Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies
|3 Months Ended|
Feb. 29, 2016
|Accounting Policies [Abstract]|
|Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies||
Note 1 - Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies
The unaudited consolidated financial statements including the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of February 29, 2016 and November 30, 2015, the related Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive (Loss) Income and Cash Flows for the three months ended February 29, 2016 and February 28, 2015 have been prepared by Cryo-Cell International, Inc. and its subsidiaries (“the Company” or “Cryo-Cell”) pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission for interim financial reporting. Certain financial information and note disclosures, which are normally included in annual financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, have been condensed or omitted pursuant to those rules and regulations. It is suggested that these consolidated financial statements be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s November 30, 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (which include only normal recurring adjustments) necessary to present fairly the financial position, results of operations, and changes in cash flows for all periods presented have been made. The results of operations for the three months ended February 29, 2016 are not necessarily indicative of the results expected for any interim period in the future or the entire year ending November 30, 2016.
Revenue Recognition for Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables
For multi-element arrangements, the Company allocates revenue to all deliverables based on their relative selling prices. In such circumstances, accounting principles establish a hierarchy to determine the selling price to be used for allocating revenue to deliverables as follows: (i) vendor-specific objective evidence of fair value (“VSOE”), (ii) third-party evidence of selling price (“TPE”), and (iii) best estimate of the selling price (“ESP”). VSOE generally exists only when the Company sells the deliverable separately and it is the price actually charged by the Company for that deliverable.
The Company has identified two deliverables generally contained in the arrangements involving the sale of its umbilical cord blood product. The first deliverable is the processing of a specimen. The second deliverable is either the annual storage of a specimen, the 21-year storage fee charged for a specimen or the life-time storage fee charged for a specimen. The Company has allocated revenue between these deliverables using the relative selling price method. The Company has VSOE for its annual storage fees as the Company renews storage fees annually with its customers on a stand-alone basis. Because the Company has neither VSOE nor TPE for the processing, 21-year storage and life-time storage deliverables, the allocation of revenue has been based on the Company’s ESPs. Amounts allocated to processing a specimen are recognized at the time the processing of the specimen is complete. Amounts allocated to the storage of a specimen are recognized ratably over the contractual storage period. Any discounts given to the customer are recognized by applying the relative selling price method whereby after the Company determines the selling price to be allocated to each deliverable (processing and storage), the sum of the prices of the deliverables is then compared to the arrangement consideration, and any difference is applied to the separate deliverables ratably.
The Company’s process for determining its ESP for deliverables without VSOE or TPE considers multiple factors that may vary depending upon the unique facts and circumstances related to each deliverable. Key factors considered by the Company in developing the ESPs for its processing, 21 year storage and life-time storage fee include the Company’s historical pricing practices, as well as expected profit margins.
The Company records revenue from processing and storage of specimens and pursuant to agreements with licensees. The Company recognizes revenue from processing fees upon completion of processing and recognizes storage fees ratably over the contractual storage period as well as other income from royalties paid by licensees related to long-term storage contracts which the Company has under license agreements. Contracted storage periods are annual, twenty-one years and lifetime. Deferred revenue on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets includes the portion of the annual storage fee, the twenty-one year storage fee and the life-time storage fee that is being recognized over the contractual storage period as well as royalties received from foreign licensees related to long-term storage contracts in which the Company has future obligations under the license agreement. The Company classifies deferred revenue as current if the Company expects to recognize the related revenue over the next 12 months. The Company also records revenue within processing and storage fees from shipping and handling billed to customers when earned. Shipping and handling costs that the Company incurs are expensed and included in cost of sales.
The Company records revenue from the sale of the Prepacyte®-CB product line upon shipment of the product to the Company’s customers.
Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the estimated future tax consequences attributable to differences between financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to be recovered or settled. The Company has recorded a valuation allowance of $2,630,000 and $2,630,000 as of February 29, 2016 and November 30, 2015, respectively, as the Company does not believe it is “more likely than not” that all future income tax benefits will be realized. When the Company changes its determination as to the amount of deferred income tax assets that can be realized, the valuation allowance is adjusted with a corresponding impact to income tax expense in the period in which such determination is made. The ultimate realization of the Company’s deferred income tax assets depends upon generating sufficient taxable income prior to the expiration of the tax attributes. In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, the Company projects future levels of taxable income. This assessment requires significant judgment. The Company examines the evidence related to the recent history of losses, the economic conditions in which the Company operates and forecasts and projections to make that determination.
There was no U.S. income tax expense for the three months ended February 29, 2016 and February 28, 2015 due to the utilization of net operating losses and foreign tax credit carryforwards, which were not previously benefited in the Company’s financial statements.
The Company records foreign income taxes withheld from installment payments of non-refundable up-front license fees and royalty income earned on the processing and storage of cord blood stem cell specimens in geographic areas where the Company has license agreements. The Company recognized approximately $0 and $25,000 for the three months ended February 29, 2016 and February 28, 2015, respectively, of foreign income tax expense. Foreign income tax expense is included in income tax expense in the accompanying consolidated statements of comprehensive (loss) income.
The Company recognizes the financial statement benefit of a tax position only after determining that the relevant tax authority would more likely than not sustain the position following an audit. For tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not threshold, the amount recognized in the financial statements is the largest benefit that has a greater than 50 percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement with the relevant tax authority. Increases or decreases to the unrecognized tax benefits could result from management’s belief that a position can or cannot be sustained upon examination based on subsequent information or potential lapse of the applicable statute of limitation for certain tax positions.
The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense. For the three months ended February 29, 2016 and February 28, 2015, the Company had no provisions for interest or penalties related to uncertain tax positions.
The Company evaluates the realizability of its long-lived assets, which requires impairment losses to be recorded on long-lived assets used in operations when indicators of impairment, such as reductions in demand or when significant economic slowdowns are present. Reviews are performed to determine whether the carrying value of an asset is impaired, based on comparisons to undiscounted expected future cash flows. If this comparison indicates that there is impairment and carrying value is in excess of fair value, the impaired asset is written down to fair value, which is typically calculated using: (i) quoted market prices or (ii) discounted expected future cash flows utilizing a discount rate. The Company did not note any impairment for the three months ended February 29, 2016 and February 28, 2015.
As of February 29, 2016, the Company has three stock-based compensation plans, which are described in Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements. The Company’s third stock-based employee compensation plan became effective December 1, 2011 as approved by the Board of Directors and approved by the stockholders at the 2012 Annual Meeting. The Company recognized approximately $252,000 and $191,000 for the three months ended February 29, 2016 and February 28, 2015, respectively, of stock-based compensation expense.
The Company recognizes stock-based compensation based on the fair value of the related awards. Under the fair value recognition guidance of stock-based compensation accounting rules, stock-based compensation expense is estimated at the grant date based on the fair value of the award and is recognized as expense over the requisite service period of the award. The fair value of service-based vesting condition and performance-based vesting condition stock option awards is determined using the Black-Scholes valuation model. For stock option awards with only service-based vesting conditions and graded vesting features, the Company recognizes stock compensation expense based on the graded-vesting method. To value awards with market-based vesting conditions the Company uses a binomial valuation model. The Company recognizes compensation cost for awards with market-based vesting conditions on a graded-vesting basis over the derived service period calculated by the binomial valuation model. The use of these valuation models involve assumptions that are judgmental and highly sensitive in the determination of compensation expense and include the expected life of the option, stock price volatility, risk-free interest rate, dividend yield, exercise price, and forfeiture rate. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of valuation and reduce expense ratably over the vesting period.
The estimation of stock awards that will ultimately vest requires judgment and to the extent that actual results or updated estimates differ from current estimates, such amounts will be recorded as a cumulative adjustment in the period they become known. The Company considered many factors when estimating forfeitures, including the recipient groups and historical experience. Actual results and future changes in estimates may differ substantially from current estimates.
The Company issues performance-based equity awards which vest upon the achievement of certain financial performance goals, including revenue and income targets. Determining the appropriate amount to expense based on the anticipated achievement of the stated goals requires judgment, including forecasting future financial results. The estimate of the timing of the expense recognition is revised periodically based on the probability of achieving the required performance targets and adjustments are made as appropriate. The cumulative impact of any revision is reflected in the period of the change. If the financial performance goals are not met, the award does not vest, so no compensation cost is recognized and any previously stock-recognized stock-based compensation expense is reversed.
The Company issues equity awards with market-based vesting conditions which vest upon the achievement of certain stock price targets. If the awards are forfeited prior to the completion of the derived service period, any recognized compensation is reversed. If the awards are forfeited after the completion of the derived service period, the compensation cost is not reversed, even if the awards never vest.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
Management uses a fair value hierarchy, which gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets. The fair value of financial instruments is estimated based on market trading information, where available. Absent published market values for an instrument or other assets, management uses observable market data to arrive at its estimates of fair value. Management believes that the carrying amount of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, notes receivable, accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments. The Company believes that the fair value of its Revenue Sharing Agreements (“RSA”) liability recorded on the balance sheet is between the recorded book value and up to the Company’s previous settlement experience, due to the various terms and conditions associated with each RSA.
The Company uses an accounting standard that defines fair value as an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. As such, fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. As a basis for considering such assumptions, the standard establishes a three-level fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The three levels of inputs used to measure fair value are as follows:
The following table summarizes the financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of February 29, 2016 and November 30, 2015, respectively, segregated among the appropriate levels within the fair value hierarchy:
The following is a description of the valuation techniques used for these items, as well as the general classification of such items pursuant to the fair value hierarchy:
Trading securities – Fair values for these investments are based on quoted prices in active markets and are therefore classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy. For trading securities, there was ($19,800) and ($4,400) in unrealized holding losses, respectively, recorded in other income and expense on the accompanying consolidated statements of comprehensive loss for the three months ended February 29, 2016 and February 28, 2015, respectively.
Available-for-sale securities – During the second quarter of fiscal 2015, management reevaluated its marketable securities and determined that there was a change in certain securities from trading to available-for-sale classification. These investments are classified as available for sale and consist of marketable equity securities that we intend to hold for an indefinite period of time. Investments are stated at fair value and unrealized holding gains and losses are reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income until realized. Realized gains or losses on disposition of investments are computed using the first in, first out (FIFO) method and reported as income or loss in the period of disposition in the accompanying consolidated statements of comprehensive income. For available-for-sale securities, there was approximately ($94,000) and $0 in unrealized holding losses, net of tax, respectively, reported as comprehensive loss on the accompanying statements of comprehensive (loss) income for the three months ended February 29, 2016 and February 28, 2015, respectively.
Product Warranty and Cryo-Cell CaresTM Program
In December 2005, the Company began providing its customers that enrolled after December 2005 a payment warranty under which the Company agrees to pay $50,000 to its client if the umbilical cord blood product retrieved is used for a stem cell transplant for the donor or an immediate family member and fails to engraft, subject to various restrictions. Effective February 1, 2012, the Company increased the $50,000 payment warranty to a $75,000 payment warranty to all of its new clients. Additionally, under the Cryo-Cell CaresTM program, the Company was paying $10,000 to the client to offset personal expenses if the umbilical cord blood product is used for bone marrow reconstitution in a myeloblative transplant procedure. Effective October 13, 2014, the Company no longer offers the Cryo-Cell CaresTM program to new clients. The product warranty is available to clients who enroll under this structure for as long as the specimen is stored with the Company. The Company has not experienced any claims under the warranty program nor has it incurred costs related to these warranties. The Company does not maintain insurance for this warranty program and therefore maintains reserves to cover any estimated potential liabilities. The Company’s reserve balance is based on the $75,000 or $50,000 (as applicable) maximum payment and the $10,000 maximum expense reimbursement multiplied by formulas to determine the projected number of units requiring a payout. The Company determined the estimated expected usage and engraftment failure rates based on an analysis of the historical usage and failure rates and the historical usage and failure rates in other private and public cord blood banks based on published data. The Company’s estimates of expected usage and engraftment failure could change as a result of changes in actual usage rates or failure rates and such changes would require an adjustment to the established reserves. The historical usage and failure rates have been very low and a small increase in the number of transplants or engraftment failures could cause a significant increase in the estimated rates used in determining the Company’s reserve. In addition, the reserve will increase as additional umbilical cord blood specimens are stored which are subject to the warranty. As of February 29, 2016 and November 30, 2015 the Company recorded reserves under these programs in the amounts of approximately $17,000 and $17,000, respectively, which are included in accrued expenses in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In March 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-09, Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. This update simplifies several aspects of the accounting for employee share-based payment transactions including the accounting for income taxes, forfeitures, and statutory tax withholding requirements, as well as classification in the statement of cash flows. The new standard is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company is currently evaluating the effect that the updated standard will have on our financial statements.
In March 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net). This update amends the principal-versus-agent implementation guidance and illustrations in the Board’s new revenue standard (ASC 606). The FASB issued the ASU in response to concerns identified by stakeholders, including those related to (1) determining the appropriate unit of account under the revenue standard’s principal-versus-agent guidance and (2) applying the indicators of whether an entity is a principal or an agent in accordance with the revenue standard’s control principle. The new standard is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the effect that the updated standard will have on our financial statements.
In February 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). This update requires organizations that lease assets with lease terms of more than 12 months to recognize assets and liabilities for the rights and obligations created by those leases on their balance sheets. It also requires new qualitative and quantitative disclosures to help investors and other financial statement users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The new standard is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the effect that the updated standard will have on its consolidated balance sheets and related disclosures.
In January 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments—Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. This update requires all equity investments to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income, requires an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments, and eliminates the requirement for public entities to disclose the methods and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet. The new standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted for the accounting guidance on financial liabilities under the fair value option. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new standard on our financial statements.
In November 2015, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2015-17, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes, which requires that deferred tax assets and liabilities be classified as non-current in a classified balance sheet. This update is effective for fiscal years, and interim reporting periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2016. The standard permits the use of either the retrospective or prospective transition method. The adoption of this standard is expected to result in a reclassification between current and non-current deferred tax assets within the Company’s consolidated balance sheets and related disclosures.
In July 2015, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No 2015-11, Inventory (Topic 330): Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory. This update simplifies the subsequent measurement of inventory. It replaces the current lower of cost or market test with the lower of cost or net realizable value test. Net realizable value is defined as the estimated selling prices in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal, and transportation. The new standard should be applied prospectively and is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016 and interim periods within those annual periods, with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption of this standard to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.
In June 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-12, Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period (“ASU 2014-12”). This update requires that a performance target that affects vesting, and that could be achieved after the requisite service period, be treated as a performance condition in determining expense recognition for the award. As a result, this type of performance condition may delay expense recognition until achievement of the performance target is probable. ASU 2014-12 is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and early adoption is permitted. We will adopt ASU 2014-12 effective December 1, 2016 and it is not anticipated to have a material impact on our financial statements.
In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). This update provides a comprehensive new revenue recognition model that requires a company to recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to a customer at an amount that reflects the consideration it expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. The guidance also requires additional disclosure about the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from customer contracts. In August 2015, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date, which defers the effective date of the guidance in Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09 by one year. This update is now effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, which will require us to adopt these provisions in the first quarter of fiscal 2019. Early application is permitted for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. This update permits the use of either the retrospective or cumulative effect transition method. The Company has not yet selected a transition method nor has it determined the effect of the standard its consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.
No definition available.
The entire disclosure for the basis of presentation and significant accounting policies concepts. Basis of presentation describes the underlying basis used to prepare the financial statements (for example, US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, Other Comprehensive Basis of Accounting, IFRS). Accounting policies describe all significant accounting policies of the reporting entity.
No definition available.