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as
of April 30, 2006 and 2007, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended April 30, 2007, in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial
statements, effective May 1, 2006, the Company adopted the
fair value method of accounting for stock-based compensation as
required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
July 27, 2007
F-2
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
31,957,209
|
|
|
|
107,505,473
|
|
Certificates of deposit
|
|
|
482,156
|
|
|
|
8,390,146
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
865,081
|
|
Unbilled receivables
|
|
|
211,000
|
|
|
|
313,080
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
331,139
|
|
|
|
441,342
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
32,981,504
|
|
|
|
117,515,122
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
544,285
|
|
|
|
387,923
|
|
Patents, net of accumulated
amortization of $157,451 and $176,840, respectively
|
|
|
372,448
|
|
|
|
597,280
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
983,376
|
|
Other noncurrent assets
|
|
|
97,901
|
|
|
|
227,845
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
33,996,138
|
|
|
|
119,711,546
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
242,624
|
|
|
|
1,708,408
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
1,726,870
|
|
|
|
4,593,413
|
|
Unearned revenues
|
|
|
14,405
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
111,576
|
|
|
|
26,106
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
2,095,475
|
|
|
|
6,327,927
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
233,959
|
|
|
|
231,585
|
|
Deferred rent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,825
|
|
Deferred credits
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
2,929,434
|
|
|
|
7,170,337
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
(note 13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.001 par
value; authorized 5,000,000 shares, issued or outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par
value; authorized 105,000,000 shares, issued and
outstanding 5,171,119 and 10,186,254 shares, respectively
|
|
|
5,171
|
|
|
|
10,186
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
59,725,777
|
|
|
|
150,842,671
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(28,632,153
|
)
|
|
|
(38,270,918
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive
loss
|
|
|
(32,091
|
)
|
|
|
(40,730
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
31,066,704
|
|
|
|
112,541,209
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
33,996,138
|
|
|
|
119,711,546
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-3
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
5,365,235
|
|
|
|
1,747,715
|
|
|
|
2,531,315
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
5,170,521
|
|
|
|
2,059,318
|
|
|
|
3,983,742
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit (loss)
|
|
|
194,714
|
|
|
|
(311,603
|
)
|
|
|
(1,452,427
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development costs
|
|
|
904,618
|
|
|
|
4,224,997
|
|
|
|
6,219,893
|
|
Selling, general and
administrative costs
|
|
|
2,553,911
|
|
|
|
3,190,687
|
|
|
|
4,893,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
3,458,529
|
|
|
|
7,415,684
|
|
|
|
11,113,473
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(3,263,815
|
)
|
|
|
(7,727,287
|
)
|
|
|
(12,565,900
|
)
|
Interest income, net
|
|
|
1,297,156
|
|
|
|
1,408,361
|
|
|
|
1,389,702
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
1,545
|
|
|
|
74,294
|
|
|
|
13,906
|
|
Foreign exchange gain (loss)
|
|
|
1,507,145
|
|
|
|
(978,242
|
)
|
|
|
1,523,527
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(457,969
|
)
|
|
|
(7,222,874
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
29,335
|
|
|
|
143,963
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(428,634
|
)
|
|
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share
|
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
|
(1.37
|
)
|
|
|
(1.83
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used to
compute basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
|
5,135,550
|
|
|
|
5,162,340
|
|
|
|
5,260,794
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-4
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Balance, May 1, 2004
|
|
|
5,116,502
|
|
|
$
|
5,116
|
|
|
|
59,005,666
|
|
|
|
(21,124,608
|
)
|
|
|
(32,928
|
)
|
|
|
37,853,246
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(428,634
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(428,634
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,405
|
)
|
|
|
(6,405
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(435,039
|
)
|
Compensation related to stock
option grants issued to employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
131,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
131,500
|
|
Compensation related to stock
option grants issued for services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,174
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53,174
|
|
Adjustment for stockholder
reduction in shares held
|
|
|
(1,397
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock
options
|
|
|
36,116
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
233,614
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
233,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, April 30, 2005
|
|
|
5,151,221
|
|
|
|
5,151
|
|
|
|
59,423,955
|
|
|
|
(21,553,242
|
)
|
|
|
(39,333
|
)
|
|
|
37,836,531
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,242
|
|
|
|
7,242
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,071,669
|
)
|
Compensation related to stock
option grants issued to employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,000
|
|
Compensation related to stock
option grants issued for services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,139
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,139
|
|
Shares issued for amounts received
in prior years
|
|
|
2,732
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
49,997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock
options
|
|
|
17,166
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
122,686
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122,703
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, April 30, 2006
|
|
|
5,171,119
|
|
|
|
5,171
|
|
|
|
59,725,777
|
|
|
|
(28,632,153
|
)
|
|
|
(32,091
|
)
|
|
|
31,066,704
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,639
|
)
|
|
|
(8,639
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,647,404
|
)
|
Compensation related to stock
option grants issued to employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,082,181
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,082,181
|
|
Compensation related to stock
option grants issued for services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,235
|
|
Adjustment for reverse stock split
rounding
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of common stock, net of
issuance costs
|
|
|
5,000,000
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
89,898,819
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89,903,819
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock
options
|
|
|
15,144
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
65,659
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65,674
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, April 30, 2007
|
|
|
10,186,254
|
|
|
$
|
10,186
|
|
|
|
150,842,671
|
|
|
|
(38,270,918
|
)
|
|
|
(40,730
|
)
|
|
|
112,541,209
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-5
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(428,634
|
)
|
|
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss
to net cash used in operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange (gain) loss
|
|
|
(1,507,145
|
)
|
|
|
978,242
|
|
|
|
(1,523,527
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
140,984
|
|
|
|
233,132
|
|
|
|
269,075
|
|
Loss on disposal of equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,572
|
|
Compensation expense related to
stock option grants
|
|
|
184,674
|
|
|
|
129,139
|
|
|
|
1,152,416
|
|
Realization of deferred credits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(75,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred rent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,825
|
|
Changes in operating assets and
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(621,499
|
)
|
|
|
668,424
|
|
|
|
(827,287
|
)
|
Unbilled receivables
|
|
|
(268,216
|
)
|
|
|
611,037
|
|
|
|
(95,896
|
)
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
(239,274
|
)
|
|
|
161,505
|
|
|
|
(99,436
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
404,491
|
|
|
|
(632,778
|
)
|
|
|
1,233,484
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
708,022
|
|
|
|
(121,840
|
)
|
|
|
2,126,616
|
|
Unearned revenues
|
|
|
(246,890
|
)
|
|
|
(2,383
|
)
|
|
|
(14,405
|
)
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57,803
|
|
|
|
(85,470
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating
activities
|
|
|
(1,873,487
|
)
|
|
|
(5,071,630
|
)
|
|
|
(7,467,798
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of certificates of
deposit
|
|
|
(58,050,287
|
)
|
|
|
(62,677,400
|
)
|
|
|
(55,187,304
|
)
|
Maturities of certificates of
deposit
|
|
|
33,573,254
|
|
|
|
87,397,606
|
|
|
|
47,279,314
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(983,376
|
)
|
Purchases of equipment
|
|
|
(435,488
|
)
|
|
|
(330,047
|
)
|
|
|
(107,271
|
)
|
Payments of patent costs
|
|
|
(125,414
|
)
|
|
|
(57,396
|
)
|
|
|
(217,763
|
)
|
Investments in joint ventures and
other noncurrent assets
|
|
|
(78,399
|
)
|
|
|
(30,747
|
)
|
|
|
(122,001
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by
investing activities
|
|
|
(25,116,334
|
)
|
|
|
24,302,016
|
|
|
|
(9,338,401
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of common stock, net of
issuance costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90,773,935
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock
options
|
|
|
233,650
|
|
|
|
122,703
|
|
|
|
65,674
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing
activities
|
|
|
233,650
|
|
|
|
122,703
|
|
|
|
90,839,609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on
cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
1,500,740
|
|
|
|
(980,694
|
)
|
|
|
1,514,854
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(25,255,431
|
)
|
|
|
18,372,395
|
|
|
|
75,548,264
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents,
beginning of period
|
|
|
38,840,245
|
|
|
|
13,584,814
|
|
|
|
31,957,209
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of
period
|
|
$
|
13,584,814
|
|
|
|
31,957,209
|
|
|
|
107,505,473
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of noncash
investing and financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of shares in connection
with amounts received in prior years
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized patent costs financed
through accounts payable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,343
|
|
Stock issuance costs financed
through accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
870,116
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-6
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. (the Company) was incorporated on
April 19, 1984 in the State of New Jersey, commenced active
operations in 1994 and re-incorporated in the State of Delaware
in April 2007. The Company develops and is commercializing
proprietary systems that generate electricity by harnessing the
renewable energy of ocean waves. The Company markets and sells
its products in the United States and internationally.
|
|
(2)
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
|
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the
accounts of the Company and its majority owned subsidiaries. All
significant intercompany balances and transactions have been
eliminated in consolidation.
In addition, the Company evaluates its relationships with other
entities to identify whether they are variable interest entities
as defined by Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)
Interpretation No. 46(R), Consolidation of Variable
Interest Entities (FIN 46R), and to assess whether it
is the primary beneficiary of such entities. If the
determination is made that the Company is the primary
beneficiary, then that entity is included in the consolidated
financial statements in accordance with FIN 46R.
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements
requires management of the Company to make a number of estimates
and assumptions relating to 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
period. Significant items subject to such estimates and
assumptions include the recoverability of the carrying amount of
property and equipment and patents; valuation allowances for
receivables and deferred income tax assets; and percentage of
completion of customer contracts for purposes of revenue
recognition. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
The Company recognizes revenue on government and commercial
contracts under the percentage-of-completion method. The
percentage of completion is determined by relating the costs
incurred to date to the estimated total costs. The cumulative
effects resulting from revisions of estimated total contract
costs and revenues are recorded in the period in which the facts
requiring revision become known. Upon anticipating a loss on a
contract, the Company recognizes the full amount of the
anticipated loss in the current period. During the years ended
April 30, 2005 and 2007, the Company recorded provisions of
approximately $21,000 and $1,290,000, respectively, related to
anticipated losses on contracts. Reserves related to loss
contracts in the amounts of approximately $785,000 and
$1,780,000 are included in accrued expenses in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets as of April 30, 2006 and 2007,
respectively.
Unbilled receivables represent expenditures on contracts, plus
applicable profit margin, not yet billed. Unbilled receivables
are normally billed and collected within one year. Billings made
on contracts are recorded as a reduction of unbilled
receivables, and to the extent that such billings exceed costs
incurred plus applicable profit margin, they are recorded as
unearned revenues.
Cash equivalents consist of investments in short-term financial
instruments with maturities of three months or less from the
date of purchase. Cash and cash equivalents include $31,506,000
and $13,254,000 of certificates of deposit with an initial term
of less than three months at April 30, 2006 and 2007,
respectively, and $93,000,000 invested in a money market fund as
of April 30, 2007.
F-7
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
(e)
|
Restricted
Cash and Credit Facility
|
As of April 30, 2007, the Company had $983,376 in cash
restricted under the terms of a security agreement (the
Agreement) between Ocean Power Technologies, Inc and Barclays
Bank. Under the Agreement, this cash is on deposit at Barclays
Bank and serves as security for letters of credit which are
expected to be issued by Barclays Bank on behalf of Ocean Power
Technologies Ltd., under a 800,000 credit facility
established by Barclays Bank for Ocean Power Technologies Ltd.
The credit facility is for the issuance of letters of credit and
bank guarantees, and carries a fee of 1% per annum of the amount
of any such obligations issued by Barclays Bank. The credit
facility does not have an expiration date, and is cancelable at
the discretion of the bank.
|
|
(f)
|
Property
and Equipment
|
Property and equipment is stated at cost, less accumulated
depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization is
calculated using the straight-line method over the estimated
useful lives (three to seven years) of the assets. Leasehold
improvements are amortized using the straight-line method over
the shorter of the estimated useful life of the asset or the
remaining lease term. Expenses for maintenance and repairs are
charged to operations as incurred. Depreciation was $112,070,
$213,374 and $247,515 for the years ended April 30, 2005,
2006 and 2007, respectively.
|
|
(g)
|
Foreign
Exchange Gains and Losses
|
The Company has invested in certain certificates of deposit and
has maintained cash accounts that are denominated in British
pound sterling, Euros and Australian dollars. Such certificates
of deposit and cash accounts had a balance of approximately
$16,724,000 and $15,646,000 as of April 30, 2006 and 2007,
respectively. Such positions may result in realized and
unrealized foreign exchange gains or losses from exchange rate
fluctuations, which are included in foreign exchange gain (loss)
on the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
External costs related to the filing of patents, including legal
and filing fees, are capitalized. Amortization is calculated
using the straight-line method over the life of the patents
(17 years). Expenses for the development of technology are
charged to operations as incurred. Amortization expense was
$28,914, $19,758 and $21,560 for the years ended April 30,
2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively. Amortization expense for the
next five fiscal years related to amounts capitalized for
patents as of April 30, 2007 is estimated to be
approximately $22,000 per year.
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, long-lived assets, such as
property and equipment, and purchased intangible assets subject
to amortization, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of
the asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be
held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount
of the asset to estimated undiscounted future cash flows
expected to be generated by the asset. If the carrying amount of
the asset exceeds its estimated future cash flows, then an
impairment charge is recognized by the amount by which the
carrying amount of the asset exceeds the fair value of the
asset. Assets to be disposed of would be separately presented in
the consolidated balance sheet and reported at the lower of the
carrying amount or fair value less costs to sell, and are no
longer depreciated. The assets and liabilities of a disposal
group classified as held for sale would be presented separately
in the appropriate asset and liability sections of the
consolidated balance sheet. The Company reviewed its long-lived
assets for indicators of impairment in accordance with
SFAS No. 144 and determined that no impairment review
was necessary for the years ended April 30, 2005, 2006 and
2007.
|
|
(j)
|
Concentration
of Credit Risk
|
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to
concentration of credit risk consist principally of cash
balances, bank certificates of deposit and trade receivables.
The Company invests its excess cash in highly
F-8
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
liquid investments (principally short-term bank deposits and a
money market fund) and does not believe that it is exposed to
any significant risks related to its cash accounts, money market
fund or certificates of deposit.
The table below shows the percentage of the Companys
revenues derived from customers whose revenues accounted for at
least 10% of the Companys consolidated revenues for the
periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended April 30,
|
|
Customer
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
US Navy
|
|
|
57
|
%
|
|
|
61
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
Iberdrola and Total
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
Lockheed Martin
|
|
|
32
|
%
|
|
|
22
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
The loss of, or a significant reduction in revenues from, any of
these customers could significantly impact the Companys
financial position or results of operations. The Company does
not require collateral from its customers.
|
|
(k)
|
Net
Loss per Common Share
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share for all periods presented
is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number
of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Due to
the Companys net losses, potentially dilutive securities,
consisting of outstanding stock options, were excluded from the
diluted loss per share calculation due to their anti-dilutive
effect.
In computing diluted net loss per share, 1,116,281, 1,205,030,
and 1,303,574 options to purchase shares of common stock were
excluded from the computations for the years ended
April 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively.
|
|
(l)
|
Stock-Based
Compensation
|
Prior to May 1, 2006, the Company applied the
intrinsic-value-based method of accounting prescribed by
Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related
interpretations including FASB Interpretation No. 44,
Accounting for Certain Transactions Involving Stock
Compensation, to account for its fixed plan stock options.
Under this method, compensation expense was recorded only if on
the date of grant the market price of the underlying stock
exceeded the exercise price. SFAS No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, and
SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation Transition and Disclosure,
established accounting and disclosure requirements using a
fair-value-based method of accounting for stock-based employee
compensation plans. As permitted by existing accounting
standards, the Company elected to continue to apply the
intrinsic-value-based method of accounting described above, and
adopted only the disclosure requirements of
SFAS No. 123, as amended. The following table
illustrates the effect on net loss if the fair-value-based
method had been applied to all outstanding and unvested awards
in the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Net loss, as reported
|
|
$
|
(428,634
|
)
|
|
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
Add stock-based employee
compensation expense included in reported net loss
|
|
|
131,500
|
|
|
|
44,000
|
|
Deduct total stock-based employee
compensation expense determined under fair-value-based method
for all awards
|
|
|
(1,367,000
|
)
|
|
|
(680,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net loss
|
|
$
|
(1,664,134
|
)
|
|
|
(7,714,911
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share, as reported
|
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
|
(1.37
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share, pro forma
|
|
$
|
(0.32
|
)
|
|
|
(1.49
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In accordance with SFAS No. 123, as amended by
SFAS No. 148, the fair value of option grants is
estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option
pricing model for pro forma disclosure purposes with the
following
F-9
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
weighted-average assumptions used for grants: dividend yield of
0%; risk-free interest rate of 4% and 4.9% for the years ended
April 30, 2005 and 2006, respectively; an expected option
life of 8.9 years and 9.3 years for the years ended
April 30, 2005 and 2006, respectively; and volatility of
80.8% and 72% for the years ended April 30, 2005 and 2006,
respectively. These assumptions were used to determine the
weighted average per share fair value of $13.92 and $10.20 for
stock options granted during the years ended April 30, 2005
and 2006, respectively.
On May 1, 2006, the Company adopted the provisions of
SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment
(SFAS No. 123R), which requires that the costs
resulting from all share-based payment transactions be
recognized in the consolidated financial statements at their
fair values. The Company adopted SFAS No. 123R using
the modified prospective application method under which the
provisions of SFAS No. 123R apply to new awards and to
awards modified, repurchased, or canceled after the adoption
date. Additionally, compensation cost for the portion of the
awards for which the requisite service had not been rendered
that were outstanding as of May 1, 2006 will be recognized
in the consolidated statements of operations over the remaining
service period after such date based on the awards
original estimated fair value. The aggregate share-based
compensation expense recorded in the consolidated statements of
operations for the year ended April 30, 2007 under
SFAS No. 123R was approximately $1,082,000. The
Company would have recorded an immaterial amount of share-based
compensation expense related to employees for the year ended
April 30, 2007 if it had continued to account for
share-based compensation under APB Opinion No. 25. For the
year ended April 30, 2007, this additional share-based
compensation increased the net loss by approximately $1,073,000
and increased basic and diluted loss per share by approximately
$0.20.
Valuation
Assumptions for Options Granted During the Year Ended
April 30, 2007
The fair value of each stock option granted during the year
ended April 30, 2007 was estimated at the date of grant
using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, assuming no
dividends and using the weighted average valuation assumptions
noted in the following table. The risk-free rate is based on the
U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant.
The expected life (estimated period of time outstanding) of the
stock options granted was estimated using the
simplified method as permitted by the Securities and
Exchange Commissions Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 107, Share-Based Payment. Expected
volatility was based on historical volatility for a peer group
of companies for a period equal to the stock options
expected life, calculated on a daily basis.
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
Expected life
|
|
|
5.5 years
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
72.0
|
%
|
The above assumptions were used to determine the weighted
average per share fair value of $8.80 for stock options granted
during the year ended April 30, 2007.
|
|
(m)
|
Accounting
for Income Taxes
|
Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability
method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for
the future tax consequences attributable to differences between
the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and
liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss
and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to
apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary
differences and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards are
expected to be recovered, settled or utilized. The effect on
deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is
recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment
date.
|
|
(n)
|
Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Loss
|
The functional currency for the Companys foreign
operations is the applicable local currency. The translation
from the applicable foreign currencies to U.S. dollars is
performed for balance sheet accounts using the exchange
F-10
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
rates in effect at the balance sheet date and for revenue and
expense accounts using an average exchange rate during the
period. The unrealized gains or losses resulting from such
translation are included in accumulated other comprehensive loss
within stockholders equity.
|
|
(o)
|
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
|
In June 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154,
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, which requires
entities that voluntarily make a change in accounting principle
to apply that change retrospectively to prior periods
financial statements, unless this would be impracticable.
SFAS No. 154 supersedes APB Opinion No. 20,
Accounting Changes, which previously required that most
voluntary changes in accounting principles be recognized by
including the cumulative effect of changing to the new
accounting principle in the current periods net income or
loss. SFAS No. 154 also makes a distinction between
retrospective application of an accounting principle
and the restatement of financial statements to
reflect the correction of an error. Another significant change
in practice under SFAS No. 154 will be that if an
entity changes its method of depreciation, amortization or
depletion of long-lived, non-financial assets, the change must
be accounted for as a change in accounting estimate effected by
a change in accounting principle. Under APB Opinion No. 20,
such a change would have been reported as a change in accounting
principle. SFAS No. 154 is effective for accounting
changes and corrections of errors made in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2005. Adoption of SFAS No. 154
did not have any effect on the Companys financial position
or results of operations.
In July 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, or
FIN 48. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprises
financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes. FIN 48 prescribes a
recognition and measurement method for tax positions taken or
expected to be taken in a tax return. FIN 48 also provides
guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and
penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosures and
transitions. FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2006. The Company is currently analyzing
the effects of FIN 48, but does not expect FIN 48 to
have a material effect on its financial position or results of
operations.
In September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued
Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, Considering the
Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying
Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements, or
SAB 108. SAB 108 provides guidance on how prior year
misstatements should be taken into consideration when
quantifying misstatements in current year financial statements
for purposes of determining whether the current years
financial statements are materially misstated. SAB 108 was
effective for the Companys year ended April 30, 2007.
The adoption of SAB 108 did not have any impact on the
Companys consolidated financial statements.
|
|
(3)
|
Certificates
of Deposit
|
Certificates of deposit with maturities in excess of
90 days from purchase are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nominal Face
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
3.92% due August 11, 2006
|
|
|
482,156
|
|
|
|
USD
|
|
|
$
|
482,156
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.20% due May 17, 2007
|
|
|
2,496,832
|
|
|
|
GBP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,989,420
|
|
5.22% due June 20, 2007
|
|
|
1,701,810
|
|
|
|
GBP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,400,726
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
482,156
|
|
|
|
8,390,146
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-11
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
(4)
|
Property
and Equipment
|
The components of property and equipment are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Computers and software
|
|
$
|
402,037
|
|
|
|
466,734
|
|
Equipment
|
|
|
452,448
|
|
|
|
403,233
|
|
Office furniture and equipment
|
|
|
233,178
|
|
|
|
198,923
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
59,358
|
|
|
|
47,494
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,147,021
|
|
|
|
1,116,384
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(602,736
|
)
|
|
|
(728,461
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
544,285
|
|
|
|
387,923
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in accrued expenses at April 30, 2006 and 2007
were contract reserves of approximately $785,000 and $1,780,000,
respectively, and accrued employee incentive payments of
approximately $353,000 and $1,051,000, respectively. Accrued
expenses at April 30, 2007 also included costs associated
with the initial public offering in the US of approximately
$680,000.
|
|
(6)
|
Related-Party
Transactions
|
The Company is obligated to pay royalties to G.W. Taylor, a
founding stockholder of the Company; M.Y. Epstein; and the
estate of J.R. Burns (stockholders of the Company) related to
U.S. patent 4404490 entitled, Power Generation from
Waves Near the Surface of Bodies of Water. Royalty
payments are limited to $925,000 in the aggregate, based on
revenues related to certain piezoelectric-technology, if any, on
the basis of 6% of future licenses sold and 4% of future product
sales and development contracts. Through April 30, 2007,
approximately $200,000 of royalties had been earned. During the
years ended April 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007, no royalties
were earned pursuant to these agreements, and no future
royalties are expected to be earned. As of April 30, 2006
and 2007, approximately $26,000 was included in other current
liabilities related to these agreements.
In August 1999, the Company entered into a consulting agreement
with an individual for marketing services at a rate of $600 per
day of services provided. The individual became a member of the
board of directors in June 2006. Under this consulting
agreement, the Company expensed approximately $51,000, $53,000
and $54,000 during the years ended April 30, 2005, 2006 and
2007, respectively.
Also see Note 8 for an additional related-party transaction.
During the year ended April 30, 2000, the Company received
an award of $250,000 from the State of New Jersey
Commission on Science and Technology for the development of a
wave power system that was deployed off the coast of New Jersey.
Under the terms of this award, the Company must repay the amount
funded, without interest, by January 15, 2012. The amounts
to be repaid each year are determined as a percentage of
revenues (as defined in the loan agreement) the Company receives
that year from its customer contracts that meet criteria
specified in the loan agreement, with any remaining amount due
on January 15, 2012. Based upon the terms of the award, the
Company has repaid approximately $16,000 and is required to
repay an additional approximately $2,000 as of April 30,
2007. The total repayment amount of approximately $18,000 has
reduced the long-term debt balance. The current payment required
was included in accrued expenses in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheet as of April 30, 2007.
F-12
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
During the year ended April 30, 2003, the Company entered
into an agreement under which the Company received a payment of
$75,000, which was included in deferred credits until the
earning process was completed. During the year ended
April 30, 2006, the earning process was completed, and the
nonrefundable payment of $75,000 has been included in other
income in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations.
During the year ended April 30, 2001, in connection with
the sale of common stock to an investor, the Company received
$600,000 from the investor in exchange for an option to purchase
up to 500,000 metric tons of carbon emissions credits generated
by the Company during the years 2008 through 2012, at a 30%
discount from the then-prevailing market rate. This amount has
been recorded in deferred credits in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets as of April 30, 2006 and 2007.
If by December 31, 2012 the Company does not become
entitled under applicable laws to the full amount of emission
credits covered by the option, the Company is obligated to
return the option fee of $600,000, less the aggregate discount
on any emission credits sold to the investor prior to such date.
If the Company receives emission credits under applicable laws
and fails to sell to the investor the credits up to the full
amount of emission credits covered by the option, the investor
is entitled to liquidated damages equal to 30% of the aggregate
market value of the shortfall in emission credits (subject to a
limit on the market price of emission credits).
On December 7, 2006, the board of directors approved and
recommended to shareholders and on January 12, 2007, the
shareholders of the Company approved a one-for-ten reverse stock
split, which was effective on April 20, 2007. All share
data shown in the accompanying consolidated financial statements
have been retroactively restated to reflect the reverse stock
split and the reincorporation.
On April 30, 2007, the Company completed an initial public
offering in the United States on The NASDAQ Global Market by
issuing 5,000,000 shares of its common stock for a purchase
price of $20.00 per share, resulting in net proceeds to the
Company of $89,903,819.
During the year ended April 30, 2003, the Company sold
3,750 shares of common stock to an investor at a price of
$13.30 per share, which was subject to adjustment based on the
pricing of future financings, if any, during calendar year 2003.
Based on the price at which the Companys common shares
were sold at the time of an initial public offering on the AIM
market of the London Stock Exchange in October 2003, this
adjustment, in the form of a reduction of 1,397 shares
issued, was resolved and recorded during the year ended
April 30, 2005.
During the year ended April 30, 1998, under an agreement
with a group of investors, the Company received $50,000 as an
advance payment related to a potential future transaction, which
was recorded in accrued expenses. During the year ended
April 30, 2006, the Company repaid this amount by issuing
2,732 shares of common stock, in accordance with the terms
of the agreement.
In September 2003, and in connection with the AIM offering, the
Companys stockholders authorized 5,000,000 shares of
undesignated preferred stock with a par value of $0.001 per
share. At April 30, 2006 and 2007, no shares of preferred
stock had been issued.
Prior to August 2001, the Company maintained qualified and
nonqualified stock option plans. The Company has reserved
494,594 shares of common stock for issuance under these
plans. There are no options available for future grant under
these plans as of April 30, 2007.
F-13
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
In August 2001, the Company approved the 2001 Stock Plan, which
provides for the grant of incentive stock options and
nonqualified stock options. A total of 1,000,000 shares are
authorized for issuance under the 2001 Stock Plan. As of
April 30, 2007, the Company had issued or reserved
808,980 shares for issuance under the 2001 Stock Plan.
Members of the board of directors who are not full-time
employees receive an annual option grant to acquire
2,500 shares. The options are granted after the annual
meeting of shareholders for the year then ended. Vesting of
stock options is determined by the board of directors. The
contractual term of these stock options is up to ten years.
After the effectiveness of the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan, no
further options or other awards have been or will be granted
under the 2001 Stock Plan.
On April 24, 2007, the Companys 2006 Stock Incentive
Plan became effective. There are 803,215 shares reserved
for issuance under this plan, which consists of 680,000 new
shares plus 123,215 shares of common stock previously
available under the 2001 Stock Plan. The Companys
employees, officers, directors, consultants and advisors are
eligible to receive awards under the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan;
however, incentive stock options may only be granted to
employees. The maximum number of shares of common stock with
respect to which awards may be granted to any participant under
the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan is 200,000 per calendar year. The
2006 Stock Incentive Plan is administered by the Companys
board of directors who may delegate authority to one or more
committees or subcommittees of the board of directors or to the
Companys officers. If the board of directors delegates
authority to an officer, the officer has the power to make
awards to all of the Companys employees, except to
executive officers. The board of directors will fix the terms of
the awards to be granted by such officer. No award may be
granted under the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan after
December 7, 2016, but the vesting and effectiveness of
awards granted before that date may extend beyond that date.
Transactions under these option plans during the year ended
April 30, 2007 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
Shares Under
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In Years)
|
|
|
Outstanding April 30, 2006
|
|
|
1,205,030
|
|
|
|
14.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(10,026
|
)
|
|
|
16.83
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(64,950
|
)
|
|
|
8.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(22,600
|
)
|
|
|
8.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
196,120
|
|
|
|
13.75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding April 30, 2007
|
|
|
1,303,574
|
|
|
|
14.49
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable April 30, 2007
|
|
|
974,266
|
|
|
|
14.89
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years
ended April 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007 was approximately
$313,000, $153,000 and $188,000, respectively. The total
intrinsic value of outstanding and exercisable options as of
April 30, 2007 was approximately $2,400,000 and $2,000,000,
respectively. As of April 30, 2007, approximately 296,000
additional options were expected to vest, which had total
intrinsic value of approximately $339,000 and a weighted average
remaining contractual term of 8.2 years. As of April 30,
2007, there was approximately $2,400,000 of total unrecognized
compensation cost related to non-vested stock options granted
under the plans. This cost is expected to be recognized over a
weighted-average period of 2.5 years. The Company normally
issues new shares to satisfy option exercises under these plans.
Certain stock options granted during the years ended
April 30, 2005 and 2006 were granted to employees with
exercise prices less than the fair value of the underlying
common stock on the date of grant. Additionally, certain options
were granted to consultants during the years ended
April 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007. The Company has charged
compensation expense of $184,674, $129,139 and $70,235 related
to these option grants, which has been
F-14
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
included in selling, general, and administrative costs in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations for the years
ended April 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively.
The tax effects of temporary differences that give rise to
significant portions of the Companys deferred tax assets
and deferred tax liabilities are presented below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal net operating loss
carryforwards
|
|
$
|
6,638,000
|
|
|
|
8,218,000
|
|
Foreign net operating loss
carryforwards
|
|
|
1,210,000
|
|
|
|
1,897,000
|
|
Research and development tax
credits
|
|
|
505,000
|
|
|
|
761,000
|
|
Stock compensation
|
|
|
1,478,000
|
|
|
|
1,509,000
|
|
Unrealized foreign exchange loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
314,000
|
|
|
|
829,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross deferred tax assets
|
|
|
10,145,000
|
|
|
|
13,220,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment
|
|
|
(31,000
|
)
|
|
|
(17,000
|
)
|
Unrealized foreign exchange gain
|
|
|
(60,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(91,000
|
)
|
|
|
(17,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets valuation
allowance
|
|
|
(10,054,000
|
)
|
|
|
(13,203,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax benefit was $29,335 and $143,963 for the years ended
April 30, 2005 and 2006, respectively. The effective income
tax rate differed from the percentages computed by applying the
U.S. Federal income tax rate of 34% to loss before income
taxes as a result of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Computed expected tax
benefit
|
|
|
(34
|
)%
|
|
|
(34
|
)%
|
|
|
(34
|
)%
|
Increase (reduction) in income
taxes resulting from:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State income taxes, net of federal
benefit
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Federal research and development
tax credits
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Sale of state loss carryforwards
and tax credits
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-deductible expenses
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Increase in valuation allowance
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)%
|
|
|
(2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets,
management considers whether it is more likely than not that
some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be
realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is
dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during
the periods in which those temporary differences become
deductible. As of April 30, 2006 and 2007, based upon the
level of historical taxable losses, valuation allowances of
$10,054,000 and $13,203,000, respectively, were recorded in
accordance with the provisions of
F-15
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
SFAS No. 109. The valuation allowance increased
$2,697,000, $2,436,000 and $3,149,000 during the years ended
April 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively.
As of April 30, 2007, the Company had net operating loss
carryforwards for Federal income tax purposes of approximately
$24,200,000, which begin to expire in 2009. The Company also had
federal research and development credit carryforwards of
approximately $761,000 as of April 30, 2007, which begin to
expire in 2012. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 contains provisions
that limit the utilization of net operating loss and tax credit
carryforwards if there has been an ownership change, as defined.
Such an ownership change, as described in Section 382 of
the Internal Revenue Code, may limit the Companys ability
to utilize its net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards
on a yearly basis. Foreign loss before income taxes was
$527,974, $982,934 and $2,289,834 for the years ended
April 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively. As of
April 30, 2007, foreign net operating loss carryforwards
were approximately $6,300,000. These losses can be carried
forward indefinitely, but the Companys ability to utilize
these carryforwards may be limited in the event of an ownership
change.
During the years ended April 30, 2005 and 2006, the Company
sold a portion of its New Jersey state net operating loss
carryforwards and research and development credits to a company
for net proceeds of $29,335 and $143,963, respectively,
resulting in the recognition of income tax benefits in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
|
|
(13)
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
|
|
(a)
|
Operating
Lease Commitments
|
The Company leases office, laboratory and manufacturing space in
Pennington, New Jersey and office space in Warwick, United
Kingdom under operating leases that expire on various dates
through April 30, 2013. Rent expense under operating leases
was $154,731, $295,089 and $338,113 for the years ended
April 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007, respectively. Future minimum
lease payments under operating leases as of April 30, 2007
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Year ending April 30:
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
256,857
|
|
2009
|
|
|
240,191
|
|
2010
|
|
|
206,859
|
|
2011
|
|
|
206,859
|
|
2012
|
|
|
206,859
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
206,859
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,324,484
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company is involved from time to time in certain legal
actions arising in the ordinary course of business. Management
believes that the outcome of such actions will not have a
material adverse effect on the Companys financial position
or results of operations.
F-16
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
(14)
|
Quarterly
Financial Data (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Fiscal Year 2007
|
|
Jul 31
|
|
|
Oct 31
|
|
|
Jan 31
|
|
|
Apr 30
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
305,186
|
|
|
|
555,561
|
|
|
|
652,884
|
|
|
|
1,017,684
|
|
Gross profit (loss)
|
|
|
79,221
|
|
|
|
(601,104
|
)
|
|
|
(67,594
|
)
|
|
|
(862,950
|
)
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(2,360,950
|
)
|
|
|
(2,976,109
|
)
|
|
|
(2,436,457
|
)
|
|
|
(4,792,384
|
)
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(1,660,954
|
)
|
|
|
(2,307,200
|
)
|
|
|
(1,540,296
|
)
|
|
|
(4,130,315
|
)
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share
|
|
$
|
(0.32
|
)
|
|
|
(0.45
|
)
|
|
|
(0.30
|
)
|
|
|
(0.75
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Fiscal Year 2006
|
|
Jul 31
|
|
|
Oct 31
|
|
|
Jan 31
|
|
|
Apr 30
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
492,820
|
|
|
|
613,679
|
|
|
|
360,784
|
|
|
|
280,432
|
|
Gross profit (loss)
|
|
|
(123,615
|
)
|
|
|
(276,520
|
)
|
|
|
(53,562
|
)
|
|
|
142,094
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(1,401,420
|
)
|
|
|
(1,984,647
|
)
|
|
|
(1,866,638
|
)
|
|
|
(2,474,582
|
)
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(2,645,920
|
)
|
|
|
(1,402,480
|
)
|
|
|
(1,437,877
|
)
|
|
|
(1,592,634
|
)
|
Basic and diluted net loss per
share
|
|
$
|
(0.51
|
)
|
|
|
(0.27
|
)
|
|
|
(0.28
|
)
|
|
|
(0.31
|
)
|
|
|
(15)
|
Operating
Segments and Geographic Information
|
The Companys business consists of one segment as this
represents managements view of the Companys
operations. The Company operates on a worldwide basis with one
operating company in the US, one subsidiary in the UK and one
subsidiary in Australia, which are categorized below as North
America, Europe and Australia, respectively. Revenues are
generally attributed to the operating unit which bills the
customers.
Geographic information is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers
|
|
$
|
5,365,235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,365,235
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(3,263,815
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,263,815
|
)
|
Long-lived assets
|
|
|
427,613
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
427,613
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
41,596,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,596,387
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers
|
|
$
|
1,747,715
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,747,715
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(6,743,896
|
)
|
|
|
(833,147
|
)
|
|
|
(150,244
|
)
|
|
|
(7,727,287
|
)
|
Long-lived assets
|
|
|
487,770
|
|
|
|
56,515
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
544,285
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
33,820,540
|
|
|
|
156,102
|
|
|
|
19,496
|
|
|
|
33,996,138
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers
|
|
$
|
1,484,998
|
|
|
|
1,007,689
|
|
|
|
38,628
|
|
|
|
2,531,315
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(10,254,579
|
)
|
|
|
(2,191,703
|
)
|
|
|
(119,618
|
)
|
|
|
(12,565,900
|
)
|
Long-lived assets
|
|
|
293,633
|
|
|
|
94,290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
387,923
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
118,074,176
|
|
|
|
1,607,549
|
|
|
|
29,821
|
|
|
|
119,711,546
|
|
F-17
EX-23.1
EXHIBIT 23.1
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors
Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.:
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statement on
Form S-8
(No. 333-142547)
of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. of our report dated
July 27, 2007, with respect to the consolidated balance
sheets of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
April 30, 2006 and 2007, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders equity and
comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended April 30, 2007, which report
appears in the April 30, 2007 annual report on
Form 10-K
of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.
Our report refers to the adoption of the fair value method of
accounting for stock-based compensation as required by Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R),
Share-Based Payment, effective May 1, 2006.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
July 27, 2007
EX-31.1
EXHIBIT 31.1
CERTIFICATIONS
I, George W. Taylor, certify that:
|
|
|
|
1.
|
I have reviewed this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.;
|
|
|
2.
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
|
|
|
3.
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in
all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;
|
|
|
4.
|
The registrants other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e))
for the registrant and have:
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during
the period in which this report is being prepared;
|
|
|
|
|
(b)
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and
|
|
|
|
|
(c)
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and
|
|
|
|
|
5.
|
The registrants other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board
of directors:
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
|
|
|
|
|
(b)
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting.
|
George W. Taylor
Chief Executive Officer
Dated: July 27, 2007
EX-31.2
EXHIBIT 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Charles F. Dunleavy, certify that:
|
|
|
|
1.
|
I have reviewed this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.;
|
|
|
2.
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
|
|
|
3.
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in
all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;
|
|
|
4.
|
The registrants other certifying officer and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e))
for the registrant and have:
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during
the period in which this report is being prepared;
|
|
|
|
|
(b)
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and
|
|
|
|
|
(c)
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and
|
|
|
|
|
5.
|
The registrants other certifying officer and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board
of directors:
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
|
|
|
|
|
(b)
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting.
|
Charles F. Dunleavy
Chief Financial Officer
Dated: July 27, 2007
EX-32.1
EXHIBIT 32.1
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Annual Report on
Form 10-K
of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. (the Company) for
the period ended April 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned, George W. Taylor, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and
|
|
|
(2)
|
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
|
George W. Taylor
Chief Executive Officer
Date: July 27, 2007
EX-32.2
EXHIBIT 32.2
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Annual Report on
Form 10-K
of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. (the Company) for
the period ended April 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned, Charles F. Dunleavy, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and
|
|
|
(2)
|
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
|
Charles F. Dunleavy
Chief Financial Officer
Date: July 27, 2007
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.
OCEAN POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INCORPORATED
Date: July 27, 2007
George W. Taylor
Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George
W. Taylor
|
|
Director, Chief Executive
Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
July 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seymour
S. Preston III
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors
|
|
July 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles
F. Dunleavy
|
|
Director, Chief Financial
Officer,
Senior Vice President, Treasurer and
Secretary (Principal Financial Officer
and Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
July 27, 2007
|