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, 2009
|
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
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
22-2535818
(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 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 whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such
files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
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, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in Rule
12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated
filer o
|
Accelerated
filer þ
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
|
Smaller
reporting
company o
|
(Do not check if a smaller
reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the common stock of the registrant
held by non-affiliates as of October 31, 2008, the last
business day of the registrants most recently completed
second fiscal quarter, was $50.8 million based on the
closing sale price of the of the registrants common stock
on that date as reported on the Nasdaq Global Market.
The number of shares outstanding of the registrants common
stock as of June 30, 2009 was 10,210,354.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
|
|
|
Document
|
|
Part of the Form 10-K into Which Incorporated
|
|
Proxy Statement for the registrants 2009 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.
2
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.
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 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 over 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.
In July 2007, our PowerBuoy interface with the electrical
utility power grid was certified as compliant with international
standards. An independent laboratory provided testing and
evaluation services to certify that our 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.
|
Our product development and engineering efforts are focused on
increasing the peak-rated output of our utility PowerBuoy system
from the current 40 kiloWatt (kW), and, to a lesser extent,
researching and developing new products, product applications
and complementary technologies. We believe that, by increasing
the maximum related output of our utility PowerBuoy system, 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
expect that our first 150kW PowerBuoy will be constructed and
ready for deployment by the end of 2009, and the design of our
500kW PowerBuoy will be completed in mid-2011. 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 multiple 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, 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 wave power station off the coast of Santoña, Spain.
|
|
|
|
The United States Navy, to develop and build wave power systems
at the US Marine Corps Base in Hawaii.
|
|
|
|
The Scottish Government, to develop a 150kW PowerBuoy for
deployment at the Orkney Islands European Marine Energy Center.
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative (PNGC Power) and the US
Department of Energy, both of which are providing funding toward
the fabrication and ocean installation of a 150kW PowerBuoy near
Reedsport, Oregon.
|
|
|
|
The United States Navy, to provide PowerBuoy technology to a
unique program for ocean data gathering. Under this program, the
Navy will conduct an ocean test of an advanced design of our
autonomous PowerBuoy as the power source for the Navys
Deep Water Active Detection System.
|
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
that we have operated off the coast of New Jersey, we are
also planning to develop and operate two additional
demonstration wave power stations, with one to be located off
the coast of Reedsport, Oregon and the other to be located near
Cornwall, England. We plan to generate revenue from the
demonstration wave power stations off Cornwall and Reedsport by
selling electricity to utilities.
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. We
make available free of charge on our website our annual reports
on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K
and all amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably
practicable after such material is filed electronically with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. 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 United States.
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. Although subject
to short-term fluctuations, the cost of fossil fuel used to
generate electricity has been generally rising and is likely to
continue to rise in the future.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
5
As a result of these and other factors, the EIA projects that
grid-connected renewable generating capacity 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 move
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 50 MegaWatts (MW) 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 approximately one-tenth of the
ocean surface occupied by an offshore wind power station of
equivalent capacity.
|
|
|
|
Predictability. The supply of electricity from
wave energy can be forecasted in advance. The amount of energy a
wave hundreds 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.
Power producers 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.
|
|
|
|
Close to population centers. The proximity of
wave energy resources to large population areas means that power
transmission infrastructure is often already in place and may be
utilized for wave energy generation projects.
|
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.
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
6
generate power for use independent of the power grid in remote
locations. Both products use the same PowerBuoy technology.
Pictured below is our 40kW PowerBuoy system at our facilities in
New Jersey, which was 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 electronically
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 for the PB150 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
recommence. 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 150kW PowerBuoy
system is expected to have a maximum diameter of approximately
36 feet and be approximately 135 feet long with
approximately 30 feet protruding above the ocean surface.
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. 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.
7
The mooring system for keeping a utility PowerBuoy system in
position connects it by lines to three floats that, in turn, are
connected by lines to three anchors. This is a well-established
mooring system, referred to as three-point mooring, which we
have improved upon with various techniques 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.
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 expect that our first 150kW PowerBuoy will be ready for
deployment by the end of 2009, and the design of our 500kW
PowerBuoy will be completed in mid-2011.
In addition, 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 multiple 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.
Construction of our first commercial pod is now in progress, in
connection with our wave power project located off the coast of
Santoña, Spain.
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 our systems comply with designated national and
international standards. The PowerBuoy grid interface bears the
ETL listing mark, and can be connected to the utility grid.
Autonomous
PowerBuoy System
The autonomous PowerBuoy system is based on similar technology
to 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 in deep ocean conditions.
Status of
Autonomous PowerBuoy Systems
We have received several contracts from the US Navy to provide
our PowerBuoy technology to a unique program for ocean data
gathering. Under this program, the Navy has conducted an ocean
test of our autonomous PowerBuoy as the power source for the
Navys Deep Water Active Detection System and we have
received a contract for the next phase of work under this
program. This new contract is for ocean testing by the Navy of
an advanced version of the autonomous PowerBuoy for the
Navys operational requirements.
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.
8
Our PowerBuoy system uses an ocean-tested technology to
generate electricity.
|
|
|
|
|
We have been conducting ocean tests for over a decade in order
to demonstrate 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 had continuous operation of
12 months. Our PowerBuoy systems have survived several
hurricanes and winter storms while installed in the ocean.
|
Our PowerBuoy systems grid connection has been
certified.
|
|
|
|
|
In July 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 design 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, or
tune 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 effectiveness of different energy
sources. Since we have not yet operated a complete wave power
station, we do not have a measured load factor. However, based
on our research and analysis, we believe the design load factor
for a PowerBuoy wave power station located at most of our
targeted sites would be favorably positioned in the range of 30%
to 45%, as compared to other renewable energy services.
|
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 currently targeting the west coast of 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 and access
to existing power transmission infrastructure.
|
We have significant commercial relationships.
|
|
|
|
|
Our current projects with Iberdrola, PNGC Power, the Scottish
Government, and the US Department of Energy provide us with an
initial opportunity to sell our wave power stations for utility
applications. 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 our experiences with our projects to add wave power
stations, new customers and complementary revenue streams from
operations and maintenance contracts.
|
|
|
|
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. We
believe that the successful deployment of our PowerBuoy systems
for the US Navy will significantly enhance market visibility.
|
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 the design of our utility
PowerBuoy system from the current 40kW. Assuming we are able to
reach manufacturing levels of at least 300 units of 500kW
PowerBuoy systems per year, we believe, based upon our
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
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 with other existing
renewables in key markets. We expect to complete the design of
our 500kW PowerBuoy in mid-2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior to achieving full production levels of the 500kW PowerBuoy
system, if we achieve economies of scale for our 150kW PowerBuoy
systems, we expect to be able to offer a renewable electricity
solution that competes with the price of electricity 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. This assessment resulted in a Finding of No
Significant Impact, the highest such level of approval. 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, in particular wind 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.
|
Customers/Projects
The table below shows the percentage of our revenue we derived
from significant customers for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
Customer
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
US Navy
|
|
|
67
|
%
|
|
|
58
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
Iberdrola and Total
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
|
31
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
Scottish Government
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
US Department of Energy
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We expect an increasing proportion of our future revenues to be
contributed by commercial customers.
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: the west coast of 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 our Executive Chairman and our
Vice President of Business Development and Marketing. 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. (Iberdrola Energias), 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
10
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, a feasibility analysis for
deployment at the site, a 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.
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. Funding is shared
among the parties to the agreement based on agreed upon
percentages that reflect the parties anticipated ownership
interest in the wave power station. We own 10% of Iberdrola
Cantabria.
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 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 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. In February 2008, the Spain
construction agreement was amended to provide for the current
phase of the construction of the 1.39MW wave power station to
include the manufacture and deployment of one 40kW PowerBuoy
system plus the fabrication of the underwater power transmission
cable and underwater substation for all ten PowerBuoy systems.
The terms of the installation of the underwater transmission
cable and underwater substation will be separately negotiated,
and, if so agreed, are expected to provide for additional
funding for the installation work.
The initial PB40 PowerBuoy system for this project was deployed
in September 2008. After a short testing period, the buoy was
removed from the water for work on improvements to the power
take-off and control systems. We are currently in discussions
with Iberdrola Cantabria regarding the nature and costs of these
improvements and their effects on plans for the redeployment of
the buoy and the next phases of the project. Because the amended
Spain construction agreement does not cover the terms for
deployment of the underwater transmission cable and substation
and the manufacture and deployment of the nine additional
PowerBuoy units, we will need to enter into a subsequent
contract with Iberdrola Cantabria before we complete these
elements of construction of the full wave power station. In
addition, if we and Iberdrola Cantabria decide not to redeploy
the PB40 PowerBuoy, the total contract value for the current
phase of the contract may be reduced. If we are unable to
successfully meet the terms of the Spain construction agreement,
or if we are not able to successfully negotiate a subsequent
contract or contracts with Iberdrola Cantabria for the
manufacture and deployment of the nine additional PowerBuoy
units, or if Iberdrola Cantabria were to terminate the Spain
construction agreement for any of these reasons, we may lose a
component of our current and anticipated revenue stream. If we
are unable to agree to the necessary contract modifications,
Iberdrola Cantabria will have the right to terminate the
agreement if the first phase of construction is not completed by
December 31, 2009 for reasons attributable to us, or if we
interrupt our services for more than 180 days and do not
resume within a
30-day
period, 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. In addition, we
have made guarantees to Iberdrola Cantabria associated with the
current 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. If we are found to be in default of our obligations
under the Spain construction agreement, Iberdrola Cantabria will
have the right to seek reimbursement for direct damages only,
limited to amounts specified in the contract.
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. We have
recognized an anticipated loss of $4.2 million under this
contract. Our estimates of the projects costs may increase
in the future, and 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
11
results of operations. The anticipated loss of $4.2 million
under the Spain construction agreement includes costs incurred
to date and our current estimate of other amounts we may be
required to bear under the agreement and reflects our estimate
of potential reductions in milestone amounts billable under the
current phase of the agreement.
Pictured below are views of our 40kW-rated PowerBuoy system
during tow-out to the deployment site off Santoña, Spain,
and after deployment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are paid under the Spain construction agreement as we
complete certain milestones for a total potential payment for
the current phase of construction of approximately
2.7 million. As of April 30, 2009, we had
recognized revenue of approximately $2.9 million and an
anticipated loss of $4.2 million under the Spain
construction agreement. The anticipated loss at completion of
the contract also reflects our decision made in the fourth
quarter of fiscal year 2008 to absorb $1.9 million of
additional costs of the project beyond our obligation for the
initial cost overruns and certain other costs as set forth in
the agreement. This decision was based on the progress of the
project to date, the benefits to be derived from a successful
initial project and the prospect of incremental contract value
to be received in connection with additional work under this
contract.
Scotland
Project
In 2007, we received a $1.8 million contract from the
Scottish Executive for the construction of a 150kW
grid-connected PowerBuoy system at the European Marine Energy
Centre (EMEC) in Orkney, Scotland. EMEC is a test facility for
marine energy technologies, for which the Scottish Government
has built the infrastructure for grid connection. In 2008, we
signed a Berth Agreement with EMEC. This agreement provides for
the deployment and operation of PowerBuoys as well as their
connection to the wave energy berths dedicated 2MW subsea
cable already installed and connected to the Scottish grid. The
Berth Agreement also enables us to sell power to the grid up to
the 2MW capacity limit. The design phase of the buoy has been
completed and construction is underway, we have completed the
mechanical elements of the power-take-off system, and we have
awarded the steel fabrication contract for the PowerBuoy
structure. We expect the buoy to be ready for deployment by the
end of 2009. As of April 30, 2009, we have recognized
$0.9 million in revenue associated with this project.
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. In September 2007, we received
$1.9 million of additional funding under this program, plus
another $1.4 million in early 2009. Under the contract for
the current phase of the project, which was entered into in
September 2005 and expires in December 2009, we are reimbursed
for costs and paid a fixed fee for total potential revenue of
$5.5 million. In November 2008, we deployed a 40kW rated
PowerBuoy at the Marine Corps Base. After an initial testing
period during which the power produced was in accord with our
predictive models, the buoy was removed from the water for
maintenance and upgrade. The PowerBuoy is expected to be
re-deployed during the summer of 2009.
12
Pictured below are views of our 40kW-rated PowerBuoy system
being lowered into the ocean in Oahu, and after deployment.
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 first
18-month
program, the Navy conducted in October 2008 an ocean test of our
autonomous PowerBuoy as the power source for the Navys
Deep Water Active Detection System. Following that ocean test,
we received a new $3.0 million contract for participation
in the second phase of the program, for the building of an
advanced version of our autonomous PowerBuoy for the Navys
operational requirements. In addition, we will support the
Navys ocean test procedures in the areas of mooring
design, at sea operations and deployment.
Reedsport,
Oregon Project
In February 2007, the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) 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 2MW would be a demonstration wave power station. In
February 2007, we signed a cooperative agreement with PNGC
Power, an Oregon-based electric power cooperative, as our
utility partner for the development of a wave power station. In
July 2007, we filed a Pre-Application Document and Notice of
Intent with FERC for the Reedsport project, which provides
notice of our intent to seek a license for the Reedsport wave
park and information regarding the project. We believe this was
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 will need
additional authorization from FERC to sell electric power
generated from the Reedsport wave power station into the
wholesale or retail markets.
In August 2007, we announced the award of a $0.5 million
contract from PNGC Power, providing funding toward the
fabrication and installation of a 150kW PowerBuoy system for the
Reedsport project. In October 2008, we received a
$2.0 million award from the US Department of Energy (DOE)
in support of the project. The DOE grant will be used to help
fund the fabrication and factory testing of the first PowerBuoy
to be installed at the Reedsport site. This is the first award
for the building of ocean wave energy systems by the DOE, and we
believe it is indicative of the growing recognition and support
of wave energy in the US federal and state governments. As of
April 30, 2009, we have recognized $0.1 million in
revenue associated with this project.
We continue to make progress on the overall permitting and
licensing process while working extensively with interested
stakeholder groups at local, county, state and federal agency
levels.
Other
Projects
In February 2006, we received approval from the South West of
England Regional Development Agency (SWRDA) to install a 5MW
demonstration wave power station off the coast of Cornwall,
England as part of SWRDAs Wave Hub project, a
planned offshore facility for demonstrating and testing wave
energy generation devices. SWRDA has obtained the necessary
permits for this Wave Hub project, and the project has been
approved
13
for over £30 million of funding for construction of
the Wave Hub infrastructure. SWRDA currently is implementing the
tender process for the design and construction of such
infrastructure, and expects it to be installed in 2010. We are
in the planning and development stage for our part of the
project.
In December 2008, we announced a Joint Development Agreement
with Leighton Contractors Pty. Ltd. for the development of wave
power projects off the east and south coasts of Australia. Over
the past 50 years, Leighton has played an active role in
building Australias ports and marine facilities,
transportation infrastructure, and energy projects including
projects within the wind and offshore oil and gas sectors. Under
the terms of the agreement, Ocean Power Technologies
(Australasia) Pty. Ltd., our subsidiary based in Australia, will
identify potential project sites and assess their commercial
prospects, under contract from Leighton. Upon identification of
projects to be developed, Leighton would obtain approvals,
negotiate power purchase agreements, structure project
financing, and oversee project delivery and operation of the
power stations. If these projects are undertaken, Ocean Power
Technologies (Australasia) would sell the PowerBuoy wave power
stations to special purpose companies formed by Leighton for the
projects.
Since October 2005, we have operated a demonstration PowerBuoy
system off the coast of New Jersey, which allows us to
continuously monitor the system and evaluate its performance in
actual wave conditions. Periodically, the buoy is removed from
the ocean for maintenance, testing and upgrades, and is
redeployed. The buoy was deployed continuously for
12 months between October 2005 and October 2006, and
survived hurricane-generated storm waves during this period and
in a later period of ocean deployment. We have conducted
extensive diagnostic tests on the system, providing us with
information about the effects of ocean deployments that will
help us implement improvements in future PowerBuoy systems. This
system was not designed to supply electricity to the power grid,
but rather to provide us with operational data and marketing
opportunities. We were partially funded, which funds we
recognized as revenue, for the construction of this PowerBuoy
system by the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities. We do not
anticipate any additional funding or recognizing any additional
revenue in connection with this project.
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, 2009, our contract backlog was $7.5 million
as compared to $5.5 million as of April 30, 2008. 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 recognized 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.
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:
|
|
|
|
|
Sell turn-key power stations and operating and maintenance
contracts. Our fundamental business plan is to
sell turn-key power stations, rather than to take on the capital
requirements of building and owning power stations and selling
the energy generated. In addition, in order to create recurring
revenue streams, we seek to sell operating and maintenance
(O&M) contracts over the life-cycle of the plants.
|
|
|
|
Outsource most of the plant construction and
deployment. We outsource all metal fabrication,
anchoring, mooring, cabling supply and deployment in order to
minimize our capital requirements as we scale up production
volumes. The high value-added smart part of the
system is assembled and tested at our facilities and shipped to
project sites for integration into the PowerBuoys.
|
|
|
|
Concentrate sales and marketing efforts on four geographic
markets. We are currently focusing our sales and
marketing efforts on the west coast of 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
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continue to increase PowerBuoy system
output. Our product development and engineering
efforts are focused on increasing the output of the design of
our PowerBuoy systems from 40kW to 500kW. 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 float 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.
|
|
|
|
Leverage customer relationships to enhance the commercial
acceptance of our utility PowerBuoy system. We currently
have a commercial relationship with Iberdrola for the first
phase of the construction of a wave power station off the coast
of Santoña, Spain. We believe that our projects 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. Our relationship with PNGC Power regarding
our Reedsport, Oregon project is the first such utility
relationship on the west coast of the United States. 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 contract with the
US Navy for the testing of our autonomous PowerBuoy in
connection with a unique program for ocean data gathering. We
believe that successful testing of our autonomous PowerBuoy
System under this contract may result in additional revenues
from the US Navy and other prospective customers.
|
|
|
|
Maximize revenue opportunities with existing
customers. In January 2007, we entered into an
agreement under which we will be 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 our Spain project. The plans for the
next phase of the project, the redeployment of the PowerBuoy
system and the deployment of the substation, are currently under
discussion. If this phase goes forward, we would be paid a fixed
fee under this agreement 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 in order to
provide us with ongoing revenue streams.
|
Marketing
and Sales
We are developing our sales capabilities and have begun
commercial marketing and selling of our PowerBuoy systems.
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.
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. 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 to sell,
manufacture or operate PowerBuoy wave power stations.
15
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.
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. In addition, demonstration
wave power stations provide us with the opportunity to test and
refine our technology in actual operating conditions. Since
2005, we have operated a demonstration PowerBuoy system off the
coast of New Jersey. We are also planning to develop and operate
two additional demonstration wave power stations off the coasts
of Reedsport, Oregon and Cornwall, England. We plan to generate
revenue from the demonstration wave power stations at the
Cornwall and Reedsport sites by selling electricity to utilities.
Autonomous
PowerBuoy System Marketing
There are a variety of potential customers, such as the US
Department of Homeland Security and US Department of Defense,
that have specific needs for off-grid power generation that can
be supplied by our autonomous PowerBuoy system. Potential
applications for off-grid power supply include sonar and radar
surveillance, tsunami warning, oceanographic data collection,
offshore platforms and offshore aquaculture.
Manufacturing
and Deployment
Manufacturing
and Raw Materials
We engage in two types of manufacturing activities: the
manufacturing of the high value-added components, or smart
part modules, for systems control, power generation and
power conversion for each PowerBuoy system, and the contracting
to outside companies for the 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 a portfolio of
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 57 employees, some of whom are
responsible for manufacturing and testing our generators and
control systems. In order to meet our growth objectives, we
expect to increase our engineering and manufacturing staff to
100 people by the end of fiscal 2012.
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
16
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, and they
are 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.
In January 2009, we announced that we signed a letter of intent
with Lockheed Martin Corporation to collaborate in the delivery
of a utility-scale wave power generation project in North
America. We intend to enter into an agreement under which we
would provide our project and site development expertise, build
the power take-off and control systems of the plant, and provide
our proprietary PowerBuoy technology. Lockheed Martin would
undertake construction, systems integration and deployment of
the plant, as well as operations and maintenance services.
This is the first agreement between our two companies for a
utility-scale renewable energy project and builds on our
previous work together on systems for US homeland security and
maritime surveillance consisting of our autonomous PowerBuoy
integrated with Lockheed Martins advanced acoustic
sensors, signal processing and communications systems.
Our prospective wave power project with Lockheed Martin is
expected to be off the coasts of either California or Oregon.
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.
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
or barges. 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.
17
Research and development expenses are reflected on our
consolidated statements of operations as product development
costs. Research and development expenses were $8.4 million
for fiscal 2009, $8.3 million for fiscal 2008 and
$6.2 million for fiscal 2007.
We expect to complete the design for our 500kW PowerBuoy by
mid-2011. 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 the wave
capture portion of the 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 floats 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 are too large for these trucks and need
to be transported in modules and assembled
on-site. In
addition, we will 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. The power conversion
and controls system is complete for the 150kW PowerBuoy system,
and we expect to commence ocean testing in 2010.
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.
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, 2009, we owned a total of 40 issued United
States patents and 16 United States patent applications. We have
pending foreign counterparts to 14 of our issued patents and
eight 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 2026. 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
18
our proprietary position for our technology will depend on our
success in continuing to obtain 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 Intellectual
Property.
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®,
Talk on
Watertm
and
CellBuoytm
marks and our Making Waves in PowerSM service mark, and we have
filed applications to register our Subseapod and PowerTower
marks 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 40 to 50 companies
worldwide developing wave energy technologies. Most of these
companies are located in the United Kingdom, continental Europe,
the United States and Australia, and almost all are focused on
offshore systems. Only a few of these companies, like ourselves,
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 SWRDA in
participating in the development of a new Wave Hub power station
project off the coast of Cornwall, England. Three companies are
currently participating in the project: Fred Olsen Ltd., Orecon
and us.
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. Orecon is
seeking to deploy a multiple oscillating wave energy device,
which consists of several individual oscillating water columns
housed in one floating device. 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 compare 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.
19
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 to us or our customers.
Sale
and Transmission of Electricity
The US government regulates the electricity wholesale and
transmission business through 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 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 Reedsport,
Oregon and a 100MW wave power station off Coos Bay, Oregon.
Further, we have filed with FERC the required applications for
these two wave power station projects to provide our notice of
intent to seek licenses for the projects and to provide required
information regarding the projects. 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.
Iberdrola Energias has applied for and received the necessary
authorizations for installation of the first PowerBuoy at our
Santoña, Spain wave power project.
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 project and SWRDA 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.
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
20
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 often 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 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. Several governments also facilitate low
interest loans for renewable energy systems, either through
direct lending, credit enhancement or other programs.
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.
In 2008, the US enacted the Energy Improvement and Extension Act
of 2008, which enables owners of wave power projects in the US
to receive federal tax credits, thereby improving the long-term
economics of wave power as a renewable energy source. The Act
expands the definition of qualifying facilities for the
Production Tax Credit (PTC) to include those that generate power
from marine renewables (including wave and tidal). As a result,
the PTC is now allowed for electricity produced and sold after
October 3, 2008 from marine renewable energy facilities
with a nameplate capacity of at least 150 kiloWatts,
and that are placed in service anytime between October 3,
2008 and December 31, 2011. The credit rate for marine
renewables is $0.01 per kiloWatt hour, and the duration of the
credit will be ten years after the facility is placed in service.
Further, the State of Oregon has enacted the Business Energy Tax
Credit program that allows companies that invest in renewable
energy capital projects an Oregon State income tax credit of up
to 50% of the first $20.0 million of capital costs.
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 2015, 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
21
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 zero, and, therefore, a
PowerBuoy wave power station may generate carbon credits that
could be used and sold.
Employees
As of April 30, 2009, we had 57 employees, including
20 employees in manufacturing, 20 in research, development
and engineering functions and 17 employees in selling,
general and administrative functions. Of these employees, 42 are
located in Pennington, New Jersey and 15 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 12 employees, including engineers with
varying levels and areas of expertise, by the end of fiscal
2010. By the end of fiscal 2012, we expect to further increase
our staff 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 currently deployed, and that can be expanded
to cover our PowerBuoy systems to be deployed in the future. 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 $18.3 million in fiscal 2009,
$14.7 million in fiscal 2008 and $9.6 million in
fiscal 2007. As of April 30, 2009, we had an accumulated
deficit of $71.2 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 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.
22
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;
|
|
|
|
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 grid-connected
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 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
23
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 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 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. 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 may
increase 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 to 500kW. Our product development costs were
$8.4 million in fiscal 2009 as compared to
$8.3 million in fiscal 2008 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 may increase 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
12 years ago. However, to date we have only manufactured 12
PowerBuoy systems for use in ocean 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 yet demonstrated that our
engineering and test results can be duplicated in volume
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
24
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 and
ultimately to 500kW. 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 deployed cost effectively and without damage, and
developing adjustments to the mooring system to account for the
larger-sized PowerBuoy systems. We have experienced problems and
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 power transmission 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.
25
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.
If we
are not successful in completing the development of wave power
stations in Spain, it could 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 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 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. In February 2008, the Spain
construction agreement was amended to provide for the current
phase of the construction of the 1.39MW wave power station to
include the manufacture and deployment of one 40kW PowerBuoy
system plus the fabrication of the underwater power transmission
cable and underwater substation for all ten PowerBuoy systems.
The terms of the installation of the underwater transmission
cable and underwater substation will be separately negotiated,
and, if so agreed, are expected to provide for additional
funding for the installation work.
The initial PB40 PowerBuoy system for this project was deployed
in September 2008. After a short testing period, the buoy was
removed from the water for work on improvements to the power
take-off and control systems. We are currently in discussions
with Iberdrola Cantabria regarding the nature and costs of these
improvements and their effects on plans for the redeployment of
the buoy and the next phases of the project. Because the amended
Spain construction agreement does not cover the terms for
deployment of the underwater transmission cable and substation
and the manufacture and deployment of the nine additional
PowerBuoy units, we will need to enter into a subsequent
contract with Iberdrola Cantabria before we complete these
elements of construction of the full wave power station. In
addition, if we and Iberdrola Cantabria decide not to redeploy
the PB40 PowerBuoy, the total contract value for the current
phase of the contract may be reduced. 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 or contracts
with Iberdrola Cantabria for the manufacture and deployment of
the nine additional PowerBuoy units, or if Iberdrola Cantabria
were to terminate the Spain construction agreement for any of
these reasons, we may lose a material component of our current
and anticipated revenue stream. If we are unable to agree to the
necessary contract modifications, Iberdrola Cantabria will have
the right to terminate the agreement if the first phase of
construction is not completed by December 31, 2009 for
reasons attributable to us or if we interrupt our services for
more than 180 days and do not resume within a
30-day
period, 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. In addition, we
have made guarantees to Iberdrola Cantabria associated with the
current 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. If we are found to be in default of our obligations
under the Spain construction agreement, Iberdrola Cantabria will
have the right to seek reimbursement for direct damages only,
limited to amounts specified in the contract.
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
26
certain other costs as set forth in the agreement. We have
recognized an anticipated loss of $4.2 million under this
contract. Our estimates of the projects costs may increase
in the future, and 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. The anticipated loss of $4.2 million under
the Spain construction agreement includes costs incurred to date
and our current estimate of other amounts we may be required to
bear under the agreement and reflects our estimate of potential
reductions in milestone amounts billable under the current phase
of the contract.
If the Spain project were cancelled or otherwise interrupted, it
could adversely affect our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
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
original Spain construction agreement. Under this operations and
maintenance agreement, we would be required to provide services
for two years following provisional acceptance of the PowerBuoy
system and substation and infrastructure. We would 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 would be 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 would incur
a loss in connection with these services, which could adversely
affect our financial condition and results of operations. The
operations and maintenance agreement is subject to the
redeployment of the buoy and an agreement of the parties
regarding the deployment of the pod and cable.
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 projected 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.
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
27
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 current
phase of the construction of a 1.39MW wave power station off the
coast of Santoña, Spain contains guarantees associated with
this phase regarding the 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 2009, we generated substantially all of our revenues
from three entities. The US Navy, our largest customer,
accounted for 67% of our revenues during fiscal 2009, while
Iberdrola and Total accounted for 18% of our revenues. In fiscal
2008, revenues from the US Navy accounted for 58% of our total
revenues while Iberdrola and Total accounted for 31% of our
revenues. Our current contract for our project in Hawaii with
the US Navy expires in December 2009. We will be required to
enter into additional contracts with the US Navy for this
project, 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 using 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.
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
28
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.
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 some of our 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 additional risk to wave power
projects undertaken by the joint venture.
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
significantly by the end of fiscal 2012. 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
29
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.
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
2009 and fiscal 2008, we derived 67% and 58%, 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,
30
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.
The
loss of federal funding designed to promote innovative research
by small businesses may adversely affect our research and
development costs and revenues.
Many 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 $2.2 million for fiscal
2009 and $2.8 million for fiscal 2008.
As a result of the increased institutional, corporate and
foreign ownership following our April 2007 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, which would 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 Spain, the United
Kingdom, Australia and Japan, and we are therefore subject to
risks associated with having international operations.
International customers accounted for 27% of our revenues in
fiscal 2009, 41% of our revenues in fiscal 2008 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;
|
|
|
|
complexity 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.
31
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
would experience dilution or may 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 our past results should not be
relied on 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 fluctuations in 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 2009, 17% of our revenues were
generated from customers outside the United States and
denominated in Euros, 8% of our revenues were generated from
customers outside the United States and denominated in British
pound sterling and 2% of our revenues were generated from
customers outside the United States and denominated in
Australian dollars. In fiscal 2008, 31% of our revenues were
generated from customers outside the United States and
denominated in Euros, and 10% of our revenues were generated
from outside the United States and denominated in British pound
sterling. 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
32
current phase of the construction of a wave power station off
the coast of Santoña, Spain is denominated in Euros, and we
have entered 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, we are dependent upon our customer to
obtain any necessary permits and approvals, and with respect to
our projects in Oregon and Cornwall, England, we are dependent
on state, federal and regional government agencies 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
33
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.
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 executive chairman, Mark Draper, our chief executive
officer, Charles Dunleavy, our senior vice president and chief
financial officer, and Herbert Nock, our vice president of
business development and marketing; 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 12 employees by the end of
fiscal 2010, including engineers with varying areas of
expertise. By the end of fiscal 2012, we expect to increase our
staff significantly 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. 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.
34
In the
event we are unable to satisfy regulatory requirements relating
to internal control over financial reporting, or if our internal
controls are not effective, our business and financial results
may suffer.
Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide
reasonable assurance with respect to our financial reports and
to effectively prevent fraud. If we cannot provide reasonable
assurance with respect to our financial reports and effectively
prevent fraud, our business and operating results could be
harmed. Pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we are
required to furnish a report by management on internal control
over financial reporting, including managements assessment
of the effectiveness of such control. Internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements
because of its inherent limitations, including the possibility
of human error, the circumvention or overriding of controls, or
fraud. Therefore, even effective internal controls can provide
only reasonable assurance with respect to the preparation and
fair presentation of financial statements. In addition,
projections of any evaluation of the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting to future periods are subject
to the risk that the control may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the
policies or procedures may deteriorate. If we fail to maintain
the adequacy of our internal controls, including any failure to
implement new or improved controls, or if we experience
difficulties in their implementation, our business and operating
results could be harmed, we could fail to meet our reporting
obligations, and there could also be a material adverse effect
on our stock price.
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
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
35
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,
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.
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
36
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 who 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.
Our
stock price is likely to be volatile, and purchasers of our
common stock could incur substantial losses.
The market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly
in response to factors that are beyond our control. The stock
market in general has recently experienced extreme volatility
that has often been unrelated or disproportionate to the
operating performance of particular companies. These broad
market fluctuations could result in fluctuations in the price of
our common stock, which could cause purchasers of our common
stock to incur substantial losses. The market price for our
common stock may be influenced by many factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the success of competitive products or technologies;
|
|
|
|
regulatory developments in the United States and foreign
countries;
|
|
|
|
developments or disputes concerning patents or other proprietary
rights;
|
|
|
|
the recruitment or departure of key personnel;
|
|
|
|
quarterly or annual variations in our financial results or those
of companies that are perceived to be similar to us;
|
|
|
|
market conditions in the conventional and renewable energy
industries and issuance of new or changed securities
analysts reports or recommendations;
|
|
|
|
the failure of securities analysts to cover our common stock or
changes in financial estimates by analysts;
|
|
|
|
the inability to meet the financial estimates of analysts who
follow our common stock;
|
|
|
|
investor perception of our company and of the renewable energy
industry; and
|
|
|
|
general economic, political and market conditions.
|
37
Provisions
in our bylaws will require disclosure of information by
shareholders that would not otherwise be required to be
disclosed under applicable US state or US federal
laws.
In accordance with the rules of the AIM market of the London
Stock Exchange, we are required to disclose information
regarding beneficial owners of three percent or more of our
outstanding common stock to the AIM market. In order to allow us
to comply with the AIM rules, our bylaws contain a provision
requiring any beneficial owner of three percent or more of our
outstanding common stock to notify us of his or her
shareholdings, as well as of any change in his or her beneficial
ownership of one percent or more of our outstanding common
stock. Comparatively, none of the US state or US federal laws
that are applicable to us or the rules of the SEC or the Nasdaq
Global Market require stockholders to report this beneficial
ownership information to us or us to disclose this information
to the public or a regulatory body. We do not intend to make any
such information public, unless required by law or the rules of
the AIM market, the SEC or the Nasdaq Global Market.
|
|
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 for
our PowerBuoy systems.
We also have an office and warehouse facilities in Warwick,
United Kingdom, where we occupy 4,685 square feet under
leases expiring on January 1, 2010 and December 18,
2011, respectively. Seventeen 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.
|
|
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 A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
|
Not applicable.
38
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, 2009,
there were 471 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
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
$
|
12.44
|
|
|
$
|
7.82
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
|
9.34
|
|
|
|
4.61
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
|
9.84
|
|
|
|
4.60
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
|
7.20
|
|
|
|
3.78
|
|
Year Ended April 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
|
18.00
|
|
|
|
13.51
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
|
17.88
|
|
|
|
10.72
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
|
19.75
|
|
|
|
10.08
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
|
14.33
|
|
|
|
9.67
|
|
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.
UNREGISTERED
SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
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),
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. None of the underwriting discounts and
commissions or offering costs were incurred or paid to directors
or officers of ours or their associates or to persons owning ten
percent or more of our common stock or to any affiliates of ours.
From the effective date of the registration statement through
April 30, 2009, we used $1.0 million to construct
demonstration wave power stations, $9.2 million to fund the
continued development and commercialization of our PowerBuoy
system, $3.0 million to expand our sales and marketing
capabilities and $0.6 million to fund the expansion of
assembly, test and field service facilities. We have invested
the balance of the net proceeds from the offering in short- and
long-term, investment grade, interest-bearing instruments, in
accordance with our investment policy. We have not used any of
the net proceeds from the offering to make payments, directly or
indirectly, to any
39
director or officer of ours, except in connection with normal
annual officer and director compensation, or any of their
associates, to any person owning ten percent or more of our
common stock or to any affiliate of ours. There has been no
material change in our planned use of the balance of the net
proceeds from the offering as described in our final prospectus
filed with the SEC pursuant to Rule 424(b) under the
Securities Act of 1933.
|
|
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,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,049,445
|
|
|
$
|
4,772,017
|
|
|
$
|
2,531,315
|
|
|
$
|
1,747,715
|
|
|
$
|
5,365,235
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
4,840,403
|
|
|
|
7,960,042
|
|
|
|
3,983,742
|
|
|
|
2,059,318
|
|
|
|
5,170,521
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit (loss)
|
|
|
(790,958
|
)
|
|
|
(3,188,025
|
)
|
|
|
(1,452,427
|
)
|
|
|
(311,603
|
)
|
|
|
194,714
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development costs
|
|
|
8,372,244
|
|
|
|
8,255,123
|
|
|
|
6,219,893
|
|
|
|
4,224,997
|
|
|
|
904,618
|
|
Selling, general and administrative costs
|
|
|
9,529,071
|
|
|
|
7,732,577
|
|
|
|
4,893,580
|
|
|
|
3,190,687
|
|
|
|
2,553,911
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
17,901,315
|
|
|
|
15,987,700
|
|
|
|
11,113,473
|
|
|
|
7,415,684
|
|
|
|
3,458,529
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(18,692,273
|
)
|
|
|
(19,175,725
|
)
|
|
|
(12,565,900
|
)
|
|
|
(7,727,287
|
)
|
|
|
(3,263,815
|
)
|
Other income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income, net
|
|
|
1,672,350
|
|
|
|
4,434,844
|
|
|
|
1,389,702
|
|
|
|
1,408,361
|
|
|
|
1,297,156
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,906
|
|
|
|
74,294
|
|
|
|
1,545
|
|
Foreign exchange gain (loss)
|
|
|
(1,295,227
|
)
|
|
|
84,158
|
|
|
|
1,523,527
|
|
|
|
(978,242
|
)
|
|
|
1,507,145
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before incomes taxes
|
|
|
(18,315,150
|
)
|
|
|
(14,656,723
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
|
(7,222,874
|
)
|
|
|
(457,969
|
)
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143,963
|
|
|
|
29,335
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(18,315,150
|
)
|
|
$
|
(14,656,723
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7,078,911
|
)
|
|
$
|
(428,634
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
$
|
(1.79
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.44
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.83
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.37
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted average shares outstanding
|
|
|
10,210,354
|
|
|
|
10,200,729
|
|
|
|
5,260,794
|
|
|
|
5,162,340
|
|
|
|
5,135,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$
|
41,108,229
|
|
|
$
|
88,836,304
|
|
|
$
|
115,895,619
|
(1)
|
|
$
|
32,439,365
|
|
|
$
|
38,787,176
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
39,120,648
|
|
|
|
85,870,307
|
|
|
|
111,187,195
|
|
|
|
30,886,029
|
|
|
|
37,903,207
|
|
Long-term investments
|
|
|
40,628,865
|
|
|
|
12,233,437
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
88,793,906
|
|
|
|
107,550,965
|
|
|
|
119,711,546
|
|
|
|
33,996,138
|
|
|
|
41,596,387
|
|
Long-term debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
345,386
|
|
|
|
188,784
|
|
|
|
231,585
|
|
|
|
233,959
|
|
|
|
245,844
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(71,242,791
|
)
|
|
|
(52,927,641
|
)
|
|
|
(38,270,918
|
)
|
|
|
(28,632,153
|
)
|
|
|
(21,553,242
|
)
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
82,783,027
|
|
|
|
100,098,609
|
|
|
|
112,541,209
|
|
|
|
31,066,704
|
|
|
|
37,836,531
|
|
40
|
|
|
(1) |
|
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 six 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, California Wave Energy
Partners I, and Fairhaven OPT Ocean Power LLC, and we own
approximately 88% of the ordinary shares of Ocean Power
Technologies (Australasia) Pty Ltd.
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 testing of our
wave power systems 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, also entered into
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 1.39 MegaWatt (MW) wave power station. Under the Spain
construction agreement, we 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
41
constitute a 1.39MW wave power station. In February 2008, the
Spain construction agreement was amended to provide for the
current phase of the construction of the PowerBuoy system plus
the fabrication of the underwater power transmission cable and
underwater substation for all ten PowerBuoy systems. The terms
of the installation of the underwater transmission cable and
underwater substation will be separately negotiated and, if so
agreed, are expected to provide for additional funding for the
installation work. The initial PB40kW PowerBuoy system for this
project was deployed in September 2008. After a short testing
period, the buoy was removed from the water for work on
improvements to the power take-off and control systems. We are
currently in discussions with Iberdrola Cantabria regarding the
nature and costs of these improvements and their effects on
plans for the redeployment of the buoy and the next phases of
the project. During the early stages of commercialization of our
technology, systems deployed in the ocean may periodically
require maintenance and repair of certain elements of the
systems which in some cases may include retrieval and
redeployment of the buoys and redeployment. We view this as an
expected aspect of our operations and the process of bringing
our PowerBuoy product to a fully commercial status.
In 2007, we received a $1.8 million contract from the
Scottish Executive for the construction of a 150 kW PowerBuoy
demonstration system near Orkney, Scotland.
In August 2007, we announced the award of a $0.5 million
contract from PNGC Power, an Oregon-based electric power
cooperative, providing funding toward the fabrication and
installation of a 150kW PowerBuoy system off the coast of
Oregon. In October 2008, we received a $2.0 million award
from the US Department of Energy in support of the Oregon
project. In June 2007, we received a $1.7 million contract
from the US Navy to provide our PowerBuoy technology to a unique
program for data gathering in the ocean. Under this
18-month
program, the US Navy conducted an ocean test in October 2008 of
our autonomous PowerBuoy as the power source for the Navys
Deep Water Active Detection System. In October 2008, we received
a $3.0 million contract from the US Navy to expand the
program and ocean-test an advanced version of our autonomous
PowerBuoy for the Deep Water Active Detection System. As of
April 30, 2009, our backlog was $7.5 million, an
increase of $2.0 million from the year ended April 30,
2008.
Our fiscal year ends on April 30. For fiscal 2009, we
generated revenues of $4.0 million and incurred a net loss
of $18.3 million, and for fiscal 2008, we generated
revenues of $4.8 million and incurred a net loss of
$14.7 million. As of April 30, 2009, our accumulated
deficit was $71.2 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
may, within a few years, represent the majority of our revenues.
The marine energy industry, including wave, tidal and ocean
current energy technologies, is expected to benefit from various
legislative initiatives that have been undertaken or are planned
by state and federal agencies. For example, the production tax
credit was expanded to include marine energy, as part of the
Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008, signed into law in
October 2008. Production tax credit provisions that were
previously in place served only to benefit other renewable
energy sources such as wind and solar. This new legislation
will, for the first time, enable owners of wave power projects
in the US to receive federal production tax credits, which, by
their prospective effect of lowering income taxes for our
customers based on energy produced, should improve the
comparative economics of wave power as a renewable energy source.
Further, it is expected that the US federal and state
governments will increase their investments in the renewable
energy sector under various economic stimulus measures announced
in early 2009. In anticipation of such investments, we are
devoting additional resources to develop proposals seeking
government funding to support existing projects and technology
enhancements. Consequently, while our selling, general and
administrative costs related to such efforts may increase over
the next year, we believe that these governmental initiatives
may result in additional revenues for us over the next several
years. Given the recent announcement of the government programs
and the uncertainties surrounding their scope and size, there
can be no assurances as to whether we will be successful in
obtaining significant additional government funding or as to the
terms and conditions of any such funding.
42
The recent global economic downturn may have a negative effect
on our business, financial condition and results of operations
because the utility companies with which we contract or propose
to contract may decrease their investment in new power
generation equipment in response to the downturn. However, the
various legislative initiatives described above may diminish the
effect of any decrease in such capital expenditures by these
utility companies insofar as they may relate to renewable energy
generation equipment. As discussed above, the timing, scope and
size of these new government programs for renewable energy is
uncertain, and there can be no assurances that we or our
customers will be successful in obtaining any additional
government funding. In addition, we do not believe the recent
global economic downturn will have a material negative impact on
our sources of supply, as our products incorporate what are
substantially non-custom, standard parts found in many regions
of the world.
According to a study in 2003 by the Energy Information
Administration, $1.6 trillion is expected to be spent for new
renewable energy generation equipment by the year 2030. This
equates to annual global expenditures of approximately
$60 billion. We plan to take advantage of these global
drivers of demand for renewable energy, as we continue to refine
and expand our proprietary technology.
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
Generally, we recognize revenue using 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 current 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 a portion of any cost overruns and to
absorb certain other costs as set forth in the agreement. During
the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008, we made the decision to
absorb additional costs related to the current phase of the
project beyond our obligation for the initial cost overruns and
certain other costs as set forth in the agreement. This decision
was based primarily on the progress of the project to date, the
benefits to be derived from a successful initial project and the
prospect of incremental contract value to be received in
connection with additional work under this contract. Our
estimate of the loss at completion of the contract also reflects
our estimate in fiscal 2009 of potential reductions in
milestones billable under the current phase of the agreement.
Revenue in fiscal 2009 decreased from the level achieved in
fiscal 2008, which reflected a significant increase from fiscal
2007 revenue. The revenue decrease for fiscal 2009 primarily
reflected a lower level of billable activity in connection with
our construction contracts in Spain and at the European Marine
Energy Centre (EMEC) at Orkney, Scotland. We also reduced the
total expected contract value related to the Spain contract by
approximately $0.5 million, reflecting an expected
reduction in scope of the current phase of this project. These
decreases in revenue during fiscal 2009 were partially offset by
an increase in revenue from the Department of Energy (DOE)
related to our project off the coast of Reedsport, Oregon. The
increase in fiscal 2008 revenue from fiscal 2007 reflected a
higher level of activity in connection with our Spain
construction agreement, our contracts with the US Navy, and our
EMEC contract.
The US Navy has been our largest customer since fiscal 2002. The
US Navy accounted for 67% of our revenues in fiscal 2009, 58% of
our revenues in fiscal 2008 and 54% of our revenues in fiscal
2007. We anticipate that, if our commercialization efforts are
successful, the relative contribution of the US Navy to our
revenue may decline in the future.
43
We currently focus our sales and marketing efforts on the west
coast of North America, the west coast of Europe, the coasts of
Australia and the east coast of Japan. For fiscal 2009 and 2008,
we derived 27% and 41%, respectively, of 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 2009,
2008 and 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of Revenues
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
Customer Location
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
United States
|
|
|
73
|
%
|
|
|
59
|
%
|
|
|
59
|
%
|
Europe
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of revenues
Our cost of revenues consists primarily of incurred 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
and anticipated losses at completion on some contracts.
We operated at a gross loss of $0.8 million in fiscal 2009,
$3.2 million in fiscal 2008, and $1.5 million in
fiscal 2007. Our ability to generate a gross profit will depend
on the nature of future contracts, 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 unfunded
research activities. Our product development costs primarily
relate to our efforts to increase the output of our utility
PowerBuoy system, including the 150kW PowerBuoy system and 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 capitalize and amortize over a
17-year
period commencing with the issuance date of each patent.
Our product development costs increased in each of fiscal 2009,
2008 and 2007 as a result of the development of our current 40kW
utility PowerBuoy system, which was introduced in fiscal 2006,
and also development of our 150kW PowerBuoy. We expect that our
product development costs may increase in absolute dollars as we
continue to increase the output and efficiency of our PowerBuoy
systems.
We introduced our current 40kW PowerBuoy system in fiscal 2006.
Since October 2005 we have operated a 40kW system off the coast
of New Jersey, which has operated and been periodically removed
from the ocean for maintenance since that time. Other 40kW
systems were deployed and tested in Hawaii for the US Navy
project during the months of June 2007 and October 2008. Work is
currently in progress on the design, construction and
installation of two 150kW PowerBuoy systems in connection with
projects off the coasts of the Orkney Islands, Scotland and
Oregon.
Selling,
general and administrative costs
Our selling, general and administrative costs consist primarily
of professional fees, salaries and other personnel-related costs
for employees and consultants engaged in sales and marketing and
support of our PowerBuoy systems and costs for executive,
accounting and administrative personnel, professional fees and
other general corporate expenses.
Our selling, general and administrative costs increased in
fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007. These increases are due to the
expansion of our sales and marketing capabilities, including
increased headcount, and as a result of our
44
becoming a public company in the United States in April 2007. We
expect our selling, general and administrative costs will
continue to increase as we further expand our sales and
marketing capabilities.
Interest
income, net
Interest income, net consists primarily of interest received on
cash and cash equivalents, investments in commercial bank-issued
certificates of deposit and US Treasury bills. Prior to
April 30, 2007, most of our cash, cash equivalents and
investments 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, short-term and long-term investments were
$81.7 million as of April 30, 2009,
$101.1 million as of April 30, 2008 and
$115.9 million as of April 30, 2007. Interest income
in fiscal 2009 decreased compared to fiscal 2008 due to a
decline in interest rates and a decline in cash, cash
equivalents and investments. Interest income in fiscal 2008 as
compared to fiscal 2007 increased significantly due to the
increase in invested cash during the year.
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 $8.5 million as of
April 30, 2009 and $9.6 million as of April 30,
2008, compared to our total cash, cash equivalents, short-term
and long-term investment balances of $81.7 million as of
April 30, 2009 and $101.1 million as of April 30,
2008. 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, 2009 and 2008 were recorded in Euros,
British pounds sterling 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 and
cash equivalents 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, 2009, we had federal and foreign research
and development tax credits of $1.7 million and federal and
foreign net operating loss carryforwards of $57.6 million
to offset future taxable income. If not utilized, the credit
carryforwards and net operating loss carryforwards will expire
at various dates through 2029. We may not achieve profitability
in time to utilize the tax credit and net operating loss
carryforwards in full or at all. In addition, we have determined
that the future utilization of our net operating loss
carryforwards is subject to limitations based upon changes in
ownership including changes resulting from our initial public
offering in April 2007, pursuant to regulations promulgated
under the Internal Revenue Code. We do not expect these
limitations to have a significant impact on our ability to
utilize net operating loss and credit carryforwards. As
discussed in Note 13 to our
45
consolidated financial statements included in this Annual
Report, we have established a valuation allowance for our net
deferred tax assets, which were $25.5 million as of
April 30, 2009 and $19.5 million as of April 30,
2008.
Results
of Operations
Fiscal
Years Ended April 30, 2009 and 2008
The following table contains statement of operations
information, which serves as the basis of the discussion of our
results of operations for the years ended April 30, 2009
and 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30, 2009
|
|
|
April 30, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a % of
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a % of
|
|
|
2009 Period to
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
|
2008 Period
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,049,445
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,772,017
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
(15
|
)%
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
4,840,403
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
7,960,042
|
|
|
|
167
|
|
|
|
(39
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross loss
|
|
|
(790,958
|
)
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
(3,188,025
|
)
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
(75
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development costs
|
|
|
8,372,244
|
|
|
|
207
|
|
|
|
8,255,123
|
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Selling, general and administrative costs
|
|
|
9,529,071
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
7,732,577
|
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
17,901,315
|
|
|
|
442
|
|
|
|
15,987,700
|
|
|
|
335
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(18,692,273
|
)
|
|
|
(462
|
)
|
|
|
(19,175,725
|
)
|
|
|
(402
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
Interest income, net
|
|
|
1,672,350
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
4,434,844
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
(62
|
)
|
Foreign exchange gain (loss)
|
|
|
(1,295,227
|
)
|
|
|
(32
|
)
|
|
|
84,158
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1639
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(18,315,150
|
)
|
|
|
(452
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(14,656,723
|
)
|
|
|
(307
|
)%
|
|
|
25
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Certain subtotals may not add due to rounding. |
Revenues
Revenues decreased by $0.8 million in fiscal 2009, or 15%,
to $4.0 million as compared to $4.8 million in fiscal
2008. The change in revenues was primarily attributable to the
following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues relating to our utility PowerBuoy system decreased by
$0.8 million due primarily to a decrease in billable work
on our wave power station off the coast of Spain, as this
project neared completion, and also a reduction in the expected
contract value related to the project. Also, decreases in
revenue related to our Hawaii project for the US Navy and our
EMEC project in Orkney, Scotland were offset by an increase in
revenue related to our project off the coast of Reedsport,
Oregon.
|
|
|
|
Revenues relating to our autonomous PowerBuoy system increased
by $0.1 million as a result of work on projects with the US
Navy to provide our PowerBuoy technology to a program for data
gathering in the ocean.
|
Cost of
revenues
Cost of revenues decreased by $3.2 million, or 39%, to
$4.8 million in fiscal 2009, as compared to
$8.0 million in fiscal 2008. This decrease in cost of
revenues reflected the lower level of activity on
revenue-bearing contracts, and the recognition, in fiscal 2008,
of an additional $2.4 million of anticipated loss at
completion on our contract for a wave power station off the
coast of Spain. The additional anticipated loss was recognized
based on a change in estimated costs associated with this
contract and our decision in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008
to absorb an
46
additional $1.9 million in costs beyond our contractual
obligation for initial cost overruns and certain other costs as
set forth in the agreement for the Spain project.
Product
development costs
Product development costs increased $0.1 million, or 1%, to
$8.4 million in fiscal 2009, as compared to
$8.3 million in fiscal 2008. Product development costs were
primarily attributable to our efforts to increase the power
output of our utility PowerBuoy system, including the 150kW
PowerBuoy system. We anticipate that our product development
costs related to the planned increase in the output of our
utility PowerBuoy system will increase in absolute dollars 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.
Selling,
general and administrative costs
Selling, general and administrative costs increased
$1.8 million, or 23%, to $9.5 million in fiscal 2009,
as compared to $7.7 million in fiscal 2008. The increase
was primarily attributable to an increase of $1.8 million
in additional payroll and incentive-based costs related to
company growth.
Interest
income
Interest income decreased by $2.7 million, or 62%, to
$1.7 million in fiscal 2009, compared to $4.4 million
in fiscal 2008, due to a decrease in cash, cash equivalents and
investments. In addition, the average yield decreased from
approximately 5.03% in the first quarter of fiscal 2008 to
approximately 1.12% in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009.
Foreign
exchange gain (loss)
Foreign exchange loss was $1.3 million in fiscal 2009,
compared to a foreign exchange gain of $0.1 million in
fiscal 2008. The difference was primarily attributable to the
relative change in value of the British pound sterling compared
to the US dollar during the two periods.
Fiscal
Years Ended April 30, 2008 and 2007
The following table contains statement of operations
information, which serves as the basis of the discussion of our
results of operations for the years ended April 30, 2008
and 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30, 2008
|
|
|
April 30, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a % of
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a % of
|
|
|
2008 Period to
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
2007 Period
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,772,017
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
2,531,315
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
89
|
%
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
7,960,042
|
|
|
|
167
|
|
|
|
3,983,742
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross loss
|
|
|
(3,188,025
|
)
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
(1,452,427
|
)
|
|
|
(57
|
)
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development costs
|
|
|
8,255,123
|
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
6,219,893
|
|
|
|
246
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
Selling, general and administrative costs
|
|
|
7,732,577
|
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
4,893,580
|
|
|
|
193
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
15,987,700
|
|
|
|
335
|
|
|
|
11,113,473
|
|
|
|
439
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(19,175,725
|
)
|
|
|
(402
|
)
|
|
|
(12,565,900
|
)
|
|
|
(496
|
)
|
|
|
53
|
|
Interest income, net
|
|
|
4,434,844
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
1,389,702
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
219
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,906
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
Foreign exchange gain
|
|
|
84,158
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1,523,527
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
(94
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(14,656,723
|
)
|
|
|
(307
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
|
(381
|
)%
|
|
|
52
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47
Revenues
Revenues increased by $2.2 million in fiscal 2008, or 89%,
to $4.8 million as compared to $2.5 million in fiscal
2007. The increase in revenues was primarily attributable to the
following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues relating to our utility PowerBuoy system increased by
$1.3 million due to an increase in on-going work on our
Hawaii project for the US Navy, work on the first phase of
construction of a 1.39MW wave power station off the coast of
Spain and work on the design, manufacture and installation of a
wave power station consisting of a single 150kW PowerBuoy device
in Orkney, Scotland.
|
|
|
|
Revenues relating to our autonomous PowerBuoy system increased
by $0.9 million as a result of work on our
$1.7 million contract with the US Navy to provide our
PowerBuoy technology to a program for data gathering in the
ocean.
|
Cost of
revenues
Cost of revenues increased by $4.0 million, or 100%, to
$8.0 million in fiscal 2008, as compared to
$4.0 million in fiscal 2007. This increase in cost of
revenues reflected the higher level of activity on
revenue-bearing contracts of approximately $1.6 million,
and the recognition of an additional $2.4 million of
anticipated loss at completion on our contract for a wave power
station off the coast of Spain. The additional anticipated loss
was recognized based on a change in estimated costs associated
with this contract and our decision in the fourth quarter of
fiscal 2008 to absorb an additional $1.9 million in costs
beyond our contractual obligation for initial cost overruns and
certain other costs as set forth in the agreement for the Spain
project.
Product
development costs
Product development costs increased $2.0 million, or 33%,
to $8.3 million in fiscal 2008, as compared to
$6.2 million in fiscal 2007. 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. We anticipate that
our product development costs related to the planned increase in
the output of our utility PowerBuoy system will increase in
absolute dollars 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.
Selling,
general and administrative costs
Selling, general and administrative costs increased
$2.8 million, or 58%, to $7.7 million in fiscal 2008,
as compared to $4.9 million in fiscal 2007. The increase
was primarily attributable to an increase of $0.5 million
related to additional marketing expenses and consulting costs,
$1.8 million in professional fees, franchise taxes and
costs incurred as a result of our becoming a public company in
the United States, and $0.5 million in additional payroll
and related incentive-based costs.
Interest
income
Interest income increased by $3.0 million to
$4.4 million in fiscal 2008, compared to $1.4 million
in fiscal 2007, due primarily to the investment of the net
proceeds of $89.9 million from our United States initial
public offering on April 30, 2007.
Foreign
exchange gain
Foreign exchange gain was $0.1 million in fiscal 2008,
compared to a foreign exchange gain of $1.5 million in
fiscal 2007. The difference was primarily attributable to the
relative change in value of the British pound sterling compared
to the US dollar during the two periods.
48
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, 2009, our revenues were
$11.4 million, our net losses were $42.6 million and
our net cash used in operating activities was
$37.8 million. Over that same period, we raised
$90.5 million in financing activities, including
$89.9 million from the closing of our United States initial
public offering on April 30, 2007.
At April 30, 2009, our total cash, cash equivalents and
short-term and long-term investments were $81.7 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 term deposits with large commercial banks,
Treasury bills and an investment in a money market fund. Our
short-term investments consist primarily of certificates of
deposit and Treasury bills with fixed maturity dates of more
than 90 days but less than one year from the date of
purchase, and other investments with current maturities of less
than one year. Long-term investments consist of Treasury notes
with maturities in excess of 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 $16.7 million for
fiscal 2009 and $13.7 million for fiscal 2008. The change
was the result of an increase in net loss of $3.7 million,
an increase in non-cash charges of $1.6 million, and a
decrease in cash provided by operating assets and liabilities of
$0.9 million. The change in non-cash charges was primarily
due to a change in foreign exchange gains (losses) of
$1.4 million due to the relative change in the value of the
British pound against the US dollar, an increase in loss on
disposal of equipment of $0.3 million, an increase in
Treasury note amortization of $0.3 million and a decrease
in stock option expense of $0.4 million. The decrease in
cash provided by operating assets and liabilities was primarily
the result of a decrease in cash provided by accrued expenses of
$0.9 million, a decrease in cash provided by unearned
revenues of $1.1 million and an increase in cash provided
by accounts receivable of $1.4 million. The change in
accrued expenses primarily reflected a net reduction in accrued
contract losses. The changes in unearned revenue and accounts
receivable were primarily due to the timing of billings to
customers.
Net cash used in investing activities was $58.6 million for
fiscal 2009 and $4.4 million for fiscal 2008. The change
was primarily the result of a net increase in purchases of
securities with maturities longer than 90 days during
fiscal 2009, reflecting a lengthening of such maturities to
increase income yield. Also, there was a $0.4 million
increase in purchases of equipment and a $0.1 million
increase in payments of patent costs during fiscal 2009.
Net cash provided by financing activities was $0.2 million
in fiscal 2009, reflecting a net increase in our loans from the
State of New Jersey. During fiscal 2009, we received a
$0.25 million interest free loan under the New Jersey Board
of Public Utilities Renewable Energy Business Venture Assistance
Program. In fiscal 2008, net cash used in financing activities
was $0.6 million, reflecting the payment of stock issuance
costs, net of proceeds from the exercise of stock options.
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 cost of development efforts for our PowerBuoy systems;
|
|
|
|
the success of our commercial relationships with major customers;
|
|
|
|
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;
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
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, cash equivalents and
investments will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash
needs for working capital and capital expenditures at least
through fiscal 2011. 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.
Contractual
Obligations
Our major outstanding contractual obligations primarily relate
to our facilities leases. We have summarized in the table below
our fixed contractual cash obligations as of April 30, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
One to
|
|
|
Three to
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
One Year
|
|
|
Three Years
|
|
|
Five Years
|
|
|
Five Years
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
438,000
|
|
|
$
|
93,000
|
|
|
$
|
95,000
|
|
|
$
|
100,000
|
|
|
$
|
150,000
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
1,474,000
|
|
|
|
451,000
|
|
|
|
715,000
|
|
|
|
308,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,912,000
|
|
|
$
|
544,000
|
|
|
$
|
810,000
|
|
|
$
|
408,000
|
|
|
$
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our long-term debt consists of an interest-free loan from the
New Jersey Economic Development Authority and a recoverable
grant award from the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities. Under
the interest-free loan, 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. Under the recoverable grant award, the
amount to be repaid is a fixed monthly amount of principal only,
repayable over a five-year period beginning in May 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.
50
Revenue
recognition and unearned revenues
Generally, we recognize revenue using 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 $1.2 million as of April 30, 2009 and
$2.1 million as of April 30, 2008 related to two
contracts. In fiscal 2009 and 2008, we recognized losses of
$0.8 million and $2.4 million, respectively, on our
contract for a wave power station off the coast of Spain. The
additional anticipated losses were recognized based on changes
in estimated costs associated with this contract, a reduction in
the expected contract value, and our decision in the fourth
quarter of fiscal 2008 to absorb an additional $1.9 million
in costs beyond our obligation for initial cost overruns and
certain other costs as set forth in the agreement. Modifications
to contract provisions, such as those currently being discussed
in connection with the Companys Spain construction
agreement, as well as modifications in contract loss estimates,
may require changes in reserves established for anticipated
contract losses.
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.
Stock-based
compensation
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or
FASB, issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or
SFAS, No. 123R, Share-Based Payment, 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 No. 123R
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 No. 123R. In particular, SAB 107 provides
guidance regarding 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 No. 123R. 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 a
significant 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
51
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 the fair value of our stock-based awards.
In addition, SFAS No. 123R 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. To date, 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 No. 123R, we
recorded stock compensation expense related to employees of
$1.5 million, $1.8 million and $1.1 million in
fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Income
taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.
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
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 13 to our consolidated
financial statements included in this Annual Report, we have
established a valuation allowance for our net deferred tax
assets, which was $25.5 million as of April 30, 2009
and $19.5 million as of April 30, 2008.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements, which establishes a framework
for reporting fair value and expands disclosures about fair
value measurements. SFAS No. 157 as issued is
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007. On February 12, 2008, FASB Staff Position (FSP)
FAS 157-2,
Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157, was
issued, which delays the effective date to fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2008 for certain nonfinancial
assets and liabilities. The Company adopted
SFAS No. 157 on May 1, 2008, except for the items
covered by FSP
FAS 157-2.
The adoption of SFAS No. 157 did not have any impact
on the Companys consolidated financial statements.
52
SFAS No. 157 establishes a three-tier fair value
hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair
value as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1: Observable inputs, such as
quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities;
|
|
|
|
Level 2: Inputs, other than the quoted
prices in active markets, that are observable either directly or
indirectly; and
|
|
|
|
Level 3: Unobservable inputs in which
there is little or no market data, which require the reporting
entity to develop its own assumptions.
|
In February 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 157-1,
Application of FASB Statement No. 157 to FASB Statement
No. 13 and Other Accounting Pronouncements That Address
Fair Value Measurements for Purposes of Lease Classification or
Measurement under Statement 13. FSP
FAS 157-1
amends SFAS No. 157 to exclude certain leasing
transactions accounted for under previously existing accounting
guidance. This exclusion, however, does not apply to assets
acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination,
regardless of whether those assets and liabilities are related
to leases. The adoption of FSP
FAS 157-1
did not have any impact on the Companys consolidated
financial statements.
In October 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 157-3,
Determining the Fair Value of a Financial Asset When the
Market for That Asset Is Not Active. FSP
FAS 157-3
clarifies the application of SFAS No. 157 when the
market for a financial asset is not active. FSP
FAS 157-3
was effective upon issuance, including reporting for prior
periods for which financial statements have not been issued. The
adoption of FSP
FAS 157-3
did not have any impact on the Companys consolidated
financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities. SFAS No. 159 allows companies to
elect to measure certain assets and liabilities at fair value
and is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007. The adoption of SFAS No. 159
on May 1, 2008 did not have any impact on the
Companys consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141
(revised 2007), Business Combinations
(SFAS No. 141R), which establishes the principles
and requirements for how an acquirer recognizes the assets
acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling
interest in the acquirer at the acquisition date, measured at
their fair values as of that date, with limited exceptions. This
statement applies to business combinations for which the
acquisition date is after the beginning of the first annual
reporting period beginning after December 15, 2008. Earlier
adoption is not permitted. The Company will adopt
SFAS No. 141R upon its effective date as appropriate
for any future business combinations.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements. SFAS No. 160 establishes accounting
and reporting standards for the noncontrolling interest in a
subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It
clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary is an
ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be
recorded as a component of equity in the consolidated financial
statements. This statement also requires that consolidated net
income shall be adjusted to include the net income attributed to
the noncontrolling interest. Disclosure on the face of the
statement of operations of the amounts of consolidated net
income attributable to the parent and to the noncontrolling
interest is required. SFAS No. 160 is effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. Earlier
adoption is not permitted. The Company is currently evaluating
the impact of SFAS No. 160.
In April 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 142-3,
Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible Assets.
FSP
FAS 142-3
amends the factors that should be considered in developing
renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful
life of a recognized intangible asset under
SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets. FSP
FAS 142-3
also adds certain disclosures to those already prescribed in
SFAS No. 142. FSP
FAS 142-3
is effective as of the beginning of the first fiscal year
beginning after December 15, 2008, and early adoption is
prohibited. The guidance for determining useful lives must be
applied prospectively to intangible assets acquired after the
effective date. The disclosure requirements must be applied
prospectively to all intangible assets recognized as of the
effective date. The Company is currently evaluating the impact
of FSP
FAS 142-3.
53
In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162, The
Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
SFAS No. 162 identifies the sources of accounting
principles and the framework for selecting the principles to be
used in the preparation of financial statements of
nongovernmental entities that are presented in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles in the United States.
This statement is effective November 15, 2008. The adoption
of SFAS No. 162 did not have any impact on the
Companys consolidated financial statements.
In April 2009, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 115-2
and
FAS 124-2,
Recognition and Presentation of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairments. FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2
changes existing guidance for determining whether debt
securities are other-than-temporarily impaired and replaces the
existing requirement that the entitys management assert it
has both the intent and ability to hold an impaired security
until recovery with a requirement that management assert:
(a) it does not have the intent to sell the security; and
(b) it is more likely than not it will not have to sell the
security before recovery of its cost basis. FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2
requires entities to separate an other-than-temporary impairment
of a debt security into two components when there are credit
related losses associated with the impaired debt security for
which management asserts that it does not have the intent to
sell the security, and it is more likely than not that it will
not be required to sell the security before recovery of its cost
basis. The amount of the other-than-temporary impairment related
to a credit loss is recognized in earnings, and the amount of
the other-than-temporary impairment related to other factors is
recorded in other comprehensive income (loss). FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2 is
effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after
June 15, 2009. The Company will adopt the provisions of FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2
during the first quarter of the fiscal year ended April 30,
2010. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2.
In April 2009, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB
28-1,
Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial
Instruments. FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB 28-1
requires disclosures about fair values of financial instruments
in interim and annual financial statements. Prior to the
issuance of FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB
28-1,
disclosures about fair values of financial instruments were only
required to be disclosed annually. FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB 28-1
requires disclosures about fair value of financial instruments
in interim and annual financial statements. The Company will
adopt FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB 28-1
during the first quarter of the fiscal year ended April 30,
2010. The adoption will not affect the Companys financial
position or results of operations.
|
|
ITEM 7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
|
We generally place our investments in money market funds,
Treasury bills and notes, and certificates of deposit with
maturities of less than one year. We actively manage our
portfolio of cash equivalents and investments, but in order to
ensure liquidity, we will only invest in instruments with high
credit quality where a secondary market exists. We have not held
and do not hold any derivatives related to our interest rate
exposure. Due to the average maturity and conservative nature of
our investment portfolio, a change in interest rates would not
have a material effect on the value of the portfolio. We do not
have market risk exposure on our long-term debt because it
consists of an interest-free loan from the New Jersey Economic
Development Authority and a recoverable grant award from the New
Jersey Board of Public Utilities.
Management estimates that had the average yield on our cash,
cash equivalents, and investments decreased by 100 basis
points, our interest income for the year ended April 30,
2009 would have decreased by $0.9 million. This estimate
assumes that the decrease occurred on the first day of fiscal
2009 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 $8.5 million as of
April 30, 2009 and $9.6 million as of April 30,
2008, compared to our short-term and long-term
54
investments and cash account balances of $81.7 million as
of April 30, 2009 and $101.1 million as of
April 30, 2008. 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, 2009 were recorded in Euros, British
pounds sterling or Australian dollars. If the foreign currency
exchange rates had fluctuated by 10% as of April 30, 2009,
the impact on our foreign exchange gains and losses would have
been $0.9 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 and
cash equivalents 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
|
An evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation
of our disclosure controls and procedures was performed as of
the end of the period covered by this report. This evaluation
was performed under the supervision and with the participation
of management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures are effective in providing
reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed
by the Company in the reports that it files or submits under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, is accumulated and
communicated to management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosure and are effective
in providing reasonable assurance that such information is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time
periods specified by the SECs rules and forms.
The annual report of management on the Companys internal
control over financial reporting is provided under Reports
of Management on
page F-2.
The attestation report of KPMG LLP, the Companys
independent registered public accounting firm, regarding the
Companys internal control over financial reporting is
provided under Report of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm on
page F-4.
During the quarter ended April 30, 2009, there were no
changes in the Companys internal control over financial
reporting that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, such internal control over financial
reporting.
|
|
ITEM 9B.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
Not applicable.
55
PART III
|
|
ITEM 10.
|
DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
|
Information with respect to this item is set forth in the Proxy
Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the
Proxy Statement) under the headings Election
of Directors, Executive Officers,
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance, Code of Ethics and Business
Conduct and Corporate Governance and Board
Matters, and 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
|
Information with respect to this item is set forth in the Proxy
Statement under the headings Executive Compensation
and Director Compensation, and 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
|
Information with respect to this item is set forth in the Proxy
Statement under the headings Security Ownership of Certain
Beneficial Owners and Management and Executive
Compensation, and 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
|
Information with respect to this item is set forth in the Proxy
Statement under the headings Certain Relationships and
Related Party Transactions and Corporate Governance
and Board Matters, and 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
|
Information with respect to this item is set forth in the Proxy
Statement under the heading Ratification of the Selection
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, and 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 58 to 59.
56
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, INC.
Date: July 14, 2009
Mark R. Draper
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/ Mark
R. Draper
Mark
R. Draper
|
|
Director, Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
July 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ George
W. Taylor
George
W. Taylor
|
|
Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors
|
|
July 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/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 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Seymour
S. Preston III
Seymour
S. Preston III
|
|
Director
|
|
July 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas
J. Meaney
Thomas
J. Meaney
|
|
Director
|
|
July 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Paul
F. Lozier
Paul
F. Lozier
|
|
Director
|
|
July 14, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ J.
Victor Chatigny
J.
Victor Chatigny
|
|
Director
|
|
July 14, 2009
|
57
Exhibits Index
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the registrant
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.1 to Form 10-Q
filed September 14, 2007)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of the registrant (incorporated by
reference from Exhibit 3.2 to Form 10-Q filed September 14, 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 Power 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
10.5 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 Power
Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.10
to Form S-1 filed November 13, 2006)
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated April 8, 2009,
between Charles F. Dunleavy and Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.2 to Form 8-K filed
April 13, 2009)*
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated April 8, 2009,
between George W. Taylor and Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to Form 8-K filed
April 13, 2009)*
|
|
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)*
|
|
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)
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
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 8-K filed June 8, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.23
|
|
Amendment to Contract for the Development and Application of a
Sea Wave Energy Generating System in France, dated as of April
2, 2007, between Iberdrola Energias Renovables, S.A.S., Total
Energie Development, S.A., Ocean Power Technologies Ltd. and
Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by reference from
Exhibit 10.1 to Form 10-Q filed September 14, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
Modification of Contract, dated September 13, 2007, modifying
Contract Number N00014-02-C-0053, between the Office of Naval
Research, U.S. Navy and Ocean Power Technologies, Inc., as
modified (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to Form
10-Q filed December 17, 2007)
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
Modification of Contract, dated September 26, 2007, modifying
Contract Number N00014-05-C-0384, between the Office of Naval
Research, U.S. Navy and Ocean Power Technologies, Inc., as
modified. (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.2 to Form
10-Q filed December 17, 2007
|
|
10
|
.26
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated December 21, 2007, between Herbert
T. Nock and Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. (incorporated by
reference from Exhibit 10.26 to Form 10-K filed July 14, 2008)*
|
|
10
|
.27
|
|
Addendum to the Agreement for the Engineering, Procurement and
Construction of a Wave Energy Power Plant at Punta del
Pescador (Santoña, Spain), between Iberdrola Energias
Marinas de Cantabria, S.A. and Ocean Power Technologies Limited,
dated February 18, 2008 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit
10.27 to Form 10-K filed July 14, 2008)
|
|
10
|
.28
|
|
Lease, dated February 1, 2008, between KUC Properties Limited
and Ocean Power Technologies Ltd. (incorporated by reference
from Exhibit 10.28 to Form 10-K filed July 14, 2008)
|
|
10
|
.29
|
|
Financial Assistance Award agreement between Ocean Power
Technologies, Inc. and US Department of Energy date September
23, 2008 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.1 to Form
10-Q filed December 10, 2008)
|
|
10
|
.30
|
|
Modification of Financial Assistance Award agreement between
Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and US Department of Energy dated
October 16, 2008 (incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.2 to
Form 10-Q filed December 10, 2008)
|
|
10
|
.31
|
|
Agreement between Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and the Office
of Naval Research of the US Navy dated October 31, 2008
(incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.3 to Form 10-Q filed
December 10, 2008)
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of the registrant
|
|
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 SEC. |
|
* |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement |
59
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Index to
Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
F-2
|
|
|
|
|
F-3
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
F-6
|
|
|
|
|
F-7
|
|
|
|
|
F-8
|
|
|
|
|
F-9
|
|
F-1
Reports
of Management
Managements
Report on Consolidated Financial Statements
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been
prepared by the Companys management in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles to reflect the
financial position of the Company and its operating results. The
financial information appearing throughout this Annual Report is
consistent with the consolidated financial statements.
Management is responsible for the information and
representations in such consolidated financial statements,
including the estimates and judgments required for their
preparation. The consolidated financial statements have been
audited by KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting
firm, as stated in their report, which appears herein.
The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, which is composed
entirely of directors who are not officers or employees of the
Company, meets regularly with management and the independent
registered public accounting firm. The independent registered
public accounting firm has had, and continues to have, direct
access to the Audit Committee without the presence of other
management personnel, and have been directed to discuss the
results of their audit work and any matters they believe should
be brought to the Committees attention. The independent
registered public accounting firm reports directly to the Audit
Committee.
Managements
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The Companys management is responsible for establishing
and maintaining adequate internal control over financial
reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles in the United States.
The Companys internal control over financial reporting
includes those policies and procedures that:
|
|
|
|
|
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and
dispositions of the assets of the Company;
|
|
|
|
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as
necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and
that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made
only in accordance with authorizations of management and
directors of the Company; and
|
|
|
|
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the
Companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
|
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
The Companys management assessed the effectiveness of the
Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
April 30, 2009. In making this assessment, management used
the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal
Control Integrated Framework. Based on this
assessment using those criteria, management concluded that the
Companys internal control over financial reporting was
effective as of April 30, 2009.
The effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting as of April 30, 2009 has been audited
by KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm,
as stated in their report, which appears herein.
Mark R. Draper
Chief Executive Officer
Charles F. Dunleavy
Chief Financial Officer
F-2
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, 2009 and 2008, 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, 2009. 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, 2009 and 2008, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended April 30, 2009, in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Ocean
Power Technologies, Inc.s internal control over financial
reporting as of April 30, 2009, based on criteria
established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report
dated July 14, 2009 expressed an unqualified opinion on the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
July 14, 2009
F-3
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of
Directors and Stockholders
Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.:
We have audited Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.s internal
control over financial reporting as of April 30, 2009,
based on criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Ocean Power
Technologies, Inc.s management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting, included in the accompanying
Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
Companys internal control over financial reporting based
on our audit.
We conducted our audit 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 effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. maintained, in
all material respects, effective internal control over financial
reporting as of April 30, 2009, based on criteria
established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.
and subsidiaries as of April 30, 2009 and 2008, 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, 2009, and our report dated July 14, 2009
expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial
statements.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
July 14, 2009
F-4
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
12,267,830
|
|
|
|
88,836,304
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
28,840,399
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
985,149
|
|
|
|
1,728,637
|
|
Unbilled receivables
|
|
|
988,418
|
|
|
|
577,452
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
1,082,696
|
|
|
|
1,375,249
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
44,164,492
|
|
|
|
92,517,642
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
897,718
|
|
|
|
628,454
|
|
Patents, net
|
|
|
909,727
|
|
|
|
717,288
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
951,552
|
|
|
|
1,123,848
|
|
Long-term investments
|
|
|
40,628,865
|
|
|
|
12,233,437
|
|
Other noncurrent assets
|
|
|
1,241,552
|
|
|
|
330,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
88,793,906
|
|
|
|
107,550,965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
908,837
|
|
|
|
1,457,575
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
3,853,437
|
|
|
|
4,490,008
|
|
Unearned revenues
|
|
|
281,570
|
|
|
|
699,752
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
5,043,844
|
|
|
|
6,647,335
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
345,386
|
|
|
|
188,784
|
|
Deferred rent
|
|
|
21,649
|
|
|
|
16,237
|
|
Deferred credits
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
6,010,879
|
|
|
|
7,452,356
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (note 14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.001 par value; authorized
5,000,000 shares,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
none issued or outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value; authorized
105,000,000 shares,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
issued and outstanding 10,210,354 shares
|
|
|
10,210
|
|
|
|
10,210
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
154,568,931
|
|
|
|
153,057,265
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(71,242,791
|
)
|
|
|
(52,927,641
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(553,323
|
)
|
|
|
(41,225
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
82,783,027
|
|
|
|
100,098,609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
88,793,906
|
|
|
|
107,550,965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-5
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,049,445
|
|
|
|
4,772,017
|
|
|
|
2,531,315
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
4,840,403
|
|
|
|
7,960,042
|
|
|
|
3,983,742
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross loss
|
|
|
(790,958
|
)
|
|
|
(3,188,025
|
)
|
|
|
(1,452,427
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development costs
|
|
|
8,372,244
|
|
|
|
8,255,123
|
|
|
|
6,219,893
|
|
Selling, general and administrative costs
|
|
|
9,529,071
|
|
|
|
7,732,577
|
|
|
|
4,893,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
17,901,315
|
|
|
|
15,987,700
|
|
|
|
11,113,473
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(18,692,273
|
)
|
|
|
(19,175,725
|
)
|
|
|
(12,565,900
|
)
|
Interest income, net
|
|
|
1,672,350
|
|
|
|
4,434,844
|
|
|
|
1,389,702
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,906
|
|
Foreign exchange gain (loss)
|
|
|
(1,295,227
|
)
|
|
|
84,158
|
|
|
|
1,523,527
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(18,315,150
|
)
|
|
|
(14,656,723
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
$
|
(1.79
|
)
|
|
|
(1.44
|
)
|
|
|
(1.83
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used to compute basic and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
diluted net loss per share
|
|
|
10,210,354
|
|
|
|
10,200,729
|
|
|
|
5,260,794
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-6
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Shares
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Stockholder
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Balance, May 1, 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
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,656,723
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,656,723
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(495
|
)
|
|
|
(495
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,657,218
|
)
|
Compensation related to stock option grants issued to employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,788,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,788,841
|
|
Compensation related to stock option grants issued for services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
137,982
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
137,982
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
24,100
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
287,771
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287,795
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, April 30, 2008
|
|
|
10,210,354
|
|
|
|
10,210
|
|
|
|
153,057,265
|
|
|
|
(52,927,641
|
)
|
|
|
(41,225
|
)
|
|
|
100,098,609
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,315,150
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,315,150
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(512,098
|
)
|
|
|
(512,098
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,827,248
|
)
|
Compensation related to stock option grants and restricted stock
issued to employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,475,215
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,475,215
|
|
Compensation related to stock option grants and restricted stock
issued for services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,451
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,451
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, April 30, 2009
|
|
|
10,210,354
|
|
|
$
|
10,210
|
|
|
|
154,568,931
|
|
|
|
(71,242,791
|
)
|
|
|
(553,323
|
)
|
|
|
82,783,027
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-7
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(18,315,150
|
)
|
|
|
(14,656,723
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638,765
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange (gain) loss
|
|
|
1,295,227
|
|
|
|
(84,158
|
)
|
|
|
(1,523,527
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
299,405
|
|
|
|
241,721
|
|
|
|
269,075
|
|
Loss on disposal of equipment
|
|
|
268,976
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,572
|
|
Treasury note premium amortization
|
|
|
288,331
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation expense related to stock option grants
|
|
|
1,511,666
|
|
|
|
1,926,823
|
|
|
|
1,152,416
|
|
Deferred rent
|
|
|
5,412
|
|
|
|
5,412
|
|
|
|
10,825
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
472,422
|
|
|
|
(878,643
|
)
|
|
|
(827,287
|
)
|
Unbilled receivables
|
|
|
(589,970
|
)
|
|
|
(270,136
|
)
|
|
|
(95,896
|
)
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
140,418
|
|
|
|
(918,380
|
)
|
|
|
(99,436
|
)
|
Other noncurrent assets
|
|
|
(857,060
|
)
|
|
|
(76,571
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(448,138
|
)
|
|
|
(122,323
|
)
|
|
|
1,233,484
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
(361,284
|
)
|
|
|
496,838
|
|
|
|
2,126,616
|
|
Unearned revenues
|
|
|
(418,182
|
)
|
|
|
699,752
|
|
|
|
(14,405
|
)
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26,106
|
)
|
|
|
(85,470
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(16,707,927
|
)
|
|
|
(13,662,494
|
)
|
|
|
(7,467,798
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of certificates of deposit
|
|
|
(95,992,100
|
)
|
|
|
(8,968,170
|
)
|
|
|
(55,187,304
|
)
|
Maturities of certificates of deposit
|
|
|
67,151,702
|
|
|
|
17,358,316
|
|
|
|
47,279,314
|
|
Purchases of long-term investments
|
|
|
(28,683,759
|
)
|
|
|
(12,233,437
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(983,376
|
)
|
Purchases of equipment
|
|
|
(811,493
|
)
|
|
|
(419,835
|
)
|
|
|
(107,271
|
)
|
Payments of patent costs
|
|
|
(243,941
|
)
|
|
|
(112,705
|
)
|
|
|
(217,763
|
)
|
Investments in joint ventures and other noncurrent assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27,714
|
)
|
|
|
(122,001
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(58,579,591
|
)
|
|
|
(4,403,545
|
)
|
|
|
(9,338,401
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from long-term debt
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of long-term debt
|
|
|
(42,801
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of common stock, net of issuance costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(870,116
|
)
|
|
|
90,773,935
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287,795
|
|
|
|
65,674
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
207,199
|
|
|
|
(582,321
|
)
|
|
|
90,839,609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(1,488,155
|
)
|
|
|
(20,809
|
)
|
|
|
1,514,854
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(76,568,474
|
)
|
|
|
(18,669,169
|
)
|
|
|
75,548,264
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
|
|
88,836,304
|
|
|
|
107,505,473
|
|
|
|
31,957,209
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
|
|
$
|
12,267,830
|
|
|
|
88,836,304
|
|
|
|
107,505,473
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of noncash investing and financing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized patent costs financed through accounts payable and
accrued espenses
|
|
$
|
23,255
|
|
|
|
35,048
|
|
|
|
30,343
|
|
Stock issuance costs financed through accounts payable and
accrued expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
870,116
|
|
Capitalized purchases of equipment financed through accounts
payable
|
|
|
96,304
|
|
|
|
36,964
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized investment in joint ventures financed through
accrued expenses
|
|
|
175,803
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-8
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 primarily recognizes revenue 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, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company recorded
provisions of approximately $810,000, $2,370,000 and $1,290,000,
respectively, related to anticipated losses on contracts.
Reserves related to loss contracts in the amounts of
approximately $1,152,000 and $2,070,000 are included in accrued
expenses in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets as of
April 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Modifications to
contract provisions, such as those currently being discussed in
connection with the Companys Spain construction agreement
(see Note 14), as well as modifications in contract loss
estimates, may require changes in reserves established for
anticipated contract losses.
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.
|
|
(d)
|
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
|
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 $4,337,000
and $15,617,000 of certificates of deposit with an initial term
of less than three months at April 30, 2009 and 2008,
respectively, and $6,530,000 and $1,251,000 invested in a money
market fund as of April 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. In
addition, $70,881,000 was invested in short-term Treasury bills
as of April 30, 2008.
F-9
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
Short-term investments consist of investments with maturities
longer than three months but less than one year. Long-term
investments consist of investments with maturities greater than
one year. Investments which the Company has the intent and
ability to hold to maturity are classified as investments
held-to-maturity
and are reported at amortized cost. The difference between the
acquisition cost and face values of
held-to-maturity
investments is amortized over the remaining term of the
investments and added to or subtracted from the acquisition cost
and interest income. As of April 30, 2009 and 2008, all of
the Companys investments were classified as
held-to-maturity.
|
|
(f)
|
Restricted
Cash and Credit Facility
|
The Company had $951,552 and $1,123,848 of restricted cash as of
April 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The cash is
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 that are
expected to be issued by Barclays Bank on behalf of Ocean Power
Technologies Ltd., one of the Companys subsidiaries, 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.
|
|
(g)
|
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 $259,696,
$213,977 and $247,515 for the years ended April 30, 2009,
2008 and 2007, respectively.
|
|
(h)
|
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
$8,541,000 and $9,646,000 as of April 30, 2009 and 2008,
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)
in 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
$39,613, $27,744 and $21,560 for the years ended April 30,
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Amortization expense for the
next five fiscal years related to amounts capitalized for
patents as of April 30, 2009 is estimated to be
approximately $53,000 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
F-10
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
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 impairment in accordance with
SFAS No. 144 and determined there was no impairment
for the years ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
|
|
(k)
|
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 liquid investments
(principally short-term bank deposits, Treasury bills, Treasury
notes 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 at
least one of the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended April 30,
|
|
Customer
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
US Navy
|
|
|
67
|
%
|
|
|
58
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
Iberdrola and Total
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
|
31
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
Scottish Government
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
The loss of, or a significant reduction in revenues from, any of
the current customers could significantly impact the
Companys financial position or results of operations. The
Company does not require collateral from its customers.
|
|
(l)
|
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, 1,677,255, 1,445,302
and 1,303,574 options to purchase shares of common stock,
non-vested restricted stock and shares to be issued to
non-employee directors were excluded from the computations for
the years ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
|
|
(m)
|
Stock-Based
Compensation
|
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 years ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and
2007 under SFAS No. 123R was approximately $1,475,000,
1,789,000 and $1,082,000, respectively.
Valuation
Assumptions for Options Granted During the Years Ended
April 30, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
The fair value of each stock option granted during the years
ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and 2007 were estimated at the
date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model,
assuming no dividends and using the
F-11
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
weighted average valuation assumptions noted in the following
table. The risk-free rate is based on the US 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
3.36
|
%
|
|
|
4.69
|
%
|
|
|
5.01
|
%
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
Expected life
|
|
|
6.29 years
|
|
|
|
5.99 years
|
|
|
|
5.5 years
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
79.3
|
%
|
|
|
77.9
|
%
|
|
|
72.0
|
%
|
The above assumptions were used to determine the weighted
average per share fair value of $6.33, $10.87 and $8.80 for
stock options granted during the years ended April 30,
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
|
|
(n)
|
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.
|
|
(o)
|
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 US dollars is
performed for balance sheet accounts using the exchange 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.
|
|
(p)
|
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
|
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements, which establishes a framework
for reporting fair value and expands disclosures about fair
value measurements. SFAS No. 157 as issued is
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007. On February 12, 2008, FASB Staff Position (FSP)
FAS 157-2,
Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157, was
issued, which delays the effective date to fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2008 for certain nonfinancial
assets and liabilities. The Company adopted
SFAS No. 157 on May 1, 2008, except for the items
covered by FSP
FAS 157-2.
The adoption of SFAS No. 157 did not have any impact
on the Companys consolidated financial statements.
SFAS No. 157 establishes a three-tier fair value
hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair
value as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1: Observable inputs, such as
quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities;
|
|
|
|
Level 2: Inputs, other than the quoted
prices in active markets, that are observable either directly or
indirectly; and
|
|
|
|
Level 3: Unobservable inputs in which
there is little or no market data, which require the reporting
entity to develop its own assumptions.
|
F-12
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
In February 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 157-1,
Application of FASB Statement No. 157 to FASB Statement
No. 13 and Other Accounting Pronouncements That Address
Fair Value Measurements for Purposes of Lease Classification or
Measurement under Statement 13. FSP
FAS 157-1
amends SFAS No. 157 to exclude certain leasing
transactions accounted for under previously existing accounting
guidance. This exclusion, however, does not apply to assets
acquired and liabilities assumed in a business combination,
regardless of whether those assets and liabilities are related
to leases. The adoption of FSP
FAS 157-1
did not have any impact on the Companys consolidated
financial statements.
In October 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 157-3,
Determining the Fair Value of a Financial Asset When the
Market for That Asset Is Not Active. FSP
FAS 157-3
clarifies the application of SFAS No. 157 when the
market for a financial asset is not active. FSP
FAS 157-3
was effective upon issuance, including reporting for prior
periods for which financial statements have not been issued. The
adoption of FSP
FAS 157-3
did not have any impact on the Companys consolidated
financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities. SFAS No. 159 allows companies to
elect to measure certain assets and liabilities at fair value
and is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007. The adoption of SFAS No. 159
on May 1, 2008 did not have any impact on the
Companys consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141
(revised 2007), Business Combinations
(SFAS No. 141R), which establishes the principles
and requirements for how an acquirer recognizes the assets
acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling
interest in the acquirer at the acquisition date, measured at
their fair values as of that date, with limited exceptions. This
statement applies to business combinations for which the
acquisition date is after the beginning of the first annual
reporting period beginning after December 15, 2008. Earlier
adoption is not permitted. The Company will adopt
SFAS No. 141R upon its effective date as appropriate
for any future business combinations.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements. SFAS No. 160 establishes accounting
and reporting standards for the noncontrolling interest in a
subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It
clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary is an
ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be
recorded as a component of equity in the consolidated financial
statements. This statement also requires that consolidated net
income shall be adjusted to include the net income attributed to
the noncontrolling interest. Disclosure on the face of the
statement of operations of the amounts of consolidated net
income attributable to the parent and to the noncontrolling
interest is required. SFAS No. 160 is effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. Earlier
adoption is not permitted. The Company is currently evaluating
the impact of SFAS No. 160.
In April 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 142-3,
Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible Assets.
FSP
FAS 142-3
amends the factors that should be considered in developing
renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful
life of a recognized intangible asset under
SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets. FSP
FAS 142-3
also adds certain disclosures to those already prescribed in
SFAS No. 142. FSP
FAS 142-3
is effective as of the beginning of the first fiscal year
beginning after December 15, 2008, and early adoption is
prohibited. The guidance for determining useful lives must be
applied prospectively to intangible assets acquired after the
effective date. The disclosure requirements must be applied
prospectively to all intangible assets recognized as of the
effective date. The Company is currently evaluating the impact
of FSP
FAS 142-3.
In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162, The
Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.
SFAS No. 162 identifies the sources of accounting
principles and the framework for selecting the principles to be
used in the preparation of financial statements of
nongovernmental entities that are presented in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles in the United States.
This statement is effective November 15, 2008. The adoption
of SFAS No. 162 did not have any impact on the
Companys consolidated financial statements.
In April 2009, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 115-2
and
FAS 124-2,
Recognition and Presentation of
Other-Than-Temporary
Impairments, FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2
changes existing guidance for determining
F-13
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
whether debt securities are
other-than-temporarily
impaired and replaces the existing requirement that the
entitys management assert it has both the intent and
ability to hold an impaired security until recovery with a
requirement that management assert: (a) it does not have
the intent to sell the security; and (b) it is more likely
than not it will not have to sell the security before recovery
of its cost basis. FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2
requires entities to separate an
other-than-temporary
impairment of a debt security into two components when there are
credit related losses associated with the impaired debt security
for which management asserts that it does not have the intent to
sell the security, and it is more likely than not that it will
not be required to sell the security before recovery of its cost
basis. The amount of the
other-than-temporary
impairment related to a credit loss is recognized in earnings,
and the amount of the
other-than-temporary
impairment related to other factors is recorded in other
comprehensive income (loss). FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2 is
effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after
June 15, 2009. The Company will adopt the provisions of FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2
during the first quarter of the fiscal year ended April 30,
2010. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of FSP
FAS 115-2
and 124-2.
In April 2009, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB
28-1,
Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial
Instruments. FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB 28-1
requires disclosures about fair values of financial instruments
in interim and annual financial statements. Prior to the
issuance of FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB
28-1,
disclosures about fair values of financial instruments were only
required to be disclosed annually. FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB 28-1
requires disclosures about fair value of financial instruments
in interim and annual financial statements. The Company will
adopt FSP
FAS 107-1
and APB 28-1
during the first quarter of the fiscal year ended April 30,
2010. The adoption will not affect the Companys financial
position or results of operations.
|
|
(3)
|
Short-Term
Investments
|
Investments with maturities in excess of 90 but less than
365 days from purchase are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit denominated in USD
|
|
$
|
3,685,370
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit denominated in GBP
|
|
|
3,217,152
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Treasury obligations
|
|
|
21,937,877
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
28,840,399
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
Long-Term
Investments
|
The Companys long-term investments are all classified as
held-to-maturity
and are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Market
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
April 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Treasury obligations
|
|
$
|
40,628,865
|
|
|
|
430,558
|
|
|
|
(20,963
|
)
|
|
|
41,038,460
|
|
April 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Treasury obligations
|
|
$
|
12,233,437
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,233,437
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This was one investment purchased on the last day of the fiscal
year. Consequently there was no difference between amortized
cost and market value. |
F-14
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
(5)
|
Property
and Equipment
|
The components of property and equipment are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Computers and software
|
|
$
|
581,790
|
|
|
|
614,695
|
|
Equipment
|
|
|
699,838
|
|
|
|
630,116
|
|
Office furniture and equipment
|
|
|
290,812
|
|
|
|
247,491
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
141,129
|
|
|
|
70,145
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,713,568
|
|
|
|
1,562,447
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(815,851
|
)
|
|
|
(933,993
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
897,718
|
|
|
|
628,454
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in accrued expenses at April 30, 2009 and 2008
were contract loss reserves of approximately $1,152,000 and
$2,070,000, respectively, and accrued employee incentive
payments of approximately $672,000 and $572,000, respectively.
Accrued expenses at April 30, 2009 and 2008 also included
legal and accounting fees of approximately $485,000 and
$556,000, respectively, and accrued employee vacation of
$151,000 and $143,000, respectively.
|
|
(7)
|
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
US 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, 2009,
approximately $200,000 of royalties had been earned. During the
years ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and 2007, no royalties
were earned pursuant to these agreements, and no future
royalties are expected to be earned. As of April 30, 2007,
approximately $26,000 was included in other current liabilities
related to these agreements. The amount was paid during the year
ended April 30, 2008.
In August 1999, the Company entered into a consulting agreement
with an individual for marketing services at a rate of $800 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 $61,000, $62,000
and $54,000 during the years ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and
2007, respectively.
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. The award
contract was assigned to the New Jersey Economic Development
Authority in fiscal 2008. 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 $61,000 and is required to repay an additional
approximately $93,000 as of April 30, 2009. The current
payment required was included in accrued expenses in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of April 30,
2009.
F-15
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
During the year ended April 30, 2009, the Company received
a recoverable grant award of $250,000 from the New Jersey Board
of Public Utilities under the Renewable Energy Business Venture
Assistance Program. Under the terms of this agreement, the
amount to be repaid is a fixed monthly amount of principal only,
repayable over a five-year period beginning May 2012.
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 as deferred credits in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets as of April 30, 2009 and 2008.
If the Company does not become entitled under applicable laws to
the full amount of emission credits covered by the option by
December 31, 2012, 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.
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 approximately $89,900,000.
In September 2003, 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, 2009 and 2008, no shares of preferred
stock had been issued.
|
|
(12)
|
Share-Based
Compensation
|
Prior to August 2001, the Company maintained qualified and
nonqualified stock option plans. The Company had reserved
453,390 shares of common stock for issuance under these
plans. There are no options available for future grant under
these plans as of April 30, 2009.
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
were authorized for issuance under the 2001 Stock Plan. As of
April 30, 2009, the Company had issued or reserved
610,402 shares for issuance under the 2001 Stock Plan.
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. A total of 803,215 shares are
authorized for issuance under the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan. As
of April 30, 2009, the Company had issued options for
613,463 shares of common stock and had reserved an
additional 189,752 shares of common stock for future
issuance under the 2006 Stock Incentive 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.
Members of the
F-16
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
board of directors who are not full-time employees receive, as
part of their annual compensation, a choice of either
(a) an option to purchase 2,000 shares of common stock
that is fully vested at the time of grant, or (b) shares of
common stock worth $10,000, which vests 50% at the time of grant
and 50% one year later. Vesting provisions of stock options are
determined by the board of directors. The contractual term of
these stock options is up to ten years. 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.
A summary of stock options under the plans is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
Shares Under
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In Years)
|
|
|
Outstanding at May 1, 2008
|
|
|
1,445,302
|
|
|
$
|
14.61
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(90,300
|
)
|
|
|
13.87
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(40,210
|
)
|
|
|
18.82
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
317,471
|
|
|
|
8.88
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at April 30, 2009
|
|
|
1,632,263
|
|
|
|
13.43
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at April 30, 2009
|
|
|
1,089,718
|
|
|
|
14.50
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years
ended April 30, 2008 and 2007 was approximately $101,000
and $188,000, respectively. There were no option exercises for
the year ended April 30, 2009. The total intrinsic value of
outstanding and exercisable options as of April 30, 2009
was zero. As of April 30, 2009, approximately 472,000
additional options were expected to vest, which had zero
intrinsic value and a weighted average remaining contractual
term of 8.4 years. As of April 30, 2009, there was
approximately $2,891,000 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 2.3 years. The Company normally issues new shares
to satisfy option exercises under these plans.
Certain options were granted to consultants during the years
ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and 2007. The Company has
charged compensation expense of $36,451, $137,982 and $70,235
related to these option grants, which has been included in
selling, general and administrative costs in the accompanying
consolidated statements of operations for the years ended
April 30, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
|
|
(b)
|
Non-Vested
Restricted Stock
|
Compensation expense for non-vested restricted stock was
historically recorded based on its market value on the date of
grant and recognized ratably over the associated service and
performance period. During the year ended April 30, 2009
there were 40,000 shares of non-vested restricted stock
granted of which 20,000 shares were issued to employees
with performance-based vesting requirements and
20,000 shares issued to employees with service-based
vesting requirements. As of April 30, 2009, all 40,000
restricted shares are unvested.
F-17
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
A summary of non-vested restricted stock under the plans is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Price per
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
Outstanding at May 1, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
6.48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at April 30, 2009
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
6.48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of April 30, 2009, there was approximately $58,000 of
total recognized compensation cost and $184,000 of total
unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested restricted
stock granted under the plans. That cost is expected to be
recognized over a weighted average period of 1.1 years.
|
|
(c)
|
Shares
of Common Stock
|
During the year ended April 30, 2009, 4,992 shares of
common stock were awarded to non-employee directors pursuant to
annual retainer arrangements. The aggregate share-based
compensation expense recorded in the consolidated statement of
operations for the year ended April 30, 2009 related to the
shares was approximately $40,000, which represents the fair
value on the date of grant. The shares were not issued as of
April 30, 2009, and accordingly the liability was included
in accrued expenses.
The tax effects of temporary differences and carryforwards that
give rise to the Companys deferred tax assets and deferred
tax liabilities are presented below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
$
|
15,519,000
|
|
|
|
10,942,000
|
|
Foreign net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
3,380,000
|
|
|
|
3,328,000
|
|
New Jersey state operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
1,792,000
|
|
|
|
756,000
|
|
Federal research and development tax credits
|
|
|
1,089,000
|
|
|
|
882,000
|
|
Foreign research and development tax credits
|
|
|
646,000
|
|
|
|
870,000
|
|
Stock compensation
|
|
|
2,151,000
|
|
|
|
1,788,000
|
|
Unrealized foreign exchange loss
|
|
|
224,000
|
|
|
|
148,000
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
515,000
|
|
|
|
731,000
|
|
Other
|
|
|
233,000
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross deferred tax assets
|
|
|
25,549,000
|
|
|
|
19,452,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
$
|
(25,549,000
|
)
|
|
|
(19,452,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-18
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
The effective income tax rate differed from the percentages
computed by applying the US Federal income tax rate of 34%
to loss before income taxes as a result of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended April 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Computed expected tax benefit
|
|
|
(34
|
)%
|
|
|
(34
|
)%
|
|
|
(34
|
)%
|
Increase (reduction) in income taxes resulting from:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Federal research and development tax credits
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Foreign research and development tax credits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign rate differential
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-deductible expenses
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Other
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in valuation allowance
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 and
carryforwards become deductible or utilized. As of
April 30, 2009 and 2008, based upon the level of historical
taxable losses, valuation allowances of $25,549,000 and
$19,452,000, respectively, were recorded in accordance with the
provisions of SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes. The valuation allowance increased $6,097,000,
$6,249,000 and $3,149,000 during the years ended April 30,
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
As of April 30, 2009, the Company had net operating loss
carryforwards for Federal income tax purposes of approximately
$45,600,000, which begin to expire in 2010. The Company also had
Federal research and development tax credit carryforwards of
approximately $1,089,000 as of April 30, 2009, 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 approximately $2,763,000, $3,371,000, and
$2,290,000 for the years ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and
2007, respectively. As of April 30, 2009, the Company had
foreign net operating loss carryforwards of approximately
$12,000,000, which begin to expire in 2024. The ability to
utilize these carryforwards may be limited in the event of an
ownership change.
On May 1, 2007, the Company adopted FASB Interpretation
No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
(FIN 48). FIN 48 clarifies the criteria for
recognizing tax benefits related to uncertain tax positions
under SFAS No. 109, and requires additional financial
statement disclosure. FIN 48 requires that the Company
recognizes in its consolidated financial statements the impact
of a tax position if that position is more likely than not to be
sustained upon examination, based on the technical merits of the
position. The implementation of FIN 48 did not have any
material impact on the Companys consolidated financial
statements. At the adoption date of May 1, 2007 and also at
April 30, 2008 and 2009, the Company had no unrecognized
tax benefits. The Company does not expect any material increase
or decrease in its income tax expense, in the next twelve
months, related to examinations or changes in uncertain tax
positions.
The Company does not have any interest or penalties accrued
related to uncertain tax positions as it does not have any
unrecognized tax benefits. In the event the Company determines
that accrual of interest or penalties is necessary in the
future, the amount will be presented as a component of income
taxes.
F-19
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
(14)
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
|
|
(a)
|
Operating
Lease Commitments
|
The Company leases office, laboratory, manufacturing and other
space in New Jersey, Warwick, United Kingdom and Santander,
Spain under operating leases that expire on various dates
through April 30, 2013. Rent expense under operating leases
was approximately $606,000, $438,000 and $338,000 for the years
ended April 30, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Future
minimum lease payments under operating leases as of
April 30, 2009 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Year ending April 30:
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
$
|
450,751
|
|
2011
|
|
|
364,293
|
|
2012
|
|
|
351,234
|
|
2013
|
|
|
307,568
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,473,846
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(b) Spain
Construction Agreement
The Company is currently engaged in discussions regarding
modifications to its agreement for the first phase of the
construction of a wave power station off the coast of Spain. If
the parties are unable to agree upon the necessary contract
changes, the agreement may be terminated if the first phase of
the project is not completed by December 31, 2009 for
reasons attributable to the Company or if the Company is
otherwise in default of its obligations under the agreement. In
such an event, the Companys customer will be entitled to
seek reimbursement for direct damages only, limited to amounts
specified in the contract.
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.
|
|
(15)
|
Quarterly
Financial Data (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Fiscal Year 2009
|
|
Jul 31
|
|
|
Oct 31
|
|
|
Jan 31
|
|
|
Apr 30
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
1,786,628
|
|
|
|
667,124
|
|
|
|
964,803
|
|
|
|
630,890
|
|
Gross profit (loss)
|
|
|
(161,518
|
)
|
|
|
(702,454
|
)
|
|
|
326,211
|
|
|
|
(253,197
|
)
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(4,416,283
|
)
|
|
|
(5,426,265
|
)
|
|
|
(3,882,472
|
)
|
|
|
(4,967,253
|
)
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(3,893,164
|
)
|
|
|
(6,115,701
|
)
|
|
|
(3,597,665
|
)
|
|
|
(4,708,620
|
)
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
$
|
(0.38
|
)
|
|
|
(0.60
|
)
|
|
|
(0.35
|
)
|
|
|
(0.46
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Fiscal Year 2008
|
|
Jul 31
|
|
|
Oct 31
|
|
|
Jan 31
|
|
|
Apr 30
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
555,704
|
|
|
|
1,686,212
|
|
|
|
1,421,856
|
|
|
|
1,108,245
|
|
Gross loss
|
|
|
(249,288
|
)
|
|
|
(236,984
|
)
|
|
|
(570,668
|
)
|
|
|
(2,131,085
|
)
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(4,061,624
|
)
|
|
|
(3,550,857
|
)
|
|
|
(4,600,822
|
)
|
|
|
(6,962,422
|
)
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(2,437,844
|
)
|
|
|
(1,870,816
|
)
|
|
|
(3,992,961
|
)
|
|
|
(6,355,102
|
)
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share
|
|
$
|
(0.24
|
)
|
|
|
(0.18
|
)
|
|
|
(0.39
|
)
|
|
|
(0.62
|
)
|
F-20
OCEAN
POWER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to
Consolidated Financial
Statements (Continued)
|
|
(16)
|
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, 2009
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers
|
|
$
|
2,944,361
|
|
|
|
1,016,223
|
|
|
|
88,861
|
|
|
|
4,049,445
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(15,870,696
|
)
|
|
|
(2,475,659
|
)
|
|
|
(345,918
|
)
|
|
|
(18,692,273
|
)
|
Long-lived assets
|
|
|
524,231
|
|
|
|
373,429
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
897,718
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
81,006,430
|
|
|
|
7,677,316
|
|
|
|
110,160
|
|
|
|
88,793,906
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Revenues from external customers
|
|
$
|
2,831,122
|
|
|
|
1,940,895
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,772,017
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(15,695,543
|
)
|
|
|
(3,221,882
|
)
|
|
|
(258,300
|
)
|
|
|
(19,175,725
|
)
|
Long-lived assets
|
|
|
392,980
|
|
|
|
234,497
|
|
|
|
977
|
|
|
|
628,454
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
103,873,654
|
|
|
|
3,624,686
|
|
|
|
52,625
|
|
|
|
107,550,965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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-21
EX-21.1
Exhibit 21.1
|
|
|
Subsidiary
|
|
Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|
|
Ocean Power Technologies Ltd
|
|
United Kingdom
|
Ocean Power Technologies (Australasia) Pty Ltd
|
|
Australia
|
Reedsport OPT Wave Park LLC
|
|
Oregon
|
Oregon Wave Energy Partners I, LLC
|
|
Delaware
|
Oregon Wave Energy Partners II, LLC
|
|
Delaware
|
Fairhaven OPT Ocean Power, LLC
|
|
California
|
California Wave Energy Partners I, LLC
|
|
California
|
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 reports dated
July 14, 2009, with respect to the consolidated balance
sheets of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
April 30, 2009 and 2008, 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, 2009, and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
April 30, 2009, which reports appear in the April 30,
2009 annual report on
Form 10-K
of Ocean Power Technologies, Inc.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
July 14, 2009
EX-31.1
EXHIBIT 31.1
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Mark R. Draper, 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))
and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f)
and
15d-15(f))
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)
|
Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or
caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
|
|
|
|
|
(c)
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
(d)
|
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 (or other persons performing the equivalent
functions):
|
|
|
|
|
(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.
|
Mark R. Draper
Chief Executive Officer
Dated: July 14, 2009
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))
and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f)
and
15d-15(f))
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)
|
Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or
caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
|
|
|
|
|
(c)
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
(d)
|
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 (or other persons performing the equivalent
functions):
|
|
|
|
|
(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 14, 2009
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 year ended April 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned, Mark R. Draper, 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.
|
Mark R. Draper
Chief Executive Officer
Date: July 14, 2009
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 year ended April 30, 2009 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 14, 2009