e10vq
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 2007
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Transition Period from ___to ___
Commission File Number 000-28275
PFSweb, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
75-2837058 |
|
|
|
(State of Incorporation)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer I.D. No.) |
|
|
|
500 North Central Expressway, Plano, Texas
|
|
75074 |
|
|
|
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
Registrants telephone number, including area code: (972) 881-2900
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 a check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer
or a non-accelerated filer.
Large accelerated filer o Accelerated filer o Non-accelerated filer þ
Indicate by a check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Act). Yes o No þ
At May 8, 2007 there were 46,563,008 shares of registrants common stock outstanding.
PFSWEB, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Form 10-Q
March 31, 2007
INDEX
2
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. Financial Statements
PFSWEB, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In Thousands, Except Share Data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT ASSETS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
14,572 |
|
|
$ |
15,066 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
852 |
|
|
|
2,653 |
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $2,020
and $2,352 at March 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively |
|
|
48,292 |
|
|
|
48,717 |
|
Inventories, net of reserves of $2,522 and $2,987 at March 31, 2007
and December 31, 2006,
respectively |
|
|
46,977 |
|
|
|
47,670 |
|
Other receivables |
|
|
12,825 |
|
|
|
10,774 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
3,802 |
|
|
|
3,531 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
127,320 |
|
|
|
128,411 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, net |
|
|
13,057 |
|
|
|
12,884 |
|
IDENTIFIABLE INTANGIBLES |
|
|
6,429 |
|
|
|
6,647 |
|
GOODWILL |
|
|
15,362 |
|
|
|
15,362 |
|
OTHER ASSETS |
|
|
819 |
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
162,987 |
|
|
$ |
164,152 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt and capital lease obligations |
|
$ |
25,036 |
|
|
$ |
23,802 |
|
Trade accounts payable |
|
|
62,072 |
|
|
|
61,972 |
|
Accrued expenses |
|
|
21,506 |
|
|
|
21,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
108,614 |
|
|
|
107,259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM DEBT AND CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS, less current
portion |
|
|
5,918 |
|
|
|
6,076 |
|
OTHER LIABILITIES |
|
|
1,700 |
|
|
|
1,977 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
116,232 |
|
|
|
115,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $1.00 par value; 1,000,000 shares authorized;
none issued and outstanding |
|
|
¾ |
|
|
|
¾ |
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value; 75,000,000 shares authorized;
46,563,008 and 46,553,752 shares issued at March 31, 2007
and December 31, 2006, respectively; and 46,476,708 and
46,467,452 outstanding at March 31, 2007 and December 31,
2006, respectively |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
91,511 |
|
|
|
91,302 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(46,715 |
) |
|
|
(44,354 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
1,997 |
|
|
|
1,930 |
|
Treasury stock at cost, 86,300 shares |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
46,755 |
|
|
|
48,840 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
162,987 |
|
|
$ |
164,152 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements.
3
PFSWEB, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
UNAUDITED INTERIM CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
REVENUES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product revenue, net |
|
$ |
80,457 |
|
|
$ |
90,204 |
|
Service fee revenue |
|
|
16,962 |
|
|
|
15,919 |
|
Pass-through revenue |
|
|
6,988 |
|
|
|
4,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues |
|
|
104,407 |
|
|
|
110,668 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COSTS OF REVENUES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product revenue |
|
|
74,771 |
|
|
|
84,354 |
|
Cost of service fee revenue |
|
|
12,664 |
|
|
|
11,348 |
|
Pass-through cost of revenue |
|
|
6,988 |
|
|
|
4,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs of revenues |
|
|
94,423 |
|
|
|
100,247 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
9,984 |
|
|
|
10,421 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SELLING, GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE
EXPENSES |
|
|
10,992 |
|
|
|
10,793 |
|
STOCK BASED COMPENSATION |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
MERGER INTEGRATION EXPENSE |
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
AMORTIZATION OF IDENTIFIABLE INTANGIBLES |
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
11,555 |
|
|
|
11,361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(1,571 |
) |
|
|
(940 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTEREST EXPENSE, NET |
|
|
584 |
|
|
|
431 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(2,155 |
) |
|
|
(1,371 |
) |
INCOME TAX EXPENSE, NET |
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET LOSS |
|
$ |
(2,361 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,587 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET LOSS PER SHARE: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and Diluted |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE NUMBER OF SHARES
OUTSTANDING: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and Diluted |
|
|
46,475 |
|
|
|
34,904 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
PFSWEB, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
UNAUDITED INTERIM CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In Thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(2,361 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,587 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,994 |
|
|
|
1,752 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
Provision for excess and obsolete inventory |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
476 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
(1,686 |
) |
Inventories, net |
|
|
739 |
|
|
|
(2,578 |
) |
Prepaid expenses, other receivables and other assets |
|
|
(2,208 |
) |
|
|
2,036 |
|
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities |
|
|
(354 |
) |
|
|
4,454 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
|
|
(1,428 |
) |
|
|
3,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(789 |
) |
|
|
(690 |
) |
Payment for purchase of eCOST, net of cash acquired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,299 |
) |
Decrease in restricted cash |
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(639 |
) |
|
|
(1,416 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments on capital lease obligations |
|
|
(465 |
) |
|
|
(384 |
) |
Decrease (increase) in restricted cash |
|
|
1,743 |
|
|
|
(1,026 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
Proceeds from (payments on) debt, net |
|
|
296 |
|
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
|
|
1,574 |
|
|
|
(1,604 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EFFECT OF EXCHANGE RATES ON CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS |
|
|
(494 |
) |
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, beginning of period |
|
|
15,066 |
|
|
|
13,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, end of period |
|
$ |
14,572 |
|
|
$ |
13,955 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash investing and financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment acquired under capital leases |
|
$ |
1,237 |
|
|
$ |
187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share consideration to acquire eCOST |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
26,778 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
1. OVERVIEW AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
PFSweb, Inc. and its subsidiaries, including Supplies Distributors, Inc., and eCOST.com, Inc.,
are collectively referred to as the Company; Supplies Distributors refers to Supplies
Distributors, Inc. and its subsidiaries; eCOST refers to eCOST.com, Inc.; and PFSweb refers to
PFSweb, Inc. and its subsidiaries excluding Supplies Distributors and eCOST.
PFSweb Overview
PFSweb is an international provider of integrated business process outsourcing services to
major brand name companies seeking to maximize their supply chain efficiencies and to extend their
traditional and e-commerce initiatives in the United States, Canada, and Europe. PFSweb offers such
services as professional consulting, technology collaboration, managed web hosting and internet
application development, order management, web-enabled customer contact centers, customer
relationship management, financial services including billing and collection services and working
capital solutions, information management, facilities and operations management, kitting and
assembly services, and international fulfillment and distribution services.
Supplies Distributors Overview
Supplies Distributors, PFSweb and International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) have
entered into master distributor agreements whereby Supplies Distributors acts as a master
distributor of various products, primarily IBM product. Pursuant to transaction management services
agreements between PFSweb and Supplies Distributors, PFSweb provides transaction management and
fulfillment services to Supplies Distributors.
Supplies Distributors has obtained certain financing that allows it to fund the working
capital requirements for the sale of primarily IBM products. Pursuant to the transaction management
services agreements, PFSweb provides to Supplies Distributors such services as managed web hosting
and maintenance, procurement support, web-enabled customer contact center services, customer
relationship management, financial services including billing and collection services, information
management, and international distribution services. Additionally, IBM and Supplies Distributors
have outsourced the product demand generation to a third party. Supplies Distributors sells its
products in the United States, Canada and Europe.
All of the agreements between PFSweb and Supplies Distributors were made in the context of a
related party relationship and were negotiated in the overall context of PFSwebs and Supplies
Distributors arrangement with IBM. Although management believes that the terms of these agreements
are generally consistent with fair market values, there can be no assurance that the prices charged
to or by each company under these arrangements are not higher or lower than the prices that may be
charged by, or to, unaffiliated third parties for similar services.
eCOST Overview
eCOST is a multi-category online discount retailer of new, close-out and recertified
brand-name merchandise, selling products primarily to customers in the United States. eCOST offers
products in several merchandise categories, including computer hardware and software, home
electronics, digital imaging, watches and jewelry, housewares, DVD movies, video games and
cellular/wireless. eCOST carries products from leading manufacturers such as Apple, Canon,
Citizen, Denon, Hewlett-Packard, Nikon, Onkyo, Seiko and Toshiba.
The Companys liquidity has been negatively impacted as a result of the merger with eCOST.
During the three months ended March 31, 2007 and the year ended December 31, 2006, eCOST
experienced a significant net usage of cash primarily due to losses incurred. As a result, during
the process of
transitioning and integrating eCOSTs operations, the Company has had to support eCOSTs cash needs to
6
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
help it achieve a stabilized operational position. The amount of further cash needed to
support eCOST operations will depend upon the financing available as well as eCOSTs ability to
improve its financial results.
In the event eCOST is unable to increase its revenue and/or gross profit from its present
levels, it may fail to comply with one or more of the financial covenants required under its
working capital line of credit. In such event, absent a waiver, the working capital lender would
be entitled to accelerate all amounts outstanding thereunder and exercise all other rights and
remedies, including sale of collateral and demand for payment under the Company parent guaranty.
Any acceleration of the repayment of the credit facilities would have a material adverse impact on
the Companys financial condition and results of operations and no assurance can be given that the
Company would have the financial ability to repay all of such obligations.
Management currently believes eCOST will meet the Companys expectations related to annual
savings and overall profitability. Nevertheless, due to the absence of any long-term commitments
related solely to eCOST, if eCOST does not meet these expectations, the Company anticipates that it
would be able to terminate certain of eCOSTs short-term facility leases, liquidate remaining
inventory through the website and reduce personnel related costs as needed to maintain
profitability among the Companys other segments.
The Company expects improvement in eCOSTs profitability in 2007 and beyond as a result of
planned efforts to increase sales and improve product mix. In addition, the Company currently
expects that eCOST, as part of a combined company, should achieve annual cost savings, as compared
to 2006 and pre-merger levels, as a result of essentially completing the integration of eCOST into
the Companys infrastructure. These savings are expected to result from, among other things, the
reduction of certain overhead expenses, changes in corporate infrastructure and reduced freight
costs, although there can be no assurance that these cost savings will be achieved.
Acquisition of eCOST
Effective February 1, 2006, a wholly-owned subsidiary of PFSweb merged with and into eCOST,
with eCOST surviving the merger as a wholly-owned subsidiary of PFSweb. As a result of the merger,
effective February 1, 2006, the Company began consolidating 100% of eCOSTs financial position and
results of operations into the Companys consolidated financial statements. The following table
presents selected pro forma information, for comparative purposes, assuming the acquisition had
occurred on January 1 for the period presented (unaudited) (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
Net revenues |
|
$ |
123,602 |
|
Net loss |
|
|
(3,177 |
) |
Basic and diluted loss per share |
|
|
(0.08 |
) |
The unaudited pro forma information combines the historical unaudited consolidated statements
of the Companys operations and eCOSTs operations for the three months ended March 31, 2006 giving
effect to the merger and related events as if they had been consummated on January 1 for the period
presented. Pro forma adjustments have been made to reflect the amortization expense relating to
the finite lives of certain acquired intangibles, such as trademark name and customer
relationships.
The unaudited pro forma information does not reflect operational and administrative cost
savings, which are referred to as synergies, that management estimates may be achieved as a result
of the merger transaction, or other incremental costs that may be incurred as a direct result of
the merger transaction. The unaudited pro forma net revenue and pro forma net loss are not
necessarily indicative of the
consolidated results of operations for future periods or the results of operations that would
have been realized had the Company consolidated eCOST during the period noted.
7
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Basis of Presentation
The unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements as of March 31, 2007, and
for the three months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, have been prepared pursuant to the rules and
regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and are unaudited. Certain
information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America have been
condensed or omitted pursuant to the rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC. In the opinion
of management and subject to the foregoing, the unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial
statements of the Company include all adjustments, consisting of only normal recurring adjustments,
necessary for a fair presentation of the Companys financial position as of March 31, 2007, its
results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006 and its cash flows for the
three months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006. Results of the Companys operations for interim periods
may not be indicative of results for the full fiscal year.
Certain prior period data has been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation.
These reclassifications had no effect on previously reported net loss or shareholders equity.
2. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Principles of Consolidation
All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the
reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and disclosure of contingent assets
and liabilities. The recognition and allocation of certain revenues and operating expenses in these
consolidated financial statements also require management estimates and assumptions. The Companys
estimates and assumptions are continually evaluated based on available information and experience.
Because the use of estimates is inherent in the financial reporting process, actual results could
differ from estimates.
Investment in Affiliates
Priority Fulfillment Services, Inc. (PFS), a wholly-owned subsidiary of PFSweb, has loaned
Supplies Distributors monies in the form of a Subordinated Demand Note (the Subordinated Note).
Under the terms of certain of the Companys debt facilities, the outstanding balance of the
Subordinated Note cannot be increased to more than $8.0 million or decreased to lower than $6.0
million without prior approval of the Companys lenders. As of March 31, 2007, the outstanding
balance of the Subordinated Note, which is eliminated upon the consolidation of Supplies
Distributors financial position, was $6.0 million.
PFS has also advanced eCOST monies under certain terms of the Companys debt facilities, which
requires total advances to eCOST not to be less than $2.0 million without prior approval of eCOSTs
lender or increased above $8.5 million without the approval of PFS lender. The total advances
from PFS were $6.4 million as of March 31, 2007. PFSweb has also advanced eCOST $4.7 million as of
March 31, 2007.
Concentration of Business and Credit Risk
The Companys service fee revenue is generated under contractual service fee relationships
with multiple client relationships. One customer exceeded 10% of consolidated revenue during the
three months ended March 31, 2007. A summary of the customer and client concentrations is as
follows:
8
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Product Revenue (as a percentage of
Product Revenue): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer 1 |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
Customer 2 |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
9 |
% |
Customer 3 |
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service Fee Revenue (as a percentage of
Service Fee Revenue): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Client 1 |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
22 |
% |
Client 2 |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
Client 3 |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts Receivable: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 Client/Customer |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
14 |
% |
PFSweb has provided certain collateralized guarantees of its subsidiaries financings and
credit arrangements. These subsidiaries ability to obtain financing on similar terms would be
significantly impacted without these guarantees. Additionally, since Supplies Distributors has
limited personnel and physical resources, its ability to conduct business could be materially
impacted by any termination of its contract with the party performing product demand generation for
the IBM products sold by Supplies Distributors.
The Company has multiple arrangements with IBM and is dependent upon the continuation of such
arrangements. These arrangements, which are critical to the Companys ongoing operations, include
Supplies Distributors master distributor agreements, certain of Supplies Distributors working
capital financing agreements, product sales to IBM business units and a term master lease
agreement.
eCOSTs arrangements with its vendors are terminable by either party at will. Loss of any
vendors could have a material adverse effect on its financial position, results of operations and
cash flows. Sales of HP and HP-related products represented 51% of eCOSTs net revenues (11% of
consolidated net revenues) in the three months ended March 31, 2007. Sales of these products in
the two month period ended March 31, 2006 were 31% and 6% of eCOSTs net revenues and consolidated
net revenues, respectively.
Inventories
The Company establishes inventory reserves based upon estimates of potential declines in
values due to inventories that are potentially slow moving or obsolete, potential excess levels of
inventory or values assessed at potentially lower than cost. Recoverability of the inventory on
hand is measured by comparison of the carrying value of the inventory to the fair value of the
inventory.
Supplies Distributors assumes responsibility for slow-moving inventory under certain master
distributor agreements, subject to certain termination rights, but has the right to return product
rendered obsolete by engineering changes, as defined. In the event PFSweb, Supplies Distributors
and IBM terminate the master distributor agreements, the agreements provide for the parties to
mutually agree on a plan of disposition of Supplies Distributors then existing inventory.
The allowance for slow moving inventory was $2.5 million and $3.0 million at March 31, 2007
and December 31, 2006, respectively.
9
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Property and Equipment
The Companys property held under capital leases amounted to approximately $4.3 million and
$3.7 million, net of accumulated amortization of approximately $10.5 million and $10.0 million, at
March 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively.
Long-Lived Assets
The Company reviews long-lived assets for impairment periodically, but at a minimum annually,
or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may
not be recoverable. Long-lived assets include property, intangible assets, goodwill and certain
other assets. Recoverability of assets is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an
asset to future net cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If such assets are
considered to be impaired, the impairment to be recognized is measured as the amount by which the
carrying amount of the assets exceeds the fair value of the assets. Fair value would be determined
using appraisals, discounted cash flow analysis or similar valuation techniques. We make judgments
and estimates in conjunction with the carrying value of these assets, including amounts to be
capitalized, depreciation and amortization methods and useful lives. We record impairment losses
in the period in which we determine that the carrying amount is not recoverable. This may require
us to make judgments regarding long-term forecasts of our future revenues and costs related to the
assets subject to review.
Cash Paid During Year
The Company made payments for interest of approximately $0.7 million and $0.4 million and
income taxes of approximately $0.4 million and $0.02 million during the three months ended March
31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxesan Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (FIN 48),
which prescribes accounting for and disclosure of uncertainty in tax positions. This interpretation
defines the criteria that must be met for the benefits of a tax position to be recognized in the
financial statements and the measurement of tax benefits recognized. Effective January 1, 2007,
the Company adopted the provisions of FIN 48; however, there was no impact as a result of adopting
such provisions and the amount of unrecognized tax benefits at adoption was insignificant. The
Company recognizes interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense.
For federal income tax purposes, tax years that remain subject to examination include years
2003 to 2006. However, the utilization of net operating loss (NOL) carryforwards that arose
prior to 2003 remain subject to examination through the years such carryforwards are utilized. For
Europe tax years that remain subject to examination include years 2004 to 2006.
However, the utilization of NOL carryforwards that arose prior to 2004 remain subject to
examination through the years such carryforwards are utilized. For
Canada, tax years that remain subject to examination include years
1999 to 2006, depending on the subsidiary. For state income tax purposes, the
tax years that remain subject to examination include years 2002 to 2006, depending upon the
jurisdiction in which the Company files tax returns.
3. COMPREHENSIVE LOSS (in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(2,361 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,587 |
) |
Other comprehensive loss: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation
adjustment |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
(2,294 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,384 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
4. NET LOSS PER COMMON SHARE
Basic and diluted net loss per share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted-average
number of common shares outstanding for the reporting period. For the three months ended March 31,
2007 and 2006, outstanding options of 5.9 million and 6.1 million, respectively, to purchase common
shares were anti-dilutive and have been excluded from the weighted diluted average share
computation. Warrants not included in the calculation of diluted net loss per share for the three
months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006 were 0.6 million for each period.
5. VENDOR FINANCING:
|
|
Outstanding obligations under vendor financing arrangements consist of the following (in
thousands): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Inventory and working capital financing agreements: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
$ |
26,166 |
|
|
$ |
28,037 |
|
Europe |
|
|
13,378 |
|
|
|
12,713 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
39,544 |
|
|
$ |
40,750 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory and Working Capital Financing Agreement, United States
Supplies Distributors has a short-term credit facility with IBM Credit LLC to finance its
distribution of IBM products in the United States, providing financing for eligible IBM inventory
and for certain receivables up to $30.5 million through its expiration in March 2008. As of March
31, 2007, Supplies Distributors had $3.5 million of available credit under this facility. The
credit facility contains cross default provisions, various restrictions upon the ability of
Supplies Distributors to, among others, merge, consolidate, sell assets, incur indebtedness, make
loans and payments to related parties (including entities directly or indirectly owned by PFSweb,
Inc.), provide guarantees, make investments and loans, pledge assets, make changes to capital stock
ownership structure and pay dividends, as well as financial covenants, such as annualized revenue
to working capital, net profit after tax to revenue, and total liabilities to tangible net worth,
as defined, and are secured by certain of the assets of Supplies Distributors, as well as a
collateralized guaranty of PFSweb. Additionally, PFS is required to maintain a minimum Subordinated
Note receivable balance from Supplies Distributors of $6.0 million and a minimum shareholders
equity of $18.0 million. Borrowings under the credit facility accrue interest, after a defined free
financing period, at prime rate plus 0.5% (8.75% as of March 31, 2007). The facility also includes
a monthly service fee. The Company has classified the outstanding amounts under this facility as
accounts payable in the consolidated balance sheets.
Inventory and Working Capital Financing Agreement, Europe
Supplies Distributors European subsidiaries have a short-term credit facility with IBM
Belgium Financial Services S.A. (IBM Belgium) to finance their distribution of IBM products in
Europe. The asset based credit facility with IBM Belgium provides up to 12.5 million Euros
(approximately $16.6 million) in financing for purchasing IBM inventory and for certain receivables
through its expiration in March 2008. As of March 31, 2007, Supplies Distributors European
subsidiaries had 1.7 million euros
($2.3 million) of available credit under this facility. The credit facility contains cross
default provisions, various restrictions upon the ability of Supplies Distributors and its European
subsidiaries to, among others, merge, consolidate, sell assets, incur indebtedness, make loans and
payments to related parties (including entities directly or indirectly owned by PFSweb, Inc.),
provide guarantees, make investments and loans, pledge assets, make changes to capital stock
ownership structure and pay dividends, as well as financial covenants, such as annualized revenue
to working capital, net profit after tax to revenue, and total liabilities to tangible net worth,
as defined, and are secured by certain of the assets of Supplies Distributors European
subsidiaries, as well as collateralized guaranties of Supplies Distributors and PFSweb.
Additionally, PFSweb is required to maintain a minimum Subordinated Note receivable balance
11
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
from Supplies Distributors of $6.0 million and a minimum shareholders equity of $18.0 million.
Borrowings under the credit facility accrue interest, after a defined free financing period, at
Euribor plus 1.5% (5.3% as of March 31, 2007). Supplies Distributors European subsidiaries pay a
monthly service fee on the commitment. The Company has classified the outstanding amounts under
this facility as accounts payable in the consolidated balance sheets.
7. DEBT AND CAPITAL LEASE OBLIGATIONS;
Outstanding obligations under debt and capital lease obligations consist of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Loan and security agreements, United States
Supplies Distributors |
|
$ |
12,679 |
|
|
$ |
12,102 |
|
PFS |
|
|
7,838 |
|
|
|
6,985 |
|
Credit facility eCOST |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Factoring agreement, Europe |
|
|
618 |
|
|
|
1,039 |
|
Taxable revenue bonds |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
4,500 |
|
Master lease agreements |
|
|
5,465 |
|
|
|
4,742 |
|
Other |
|
|
354 |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
30,954 |
|
|
|
29,878 |
|
Less current portion of long-term debt |
|
|
25,036 |
|
|
|
23,802 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, less current portion |
|
$ |
5,918 |
|
|
$ |
6,076 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan and Security Agreement Supplies Distributors
Supplies Distributors has a loan and security agreement with Wachovia Bank, N.A. (Wachovia)
to provide financing for up to $25 million of eligible accounts receivable in the United States and
Canada. As of March 31, 2007, Supplies Distributors had $1.5 million of available credit under this
agreement. The Wachovia facility expires on the earlier of March 29, 2009 or the date on which the
parties to the IBM master distributor agreement no longer operate under the terms of such agreement
and/or IBM no longer supplies products pursuant to such agreement. Borrowings under the Wachovia
facility accrue interest at prime rate or Eurodollar rate plus 1.75% to 2.25%, dependent on excess
availability, as defined. The interest rate as of March 31, 2007 was 8.25% for $6.7 million of
outstanding borrowings and 7.8% for $6.0 million of outstanding borrowings. This agreement
contains cross default provisions, various restrictions upon the ability of Supplies Distributors
to, among other things, merge, consolidate, sell assets, incur indebtedness, make loans and
payments to related parties (including entities directly or indirectly owned by PFSweb, Inc.),
provide guarantees, make investments and loans, pledge assets, make changes to capital stock
ownership structure and pay dividends, as well as financial covenants, such as minimum net worth,
as defined, and is secured by all of the assets of Supplies Distributors, as well as a
collateralized guaranty of PFSweb. Additionally, PFSweb is required to maintain a Subordinated Note
receivable balance from Supplies Distributors of no less than $5.5 million and restricted cash of
less than $5.0 million, and is restricted with regard to transactions with related parties,
indebtedness and changes to capital stock ownership structure. Supplies Distributors has entered
into blocked account agreements with
its banks and Wachovia pursuant to which a security interest was granted to Wachovia for all
U.S. and Canadian customer remittances received in specified bank accounts. At March 31, 2007 and
December 31, 2006, these bank accounts held $0.5 million and $2.2 million, respectively, which was
restricted for payment to Wachovia.
Loan and Security Agreement PFSweb
PFS has a Loan and Security Agreement (Comerica Agreement) with Comerica Bank (Comerica).
The Comerica Agreement provides for up to $7.5 million of eligible accounts receivable financing
(Working Capital Advances) through April 2008, a Term Loan of $1.5 million due in monthly
installments through December 2007 and $2.5 million of equipment financing (Equipment Advances)
through June 15, 2008. Outstanding Working Capital Advances, $6.5 million as of March 31, 2007,
accrue interest at prime rate plus 1% (9.25% as of March 31, 2007). Outstanding Equipment Advances,
($0.3 million as of March 31, 2007) and the Term Loan ($1.0 million outstanding as of March 31,
2007), accrue
12
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
interest at prime rate plus 1.5% (9.75% as of March 31, 2007). As of March 31, 2007,
PFS had $0.6 million of available credit under the Working Capital Advance portion of this facility
and no available credit under the Equipment Advance or Term Loan portions of this facility. In
April 2007, the Company repaid the $6.5 million of Working Capital Advances outstanding as of March
31, 2007. The Comerica Agreement contains cross default provisions, various restrictions upon PFS
ability to, among other things, merge, consolidate, sell assets, incur indebtedness, make loans and
payments to related parties (including entities directly or indirectly owned by PFSweb, Inc.), make
investments and loans, pledge assets, make changes to capital stock ownership structure, as well as
financial covenants of a minimum tangible net worth of $20 million, as defined, a minimum earnings
before interest and taxes, plus depreciation, amortization and non-cash compensation accruals, if
any, as defined, and a minimum liquidity ratio, as defined. The Comerica Agreement restricts the
amount of the subordinated note receivable from Supplies Distributors to a maximum of $8 million.
Comerica has provided approval for PFS to advance $6.5 million in cash to fund the cash flow
requirements of eCOST. The Comerica Agreement is secured by all of the assets of PFS, as well as a
guarantee of PFSweb, Inc.
On April 2, 2007, PFS entered into an amended agreement with Comerica, which increases the
maximum Working Capital Advance balance to $10.0 million and provides the approval for PFS to
advance an additional $2.0 million to eCOST, with certain restrictions, if needed.
Credit Facility eCOST
eCOST has an asset-based line of credit facility of up to $7.5 million from Wachovia Capital
Finance Corporation (Western), through May 2009, which is collateralized by substantially all of
eCOSTs assets. Borrowings under the facility are limited to a percentage of eligible accounts
receivable and inventory. Outstanding amounts under the facility bear interest at rates ranging
from the prime rate to the prime rate plus 0.5% (8.75% as of March 31, 2007), depending on eCOSTs
financial results. As of March 31, 2007, eCOST had $1.6 million of letters of credit outstanding
and $1.1 million of available credit under this facility. In connection with the line of credit,
eCOST entered into a cash management arrangement whereby eCOSTs operating amounts are swept and
used to repay outstanding amounts under the line of credit. The credit facility restricts eCOSTs
ability to, among other things, merge, consolidate, sell assets, incur indebtedness, make loans,
investments and payments to subsidiaries, affiliates and related parties (including entities
directly or indirectly owned by PFSweb, Inc.), make investments and loans, pledge assets, make
changes to capital stock ownership structure, and requires a minimum tangible net worth of $0
million, as defined. PFSweb has guaranteed all current and future obligations of eCOST under this
line of credit.
Factoring Agreement
Supplies Distributors European subsidiary has a factoring agreement with Fortis Commercial
Finance N.V. (Fortis) to provide factoring for up to 7.5 million euros (approximately $10.0
million) of eligible accounts receivables through March 2008. As of March 31, 2007, Supplies Distributors European
subsidiary had approximately 3.5 million euros ($4.7 million) of available credit under this
agreement. Borrowings accrue interest at Euribor plus 0.6% (4.5% at March 31, 2007). This agreement
contains various restrictions upon the ability of Supplies Distributors European subsidiary to,
among other things, merge, consolidate and incur indebtedness, as well as financial covenants, such
as minimum net worth. This agreement is secured by a guarantee of Supplies Distributors, up to a
maximum of 200,000 euros.
Taxable Revenue Bonds
PFSweb has a Loan Agreement with the Mississippi Business Finance Corporation (the MBFC) in
connection with the issuance by the MBFC of $5 million MBFC Taxable Variable Rate Demand Limited
Obligation Revenue Bonds, Series 2004 (Priority Fulfillment Services, Inc. Project) (the Bonds).
The MBFC loaned the proceeds of the Bonds to PFSweb for the purpose of financing the acquisition
and
13
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
installation of equipment, machinery and related assets located in the Companys Southaven,
Mississippi distribution facility. The Bonds bear interest at a variable rate (5.4% as of March
31, 2007), as determined by Comerica Securities, as Remarketing Agent. PFSweb, at its option, may
convert the Bonds to a fixed rate, to be determined by the Remarketing Agent at the time of
conversion.
The primary source of repayment of the Bonds is a letter of credit (the Letter of Credit) in
the initial face amount of $5.1 million issued by Comerica pursuant to a Reimbursement Agreement
between PFSweb and Comerica under which PFSweb is obligated to pay to Comerica all amounts drawn
under the Letter of Credit. The Letter of Credit has a maturity date of April 2008 at which time,
if not renewed or replaced, will result in a draw on the undrawn face amount thereof. If the
Letter of Credit is renewed or replaced, the Bonds require future principal repayments of $800,000
in each of January 2008 through 2012.
Debt Covenants
To the extent the Company or any of its subsidiaries fail to comply with its covenants
applicable to its debt or vendor financing obligations, including the monthly financial covenant
requirements and required level of shareholders equity or net worth, and one or all of the lenders
accelerate the repayment of the credit facility obligations, the Company would be required to repay
all amounts outstanding thereunder. In particular, in the event eCOST is unable to increase its
revenue and/or gross profit from its present levels, it may fail to comply with one or more of the
financial covenants required under its working capital line of credit. In such event, absent a
waiver, the working capital lender would be entitled to accelerate all amounts outstanding
thereunder and exercise all other rights and remedies, including sale of collateral and demand for
payment under the Company parent guaranty. Any acceleration of the repayment of the credit
facilities would have a material adverse impact on the Companys financial condition and results of
operations and no assurance can be given that the Company would have the financial ability to repay
all of such obligations.
Master Lease Agreements
The Company has a Term Lease Master Agreement with IBM Credit Corporation (Master Lease
Agreement) that provides for leasing or financing transactions of equipment and other assets,
which generally have terms of 3 to 5 years. The outstanding leasing transactions ($1.2 million and
$1.0 million as of March 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively) are secured by the related
equipment.
The Company has two master agreements with financing companies that provide for leasing or
financing transactions of certain equipment. The amounts outstanding under these agreements were
$1.9 million and $2.1 million as of March 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively, and are
secured by the related equipment.
The Company has other leasing and financing agreements and will continue to enter into those
arrangements as needed to finance the purchasing or leasing of certain equipment or other
assets. Borrowings under these agreements are generally secured by the related equipment.
8. SEGMENT INFORMATION
The Company is organized into three operating segments: PFSweb is an international provider of
integrated business process outsourcing solutions and operates as a service fee business; Supplies
Distributors is a master distributor of primarily IBM products; and eCOST is a multi-category
online discount retailer of new, close-out and recertified brand-name merchandise.
14
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Revenues (in thousands): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PFSweb |
|
$ |
26,084 |
|
|
$ |
22,988 |
|
Supplies Distributors |
|
|
58,810 |
|
|
|
68,415 |
|
eCOST |
|
|
21,647 |
|
|
|
21,789 |
|
Eliminations |
|
|
(2,134 |
) |
|
|
(2,524 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
104,407 |
|
|
$ |
110,668 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations (in
thousands): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PFSweb |
|
$ |
(1,612 |
) |
|
$ |
(529 |
) |
Supplies Distributors |
|
|
1,367 |
|
|
|
1,755 |
|
eCOST |
|
|
(1,326 |
) |
|
|
(2,166 |
) |
Eliminations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(1,571 |
) |
|
$ |
(940 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
(in thousands): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PFSweb |
|
$ |
1,745 |
|
|
$ |
1,561 |
|
Supplies Distributors |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
eCOST |
|
|
245 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
Eliminations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,994 |
|
|
$ |
1,752 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures (in thousands): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PFSweb |
|
$ |
738 |
|
|
$ |
650 |
|
Supplies Distributors |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
eCOST |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Eliminations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
789 |
|
|
$ |
690 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Assets (in thousands): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PFSweb |
|
$ |
100,782 |
|
|
$ |
100,229 |
|
Supplies Distributors |
|
|
85,132 |
|
|
|
85,249 |
|
eCOST |
|
|
32,861 |
|
|
|
33,147 |
|
Eliminations |
|
|
(55,788 |
) |
|
|
(54,473 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
162,987 |
|
|
$ |
164,152 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTENGENCIES
The Company receives municipal tax abatements in certain locations. During 2004 the Company
received notice from a municipality that it did not satisfy certain criteria necessary to maintain
the abatements. In December 2006, the Company received notice that the municipal authority planned
to make an adjustment to certain tax abatements. The Company plans to dispute the adjustment, but
if the dispute is not resolved favorably, the Company could be assessed additional taxes from
January 1, 2004. The Company has not accrued for the additional taxes, which through March 31,
2007 could be approximately $1.5 million, as it does not believe that it is probable that an
additional assessment will be incurred.
On May 9, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in the District Court of Collin County, Texas, by J. Gregg
Pritchard, as Trustee of the D.I.C. Creditors Trust, naming the former directors of Daisytek
International Corporation and the Company as defendants. Daisytek filed for bankruptcy in May 2003
and the Trust was created pursuant to Daisyteks Plan of Liquidation. The complaint alleges, among
other things, that the spin-off of the Company from Daisytek in December 1999 was a fraudulent
conveyance and that Daisytek was damaged thereby in the amount of at least $38 million. The Company
believes the claim has no merit and intends to vigorously defend the action. Through March 31,
2007, the Company has incurred
15
PFSweb, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Unaudited Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
outstanding legal costs of $0.8 million, which have not been paid as
the Company expects such costs to be covered by insurance. On May 3, 2007, the Court granted
certain motions for summary judgment filed by the Company and certain of the former Daisytek
directors. We believe that as a result of this ruling, all of the claims against the Company and
certain of the defendants have been dismissed; however, the ruling is subject to objection and/or
appeal.
On July 12, 2004, eCOST received correspondence from MercExchange LLC alleging infringement of
MercExchanges U.S. patents relating to e-commerce and offering to license its patent portfolio to
eCOST. On July 15, 2004, eCOST received a follow-up letter from MercExchange specifying which of
its technologies MercExchange believed infringed certain of its patents, alone or in combination
with technologies provided by third parties. Some of those patents are currently being litigated by
third parties, and eCOST is not involved in those proceedings. In addition, three of the four
patents identified by MercExchange are under reexamination at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,
which may or may not result in the modification of those claims. In the July 15 letter,
MercExchange also advised eCOST that it has a number of applications pending for additional
patents. MercExchange has filed lawsuits alleging infringement of some or all of its patents
against third parties, resulting in settlements or verdicts in favor of MercExchange. At least one
such verdict was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and was
affirmed in part. Based on eCOSTs investigation of this matter to date, eCOST believes that its
current operations do not infringe any valid claims of the patents identified by MercExchange in
these letters. There can be no assurance, however, that such claims will not be material or
adversely affect eCOSTs business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
16
ITEM 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion and analysis of our results of operations and financial condition
should be read in conjunction with the unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial
statements and related notes appearing elsewhere in this Form 10-Q.
Forward-Looking Information
We have made forward-looking statements in this Report on Form 10-Q. These statements are
subject to risks and uncertainties, and there can be no guarantee that these statements will prove
to be correct. Forward-looking statements include assumptions as to how we may perform in the
future. When we use words like seek, strive, believe, expect, anticipate, predict,
potential, continue, will, may, could, intend, plan, target and estimate or
similar expressions, we are making forward-looking statements. You should understand that the
following important factors, in addition to those set forth above or elsewhere in this Report on
Form 10-Q and our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, could cause our results to differ
materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements. These factors include:
|
|
|
our ability to retain and expand relationships with existing clients and attract and
implement new clients; |
|
|
|
|
our reliance on the fees generated by the transaction volume or product sales of our clients; |
|
|
|
|
our reliance on our clients projections or transaction volume or product sales; |
|
|
|
|
our dependence upon our agreements with IBM; |
|
|
|
|
our dependence upon our agreements with our major clients; |
|
|
|
|
our client mix, their business volumes and the seasonality of their business; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to finalize pending contracts; |
|
|
|
|
the impact of strategic alliances and acquisitions; |
|
|
|
|
trends in e-commerce, outsourcing, government regulation both foreign and domestic and
the market for our services; |
|
|
|
|
whether we can continue and manage growth; |
|
|
|
|
increased competition; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to generate more revenue and achieve sustainable profitability; |
|
|
|
|
effects of changes in profit margins; |
|
|
|
|
the customer and supplier concentration of our business; |
|
|
|
|
the unknown effects of possible system failures and rapid changes in technology; |
|
|
|
|
foreign currency risks and other risks of operating in foreign countries; |
|
|
|
|
potential litigation; |
|
|
|
|
potential delisting; |
|
|
|
|
our dependency on key personnel; |
|
|
|
|
the impact of new accounting standards and changes in existing accounting rules or the
interpretations of those rules; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to raise additional capital or obtain additional financing; |
|
|
|
|
our ability and the ability of our subsidiaries to borrow under current financing
arrangements and maintain compliance with debt covenants; |
|
|
|
|
relationship with and our guarantees of certain of the liabilities and indebtedness of
our subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
|
whether outstanding warrants issued in a prior private placement will be exercised in the future; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to successfully achieve the anticipated benefits of the merger: |
|
|
|
|
eCOSTs potential indemnification obligations to its former parent; |
|
|
|
|
eCOSTs ability to maintain existing and build new relationships with manufacturers and vendors
and the success of its advertising and marketing efforts; |
|
|
|
|
eCOSTs ability to increase its sales revenue and sales margin and improve operating
efficiencies; and |
|
|
|
|
eCOSTs ability to generate a profit and cash flows sufficient to cover the values of
its intangible assets. |
We have based these statements on our current expectations about future events. Although we
believe that the expectations reflected in our forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot
guarantee you that these expectations actually will be achieved. In addition, some forward-looking
statements are based
17
upon assumptions as to future events that may not prove to be accurate.
Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expected or forecasted in
such forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking
statement for any reason, even if new information becomes available or other events occur in the
future.
Overview
We are an international provider of integrated business process outsourcing solutions to major
brand name companies seeking to maximize their supply chain efficiencies and to extend their
traditional business and e-commerce initiatives as well as a leading multi-category online discount
retailer of new, close-out and recertified brand-name merchandise. We derive our revenues from
three business segments: business process outsourcing, a master distributor and a discount online
retailer.
First, in our business process outsourcing business we derive our revenues from a broad range
of services, including professional consulting, technology collaboration, order management, managed
web hosting and web development, customer relationship management, financial services including
billing and collection services and working capital solutions, kitting and assembly services,
information management and international fulfillment and distribution services. We offer our
services as an integrated solution, which enables our clients to outsource their complete
infrastructure needs to a single source and to focus on their core competencies. Our distribution
services are conducted at warehouses that we lease or manage and include real-time inventory
management and customized picking, packing and shipping of our clients customer orders. We
currently offer the ability to provide infrastructure and distribution solutions to clients that
operate in a range of vertical markets, including technology manufacturing, computer products,
printers, cosmetics, fragile goods, high security collectibles, pharmaceuticals, contemporary
home furnishings, apparel, aviation, telecommunications and consumer electronics, among
others.
In this business process outsourcing segment, we do not own the underlying inventory or the
resulting accounts receivable, but provide management services for these client-owned assets. We
typically charge our service fee revenue on a cost-plus basis, a percent of shipped revenue basis
or a per-transaction basis, such as a per-minute basis for web-enabled customer contact center
services and a per-item basis for fulfillment services. Additional fees are billed for other
services. We price our services based on a variety of factors, including the depth and complexity
of the services provided, the amount of capital expenditures or systems customization required, the
length of contract and other factors.
Many of our service fee contracts involve third-party vendors who provide additional services
such as package delivery. The costs we are charged by these third-party vendors for these services
are often passed on to our clients. Our billings for reimbursements of these and other
out-of-pocket expenses include travel, shipping and handling costs and telecommunication charges
are included in pass-through revenue.
Our second business segment is a product revenue model. In this segment, we are a master
distributor of product for IBM and certain other clients. In this capacity, we purchase, and thus
own, inventory and recognize the corresponding product revenue. As a result, upon the sale of
inventory, we own the accounts receivable. Freight costs billed to customers are reflected as
components of product revenue. This business segment requires significant working capital
requirements, for which we have senior credit facilities to provide for more than $80 million of
available financing.
Our third business segment is a web-commerce product revenue model focused on the sale of
products to a broad range of consumer and small business customers. In this segment we operate as
a multi-category online discount retailer of new, close-out and recertified brand-name
merchandise. Our product line currently offers approximately 75,000 products in several primary
merchandise categories, primarily including computer hardware and software, home electronics,
digital imaging, watches and jewelry, housewares, DVD movies, video games and cellular/wireless.
Growth is a key element to achieving our future goals, including achieving and maintaining
sustainable profitability. Growth in our business process outsourcing segment is driven by two
main elements: new client relationships and organic growth from existing clients. We focus our
sales efforts on larger contracts with brand-name companies within two primary target markets,
which, by nature, require a longer duration to close but also often prove to be higher-quality and
longer duration engagements. Our results for the
18
three months ended March 31, 2007 include
approximately $1.9 million of new revenue including certain incremental projects.
Growth within our product revenue business is primarily driven by our ability to attract new
master distributor arrangements with IBM or other manufacturers and the sales and marketing efforts
of the manufacturers and third party sales partners.
Growth within our web-commerce product revenue model is primarily driven by eCOSTs ability to
increase sales and expand its product line.
We continue to monitor and control our costs to focus on profitability. While we are
targeting our new service fee contracts to yield increased gross profit, we also expect to incur
incremental investments to implement new contracts, investments in infrastructure and sales and
marketing to support our targeted growth and increased public company professional fees.
Our expenses comprise primarily four categories: 1) cost of product revenue, 2) cost of
service fee revenue, 3) cost of pass-through revenue and 4) operating expenses.
Cost of product revenues consists of the purchase price of product sold and freight costs,
which are reduced by certain reimbursable expenses. These reimbursable expenses include
pass-through customer marketing programs, direct costs incurred in passing on any price decreases
offered by vendors to cover price protection and certain special bids, the cost of products
provided to replace defective product returned by customers and certain other expenses as defined
under the master distributor agreements. Vendor marketing programs, such as co-op advertising, also reduce cost of product revenue.
Cost of service fee revenue consists primarily of compensation and related expenses for our
web-enabled customer contact center services, international fulfillment and distribution services
and professional consulting services, and other fixed and variable expenses directly related to
providing services under the terms of fee based contracts, including certain occupancy and
information technology costs and depreciation and amortization expenses.
Cost of pass-through revenue the related reimbursable costs for pass-through expenditures
are reflected as cost of pass-through revenue.
Operating expenses consist primarily of selling, general and administrative (SG&A)
expenses such as compensation and related expenses for sales and marketing staff, advertising,
on-line marketing and catalog production, distribution costs (excluding freight) applicable to the
Supplies Distributors and eCOST businesses, executive, management and administrative personnel and
other overhead costs, including certain occupancy and information technology costs and depreciation
and amortization expenses.
Monitoring and controlling our available cash balances continues to be a primary focus. Our
cash and liquidity positions are important components of our financing of both current operations
and our targeted growth. In recent years we have added to our available cash and liquidity
positions through various transactions:
|
|
|
Each of our primary operating subsidiaries has one or more asset based working
capital financing agreements with various lenders. |
|
|
|
|
In 2003 we completed a private placement of approximately 1.6 million shares of our
common stock to certain investors that provided net proceeds of approximately $3.2
million. In January 2005, we issued an additional 0.4 million shares of common stock to
certain of these investors who exercised warrants issued in the private placement. The
warrants exercised provided $1.3 million of additional proceeds. |
|
|
|
|
In 2004 we received proceeds of $5.0 million of taxable revenue bonds to finance
capital additions to our new facility in Southaven, MS. |
|
|
|
|
In June 2006, we completed another private placement of 5.0 million shares of our
common stock to certain investors that provided net proceeds of $4.8 million. |
19
Results of Operations
The following table sets forth certain historical financial information from our unaudited
interim condensed consolidated statements of operations expressed as a percent of net revenues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
(Unaudited) |
Product revenue, net |
|
|
77.1 |
% |
|
|
81.5 |
% |
Service fee revenue |
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
14.4 |
|
Pass-through revenue |
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product revenue (as % of product
revenue) |
|
|
92.9 |
|
|
|
93.5 |
|
Cost of service fee revenue (as % of
net service fee revenue) |
|
|
74.7 |
|
|
|
71.3 |
|
Cost of pass-through revenue (as % of
pass- through revenue) |
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs of revenues |
|
|
90.4 |
|
|
|
90.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
9.6 |
|
|
|
9.4 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
11.1 |
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
Interest expense, net |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(2.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
Income tax expense |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
(2.3 |
)% |
|
|
(1.5 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results of Operations for the Interim Periods Ended March 31, 2007 and 2006
Product Revenue. Product revenue was $80.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2007,
as compared to $90.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2006, a decrease of $9.7 million,
or 10.8%. Product revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2007 includes three months of
activity for eCOST as compared to two months in the three month period ended March 31, 2006
following the acquisition of eCOST in February 2006. eCOSTs product revenue was comparable for
the periods presented. Supplies Distributors product revenue decreased $9.6 million, or 14.0%,
primarily due to incremental vendor promotion activity in the 2006
period that did not occur in 2007, the impact of foreign currency
fluctuations, as well as
reduced volumes of product sales.
Service Fee Revenue. Service fee revenue was $17.0 million for the three months ended March
31, 2007 as compared to $15.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2006, an increase of
$1.1 million or 6.6%. Service fee revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006
included increased service fees generated from incremental projects with certain client
relationships. The change in service fee revenue is shown below ($ millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three |
|
|
Months |
Period ended March 31, 2006 |
|
$ |
15.9 |
|
New service contract relationships, including certain
incremental projects under new contracts |
|
|
1.9 |
|
Change in existing client service fees from organic
growth and certain incremental projects with existing
clients |
|
|
0.1 |
|
Terminated clients not included in 2007 revenue |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Period ended March 31, 2007 |
|
$ |
17.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Product Revenue. Cost of product revenue was $74.8 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2007, as compared to $84.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2006, a decrease
of $9.6 million or 11.4%. Cost of product revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2007
includes three months of activity for eCOST as compared to two months in the three month period
ended March 31, 2006 following the acquisition of eCOST in February 2006. eCOSTs cost of product
revenue decreased $0.6
20
million or 2.8%. As a percentage of product revenue eCOSTs cost of product
revenue decreased to 91.6% during the three month period ended March 31, 2007 from 93.6% in the
period ended March 31, 2006. The resulting gross margin for eCOST was 8.4% in the 2007 period and
6.4% during the 2006 period. Gross margin for eCOST for the period ended March 31, 2006 included
approximately $0.4 million of a loss applicable to a sales transaction to a former eCOST customer.
Excluding this matter, eCOSTs gross margin for the period ended March 31, 2006 would have been
8.1%. Gross margin for eCOST is improving from the levels in the prior year due to improved
product pricing controls and freight initiatives. Cost of product revenue for Supplies
Distributors decreased $9.1 million or 14.1% primarily as the result of decreased sales volumes of
certain products. Cost of product revenue, as a percent of product revenue, for Supplies
Distributors, was 93.4% during the three months ended March 31, 2007 and 93.5% for the comparable
2006 period. The resulting gross profit margin was 6.6% for the three months ended March 31, 2007
and 6.5% for the same period in 2006.
Cost of Service Fee Revenue. Cost of service fee revenue was $12.7 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2007, as compared to $11.3 million during the three months ended March 31,
2006, an increase of $1.4 million or 11.7%. The resulting service fee gross profit was $4.3 million
or 25.3% of service fee revenue, during the three months ended March 31, 2007 as compared to $4.6
million, or 28.7% of service fee revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2006. The decrease
in gross profit as a percent of service fees for the three months ended March 31, 2007 is primarily
due to fewer, higher
gross margin projects during 2007 than in the prior year, and due to
lower gross margins earned in 2007 on certain new clients, which
generally operate at lower gross margins in the first several
quarters after implementation. As we add new service fee revenue
in the future, we currently intend to target the underlying contracts to earn an average gross
profit percentage of 25-35%, but we have and may continue to accept lower gross margin percentages
on certain contracts depending on contract scope and other factors.
Operating Expenses. Operating expenses were $11.5 million for the three months ended March 31,
2007, or 11.1% of total net revenues, as compared to $11.4 million, or 10.3% of total net revenues,
for the three months ended March 31, 2006. Operating expenses for the three months ended March 31,
2007 include three months of activity for eCOST as compared to only two months in the three month
period ended March 31, 2006 following the acquisition of eCOST in February 2006. eCOSTs operating
expenses declined during 2007 by $0.4 million as compared to the prior year primarily due to the
realization of savings through the reduction of certain advertising and overhead expenses, changes
in corporate infrastructure expenses and operating efficiencies attained as a result of the eCOST
integration. Excluding eCOST, operating expenses were $8.4 million, or 10.2% of total net
revenues, during the 2007 period and $7.8 million or 8.8% in the prior year period. The increase
in operating expenses is primarily due to increased travel and facility related costs and the
impact of exchange rates related to our European and Canadian operations as compared to the prior
year.
Interest Expense, net. Net interest expense was $0.6 million and $0.4 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively primarily due to higher debt balances to support
working capital needs and increased interest rates.
Income Taxes. For the three months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, we recorded a tax provision
of $0.2 million for each period primarily associated with our subsidiary Supplies Distributors
Canadian and European operations. We did not record an income tax benefit associated with our
consolidated net loss in our U.S. operations or for our PFSweb Canadian pre-tax losses in the
current or prior periods. A valuation allowance has been provided for the majority of our net
deferred tax assets as of March 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, which are primarily related to our
net operating loss carryforwards, and certain foreign deferred tax assets. We expect that we will
continue to record an income tax provision associated with Supplies Distributors Canadian and
European results of operations.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Net cash used in operating activities was $1.4 million for the three months ended March 31,
2007, and primarily resulted from a $2.2 million increase in prepaid expenses, other receivables
and other current assets, a $0.4 million decrease in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other
liabilities and a $0.1 million increase in restricted cash, partially offset by a decrease in
inventories of $0.7 million and a decrease in accounts receivable of $0.5 million.
21
Net cash provided by operating activities was $3.3 million for the three months ended March
31, 2006, and primarily resulted from a $4.5 million increase in accounts payable, accrued expenses
and other liabilities, a $2.0 million decrease in prepaid expenses, other receivables and other
current assets, and a $0.6 million increase in income, as adjusted for non-cash items partially
offset by increases in inventories of $2.6 million and accounts receivable of $1.7 million.
Net cash used in investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2007 totaled $0.6
million, representing capital expenditures of $0.8 million partially offset by a decrease in
restricted cash of $0.2 million.
Net cash used in investing activities for the three months ended March 31, 2006 totaled $1.4
million, representing capital expenditures of $0.7 million and cash paid to acquire eCOST, net of
cash acquired, of $1.3 million, partially offset by a decrease in restricted cash of $0.6 million.
Capital expenditures have historically consisted primarily of additions to upgrade our
management information systems, and general expansion of our facilities, both domestic and foreign.
We expect to incur capital expenditures to support new contracts and anticipated future growth
opportunities. Based on our current client business activity and our targeted growth plans, we anticipate that our
total investment in upgrades and additions to facilities and information technology services for
the upcoming twelve months will be approximately $6 to $9 million, although additional capital
expenditures may be necessary to support the infrastructure requirements of new clients as well as
the eCOST infrastructure. To maintain our current operating cash position, a portion of these
expenditures may be financed through debt, operating or capital leases or additional equity. We
may elect to modify or defer a portion of such anticipated investments in the event that we do not
obtain the financing or achieve the revenue necessary to support such investments.
Net cash provided by financing activities was approximately $1.6 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2007, primarily representing $1.7 million decrease in restricted cash and $0.3
million of proceeds on debt, partially offset by $0.5 million of payments on capital leases.
Net cash used in financing activities was approximately $1.6 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2006, primarily representing a $1.0 million increase in restricted cash, $0.2
million of payments on debt and $0.4 million of payments on capital leases.
Our liquidity has been negatively impacted as a result of the merger with eCOST. During 2006
and the three months ended March 31, 2007, eCOST experienced a significant net usage of cash
primarily due to losses incurred. During the three months ended March 31, 2007, eCOST experienced
a further net usage of cash primarily due to losses incurred, although at a reduced rate than in
2006. As a result, during the process of transitioning and integrating the eCOST operations, we
have had to support eCOSTs cash needs to help it achieve a stabilized operational position. The
amount of further cash needed to support eCOST operations will depend upon the financing available
as well as eCOSTs ability to improve its financial results.
We initially targeted that eCOST, as part of a combined Company, would achieve annual
recurring cost savings of approximately $4 million to $5 million, dependent upon sales volumes, as
compared to pre-merger levels. These targeted savings were expected to result from, among other
things, the reduction of certain overhead expenses, changes in corporate infrastructure and reduced
freight costs. As we
have now completed the integration of eCOST into our infrastructure,
we have begun to realize the expected
benefits of many of these cost savings initiatives, though due to
reduced sales volumes, the freight cost savings that have occurred
are less than originally anticipated.
During the three months ended March 31, 2007, our working capital decreased to $18.7 million
from $21.2 million at December 31, 2006, primarily as a result of the use of cash to support
operating losses. To obtain additional financing in the future, in addition to our current cash
position, we plan to evaluate various financing alternatives including the sale of equity,
utilizing capital or operating leases, borrowing under our credit facilities, expanding our current
credit facilities, entering into new debt agreements or
22
transferring to third parties a portion of
our subordinated loan balance due from Supplies Distributors. In conjunction with certain of these
alternatives, we may be required to provide certain letters of credit to secure these arrangements.
No assurances can be given that we will be successful in obtaining any additional financing or the
terms thereof. We currently believe that our cash position, financing available under our credit
facilities and funds generated from operations (including our anticipated revenue growth and/or
cost reductions to offset lower than anticipated revenue growth) will satisfy our presently known
operating cash needs, our working capital and capital expenditure requirements, our lease
obligations, and additional loans to our subsidiaries Supplies Distributors and eCOST, if
necessary, for at least the next twelve months.
The following is a schedule of our total contractual cash obligations which is comprised of
operating leases, debt, vendor financing and capital leases (excluding interest) as of March 31,
2007, (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due By Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than |
|
|
1 - 3 |
|
|
3 - 5 |
|
|
More than |
|
Contractual Obligations |
|
Total |
|
|
1 Year |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
|
5 Years |
|
Debt and vendor financing |
|
$ |
65,589 |
|
|
$ |
61,946 |
|
|
$ |
1,936 |
|
|
$ |
1,707 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Capital lease obligations |
|
|
4,909 |
|
|
|
2,632 |
|
|
|
1,795 |
|
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leases |
|
|
24,412 |
|
|
|
8,021 |
|
|
|
10,870 |
|
|
|
5,321 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
94,910 |
|
|
$ |
72,599 |
|
|
$ |
14,601 |
|
|
$ |
7,510 |
|
|
$ |
200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 31 2007, we had $0.8 million of cash restricted for payment of capital
expenditures or repayments to lenders. In addition, as described above, we have provided
collateralized guarantees to secure the repayment of certain of our subsidiaries credit
facilities. Many of these facilities include both financial and non-financial covenants, and also
include cross default provisions applicable to other credit facilities and agreements. These
covenants include minimum levels of net worth for the individual borrower subsidiaries and
restrictions on the ability of the borrower subsidiaries to advance funds to other borrower
subsidiaries. To the extent we fail to comply with our debt covenants, including the monthly
financial covenant requirements and our required level of shareholders equity, and the lenders
accelerate the repayment of the credit facility obligations, we would be required to repay all
amounts outstanding thereunder. In particular, in the event eCOST is unable to increase its revenue
and/or gross profit from its present levels, it may fail to comply with one or more of the
financial covenants required under its working capital line of credit. In such event, absent a
waiver, the working capital lender would be entitled to accelerate all amounts outstanding
thereunder and exercise all other rights and remedies, including sale of collateral and payment
under our parent guaranty. A requirement to accelerate the repayment of the credit facility
obligations would have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of
operations. We can provide no assurance that we will have the financial ability to repay all of
such obligations. As of March 31, 2007, we were in compliance with all debt covenants. We do not
have any other material financial commitments, although future client contracts may require capital
expenditures and lease commitments to support the services provided to such clients.
In the future, we may attempt to acquire other businesses or seek an equity or strategic
partner to generate capital or expand our services or capabilities in connection with our efforts
to grow our business. Acquisitions involve certain risks and uncertainties and may require
additional financing. Therefore, we can give no assurance with respect to whether we will be
successful in identifying businesses to acquire or an equity or strategic partner, whether we or
they will be able to obtain financing to complete a transaction, or whether we or they will be
successful in operating the acquired business.
To finance their distribution of IBM products, Supplies Distributors and its subsidiaries have
short-term credit facilities with IBM Credit LLC (IBM Credit) and IBM Belgium Financial Services
S.A. (IBM Belgium). We have provided a collateralized guaranty to secure the repayment of these
credit facilities. These asset-based credit facilities provided financing for up to $30.5 million
and up to 12.5 million Euros (approximately $16.6 million) with IBM Credit and IBM Belgium,
respectively. These agreements expire in March 2008.
Supplies Distributors also has a loan and security agreement with Wachovia Bank, N.A.
(Wachovia) to provide financing for up to $25 million of eligible accounts receivables in the
United States and Canada. The Wachovia facility expires on the earlier of March 29, 2009 or the
date on which the parties to the IBM
23
master distributor agreement no longer operate under the terms
of such agreement and/or IBM no longer supplies products pursuant to such agreement.
Supplies Distributors European subsidiary has a factoring agreement with Fortis Commercial
Finance N.V. (Fortis) to provide factoring for up to 7.5 million Euros (approximately $10.0
million) of eligible accounts receivables through March 2008.
These credit facilities contain cross default provisions, various restrictions upon the
ability of Supplies Distributors and its subsidiaries to, among other things, merge, consolidate,
sell assets, incur indebtedness, make loans and payments to related parties (including entities
directly or indirectly owned by PFSweb, Inc.), provide guarantees, make investments and loans,
pledge assets, make changes to capital stock ownership structure and pay dividends, as well as
financial covenants, such as cash flow from operations, annualized revenue to working capital, net
profit after tax to revenue, minimum net worth and
total liabilities to tangible net worth, as defined, and are secured by all of the assets of
Supplies Distributors, as well as a collateralized guaranty of PFSweb. Additionally, we are
required to maintain a subordinated loan to Supplies Distributors of no less than $6.0 million,
maintain restricted cash of less than $5.0 million, are restricted with regard to transactions with
related parties, indebtedness and changes to capital stock ownership structure and a minimum
shareholders equity of at least $18.0 million. Furthermore, we are obligated to repay any
over-advance made to Supplies Distributors or its subsidiaries under these facilities if they are
unable to do so. We have also provided a guarantee of the obligations of Supplies Distributors and
its subsidiaries to IBM, excluding the trade payables that are financed by IBM credit.
Our subsidiary, Priority Fulfillment Services, Inc. (PFS), has entered into a Loan and
Security Agreement with Comerica Bank (Comerica), which provides for up to $10.0 million of
eligible accounts receivable financing through March 2008, provided a $1.5 million Term Loan due in
equal monthly installments through December 2007 and provided for up to $2.5 million of eligible
equipment purchases through June 2008. We entered this Agreement to supplement our existing cash
position, and provide funding for our current and future operations, including our targeted growth.
The Agreement contains cross default provisions, various restrictions upon our ability to, among
other things, merge, consolidate, sell assets, incur indebtedness, make loans and payments to
subsidiaries, affiliates and related parties (including entities directly or indirectly owned by
PFSweb, Inc.), make investments and loans, pledge assets, make changes to capital stock ownership
structure, as well as financial covenants of a minimum tangible net worth of $20 million, as
defined, and a minimum liquidity ratio, as defined. The agreement also limits PFS ability to
increase the subordinated loan to Supplies Distributors to more than $8.0 million or advance more
than $8.5 million to eCOST without Comericas approval. The agreement is secured by all of the
assets of PFS, as well as a guarantee of PFSweb.
eCOST currently has an asset-based line of credit facility of up to $7.5 million with Wachovia
Capital Finance Corporation (Western), which is collateralized by substantially all of eCOSTs
assets and expires in May 2009. Borrowings under the facility are limited to a percentage of
eligible accounts receivable and letter of credit availability is limited to a percentage of
accounts receivable and inventory. As of March 31, 2007, eCOST had $1.6 million of letters of
credit outstanding and $1.1 million of available under this facility. Outstanding amounts under
the facility bear interest at rates ranging from the prime rate to the prime rate plus 0.5% (8.75%
as of March 31, 2007), depending on eCOSTs financial results. The credit facility restricts
eCOSTs ability to, among other things, merge, consolidate, sell assets, incur indebtedness, make
loans, investments and payments to subsidiaries, affiliates and related parties, make investments
and loans, pledge assets, make changes to capital stock ownership structure, as well as a minimum
tangible net worth of $0 million, as defined. PFSweb has guaranteed all current and future
obligations of eCOST under this line of credit.
In 2003, we entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with certain institutional investors
in a private placement transaction pursuant to which we issued and sold an aggregate of 1.6 million
shares of our common stock (the Common Stock), In addition to the Common Stock, the investors
received certain warrants to purchase shares of Common Stock at a specified exercise price. The
adjusted exercise price of the outstanding warrants is $2.31 per share and the adjusted number of
warrants is 564,980. In addition, in connection with the merger with eCOST, we assumed outstanding
warrants to issue an aggregate of 36,210 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $2.00 per
share, subject to the terms set forth therein.
24
In 2004, to fulfill our obligations under certain new client relationships, we entered into a
three-year operating lease arrangement for a new distribution facility in Southaven, MS, near our
existing distribution complex in Memphis, TN. We have incurred more than $5 million in capital
expenditures to support the incremental business in this new distribution center. We financed a
significant portion of these expenditures through a Loan Agreement with the Mississippi Business
Finance Corporation (the MBFC) pursuant to which the MBFC issued $5 million MBFC Taxable Variable
Rate Demand Limited Obligation Revenue Bonds, Series 2004 (Priority Fulfillment Services, Inc.
Project) (the Bonds). The MBFC loaned us the proceeds of the Bonds for the purpose of financing
the acquisition and installation of equipment, machinery and related assets located in our new
Southaven, Mississippi distribution facility. The primary source of repayment of the Bonds is a
letter of credit (the Letter of Credit) in the initial
face amount of $5.1 million issued by Comerica pursuant to a Reimbursement Agreement between
us and Comerica under which we are obligated to pay to Comerica all amounts drawn under the Letter
of Credit. The Letter of Credit has a maturity date of April 2008 at which time, if not renewed or
replaced, will result in a draw on the undrawn face amount thereof.
In June 2006, we entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement with certain institutional
investors in a private placement transaction pursuant to which we issued and sold an aggregate of
5.0 million shares of our common stock, par value $.001 per share, at $1.00 per share, resulting in
gross proceeds of $5.0 million. After deducting expenses, the net proceeds were approximately $4.8
million. We have advanced the net proceeds to eCOST to support its operating requirements.
To the extent we fail to comply with the various debt covenants described above, and the
lenders accelerate the repayment of the credit facility obligations, we would be required to repay
all amounts outstanding thereunder. Any requirement to accelerate the repayment of the credit
facility obligations would have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of
operations. We can provide no assurance that we will have the financial ability to repay all of
such obligations. As of March 31, 2007, we were in compliance with all debt covenants.
Through our merger with eCOST, we have aligned the core strengths of each company, to leverage
our operational infrastructure and technology expertise with eCOSTs customer base and supplier
relationships. We initially targeted to achieve $4 million to $5 million in annual cost
savings, dependent upon sales volumes, as compared to pre-merger levels. These targeted savings
were expected to result from, among other things, reductions in the following costs:
|
|
|
Certain redundant administrative and public company activities; |
|
|
|
|
Excess capacity and other related facility expenses; |
|
|
|
|
Technology, telecommunications and operational costs; and |
|
|
|
|
Overall outbound freight costs due to additional freight options. |
As
we have now completed the integration of eCOST into our
infrastructure, we have begun to realize the expected benefits of
many of these cost saving initiatives, though due to reduced sales
volumes, the freight cost savings that have occurred are less than
originally anticipated.
Additionally, we believe the combined companies can pursue a variety of incremental revenue
and gross profit-related opportunities, such as:
|
|
|
Increase the number of virtual warehouse partnerships for both electronics and
non-electronic goods; |
|
|
|
|
Develop higher margin non-product and service categories; |
|
|
|
|
Expand international sales, particularly in Europe and Canada, where we maintain a
presence; and |
|
|
|
|
Utilize our stronger financial platform to enhance eCOSTs working capital resources to
expand access to exclusive products and deals. |
We can provide no assurance that such plans or the underlying financial benefits will be
achieved. Additionally, even with such plans, we expect that eCOST will operate at a loss during
2007 and will require further funding to support its operations.
eCOST has historically incurred significant operating losses and used cash to fund its
operations. As a result, we have been required to invest cash to fund eCOSTs operations, which we
may not be able to
25
continue to do without approval from our lenders. The amount of further cash
needed to support eCOST operations depends upon the financing available under its credit line as
well as eCOSTs ability to improve its financial results. Through May 15, 2007, we have advanced
$11.1 million to eCOST to fund eCOSTs cash flow requirements and have lender approval to advance
an additional $2.1 million, with certain restrictions, if needed. In the event we need to invest
further cash to eCOST, we may be required to seek approval from our lenders to provide such funds.
We can provide no assurance that we will receive such approval from our lenders or any terms or
conditions required by our lenders in order to
obtain such approval. In addition, PFSweb has provided a guaranty of eCOSTs bank line of
credit and certain eCOST vendor trade payables.
If eCOST is unable to meet its requirements under its debt obligations and bank facility, the
guarantees referred to above could be called upon.
We receive municipal tax abatements in certain locations. During 2004 we received notice from
a municipality that we did not satisfy certain criteria necessary to maintain the abatements. In
December 2006, we received notice that the municipal authority planned to make an adjustment to our
tax abatement. We plan to dispute the adjustment, but if the dispute is not resolved favorably,
additional taxes of $1.5 million could be assessed against us through March 31, 2007.
On May 9, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in the District Court of Collin County, Texas, by J. Gregg
Pritchard, as Trustee of the D.I.C. Creditors Trust, naming the former directors of Daisytek
International Corporation and the Company as defendants. Daisytek filed for bankruptcy in May 2003
and the Trust was created pursuant to Daisyteks Plan of Liquidation. The complaint alleges, among
other things, that the spin-off of the Company from Daisytek in December 1999 was a fraudulent
conveyance and that Daisytek was damaged thereby in the amount of at least $38 million. We believe
the claim has no merit and are vigorously defending the action. Through March 31, 2007, we have
incurred outstanding legal costs of approximately $0.8 million which have not been paid as we
expect such costs to be covered by insurance. On May 3, 2007, the Court granted certain motions
for summary judgment filed by the Company and certain of the former Daisytek directors. We believe
that as a result of this ruling, all of the claims against the Company and certain of the
defendants have been dismissed; however, the ruling is subject to objection and/or appeal.
On July 12, 2004, eCOST received correspondence from MercExchange LLC alleging infringement of
MercExchanges U.S. patents relating to e-commerce and offering to license its patent portfolio to
eCOST. On July 15, 2004, eCOST received a follow-up letter from MercExchange specifying which of
its technologies MercExchange believed infringed certain of its patents, alone or in combination
with technologies provided by third parties. Some of those patents are currently being litigated by
third parties, and we are not involved in those proceedings. In addition, three of the four patents
identified by MercExchange are under reexamination at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which
may or may not result in the modification of those claims. In the July 15 letter, MercExchange also
advised eCOST that it has a number of applications pending for additional patents. MercExchange has
filed lawsuits alleging infringement of some or all of its patents against third parties, resulting
in settlements or verdicts in favor of MercExchange. At least one such verdict was appealed to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and was affirmed in part. Based on eCOSTs
investigation of this matter to date, we believe that our current eCOST operations do not infringe
any valid claims of the patents identified by MercExchange in these letters. There can be no
assurance, however, that such claims will not be material or adversely affect our business,
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Seasonality
The seasonality of our service fee business is dependent upon the seasonality of our clients
business and sales of their products. Accordingly, our management must rely upon the projections of
our clients in assessing quarterly variability. We believe that with our current client mix and
their current business volumes, our service fee business activity will be at it lowest in the
quarter ended March 31. We anticipate that our Supplies Distributors product revenue will be
highest during the quarter ended December 31. Our eCOST business is moderately seasonal,
reflecting the general pattern of peak sales for the retail industry during the holiday shopping
season. Typically, a larger portion of our eCOST revenues occur during the
26
first and fourth fiscal
quarters. We believe that our historical revenue growth makes it difficult to predict the effect
of seasonality on our future revenues and results of operations.
We believe that results of operations for a quarterly period may not be indicative of the
results for any other quarter or for the full year.
Inflation
Management believes that inflation has not had a material effect on our operations.
Critical Accounting Policies
A description of critical accounting policies is included in Note 2 of the consolidated
financial statements in our December 31, 2006 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
27
ITEM 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk
We are exposed to various market risks including interest rates on its financial instruments
and foreign exchange rates.
Interest Rate Risk
Our interest rate risk is limited to our outstanding balances on our inventory and working
capital financing agreements, taxable revenue bonds, loan and security agreements and factoring
agreement for the financing of inventory, accounts receivable and certain other receivables and
certain equipment, which amounted to $70.5 million at March 31, 2007. A 100 basis point movement in
interest rates would result in approximately $0.3 million annualized increase or decrease in
interest expense based on the outstanding balance of these agreements at March 31, 2007.
Foreign Exchange Risk
Currently, our foreign currency exchange rate risk is primarily limited to the Canadian Dollar
and the Euro. In the future, our foreign currency exchange risk may also include other currencies
applicable to certain of our international operations. We have and may continue, from time to
time, to employ derivative financial instruments to manage our exposure to fluctuations in foreign
currency rates. To hedge our net investment and intercompany payable or receivable balances in
foreign operations, we may enter into forward currency exchange contracts.
ITEM 4. Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain a system of controls and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance as to
the reliability of the financial statements and other disclosures included in this report, as well
as to safeguard assets from unauthorized use or disposition. We evaluated the effectiveness of the
design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures under the supervision and with the
participation of management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial and
Accounting Officer. Based upon the evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial
and Accounting Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective in
timely alerting them to material information required to be included in our periodic Securities and
Exchange Commission filings. No significant changes were made to our internal controls or other
factors that could significantly affect these controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation.
28
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. Legal Proceedings
On May 9, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in the District Court of Collin County, Texas, by J. Gregg
Pritchard, as Trustee of the D.I.C. Creditors Trust, naming the former directors of Daisytek
International Corporation and the Company as defendants. Daisytek filed for bankruptcy in May 2003
and the Trust was created pursuant to Daisyteks Plan of Liquidation. The complaint alleges, among
other things, that the spin-off of the Company from Daisytek in December 1999 was a fraudulent
conveyance and that Daisytek was damaged thereby in the amount of at least $38 million. We believe
the claim has no merit and are vigorously defending the action. On May 3, 2007, the Court granted
certain motions for summary judgment filed by the Company and certain of the former Daisytek
directors. We believe that as a result of this ruling, all of the claims against the Company and
certain of the defendants have been dismissed; however, the ruling is subject to objection and/or
appeal.
ITEM 1A. Risk Factors
Our business, financial condition and operating results could be adversely affected by any of
the following factors, in which event the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you
could lose part or all of your investment.
Risks Related to All Our Business Segments
Certain of our historical financial information may not be representative of our future results.
Effective February 1, 2006, we now consolidate eCOST.coms financial position and results of
our operations into our consolidated financial statements. As a result of our acquisition of
eCOST, our historical results of operations may not be indicative of our future operating or
financial performance.
We anticipate incurring significant expenses in the foreseeable future, which may reduce our
ability to achieve or maintain profitability.
To reach our business growth objectives, we may increase our operating and marketing expenses,
as well as capital expenditures. To offset these expenses, we will need to generate additional
profitable business. If our revenue grows slower than either we anticipate or our clients
projections indicate, or if our operating and marketing expenses exceed our expectations, we may
not generate sufficient revenue to be profitable or be able to sustain or increase profitability on
a quarterly or an annual basis in the future. Additionally, if our revenue grows slower than either
we anticipate or our clients projections indicate, we may incur unnecessary or redundant costs and
our operating results could be adversely affected.
Changes to financial accounting standards may affect our reported results of operations.
We prepare our financial statements to conform to generally accepted accounting principles, or
GAAP. GAAP is subject to interpretation by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants,
the SEC and various bodies formed to interpret and create appropriate accounting policies. A change
in those policies can have a significant effect on our reported results and may even affect our
reporting of transactions that were completed before a change is announced. Accounting rules
affecting many aspects of our business, including rules relating to accounting for asset
impairments, revenue recognition, arrangements involving multiple deliverables, employee stock
purchase plans and stock option grants, have recently been revised or are currently under review.
Changes to those rules or current interpretation of those rules may have a material adverse effect
on our reported financial results or on the way we conduct our business.
We operate with significant levels of indebtedness and are required to comply with certain
financial and non-financial covenants; we are required to maintain a minimum level of subordinated
loans to our subsidiary Supplies Distributors; and we have guaranteed certain indebtedness and
obligations of our subsidiaries Supplies Distributors and eCOST.
As of March 31, 2007, our total credit facilities outstanding, including debt, capital lease
obligations
29
and our vendor accounts payable related to financing of IBM product inventory, was
approximately $70.5 million. Certain of the credit facilities have maturity dates in calendar year
2008 or after, but are classified as current liabilities in our consolidated financial statements.
We cannot provide assurance that our credit facilities will be renewed by the lending parties.
Additionally, these credit facilities include both financial and non-financial covenants, many of
which also include cross default provisions applicable to other agreements. These covenants also
restrict our ability to transfer funds among our various subsidiaries, which may adversely affect
the ability of our subsidiaries to operate their businesses or comply with their respective loan
covenants. We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to maintain compliance with these
covenants. Any non-renewal or any default under any of our credit facilities would have a material
adverse impact upon our business and financial condition. In addition we have provided $6.0 million
of subordinated indebtedness to Supplies Distributors, the minimum level required under certain
credit facilities as of March 31, 2007. The maximum level of this subordinated indebtedness to
Supplies Distributors that may be provided without approval from our lenders is $8.0 million. The
restrictions on increasing this amount without lender approval may limit our ability to comply with
certain loan covenants or further grow and develop Supplies Distributors business. We have
guaranteed most of the indebtedness of Supplies Distributors. Furthermore, we are obligated to
repay any over-advance made to Supplies Distributors by its lenders to the extent Supplies
Distributors is unable to do so. We have also guaranteed eCOSTs $7.5 million credit line with
Wachovia, as well as certain of its vendor trade payables. We currently expect that it may be
necessary to provide additional guarantees of certain eCOST vendor trade payables in the future.
We are dependent on our key personnel, and we need to hire and retain skilled personnel to sustain
our business.
Our performance is highly dependent on the continued services of our executive officers and
other key personnel, the loss of any of whom could materially adversely affect our business. In
addition, we need to attract and retain other highly-skilled, technical and managerial personnel
for whom there is intense competition. We cannot assure you that we will be able to attract and
retain the personnel necessary for the continuing growth of our business. Our inability to attract
and retain qualified technical and managerial personnel would materially adversely affect our
ability to maintain and grow our business.
We are subject to risks associated with our international operations.
We currently operate a 150,000 square foot distribution center in Liege, Belgium and a 22,000
square foot distribution center in Markham, Canada, near Eastern Toronto, both of which currently
have excess capacity. We recently opened a 6,500 square foot facility in the Philippines to provide
call center and customer service functions. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in
expanding in these or any additional international markets. In addition to the uncertainty
regarding our ability to generate revenue from foreign operations and expand our international
presence, there are risks inherent in doing business internationally, including:
|
|
|
changing regulatory requirements; |
|
|
|
|
legal uncertainty regarding foreign laws, tariffs and other trade barriers; |
|
|
|
|
political instability; |
|
|
|
|
potentially adverse tax consequences; |
|
|
|
|
foreign currency fluctuations; and |
|
|
|
|
cultural differences. |
Any one or more of these factors could materially adversely affect our business in a number of
ways, such as increased costs, operational difficulties and reductions in revenue.
We are uncertain about our need for and the availability of additional funds.
Our future capital needs are difficult to predict. We may require additional capital to take
advantage of unanticipated opportunities, including strategic alliances and acquisitions and to
fund capital expenditures, or to respond to changing business conditions and unanticipated
competitive pressures. We
may also require additional funds to finance operating losses, including continuing operating
losses currently anticipated to be incurred by eCOST. Should these circumstances arise, our
existing cash balance and
30
credit facilities may be insufficient and we may need to raise additional
funds either by borrowing money or issuing additional equity. We cannot assure you that such
resources will be adequate or available for all of our future financing needs. Our inability to
finance our growth, either internally or externally, may limit our growth potential and our ability
to execute our business strategy. If we are successful in completing an additional equity
financing, this could result in further dilution to our shareholders or reduce the market value of
our common stock.
We may engage in future strategic alliances or acquisitions that could dilute our existing
shareholders, cause us to incur significant expenses or harm our business.
We may review strategic alliance or acquisition opportunities that would complement our
current business or enhance our technological capabilities. Integrating any newly acquired
businesses, technologies or services may be expensive and time-consuming. To finance any
acquisitions, it may be necessary for us to raise additional funds through borrowing money or
completing public or private financings. Additional funds may not be available on terms that are
favorable to us and, in the case of equity financings, may result in dilution to our shareholders.
We may not be able to operate any acquired businesses profitably or otherwise implement our growth
strategy successfully. If we are unable to integrate any newly acquired entities or technologies
effectively, our operating results could suffer. Future acquisitions could also result in
incremental expenses and the incurrence of debt and contingent liabilities, any of which could harm
our operating results.
If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately
report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, current and potential shareholders
could lose confidence in our financial reporting, which could harm our business, and the trading
price of our common stock.
We have begun a process to document and evaluate our internal controls over financial
reporting to satisfy the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires
annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial
reporting and a report by our independent auditors addressing these assessments. Based on the
current requirements, and our current public float, we were not required to comply with Section 404
as of December 31, 2006. We are currently subject to the management assessment portion of Section
404 for the year ending December 31, 2007, but we are not subject to the requirement to obtain a
report by our independent auditors opining on these assessments. Under current law, we will be
subject to the independent auditor requirement for the year ending December 31, 2008. In this
regard, our management has been dedicating internal resources, has engaged outside consultants and
has begun to develop a detailed work plan to (i) assess and document the adequacy of internal
controls over financial reporting, (ii) take steps to improve control processes, where appropriate,
and (iii) validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented. If we fail to
correct any issues in the design or operating effectiveness of internal controls over financial
reporting or fail to prevent fraud, current and potential shareholders could lose confidence in our
financial reporting, which could harm our business and the trading price of our common stock.
Delivery of our and our clients products could be delayed or disrupted by factors beyond our
control, and we could lose customers and clients as a result.
We rely upon third party carriers for timely delivery of our and our clients product
shipments. As a result, we are subject to carrier disruptions and increased costs due to factors
that are beyond our control, including employee strikes, inclement weather and increased fuel
costs. Any failure to deliver products to our and our clients customers in a timely and accurate
manner may damage our reputation and brand and could cause us to lose customers and clients. We
cannot be sure that our relationships with third party carriers will continue on terms favorable to
us, if at all. If our relationship with any of these third party carriers is terminated or impaired
or if any of these third parties is unable to deliver products, we would be required to use
alternative carriers for the shipment of our and our clients products to customers. We may be
unable to engage alternative carriers on a timely basis or on favorable terms, if at all. Potential
adverse consequences include:
|
|
|
reduced visibility of order status and package tracking; |
|
|
|
|
delays in order processing and product delivery; |
31
|
|
|
increased cost of delivery, resulting in reduced margins; and |
|
|
|
|
reduced shipment quality, which may result in damaged products and customer
dissatisfaction. |
A breach of our e-commerce security measures could reduce demand for its services. Credit card
fraud and other fraud could adversely affect our business.
A requirement of the continued growth of e-commerce is the secure transmission of confidential
information over public networks. A party who is able to circumvent our security measures could
misappropriate proprietary information or interrupt our operations. Any compromise or elimination
of our security could reduce demand for our services.
We may be required to expend significant capital and other resources to protect against
security breaches or to address any problem they may cause. Because our activities involve the
storage and transmission of proprietary information, such as credit card numbers, security breaches
could damage its reputation, cause us to lose clients, impact our ability to attract new clients
and we could be exposed to litigation and possible liability. Our security measures may not prevent
security breaches, and failure to prevent security breaches may disrupt our operations. In certain
circumstances, we do not carry insurance against the risk of credit card fraud and other fraud, so
the failure to adequately control fraudulent transactions on our clients behalf could increase our
expenses.
We are subject to a dispute with a municipal authority, which, if not resolved in our favor, may
materially adversely affect our results of operations.
We receive municipal tax abatements in certain locations. During 2004 we received notice from
a municipal authority that we did not satisfy certain criteria necessary to maintain the
abatements. In December 2006 we received notice that the municipal authority planned to make an
adjustment to our tax abatement. We plan to dispute the adjustment, but if the dispute is not
resolved favorably, additional taxes of approximately $1.5 million could be assessed against us
through March 31, 2007.
Risks Related to Our PFS and Supplies Distributors Operating Segments
Our service fee revenue and gross margin is dependent upon our clients business and transaction
volumes and our costs; many of our client service agreements are terminable by the client at will;
we may incur financial penalties if we fail to meet contractual service levels under certain client
service agreements.
Our service fee revenue is primarily transaction based and fluctuates with the volume of
transactions or level of sales of the products by our clients for whom we provide transaction
management services. If we are unable to retain existing clients or attract new clients or if we
dedicate significant resources to clients whose business does not generate sufficient revenue or
whose products do not generate substantial customer sales, our business may be materially adversely
affected. Moreover, our ability to estimate service fee revenue for future periods is substantially
dependent upon our clients and our own projections, the accuracy of which has been, and will
continue to be, unpredictable. Therefore, our planning for client activity and targeted goals for
service fee revenue and gross margin may be materially adversely affected by incomplete, delayed or
inaccurate projections. In addition, many of our service agreements with our clients are terminable
by the client at will. Therefore, we cannot assure you that any of our clients will continue to use
our services for any period of time. The loss of a significant amount of service fee revenue due to
client terminations could have a material adverse effect on our ability to cover our costs and thus
on our profitability. Certain of our client service agreements contain minimum service level
requirements and impose financial penalties if we fail to meet such requirements. The imposition of
a substantial amount of such penalties could have a material adverse effect on our business and
operations.
Our business is subject to the risk of customer and supplier concentration.
For the three months ended March 31, 2007 and 2006, a prime contractor (for whom we are a
subcontractor) to a U.S. government agency, a consumer products company and Xerox Corporation
represented approximately 24%, 13% and 13%, respectively, and approximately 22%, 21% and 12%,
respectively of our total service fee revenue, net of pass-through revenue. The loss of, or
non-payment of
32
invoices by, any or all of such clients would have a material adverse effect upon
our business. In particular, the agreement under which we provide services to such clients are
terminable at will upon notice by such clients.
A substantial portion of our Supplies Distributors product revenue was generated by sales of
product purchased under master distributor agreements with the Printing System Division of IBM and
is dependent on IBMs business and the continuing market for IBM products. In January 2007, IBM and
Ricoh announced the planned formation of a joint venture company based on IBMs Printing Systems
Division. Upon closing of the agreement, Ricoh will initially acquire 51% of the joint venture,
which will be called InfoPrint Solutions Company, and will progressively acquire the remaining 49%
over the next three years. The newly formed joint venture company is expected to eventually become
a fully owned subsidiary of Ricoh. No assurance can be given that InfoPrint Solutions Company will
continue the master distributor agreements with Supplies Distributors. A termination of this
relationship or a decline in customer demand for these products will have a material adverse effect
on Supplies Distributors business.
Sales by Supplies Distributors to three customers accounted for approximately 36% of Supplies
Distributors total product revenue for the three months ended March 31, 2007. Sales to three
customers accounted for approximately 39% of Supplies Distributors product revenues for the three
months ended March 31, 2006. The loss of any one or more of such customers, or non-payment of any
material amount by these or any other customer, would have a material adverse effect upon Supplies
Distributors business.
Our operating results are materially impacted by our client mix and the seasonality of their
business.
Our business is materially impacted by our client mix and the seasonality of their business.
Based upon our current client mix and their current projected business volumes, we anticipate our
service fee revenue business activity will be at its lowest in the first quarter of our fiscal year
and that our master distributor product revenue business activity will be at its highest in the
fourth quarter of our fiscal year. We believe results of operations for a quarterly period may not
be indicative of the results for any other quarter or for the full year. We are unable to predict
how the seasonality of future clients business may affect our quarterly revenue and whether the
seasonality may change due to modifications to a clients business. As such, we believe that
results of operations for a quarterly period may not be indicative of the results for any other
quarter or for the full year.
Our systems may not accommodate significant growth in our number of clients.
Our success depends on our ability to handle a large number of transactions for many different
clients in various product categories. We expect that the volume of transactions will increase
significantly as we expand our operations. If this occurs, additional stress will be placed upon
the network hardware and software that manages our operations. We cannot assure you of our ability
to efficiently manage a large number of transactions. If we are not able to maintain an appropriate
level of operating performance, we may develop a negative reputation, and impair existing and
prospective client relationships and our business would be materially adversely affected.
We may not be able to recover all or a portion of our start-up costs associated with one or more of
our clients.
We generally incur start-up costs in connection with the planning and implementation of
business process solutions for our clients. Although we generally attempt to recover these costs
from the client in the early stages of the client relationship, or upon contract termination if the
client terminates without cause prior to full amortization of these costs, there is a risk that the
client contract may not fully cover the start-up costs. To the extent start-up costs exceed the
start-up fees received, excess costs will be expensed as incurred. Additionally, in connection with
new client contracts we generally incur capital expenditures associated with assets whose primary
use is related to the client solution. There is a risk that the contract
may end before expected and we may not recover the full amount of our capital costs.
33
Our revenue and margins may be materially impacted by client transaction volumes that differ from
client projections and business assumptions.
Our pricing for client transaction services, such as call center and fulfillment, is often
based upon volume projections and business assumptions provided by the client and our anticipated
costs to perform such work. In the event the actual level of activity or cost is substantially
different from the projections or assumptions, we may have insufficient or excess staffing,
incremental costs or other assets dedicated for such client that may negatively impact our margins
and business relationship with such client. In the event we are unable to meet the service levels
expected by the client, our relationship with the client will suffer and may result in financial
penalties and/or the termination of the client contract.
We face competition from many sources that could adversely affect our business.
Many companies offer, on an individual basis, one or more of the same services we do, and we
face competition from many different sources depending upon the type and range of services
requested by a potential client. Our competitors include vertical outsourcers, which are companies
that offer a single function, such as call centers, public warehouses or credit card processors. We
compete against transportation logistics providers who offer product management functions as an
ancillary service to their primary transportation services. We also compete against other business
process outsourcing providers, who perform many similar services as us. Many of these companies
have greater capabilities than we do for the single or multiple functions they provide. In many
instances, our competition is the in-house operations of its potential clients themselves. The
in-house operations of potential clients often believe that they can perform the same services we
do, while others are reluctant to outsource business functions that involve direct customer
contact. We cannot be certain that we will be able to compete successfully against these or other
competitors in the future.
Our sales and implementation cycles are highly variable and our ability to finalize pending
contracts may cause our operating results to vary widely.
The sales cycle for our services is variable, typically ranging between several months to up
to a year from initial contact with the potential client to the signing of a contract. Occasionally
the sales cycle requires substantially more time. Delays in signing and executing client contracts
may affect our revenue and cause our operating results to vary widely. We believe that a potential
clients decision to purchase our services is discretionary, involves a significant commitment of
the clients resources and is influenced by intense internal and external pricing and operating
comparisons. To successfully sell our services, we generally must educate our potential clients
regarding the use and benefit of our services, which can require significant time and resources.
Consequently, the period between initial contact and the purchase of our services is often long and
subject to delays associated with the lengthy approval and competitive evaluation processes that
typically accompany significant operational decisions. Additionally, the time required to finalize
pending contracts and to implement our systems and integrate a new client can range from several
weeks to many months. Delays in signing and integrating new clients may affect our revenue and
cause our operating results to vary widely.
Our business could be adversely affected by a systems or equipment failure, whether that of us or
our clients.
Our operations are dependent upon our ability to protect our distribution facilities, customer
service centers, computer and telecommunications equipment and software systems against damage and
failures. Damage or failures could result from fire, power loss, equipment malfunctions, system
failures, natural disasters and other causes. If our business is interrupted either from accidents
or the intentional acts of others, our business could be materially adversely affected. In
addition, in the event of widespread damage or failures at our facilities, our short-term disaster
recovery and contingency plans and insurance coverage may not be sufficient.
Our clients businesses may also be harmed from any system or equipment failures we
experiences. In
that event, our relationship with these clients may be adversely affected, we may lose these
clients, our ability to attract new clients may be adversely affected and we could be exposed to
liability.
Interruptions could also result from the intentional acts of others, like hackers. If our
systems are penetrated by computer hackers, or if computer viruses infect our systems, our
computers could fail or proprietary information could be misappropriated.
34
If our clients suffer similar interruptions in their operations, for any of the reasons
discussed above or for others, our business could also be adversely affected. Many of our clients
computer systems interface with our systems. If our clients suffer interruptions in their systems,
the link to our systems could be severed and sales of the clients products could be slowed or
stopped.
We may be a party to litigation involving our e-commerce intellectual property rights.
In recent years, there has been significant litigation in the United States involving patent
and other intellectual property rights. We may be a party to intellectual property litigation in
the future to protect our trade secrets or know-how. United States patent applications are
confidential until a patent is issued and most technologies are developed in secret. Accordingly,
we are not, and cannot be, aware of all patents or other intellectual property rights of which our
services may pose a risk of infringement. Others asserting rights against us could force us to
defend ourself or our customers against alleged infringement of intellectual property rights. We
could incur substantial costs to prosecute or defend any such litigation.
Risks Related to the Business Process Outsourcing Industry
If the trend toward outsourcing does not continue, our business will be adversely affected.
Our business could be materially adversely affected if the trend toward outsourcing declines
or reverses, or if corporations bring previously outsourced functions back in-house. Particularly
during general economic downturns, businesses may bring in-house previously outsourced functions to
avoid or delay layoffs. The continued threat of terrorism within the United States and abroad and
the potential for sustained military action may cause disruption to commerce and economic
conditions, both domestic and foreign, which could have a material adverse effect upon our business
and new client prospects.
Our market is subject to rapid technological change and to compete we must continually enhance our
systems to comply with evolving standards.
To remain competitive, we must continue to enhance and improve the responsiveness,
functionality and features of our services and the underlying network infrastructure. If we are
unable to adapt to changing market conditions, client requirements or emerging industry standards,
our business could be adversely affected. The internet and e-commerce environments are
characterized by rapid technological change, changes in user requirements and preferences, frequent
new product and service introductions embodying new technologies and the emergence of new industry
standards and practices that could render our technology and systems obsolete. Our success will
depend, in part, on our ability to both internally develop and license leading technologies to
enhance our existing services and develop new services. We must continue to address the
increasingly sophisticated and varied needs of our clients and respond to technological advances
and emerging industry standards and practices on a cost-effective and timely basis. The development
of proprietary technology involves significant technical and business risks. We may fail to develop
new technologies effectively or to adapt our proprietary technology and systems to client
requirements or emerging industry standards.
Risks Related to our Merger with eCOST
We may fail to realize the anticipated synergies, cost savings, growth opportunities and other
benefits expected from the merger.
We entered into a merger with eCOST with the expectation that the merger will result in
synergies, cost savings, growth opportunities and other benefits to the combined company. However,
there can be no assurance that we will realize any of these anticipated benefits. The combination
of our businesses may
not result in combined financial performance that is better than what our company would have
achieved independently if the merger had not occurred.
35
Uncertainty regarding the merger may cause clients, customers, suppliers and others to delay or
defer decisions concerning us and eCOST, which may harm the results of operations of either or both
companies.
In response to our completion of the merger, clients, customers and suppliers may delay or
defer outsourcing, purchasing or supply decisions or otherwise alter existing relationships with us
and eCOST. Prospective clients and customers could be reluctant to contract for the combined
companys services or purchase the combined companys products due to uncertainty about the
combined companys ability to efficiently provide products and services. In addition, clients,
customers, suppliers and others may also seek to terminate or change existing agreements with us or
eCOST as a result of the merger. These and other actions by clients, customers, suppliers and
others could negatively affect the business of the combined company.
eCOST may be liable to PC Mall for taxes arising as a result of the merger.
In connection with the consummation of the merger, eCOST received a written opinion from its
legal counsel to the effect that the merger should not cause Section 355(e) of the Internal Revenue
Code to apply to the April 2005 spin-off of eCOST from its former parent, PC Mall. Such opinion was
based on certain factual representations made by PC Mall and eCOST and certain factual and legal
assumptions made by eCOSTs legal counsel. Such opinion represented such legal counsels best
judgment regarding the application of the U.S. federal income tax laws, but is not binding on the
IRS or the courts. No assurance can be given that the IRS will not assert a contrary position or
that any such contrary position would not be sustained by a court. If the merger does cause Section
355(e) to apply to the April 2005 spin-off of eCOST from PC Mall, eCOST will be liable to PC Mall
for any resulting tax-related liabilities.
Risks Related to eCOST, our Online Discount Retailer Segment
We may not be able to achieve or maintain profitability.
We have incurred continuing operating losses and may not be able to achieve or maintain
profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our ability to achieve or maintain profitability
depends on a number of factors, including our ability to:
|
|
|
increase sales; |
|
|
|
|
maintain and expand vendor relationships; |
|
|
|
|
obtain additional and increase existing trade credit with key suppliers; |
|
|
|
|
generate sufficient gross profit; and |
|
|
|
|
control costs and generate the expected synergies applicable to the merger. |
We need additional financing and may not be able to obtain additional financing on favorable terms
or at all, which could increase our costs and limit our ability to grow.
We need to obtain additional financing and there can be no assurance that we will be able to
obtain additional financing on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Our failure to obtain
additional financing or our inability to obtain financing on acceptable terms will materially
adversely affect our ability to achieve profitability and grow our business.
Our operating results are difficult to predict.
Our operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely to vary significantly in the
future based upon a number of factors, many of which we cannot control. We operate in a highly
dynamic industry and future results could be subject to significant fluctuations. Revenue and
expenses in future periods may be greater or less than revenue and expenses in the immediately
preceding period or in the comparable period of the prior year. Therefore, period-to-period
comparisons of our operating results are not
necessarily a good indication of our future performance. Some of the factors that could cause
our operating results to fluctuate include:
|
|
|
price competition that results in lower sales volumes, lower profit margins, or net
losses; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to prevent credit card fraud and reduce chargeback activity; |
|
|
|
|
the amount, timing and impact of advertising and marketing costs; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to successfully implement new technologies or software systems; |
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain sufficient financing; |
36
|
|
|
changes in the number of visitors to the out website or our inability to convert those
visitors into customers; |
|
|
|
|
technical difficulties, including system or Internet failures; |
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in the demand for our products or overstocking or under-stocking of
products; |
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in revenues and shipping costs, particularly during the holiday season; |
|
|
|
|
economic conditions generally or economic conditions specific to the Internet, online
commerce, the retail industry or the mail order industry; |
|
|
|
|
changes in the mix of products that we sell; and |
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in levels of inventory theft, damage or obsolescence. |
The failure to improve our financial and operating performance may result in a failure to comply
with our financial covenants.
In the event we are unable to increase our revenue and/or gross profit from our present levels
and do not achieve a sufficient level of operating efficiencies, we may fail to comply with one or
more of the financial covenants required under our working capital line of credit. In such event,
absent a waiver, the working capital lender would be entitled to accelerate all amounts outstanding
thereunder and exercise all other rights and remedies, including sale of collateral and payment
under the parent guaranty.
If we fail to accurately predict our inventory risk, our margins may decline as a result of
write-downs of our inventory due to lower prices obtained for older or obsolete products.
Some of the products we sell on our website are characterized by rapid technological change,
obsolescence and price erosion (for example, computer hardware, software and consumer electronics),
and because we may sometimes stock large quantities of particular types of inventory, inventory
reserves may be required or may subsequently prove insufficient, and additional inventory
write-downs may be required.
Increased product returns or a failure to accurately predict product returns could decrease our
revenues and impact profitability.
We make allowances for product returns based on historical return rates. We are responsible
for returns of certain products ordered through our website from our distribution center as well as
products that are shipped to our customers directly from our vendors. If our actual product returns
significantly exceed our allowances for returns, especially as we expand into new product
categories, our revenues and profitability could decrease. In addition, because our allowances are
based on historical return rates, the introduction of new merchandise categories, new products,
changes in our product mix, or other factors may cause actual returns to exceed return allowances,
perhaps significantly. In addition, any policies intended to reduce the number of product returns
may result in customer dissatisfaction, increased credit card chargeback activity and fewer repeat
customers.
Our ability to offer a broad selection of products at competitive prices is dependent on our
ability to maintain existing and build new relationships with manufacturers and vendors. We do not
have long-term agreements with our manufacturers or vendors and some of our manufacturers and
vendors compete directly with us.
We purchase products for resale both directly from manufacturers and indirectly through
distributors and other sources, all of whom we consider our vendors. We have historically offered
products on our website from more than 1,000 third-party manufacturers. We do not have any
long-term agreements with
any of these vendors. Any agreements with vendors governing our purchase of products are
generally terminable by either party upon 30 days notice or less. In general, we agree to offer
products on our website and the vendors agree to provide us with information about their products
and honor our customer service policies. If we do not maintain relationships with vendors on
acceptable terms, including favorable product pricing and vendor consideration, we may not be able
to offer a broad selection of products or continue to offer products at competitive prices, and
customers may choose not to shop at our website. In addition, some vendors may decide not to offer
particular products for sale on the Internet, and others may avoid offering their new products to
retailers like us who offer a mix of close-out and recertified products in addition to new
products. From time to time, vendors may terminate our right to sell some or all of our products,
change the applicable terms and conditions of sale or reduce or discontinue the incentives or
37
vendor consideration that they offer. Any such termination or the implementation of such changes
could have a negative impact on our operating results. Additionally, some products are subject to
manufacturer or distributor allocation, which limits the number of units of those products that are
available to us and other resellers.
In particular, our business is dependent on sales of Hewlett Packard (HP) and HP-related
products, which represented approximately 51% of eCOSTs net revenues (11% of consolidated net
revenues) in the three months ended March 31, 2007. Sales of these products in the two month
period ended March 31, 2006 were 31% and 6% of eCOSTs net revenues and consolidated net revenues,
respectively. If our ability to purchase direct from HP is terminated or restricted, or if the
demand for HP and HP-related products declines, our business will be materially adversely affected.
We are dependent on the success of our advertising and marketing efforts, which are costly and may
not achieve desired results, and on our ability to attract customers on cost-effective terms.
Our revenues depend on our ability to advertise and market our products effectively. Increases
in the costs of advertising and marketing, including costs of online advertising, paper and postage
costs, costs and fees of third-party service providers and the costs of complying with applicable
regulations, may limit our ability to advertise and market our business without impacting our
profitability. If our advertising and marketing efforts prove ineffective or do not produce a
sufficient level of sales to cover their costs, or if we decrease our advertising or marketing
activities due to increased costs, restrictions enacted by regulatory agencies or for any other
reason, our revenues and profit margins may decrease. Our success depends on our ability to attract
customers on cost-effective terms. We have relationships with online services, search engines,
shopping engines, directories and other websites and e-commerce businesses through which we provide
advertising banners and other links that direct customers to our website. We expect to rely on
these relationships as significant sources of traffic to our website and to generate new customers.
If we are unable to develop or maintain these relationships on acceptable terms, our ability to
attract new customers on a cost-effective basis could be harmed. In addition, certain of our
existing online marketing agreements require us to pay fixed placement fees or fees for directing
visits to our eCOST website, neither of which may convert into sales.
Because we experience seasonal fluctuations in our revenues, our quarterly results may fluctuate.
Our business is moderately seasonal, reflecting the general pattern of peak sales for the
retail industry during the holiday shopping season. Typically, a larger portion of our revenues
occur during the first and fourth fiscal quarters. We believe that our historical revenue growth
makes it difficult to predict the effect of seasonality on our future revenues and results of
operations. In anticipation of increased sales activity during the first and fourth quarter, we
incur additional expenses, including higher inventory and staffing costs. If sales for the first
and fourth quarter do not meet anticipated levels, then increased expenses may not be offset which
could decrease our profitability. If we were to experience lower than expected sales during its
first or fourth quarter, for any reason, it would decrease our profitability.
Our business may be harmed by fraudulent activities on our website.
We have received in the past, and anticipate that we will receive in the future,
communications from customers due to purported fraudulent activities on our eCOST website. Negative
publicity generated as a result of fraudulent conduct by third parties could damage our reputation
and diminish the value of our
brand name. Fraudulent activities on our eCOST website could also subject us to losses. We
expect to continue to receive requests from customers for reimbursement due to purportedly
fraudulent activities or threats of legal action if no reimbursement is made.
If we do not successfully expand our eCOST website and processing systems to accommodate higher
levels of traffic and changing customer demands, we could lose customers and our revenues could
decline.
To remain competitive, we must continue to enhance and improve the functionality and features
of our website. If we fail to upgrade our website in a timely manner to accommodate higher volumes
of traffic, our website performance could suffer and we may lose customers. The Internet and the
e-commerce
38
industry are subject to rapid technological change. If competitors introduce new
features and website enhancements embodying new technologies, or if new industry standards and
practices emerge, our existing eCOST website and systems may become obsolete or unattractive.
Developing our eCOST website and other systems entails significant technical and business risks. We
may face material delays in introducing new services, products and enhancements. If this happens,
customers may forgo the use of our eCOST website and use those of our competitors. We may use new
technologies ineffectively, or we may fail to adapt our website, transaction processing systems and
computer network to meet customer requirements or emerging industry standards.
If we fail to successfully expand our merchandise categories and product offerings in a
cost-effective and timely manner, our reputation and the value of our new and existing brands could
be harmed, customer demand for our products could decline and our profit margins could decrease.
We have generated the substantial majority of our revenues during the past five years from the
sale of computer hardware, software and accessories and consumer electronics products. We launched
several new product categories, including digital imaging, watches and jewelry, housewares, DVD
movies, video games and cellular/wireless. While our merchandising platform has been incorporated
into and tested in the online computer and consumer electronics retail markets, we cannot predict
with certainty whether it can be successfully applied to other product categories. In addition,
expansion of our business strategy into new product categories may require us to incur significant
marketing expenses, develop relationships with new vendors and comply with new regulations. We may
lack the necessary expertise in a new product category to realize the expected benefits of that new
category. These requirements could strain managerial, financial and operational resources.
Additional challenges that may affect our ability to expand into new product categories include our
ability to:
|
|
|
establish or increase awareness of new brands and product categories; |
|
|
|
|
acquire, attract and retain customers at a reasonable cost; |
|
|
|
|
achieve and maintain a critical mass of customers and orders across all product
categories; |
|
|
|
|
attract a sufficient number of new customers to whom new product categories are
targeted; |
|
|
|
|
successfully market new product offerings to existing customers; |
|
|
|
|
maintain or improve gross margins and fulfillment costs; |
|
|
|
|
attract and retain vendors to provide an expanded line of products to customers on
terms that are acceptable; and |
|
|
|
|
manage inventory in new product categories. |
We cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully address any or all of these
challenges in a manner that will enable us to expand our business into new product categories in a
cost-effective or timely manner. If our new categories of products or services are not received
favorably, or if our suppliers fail to meet our customers expectations, our results of operations
would suffer and our reputation and the value of the applicable new brand and other brands could be
damaged. The lack of market acceptance of our new product categories or inability to generate
satisfactory revenues from any expanded product categories to offset our cost could harm our
business.
Credit card fraud could materially adversely affect our business.
We do not currently carry insurance against the risk of credit card fraud, so the failure to
adequately control fraudulent credit card transactions could reduce our revenues and gross margin. We may
suffer losses as a result of orders placed with fraudulent credit card data even though the
associated financial institution approved payment of the orders. Under current credit card
practices, we may be liable for fraudulent credit card transactions because we did not obtain a
cardholders signature. If we are unable to detect or control credit card fraud, or if credit card
companies require more burdensome terms, refuse to accept credit card charges or assess financial
penalties, our business could be materially adversely affected.
If we are unable to provide satisfactory customer service, we could lose customers.
Our ability to provide satisfactory levels of customer service depends, to a large degree, on
the efficient and uninterrupted operation of our customer service operations. Any material
disruption or slowdown in our order processing systems resulting from labor disputes, telephone or
Internet failures, power or service
39
outages, natural disasters or other events could make it
difficult or impossible to provide adequate customer service and support. If we are unable to
continually provide adequate staffing and training for our customer service operations, our
reputation could be seriously harmed and we could lose customers. Because our success depends in
large part on keeping our customers satisfied, any failure to provide high levels of customer
service would likely impair our reputation and decrease our revenues.
We may not be able to compete successfully against existing or future competitors.
The market for online sales of the products we offer is intensely competitive and rapidly
evolving. We principally compete with a variety of online retailers, specialty retailers and other
businesses that offer products similar to or the same as our products. Increased competition is
likely to result in price reductions, reduced revenue and gross margins and loss of market share.
We expect competition to intensify in the future because current and new competitors can enter the
market with little difficulty and can launch new websites at a relatively low cost. In addition,
some of our product vendors have sold, and continue to intensify their efforts to sell, their
products directly to customers. We currently or potentially compete with a variety of businesses,
including:
|
|
|
other multi-category online retailers and liquidation e-tailers; |
|
|
|
|
online discount retailers of computer and consumer electronics merchandise such as
Buy.com, NewEgg and TigerDirect; |
|
|
|
|
consumer electronics and office supply superstores such as Best Buy, Circuit City,
CompUSA, Office Depot, OfficeMax and Staples; and |
|
|
|
|
manufacturers such as Apple, Dell, Gateway, Hewlett-Packard and IBM, that sell directly
to customers. |
Many of the current and potential competitors described above have longer operating histories,
larger customer bases, greater brand recognition and significantly greater financial, marketing and
other resources than we do. In addition, online retailers may be acquired by, receive investments
from or enter into other commercial relationships with larger, well-established and well-financed
companies. Some of our competitors may be able to secure products from manufacturers or vendors on
more favorable terms, devote greater resources to marketing and promotional campaigns, adopt more
aggressive pricing or inventory availability policies and devote substantially more resources to
website and systems development than we are able to.
If the protection of our trademarks and proprietary rights is inadequate, our eCOST brand and
reputation could be impaired and we could lose customers.
We have five trademarks and/or service marks that we consider to be material to the successful
operation of our business: eCOST®, eCOST.com®, eCOST.com Your Online Discount Superstore!, Bargain
Countdown® and Bargain Countdown Platinum Club. We currently use all of these marks in connection
with telephone, mail order, catalog, and online retail services. We also have several additional
pending trademark applications. We rely on trademark and copyright law, trade secret protection and
confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, suppliers and others to protect our
proprietary rights. Our applications may not be granted, and we may not be able to secure
significant protection for
our service marks or trademarks. Our competitors or others could adopt trademarks or service
marks similar to our marks, or try to prevent us from using our marks, thereby impeding our ability
to build brand identity and possibly leading to customer confusion. Any claim by another party
against us for customer confusion caused by use of our trademarks or service marks, or our failure
to obtain registrations for our marks, could negatively affect our competitive position and could
cause us to lose customers.
We have also filed an application with the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office for patent
protection for our proprietary Bargain Countdown(TM) technology. We may not be granted a patent for
this technology and may not be able to enforce our patent rights if our competitors or others use
infringing technology. If this occurs, our competitive position, revenues and profitability could
be negatively affected.
Effective trademark, service mark, patent, copyright and trade secret protection may not be
available in every country in which we will sell our products and offer our services. In addition,
the relationship between regulations governing domain names and laws protecting trademarks and
similar proprietary
40
rights is unclear. Therefore, we may be unable to prevent third parties from
acquiring domain names that are similar to, infringe upon or otherwise decrease the value of our
trademarks and other proprietary rights. If we are unable to protect or preserve the value of our
trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets or other proprietary rights for any reason, our competitive
position could be negatively affected and we could lose customers.
We also rely on technologies that we license from related and third parties. These licenses
may not continue to be available to us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, in the future.
As a result, we may be required to develop or obtain substitute technology of lower quality or at
greater cost, which could negatively affect our competitive position, cause us to lose customers
and decrease our profitability.
If third parties claim we are infringing their intellectual property rights, we could incur
significant litigation costs, be required to pay damages, or change our business or incur licensing
expenses.
Third parties have asserted, and may in the future assert, that our business or the
technologies we use infringe on their intellectual property rights. As a result, we may be subject
to intellectual property legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business. We cannot
predict whether third parties will assert claims of infringement in the future or whether any
future claims will prevent us from offering popular products or services. If we are found to
infringe, we may be required to pay monetary damages, which could include treble damages and
attorneys fees for any infringement that is found to be willful, and either be enjoined or
required to pay ongoing royalties with respect to any technologies found to infringe. Further, as a
result of infringement claims either against us or against those who license technology to us, we
may be required, or deem it advisable, to develop non-infringing technology, which could be costly
and time consuming, or enter into costly royalty or licensing agreements. Such royalty or licensing
agreements, if required, may be unavailable on terms that are acceptable, or at all. If a third
party successfully asserts an infringement claim against us and we are enjoined or required to pay
monetary damages or royalties or we are unable to develop suitable non-infringing alternatives or
license the infringed or similar technology on reasonable terms on a timely basis, our business,
results of operations and financial condition could be materially harmed.
On July 12, 2004, we received correspondence from MercExchange LLC alleging infringement of
its U.S. patents relating to e-commerce and offering to license its patent portfolio to eCOST. On
July 15, 2004, we received a follow-up letter from MercExchange specifying which of eCOSTs
technologies it believes infringe certain of its patents, alone or in combination with technologies
provided by third parties. Some of those patents are currently being litigated by third parties,
and we are not involved in those proceedings. In addition, three of the four patents identified by
MercExchange are under reexamination at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which may or may not
result in the modification of the claims. In the July 15(th) letter, MercExchange also advised that
it has a number of applications pending for additional patents. MercExchange has filed lawsuits
alleging infringement of some or all of its patents against third parties, resulting in settlements
or verdicts in favor of MercExchange. At least one such verdict was appealed to the United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and was affirmed in part. Based on our investigation of
this matter to date, we believe that our current eCOST operations do not infringe any valid claims
of the patents identified by MercExchange in these letters.
We may be liable for misappropriation of our customers personal information.
Data security laws are becoming more stringent in the United States and abroad. Third parties
are engaging in increased cyber attacks against companies doing business on the Internet and
individuals are increasingly subjected to identity and credit card theft on the Internet. If third
parties or unauthorized employees are able to penetrate our network security or otherwise
misappropriate its customers personal information or credit card information, or if we give third
parties or our employees improper access to customers personal information or credit card
information, we could be subject to liability. This liability could include claims for unauthorized
purchases with credit card information, impersonation or other similar fraud claims. This liability
could also include claims for other misuses of personal information, including unauthorized
marketing purposes. Liability for misappropriation of this information could decrease our
profitability. In such circumstances, we also could be liable for failing to provide timely notice
of a data security breach affecting certain types of personal information. In addition, the Federal
Trade Commission and state agencies have brought numerous enforcement actions against Internet
41
companies for alleged deficiencies in those companies privacy and data security practices, and
they may continue to bring such actions. We could incur additional expenses if new regulations
regarding the collection, use or storage of personal information are introduced or if government
agencies investigate our privacy or security practices.
We rely on encryption and authentication technology licensed from third parties to provide the
security and authentication necessary to effect secure transmission of sensitive customer
information such as customer credit card numbers. Advances in computer capabilities, new
discoveries in the field of cryptography or other events or developments may result in a compromise
or breach of the algorithms that we use to protect customer transaction data. If any such
compromise of security were to occur, it could subject us to liability, damage our reputation and
diminish the value of our brand-name. A party who is able to circumvent the security measures could
misappropriate proprietary information or cause interruptions in operations. We may be required to
expend significant capital and other resources to protect against such security breaches or to
alleviate problems caused by such breaches. Our security measures are designed to prevent security
breaches, but our failure to prevent such security breaches could subject us to liability, damage
our reputation and diminish the value of our brand-name.
Moreover, for the convenience of our customers, we provide non-secured channels for customers
to communicate. Despite the increased security risks, customers may use such channels to send
personal information and other sensitive data. In addition, phishing incidents are on the rise.
Phishing involves an online companys customers being tricked into providing their credit card
numbers or account information to someone pretending to be the online companys representative.
Such incidents have recently given rise to litigation against online companies for failing to take
sufficient steps to police against such activities by third parties, and may discourage customers
from using online services.
We may be subject to product liability claims that could be costly and time consuming.
We sell products manufactured and distributed by third parties, some of which may be
defective. If any product that we sell were to cause physical injury or damage to property, the
injured party or parties could bring claims against us as the retailer of the product. Our
insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover every claim that could be asserted. If a successful
claim were brought against us in excess of its insurance coverage, it could expose us to
significant liability. Even unsuccessful claims could result in the expenditure of funds and
management time and could decrease profitability.
If eCOST is unable to generate projected cash flows, it could trigger future impairment charges
related to eCOSTs intangible assets.
The valuation of intangible assets related to eCOST is dependent upon, among other things,
eCOSTs ability to generate projected cash flows for its business. In the event eCOST is unable to
meet such projections, we may be required under current accounting rules to record an impairment
charge in connection with the write-down of such intangibles.
Risks Related to Our eCOST Online Retailer Operating Segments Industry
Additional sales and use taxes could be imposed on past or future sales of our products or other
products sold on our eCOST website, which could adversely affect our revenues and profitability.
In accordance with current industry practice and our interpretation of applicable law, we
collect and remit sales taxes only with respect to physical shipments of goods into states where we
have a physical presence. If any state or other jurisdiction successfully challenges this practice
and imposes sales and use taxes on orders on which we do not collect and remit sales taxes, we
could be exposed to substantial tax liabilities for past sales and could suffer decreased sales in
that state or jurisdiction in the future. In addition, a number of states, as well as the U.S.
Congress, have been considering various legislative initiatives that could result in the imposition
of additional sales and use taxes on Internet sales. If any of these initiatives are enacted, we
could be required to collect sales and use taxes in states where we do not have a physical
presence. Future changes in the operation of our business also could result in the imposition of
additional sales and use tax obligations. The imposition of additional sales and use taxes on past
or future sales could adversely affect our revenues and profitability.
42
Existing or future government regulation could expose us to liabilities and costly changes in our
business operations, and could reduce customer demand for our products.
We are subject to general business regulations and laws, as well as regulations and laws
specifically governing the Internet and e-commerce. Such existing and future laws and regulations
may impede the growth of the Internet or other online services. These regulations and laws may
cover taxation, user privacy, marketing and promotional practices, database protection, pricing,
content, copyrights, distribution, electronic contracts, email and other communications, consumer
protection, product safety, the provision of online payment services, intellectual property rights,
unauthorized access (including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act), and the characteristics and
quality of products and services. It is unclear how existing laws governing issues such as property
ownership, sales and other taxes, libel, trespass, data mining and collection, and personal privacy
apply to the Internet and e-commerce. Unfavorable resolution of these issues may expose us to
liabilities and costly changes in our business operations, and could reduce customer demand. The
growth and demand for online commerce has and may continue to result in more stringent consumer
protection laws that impose additional compliance burdens on online companies. For example,
California law requires notice to California customers if certain personal information about them
is obtained by an unauthorized person, such as a computer hacker. These consumer protection laws
could result in substantial compliance costs and could decrease profitability.
Laws or regulations relating to privacy and data protection may adversely affect the growth of our
eCOST Internet business or our marketing efforts.
We are subject to increasing regulation relating to privacy and the use of personal user
information. For example, we are subject to various telemarketing and anti-spam laws that regulate
the manner in which it may solicit future suppliers and customers. Such regulations, along with
increased governmental or private enforcement, may increase the cost of growing the business. In
addition, several jurisdictions, including California, have adopted legislation limiting the uses
of personal user information gathered online or require online services to establish privacy
policies. Pursuant to the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act, the Federal Trade Commission
has adopted regulations regarding the collection and use of personal identifying information
obtained from children under 13 years of age. Increasingly, federal, state and foreign laws and
regulations extend online privacy protection to adults. Moreover, in jurisdictions where we do
business, there is a trend toward requiring companies to establish procedures to notify users of
privacy and security policies, to obtain prior consent from users for the collection, use and
disclosure of personal information (even disclosure to affiliates), and to provide users with the
ability to access, correct and delete personal information stored by companies. These data
protection regulations and enforcement efforts may restrict our ability to collect, use or transfer
demographic and personal information from users, which could be costly or harm marketing efforts.
Further, any violation of privacy or data protection laws and regulations may subject us to fines,
penalties and damages, as well as harm to our reputation, which could decrease our revenues and
profitability.
Risks Related to Our Stock
The market price of our common stock may be volatile. You may not be able to sell your shares at or
above the price at which you purchased such shares.
The trading price of our common stock may be subject to wide fluctuations in response to
quarter-to-quarter fluctuations in operating results, announcements of material adverse events,
general conditions in our industry or the public marketplace and other events or factors. In
addition, stock markets have experienced extreme price and trading volume volatility in recent
years. This volatility has had a substantial effect on the market prices of securities of many
technology related companies for reasons frequently unrelated to the operating performance of the
specific companies. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of our
common stock. In addition, if our operating results differ from our announced guidance or the
expectations of equity research analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decrease
significantly.
43
Our stock price could decline if a significant number of shares become available for sale.
As of March 31, 2007, we had issued and outstanding 601,190 warrants to purchase common stock
(having a weighted average exercise price of $2.29 per share). In addition, as of March 31, 2007,
we have an aggregate of 5,873,728 stock options outstanding to employees, directors and others with
a weighted average exercise price of $1.27 per share. The shares of common stock that may be issued
upon exercise of these warrants and options may be resold into the public market. Sales of
substantial amounts of common stock in the public market as a result of the exercise of these
warrants or options, or the perception that future sales of these shares could occur, could reduce
the market price of our common stock and make it more difficult to sell equity securities in the
future.
Our common stock could be delisted from the Nasdaq Capital Market which would cause us to become
ineligible to use Form S-3 for the registration of the resale of our securities held by certain of
our security holders.
Historically, the price of our common stock has traded below $1.00 per share. If the price of
our common stock declines below $1.00 per share for 30 consecutive trading days, we may fail to
meet Nasdaqs maintenance criteria, which may result in the delisting of our common stock from the
Nasdaq Capital Market.
In the event of such delisting, trading, if any, in our common stock may then continue to be
conducted in the non-Nasdaq over-the-counter market in what are commonly referred to as the
electronic bulletin board and the pink sheets. As a result, an investor may find it more
difficult to dispose of or obtain accurate quotations as to the market value of our common stock.
In addition, we would be subject to a Rule promulgated by the SEC that, if we fail to meet criteria
set forth in such Rule, imposes various practice requirements on broker-dealers who sell securities
governed by the Rule to persons other than established customers and accredited investors. For
these types of transactions, the broker-dealer must make a special suitability determination for
the purchaser and have received the purchasers written consent to the transactions prior to the
sale. Consequently, the Rule may have a material adverse effect on the ability of broker-dealers to
sell our securities, which may materially affect the ability of shareholders to sell our securities
in the secondary market.
A delisting from the Nasdaq Capital Market will also make us ineligible to use Form S-3 to
register the sale of shares of our common stock or to register the resale of our securities held by
certain of our security holders with the SEC, thereby making it more difficult and expensive for us
to register our common stock or other securities and raise additional capital. We are a party to
certain registration rights agreements, which require us to maintain the effectiveness of
registration statements relating to the resale of shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of outstanding warrants. If we are ineligible to use Form S-3, we will need to file new
registration statements on some other permitted Form and maintaining the effectiveness of such
registration statements may be more difficult, expensive and time-consuming.
Our certificate of incorporation, our bylaws, our shareholder rights plan and Delaware law make it
difficult for a third party to acquire us, despite the possible benefit to our shareholders.
Provisions of our certificate of incorporation, our bylaws, our shareholder rights plan and
Delaware law could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so would
be beneficial to our shareholders. For example, our certificate of incorporation provides for a
classified board of directors, meaning that only approximately one-third of our directors may be
subject to re-election at each annual stockholder meeting. Our certificate of incorporation also
permits our Board of Directors to issue one or more series of preferred stock, which may have
rights and preferences superior to those of the common stock. The ability to issue preferred stock
could have the effect of delaying or preventing a third party from acquiring us. We have also
adopted a shareholder rights plan. These provisions could discourage takeover attempts and could
materially adversely affect the price of our stock. In addition, because we are incorporated in
Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law,
which may prohibit large shareholders from consummating a merger with, or acquisition of us. These
provisions may prevent a merger or acquisition that would be attractive to shareholders and could
limit the price that investors would be willing to pay in the future for our common stock.
44
There are limitations on the liabilities of our directors and executive officers.
Pursuant to our bylaws and under Delaware law, our directors are not liable to us or our
shareholders for monetary damages for breach of fiduciary duty, except for liability for breach of
a directors duty of loyalty, acts or omissions by a director not in good faith or which involve
intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law, or any transaction in which a director has
derived an improper personal benefit.
ITEM 2. Changes in Securities and Use of Proceeds
None
ITEM 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
None
ITEM 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
None
ITEM 5. Other Information
None.
ITEM 6. Exhibits
a) Exhibits:
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
No. |
|
Description of Exhibits |
3.1(1)
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation |
|
|
|
3.2(1)
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws |
|
|
|
10.1.1 (2)
|
|
PFSweb, Inc. 2007 Management Bonus Plan. |
|
|
|
10.74 (2)
|
|
Fifth Amended and Restated Notes Payable Subordination
Agreement by and between Priority Fulfillment Services, Inc.,
Supplies Distributors, Inc. and IBM Credit Corporation. |
|
|
|
10.75 (2)
|
|
Amendment 8 to Agreement for Inventory Financing. |
|
|
|
10.76 (2)
|
|
Fourth Amendment to the Loan and Security Agreement by and
between eCOST.com, Inc. and Wachovia Capital Finance
Corporation (Western). |
|
|
|
10.77 (2)
|
|
Amendment 5 to Loan and Security Agreement. |
|
|
|
10.78 (2)
|
|
Amendment 7 to Amended and Restated Platinum Plan Agreement. |
|
|
|
10.79 (2)
|
|
Agreement for IBM Global Financing Platinum Plan Invoice
Discounting Schedule. |
|
|
|
10.80*
|
|
Fifth Amendment to First Amended and Restated Loan and Security
Agreement by and between Comerica Bank and Priority Fulfillment
Services, Inc. |
|
|
|
31.1*
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
31.2*
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
32.1*
|
|
Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference from PFSweb, Inc. Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Commission
File No. 333-87657) and Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2005
filed on March 31, 2006. |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by reference from PFSweb, Inc. Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. |
|
* |
|
Filed herewith |
45
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
Date: May 15, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
PFSweb, Inc.
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Thomas J. Madden
|
|
|
|
Thomas J. Madden |
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer,
Chief Accounting Officer,
Executive Vice President |
|
46
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
No. |
|
Description of Exhibits |
3.1(1)
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation |
|
|
|
3.2(1)
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws |
|
|
|
10.1.1 (2)
|
|
PFSweb, Inc. 2007 Management Bonus Plan. |
|
|
|
10.74 (2)
|
|
Fifth Amended and Restated Notes Payable Subordination
Agreement by and between Priority Fulfillment Services, Inc.,
Supplies Distributors, Inc. and IBM Credit Corporation. |
|
|
|
10.75 (2)
|
|
Amendment 8 to Agreement for Inventory Financing. |
|
|
|
10.76 (2)
|
|
Fourth Amendment to the Loan and Security Agreement by and
between eCOST.com, Inc. and Wachovia Capital Finance
Corporation (Western). |
|
|
|
10.77 (2)
|
|
Amendment 5 to Loan and Security Agreement. |
|
|
|
10.78 (2)
|
|
Amendment 7 to Amended and Restated Platinum Plan Agreement. |
|
|
|
10.79 (2)
|
|
Agreement for IBM Global Financing Platinum Plan Invoice
Discounting Schedule. |
|
|
|
10.80*
|
|
Fifth Amendment to First Amended and Restated Loan and Security
Agreement by and between Comerica Bank and Priority Fulfillment
Services, Inc. |
|
|
|
31.1*
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
31.2*
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
32.1*
|
|
Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference from PFSweb, Inc. Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Commission
File No. 333-87657) and Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Fiscal Year ended December 31,
2005 filed on March 31, 2006. |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by reference from PFSweb, Inc. Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. |
|
* |
|
Filed herewith |
47
exv10w80
Exhibit 10.80
FIFTH AMENDMENT TO FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED
LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT
THIS FIFTH AMENDMENT TO FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT (herein called
this Amendment) made as of the 2nd day of April, 2007 by and between Priority Fulfillment
Services, Inc. (Borrower) and Comerica Bank (Bank),
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Borrower and Bank have entered into that certain First Amended and Restated Loan and
Security Agreement dated as of December 29, 2004 (as from time to time amended or modified, the
Original Agreement) for the purposes and consideration therein expressed, pursuant to which Bank
became obligated to make loans to Borrower as therein provided; and
WHEREAS, Borrower and Bank desire to amend the Original Agreement to provide for term loans
and for the other purposes set forth herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreements
contained herein and in the Original Agreement, in consideration of the loans which may hereafter
be made by Bank to Borrower, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows:
ARTICLE I.
Definitions and References
1.1 Terms Defined in the Original Agreement. Unless the context otherwise requires
or unless otherwise expressly defined herein, the terms defined in the Original Agreement shall
have the same meanings whenever used in this Amendment.
1.2. Other Defined Terms. Unless the context otherwise requires, the following
terms when used in this Amendment shall have the meanings assigned to
them in this 1.2.
Amendment means this Fifth Amendment to First Amended and Restated Loan and
Security Agreement.
Loan Agreement means the Original Agreement as amended hereby.
ARTICLE II.
Amendments to Original Agreement
2.1 Defined Terms.
(a) The definition of Committed Revolving Line in Exhibit A to the Original Agreement is
hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
Committed Revolving Line means (a) before the occurrence of the SD Transfer, a Credit
Extension of up to $7,500,000 (inclusive of any amounts outstanding under the Letter of
Credit Sublimit), and (b) at all times after the occurrence of the SD Transfer, a Credit
Extension of up to $10,000,000 (inclusive of any amounts outstanding under the Letter of
Credit Sublimit).
(b) The definition of SD Transfer is added to Exhibit A to the Original Agreement as
follows:
SD Transfer means the receipt by Borrower from Supplies Distributor, Inc. of cash funds
after March 29, 2007, to the satisfaction of the Bank.
(c) Clauses (i), (j), (n) and (o) of the definition of Permitted Indebtedness in Exhibit A
to the Original Agreement are hereby amended in their entirety to read as follows:
(i) Intentionally deleted.
(j) Intentionally deleted.
(n) Indebtedness of eCost.com owing to Borrower for working capital needs of
eCost.com, provided that:
|
(i) |
|
the aggregate outstanding principal amount of loans
made by Borrower to eCost.com shall not exceed $6,500,000 before the
occurrence of the SD Transfer and, at all times thereafter, increased by: |
|
(A) |
|
one half of the amount of the SD Transfers up
to $1,600,000 (which shall result in up to an $800,000 increase); and |
|
|
(B) |
|
an amount equal to the SD Transfers in excess
of $1,600,000; provided, however, such aggregate increases in subsections (A) and (B) shall
never exceed $2,000,000; |
|
(ii) |
|
at the time of incurrence of such Indebtedness and
after giving effect thereto, no Event of Default has occurred and is
continuing; |
|
|
(iii) |
|
the aggregate outstanding amount of Indebtedness
incurred by eCost.com pursuant to this clause (n) when added to the
aggregate amount of Investments made by Borrower pursuant to clause (p) of
the definition of Permitted Investments and the aggregate amount of
Permitted
Distributions does not exceed $6,500,000 before the occurrence of the SD
Transfer and, at all times thereafter, increased by: |
2
|
(A) |
|
one half of the amount of the SD Transfers up to $1,600,000 (which shall
result in up to an $800,000 increase); and |
|
|
(B) |
|
an amount equal to the SD Transfers in excess
of $1,600,000; provided, however, such aggregate increases in subsections (A) and (B)
shall never exceed $2,000,000; and |
|
(iv) |
|
indebtedness incurred in the ordinary course of
business between Borrower and eCost.com shall not constitute
Indebtedness. |
(o) Intentionally deleted.
(d) Clauses (f), (g), (h) and (p) of the definition of Permitted Investment in Exhibit A to
the Original Agreement are hereby amended in their entirety to read as follows:
(f) Investments by Borrower
|
(i) |
|
in or advances to SPRL PFSweb B.V., Priority
Fulfillment Services of Canada, Inc. and eCost Philippine Services LLC, and |
|
|
(ii) |
|
in PFSM, LLC for the acquisition of equipment by PFSM,
LLC, provided each such Investment does not exceed the lesser of the cost
or fair market value of the equipment acquired with such Investment, |
provided, the aggregate amount of all Investments made pursuant to this clause
(f) does not exceed $2,200,000 in any fiscal year, and at the time of each such
Investment and after giving effect thereto, no Event of Default has occurred and
is continuing.
(g) Intentionally deleted.
(h) Intentionally deleted.
(p) Investments by Borrower in eCost.com for working capital needs of eCost.com,
provided that:
|
(i) |
|
the aggregate amount of Investments made by Borrower
in eCost.com shall not exceed $6,500,000 before the occurrence of the SD
Transfer and, at all times thereafter, increased by: |
|
(A) |
|
one half of the amount of the SD Transfers up to
$1,600,000 (which shall result in up to an $800,000 increase); and |
|
|
(B) |
|
an amount equal to the SD Transfers in excess of
$1,600,000;
provided, however, such aggregate increases in subsections (A) and (B)
shall never exceed $2,000,000; |
|
(ii) |
|
at the time of such Investment and after giving effect
thereto, no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing, and |
|
|
(iii) |
|
the aggregate amount of Investments made pursuant to
this clause (p) when added to the aggregate outstanding amount of
Indebtedness incurred |
3
|
|
|
by eCost.com pursuant to clause (n) of the definition of
Permitted Indebtedness and the aggregate amount of Permitted Distributions
does not exceed $6,500,000 before the occurrence of the SD Transfer and, at
all times thereafter, increased by: |
|
(A) |
|
one half of the amount of the SD Transfers up to
$1,600,000 (which shall result in up to an $800,000 increase); and |
|
|
(B) |
|
an amount equal to the SD Transfers in excess of
$1,600,000;
provided, however, such aggregate increases in subsections (A) and (B)
shall never exceed $2,000,000. |
(e) Capital Expenditures. Section 7.12 of the Original Agreement is hereby amended in
its entirety to read as follows:
7.12 Capital Expenditures. Make capital expenditures in an aggregate amount
greater than (i) $4,000,000 in any fiscal year (other than 2007), (ii) $5,250,000 in
fiscal year 2007; provided that not less than $3,250,000 of capital expenditures
made by Borrower in fiscal year 2007 shall be financed with Indebtedness from third
parties. As used herein, the term capital expenditures does not include (i) any
software that is internally developed by Borrower, whether or not Borrower
capitalized the development costs, and (ii) any equipment ordered, but not yet
accepted or paid for, by Borrower.
2.2 Consolidated Covenant Compliance. The due dates for the consolidating reports
due for the calendar months of December 31, 2006 and January 31, 2007 under Sub-Sections 6.2(a),
(b) and (c) of the Original Agreement are hereby extended to April 2, 2007.
2.3 Financial Covenants.
(a) Liquidity Ratio. Section 6.7(a) of the Original Agreement is hereby amended in
its entirety to read as follows:
(a) Liquidity Ratio. A ratio of Cash (including all Cash held in a sinking
fund with Bank for repayment of the Bonds) plus Eligible Accounts to the remainder of (i)
all Indebtedness to Bank minus (ii) $2,000,000 of at least 1.25 to 1.00.
(b) Minimum Cash. Section 6.7(b) of the Original Agreement is hereby amended in its
entirety to read as follows:
(b) Intentionally deleted.
(c) EBITDA. Section 6.7(d) of the Original Agreement is hereby amended in its
entirety to read as follows:
(d) EBITDA. For each month ending after January 2007, the variance, if
negative, then expressed as a positive number, between Borrowers EBITDA and the EBITDA set
forth in the Approved Projections for such period, (a) for any period ending
4
\
on or before June 30, 2007, for the six consecutive month period ending on the date of
calculation shall not exceed $1,000,000, and (b) for the period beginning January 2007 and
ending on the following dates of calculation shall not exceed $1,100,000 for the period
ending July 31, 2007, $1,200,000 for the period ending August 31, 2007, $1,300,000 for the
period ending September 30, 2007, and $1,400,000 for the period ending October 31, 2007, and
(c) thereafter for the twelve consecutive month period ending on the date of calculation
shall not exceed $1,500,000. As used herein, EBITDA shall mean, for any period of
calculation, Borrowers earnings for such period before interest and taxes plus
depreciation, amortization and non-cash stock compensation accruals to the extent deducted
in the calculation of such earnings. Approved Projections means for any period of time,
the projections for such period that have been approved by Borrowers Board of directors and
delivered to Bank. Borrower shall deliver to Bank (i) a preliminary draft of the
projections for the next fiscal year of Borrower by January 31 of each year and (ii) the
updated projections approved by Borrowers Board of Directors for the next fiscal year not
later than February 28 of each year.
2.4 Exhibits. Exhibits D and E to the Original Agreement are hereby amended in
their entirety to read as set forth on Exhibits D and E attached hereto.
ARTICLE III.
Conditions of Effectiveness
3.1. Effective Date. This Amendment shall become effective as of the date first
above written when and only when Bank shall have received, at Banks office, (a) a counterpart of
this Amendment executed and delivered by Borrower and (b) an amendment fee paid in good and
immediately available funds in the amount of $13,500.00, which fee shall be fully earned on the
date hereof.
ARTICLE IV.
Representations and Warranties
4.1. Representations and Warranties of Borrower. In order to induce Bank to enter
into this Amendment, Borrower represents and warrants to Bank that:
(a) The representations and warranties contained in Article 5 of the Original Agreement
are true and correct at and as of the time of the effectiveness hereof; provided Bank
acknowledges that Borrower has heretofore given written notice to Bank of the matters set
forth in Schedule 1 attached hereto.
(b) Borrower is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Amendment and is and will
continue to be duly authorized to borrow and to perform its obligations under the Loan
Agreement. Borrower has duly taken all corporate action necessary to authorize the
5
execution and delivery of this Amendment and to authorize the performance of the
obligations of Borrower hereunder.
(c) The execution and delivery by Borrower of this Amendment, the performance by
Borrower of its obligations hereunder and the consummation of the transactions contemplated
hereby do not and will not conflict with any provision of law, statute, rule or regulation
or of the organizational documents of Borrower, or of any material agreement, judgment,
license, order or permit applicable to or binding upon Borrower, or result in the creation
of any lien, charge or encumbrance upon any assets or properties of Borrower. Except for
those which have been duly obtained, no consent, approval, authorization or order of any
court or governmental authority or third party is required in connection with the execution
and delivery by Borrower of this Amendment or to consummate the transactions contemplated
hereby.
(d) When duly executed and delivered, each of this Amendment and the Loan Agreement
will be a legal and binding instrument and agreement of Borrower, enforceable in accordance
with its terms, except as limited by bankruptcy, insolvency and similar laws applying to
creditors rights generally and by principles of equity applying to creditors rights
generally.
ARTICLE V
Miscellaneous
5.1. Ratification of Agreements. The Original Agreement as hereby amended is
hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects. Any reference to the Loan Agreement in any Loan
Document shall be deemed to be a reference to the Original Agreement as hereby amended. The
execution, delivery and effectiveness of this Amendment shall not, except as expressly provided
herein, operate as a waiver of any right, power or remedy of Bank under the Loan Agreement or any
other Loan Document nor constitute a waiver of any provision of the Loan Agreement or any other
Loan Document.
5.2. Survival of Agreements. All representations, warranties, covenants and
agreements of Borrower herein shall survive the execution and delivery of this Amendment and the
performance hereof, including without limitation the making or granting of the Advances, and shall
further survive until all of the Obligations are paid in full. All statements and agreements
contained in any certificate or instrument delivered by Borrower hereunder or under the Loan
Agreement to Bank shall be deemed to constitute representations and warranties by, or agreements
and covenants of, Borrower under this Amendment and under the Loan Agreement.
5.3. Loan Documents. This Amendment is a Loan Document, and all provisions in the
Loan Agreement pertaining to Loan Documents apply hereto.
5.4. Governing Law. This Amendment shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of California and any applicable laws of the United States of
America in all respects, including construction, validity and performance.
6
5.5. Counterparts. This Amendment may be separately executed in counterparts and
by the different parties hereto in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be
deemed to constitute one and the same Amendment.
THIS AMENDMENT AND THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS REPRESENT THE FINAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES
AND MAY NOT BE CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR, CONTEMPORANEOUS, OR SUBSEQUENT ORAL AGREEMENTS OF
THE PARTIES. THERE ARE NO UNWRITTEN ORAL AGREEMENTS OF THE PARTIES.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment is executed as of the date first above written.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PRIORITY FULFILLMENT SERVICES, INC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name: |
|
|
|
|
Title: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMERICA BANK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name: |
|
|
|
|
Title: |
7
CONSENT AND AGREEMENT
PFSWEB, INC., a Delaware corporation, hereby consents to the provisions of this Amendment and
the transactions contemplated herein, and hereby ratifies and confirms the Guaranty dated as of
December 29, 2004, made by it for the benefit of Bank, and agrees that its obligations and
covenants thereunder are unimpaired hereby and shall remain in full force and effect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PFSWEB, INC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name: |
|
|
|
|
Title: |
Consent and Agreement
EXHIBIT D
BORROWING BASE CERTIFICATE
|
|
|
Borrower: Priority Fulfillment Services, Inc.
|
|
Lender: Comerica Bank |
|
|
|
Commitment Amount: $7,500,000 prior to SD Transfer; $10,000,000 at all times thereafter. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Accounts
Receivable Book Value as of _________ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Additions (please explain on reverse) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. TOTAL ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE DEDUCTIONS (without duplication) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Amounts over 90 days due |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. Balance of 25% over 90 day accounts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. Concentration Limits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. Foreign Accounts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8. Governmental Accounts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. Contra Accounts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10. Demo Accounts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11. Intercompany/Employee Accounts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12. Credit Card Accounts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13. Other (please explain on reverse) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14. TOTAL ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE DEDUCTIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15. Eligible Accounts (#3 minus #14) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16. LOAN VALUE OF ACCOUNTS (80% of #15) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17. Minus Reserve Amount |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18. Borrowing Base (#16 minus #17) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19. Maximum Loan Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
$[7,500,000] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[10,000,000] |
|
|
20. Total Funds Available [Lesser of #19 or #18] |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21. Present balance owing on Line of Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22. Outstanding under Sublimit (Letters of Credit) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23. RESERVE POSITION (#20 minus #21 and #22) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The undersigned represents and warrants that the foregoing is true, complete and correct in
all material respects, and that the information reflected in this Borrowing Base Certificate
complies with the representations and warranties set forth in the First Amended and Restated
Loan and Security Agreement between the undersigned and Comerica Bank.
PRIORITY FULFILLMENT SERVICES, INC.
Exhibit D
EXHIBIT E
COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
TO: COMERICA BANK
FROM: PRIORITY FULFILLMENT SERVICES, INC.
The undersigned authorized officer of PRIORITY FULFILLMENT SERVICES, INC. hereby certifies that in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the First Amended and Restated Loan and Security
Agreement between Borrower and Bank (the Agreement) as amended, (i) Borrower is in complete
compliance for the period ending with all required covenants, including without
limitation the ongoing registration of intellectual property rights in accordance with Section 6.8,
except as noted below and (ii) all representations and warranties of Borrower stated in the
Agreement are true and correct in all material respects as of the date hereof. Attached herewith
are the required documents supporting the above certification. The Officer further certifies that
these are prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and are
consistently applied from one period to the next except as explained in an accompanying letter or
footnotes.
Please indicate compliance status by circling Yes/No under Complies column.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reporting Covenant |
|
Required |
|
|
|
Complies |
|
|
|
|
Monthly financial statements |
|
Monthly within 45 days |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
Annual (CPA Audited) of Guarantor |
|
FYE within 90 days |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
Annual (CPA Audited) of BSD |
|
FYE within 90 days |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
10K of Guarantor |
|
FYE within 90 days |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
10Q of Guarantor |
|
Quarterly within 45 days |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
A/R & A/P Agings, Borrowing Base Cert. |
|
Monthly within 30 days* |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
A/R Audit |
|
Annual |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
IP Report |
|
Quarterly within 30 days |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible Net Worth |
|
$21,000,000 |
|
$ |
|
Yes |
|
No |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*Weekly during any period that |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible Net Worth is less than |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$21,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Covenant |
|
Required |
|
Actual |
|
Complies |
|
|
|
|
Maintain on a Monthly Basis: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidity Ratio
|
|
1.25:1.00
|
|
|
___:1.00 |
|
|
Yes
|
|
No |
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
See Section 6.7(d)
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Yes
|
|
No |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum Tangible Net Worth
|
|
> of $20,000,000 or $2,000,000 plus
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Yes
|
|
No |
|
|
|
|
IBM
et al requirement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments Regarding Exceptions: See Attached.
Sincerely,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BANK USE ONLY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Received by: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AUTHORIZED SIGNER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verified: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AUTHORIZED SIGNER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compliance Status |
|
Yes |
|
No |
Schedule 1
Exhibit E
Litigation
During 2004 the Company received notice from a municipal authority that it did not satisfy
certain criteria necessary to maintain certain tax abatements. In December 2006 the Company
received notice that the municipal authority planned to make an adjustment to certain tax
abatements. The Company plans to dispute the adjustment, but if the dispute is not resolved
favorably, the Company could be assessed additional taxes from January 1, 2004. The Company has
not accrued for the additional taxes, which through December 31, 2006 could be approximately
$1.5 million, as the Company does not believe that it is probable that an additional assessment
will be incurred.
On May 9, 2005, a lawsuit was filed in the District Court of Collin County, Texas, by J. Gregg
Pritchard, as Trustee of the D.I.C. Creditors Trust, naming the former directors of Daisytek
International Corporation and the Company as defendants. Daisytek filed for bankruptcy in May 2003
and the Trust was created pursuant to Daisyteks Plan of Liquidation. The complaint alleges, among
other things, that the spin-off of the Company from Daisytek in December 1999 was a fraudulent
conveyance and that Daisytek was damaged thereby in the amount of at least $38 million. The Company
believes the claim has no merit and intends to vigorously defend the action. Through December 31,
2006, the Company has incurred outstanding legal costs of $0.3 million that have not been paid as
the Company expects such costs to be covered by insurance.
On August 24, 2006, a lawsuit was filed in the Chancery Court of Davidson County, Tennessee,
by ClientLogic Corp. alleging, among other things, that the Company breached its obligations under
a Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreement. The complaint sought injunctive relief and damages
in an unspecified amount. In January 2007 the lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.
On July 12, 2004, eCOST received correspondence from MercExchange LLC alleging infringement of
MercExchanges U.S. patents relating to e-commerce and offering to license its patent portfolio
to eCOST. On July 15, 2004, eCOST received a follow-up letter from MercExchange specifying which
of its technologies MercExchange believed infringed certain of its patents, alone or in
combination with technologies provided by third parties. Some of those patents are currently
being litigated by third parties, and eCOST is not involved in those proceedings. In addition,
three of the four patents identified by MercExchange are under reexamination at the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office, which may or may not result in the modification of those claims. In the
July 15 letter, MercExchange also advised eCOST that it has a number of applications pending for
additional patents. MercExchange has filed lawsuits alleging infringement of some or all of its
patents against third parties, resulting in settlements or verdicts in favor of MercExchange. At
least one such verdict was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit and was affirmed in part. Based on eCOSTs investigation of this matter to date, eCOST
believes that its current operations do not infringe any valid claims of the patents identified
by MercExchange in these letters. There can be no assurance, however, that such claims will
not be material or adversely affect eCOSTs business, financial position, results of operations
or cash flows.
eCOST received a letter dated March 15, 2007 alleging patent infringement, copyright
infringement,
trademark infringement, among other claims, against the Bose Corporation by offering Bose
product for sale on www.ecost.com. The Company has responded that it strongly disagrees with the
claims made and
Exhibit E
thus denies any liability in connection with any of the claims and allegations. Further, eCOST
notified Bose that eCOST purchased a total of forty units of Bose Sounddock product from an
entity whom eCOST believed to be an authorized source for such products. eCOST then resold these
units and has no remaining inventory. eCOST has removed any references to the Bose Sounddock
product from its website.
The Company has received correspondence from the Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, of
the State of Tamilnadu India Police Department alleging that the Company contracted with an
individual as a consultant. The correspondence further alleges that this consultant then entered
into outsourcing agreements with local businesses on behalf of the Company, yet the Company has
failed to honor the agreements. The Company has responded that it has no knowledge of the
outsourcing agreements nor has it contracted with anyone in India to represent the Company in
any capacity. Accordingly, the Company does not believe the claim has any merit.
On March 29, 2007, the Company received correspondence from a party investigating possible wrong
doings by a former employee and alleged current consulting partner. The possible wrong doings
involve possible tax fraud in Belgium and abuse of confidential business data. The Company has
responded and does not believe the claim has any merit as it does not have a current
relationship with the named consulting partner, and hasnt for approximately 3 years.
No Material Adverse Change in Financial Statements
During the Companys annual analysis of the carrying value of intangible assets, pursuant to
Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, the
Company determined that the carrying value of goodwill exceeded the fair value, which resulted in a
$3.5 million non-cash write-off of goodwill during the fourth quarter of 2006
Exhibit E
exv31w1
EXHIBIT 31.1
CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
I, Mark Layton, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of PFSweb, 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 periods 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 operation
and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
the registrant and have:
a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
b) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and |
c) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting. |
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 registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
Date:
|
|
May 15, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By:
|
|
/s/ Mark C. Layton |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
48
exv31w2
EXHIBIT 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
I, Tom Madden, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of PFSweb, 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 periods 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 operation
and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
the registrant and have:
a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
b) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and |
c) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting. |
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 registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
Date:
|
|
May 15, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By:
|
|
/s/ Thomas J. Madden |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
49
exv32w1
EXHIBIT 32.1
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section
1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of PFSweb, Inc.
(the Company), does hereby certify that:
The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the Form 10-Q) of the
Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and
for, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.
|
|
|
|
|
May 15, 2007
|
|
/s/ Mark C. Layton
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark C. Layton |
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 15, 2007
|
|
/s/ Thomas J. Madden |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas J. Madden |
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q pursuant to Item
601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being
filed as part of the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language
in such filing.
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to PFSweb,
Inc. and will be retained by PFSweb, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
50