e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2008
|
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:
000-28820
JONES SODA CO.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Washington
|
|
91-1696175
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
234 Ninth Avenue North
Seattle, WA 98109
(Address of principal executive
offices)
(206) 624-3357
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock, no par value
|
|
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by checkmark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned
issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by checkmark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
(§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein,
and will not be contained, to the best of registrants
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in Rule
12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated
filer o
|
Accelerated
filer þ
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
|
Smaller
reporting
company o
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the
Act). Yes o No þ
As of the last business day of the second fiscal quarter,
June 30, 2008, the aggregate market value of such common
stock held by non-affiliates was approximately $84,860,888 using
the closing price on that day of $3.22.
As of March 6, 2009, there were 26,454,391 shares of
the Companys common stock issued and outstanding.
Documents
Incorporated By Reference:
The information required by Part III of this Report, to the
extent not set forth herein, is incorporated in this Report by
reference to the Companys definitive proxy statement
relating to its 2009 annual meeting of shareholders. The
definitive proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the
2008 fiscal year.
EXPLANATORY
NOTE
Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires,
all references in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
to we, us, our,
Jones, Jones Soda, and the
Company are to Jones Soda
Co.®,
a Washington corporation, and our wholly-owned subsidiaries
Jones Soda Co. (USA) Inc., Jones Soda (Canada) Inc., myJones.com
Inc. and Whoopass USA Inc.
In addition, unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise
requires, all references in this Annual Report to Jones
Soda and Jones Pure Cane Soda refer
to our premium soda sold under the trademarked brand name
Jones Soda Co.
CAUTIONARY
NOTICE REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
We desire to take advantage of the safe harbor
provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995. This Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(Report) and the documents incorporated herein by reference
contain a number of forward-looking statements that reflect
managements current views and expectations with respect to
our business, strategies, products, future results and events
and financial performance. All statements made in this Report
other than statements of historical fact, including statements
that address operating performance, the economy, events or
developments that management expects or anticipates will or may
occur in the future, including statements related to distributor
channels, volume growth, revenues, profitability, new products,
adequacy of funds from operations, cash flows and financing,
statements expressing general optimism about future operating
results and non-historical information, are forward-looking
statements. In particular, the words such as
believe, expect, intend,
anticipate, estimate, may,
will, should, plan,
predict, could, future,
target, variations of such words, and similar
expressions identify forward-looking statements, but are not the
exclusive means of identifying such statements and their absence
does not mean that the statement is not forward-looking.
Readers should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements, which are based on managements current
expectations and projections about future events, are not
guarantees of future performance, are subject to risks,
uncertainties and assumptions and apply only as of the date of
this Report. Our actual results, performance or achievements
could differ materially from historical results as well the
results expressed in, anticipated or implied by these
forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we
undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any
forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new
information, future events or otherwise.
For a discussion of some of the factors that may affect our
business, results and prospects, see Item 1A. Risk
Factors. Readers are urged to carefully review and
consider the various
disclosures made by us in this Report and in our other reports
we file with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, including our periodic reports on
Forms 10-Q
and 8-K, and
those described from
time to time in our press releases and other communications,
which attempt to advise interested
parties of the risks and factors that may affect our business,
prospects and results of operations.
JONES
SODA CO.
ANNUAL
REPORT ON
FORM 10-K
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008
Table of
Contents
PART I
Overview
We develop, produce, market and distribute a range of premium
beverages. With the addition of Jones
GABAtm
in the first quarter of 2009, our premium beverages include the
following six brands:
|
|
|
|
|
Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm,
a premium carbonated soft drink;
|
|
|
|
Jones
24Ctm,
an enhanced water beverage;
|
|
|
|
Jones
GABAtm,
a functional tea juice blend;
|
|
|
|
Jones
Organicstm,
a
ready-to-drink
organic tea;
|
|
|
|
Jones
Naturals®,
a non-carbonated juice & tea; and
|
|
|
|
Whoop Ass Energy
Drink®,
a citrus energy drink.
|
We sell and distribute our products primarily throughout the
United States (U.S.) and Canada through our network of
independent distributors, which we refer to as our direct store
delivery (DSD) channel, national retail accounts, which we refer
to as our direct to retail (DTR) channel, as well as through
licensing and distribution arrangements. We also sell various
products on-line which we refer to as our interactive channel
and sell soda with customized labels, wearables, candy and other
items. In addition we are expanding our international business
outside of North America and have entered the markets of
Ireland, the United Kingdom (UK) and Australia through
independent distributors.
Our company is a Washington corporation formed in 2000 as a
successor to Urban Juice and Soda Company Ltd., a Canadian
company formed in 1987. Our principal place of business is
located at 234 Ninth Avenue North, Seattle, Washington 98109.
Our telephone number is
(206) 624-3357.
Segment
Information
The Company operates in one reportable segment with operations
primarily in the United States and Canada. Refer to Note 12
to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8
of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(Report).
Products
Our six beverage brands include the following:
Jones
Pure Cane
Sodatm
In November 1995, we launched Jones Soda, a premium
carbonated soft drink, under our trademarked brand creating a
new category in the New Age beverage market (see Industry
Background below for a description of the New Age market).
Jones Soda comes in 12-ounce, clear long-neck bottles,
and every bottle label carries a photo sent to us by our
consumers. Over 1,000,000 photos have been submitted to us,
mostly via the internet through a patented process which is
owned by Jones Soda Co. This unique interaction between the
consumer and the brand creates a distinguishable point of
difference and strong competitive advantage for Jones
Soda. Equally differentiating is the bright colorful look of
our drinks with distinctive names such as Fu Fu Berry and Blue
Bubble Gum. Jones Soda is made with the highest quality
ingredients and flavors. We currently sell Jones Soda in
twelve flavors.
In 2003, we launched a sugar-free version of our Jones Soda
line. These sugar-free sodas are sweetened with
Splenda®
and have zero calories and zero carbohydrates. We believe that
the launch of our sugar-free Jones Soda provides an
alternative for consumers to our regular Jones Soda line
and is an important product extension, especially in light of
the recent concern and media coverage regarding obesity in young
people. We currently have three flavors of sugar-free Jones
Soda.
1
In 2004, we expanded the Jones Soda package lineup to
include 12-ounce cans which are available in both 8 and 12 pack
varieties. Jones Soda multi-packs are available
nationally primarily through the grocery channel and are
produced and distributed by National Beverage Corp. (National
Beverage). We believe our can business provides our customers
with an alternative method of consuming our premium soda and
allows for Jones Soda consumption on more usage occasions
throughout the year.
In keeping with our commitment to produce the highest quality
beverage, in the second quarter of 2007, we launched Jones
Pure Cane Soda by converting our sweetener system from high
fructose corn syrup to pure cane sugar which not only improves
the taste and mouth feel but is understood to digest much easier
in the body, making Jones Pure Cane Soda a healthier
product.
Jones
24Ctm
In June 2006, we purchased the trademark rights and related
assets of 24C. Jones 24C, an enhanced water beverage
sweetened with pure cane sugar, has 100% natural flavors and
contains daily vitamin requirements (including 500% RDA of
Vitamin C) and is available in eight flavors. We began
production and distribution of Jones 24C in the first
quarter of 2007. 24C is available in 20-ounce PET bottles
and as a powdered drink mix.
Jones
GABAtm
We have an agreement through July 2010 with Pharma Foods
International Co., LTD., of Kyoto, Japan; Mitsubishi
Corporation, of Tokyo, Japan; and Mitsubishi International Food
Ingredients, Inc., of Dublin, Ohio for the supply and
non-exclusive use of Pharma GABA in specified beverage
applications. Pharma GABA is a naturally produced form of the
amino acid gamma amino butyric acid (GABA), which studies have
shown to be a key neurotransmitter in the human brain that
improves mental focus, balance and clarity, while reducing
stress. We introduced our first line of beverages containing
Pharma GABA in February 2009. The product, branded Jones GABA
and offered in 12-ounce cans, is available in the following
flavors: Lemon Honey Tea, Fuji Apple, Nectarine and Grapefruit
tea and juice blends. We are marketing the brand by focusing on
the benefits of enhanced focus and clarity that studies have
shown GABA provides.
Jones
Organicstm
In April 2005, we launched Jones Organics, a
ready-to-drink
organic tea, sweetened with organic cane sugar. Jones
Organics comes in 14-ounce proprietary clear glass bottles
with a design of the fruit on the front label, but does not
contain the usual black and white photograph labels used on
Jones Soda and Jones Naturals product labels. The
Jones Organics line currently consists of six flavors.
Jones
Naturals®
In April 2001, we launched Jones Naturals, our
non-carbonated beverage containing 100% natural flavors and
ingredients such as ginseng, zinc and various vitamins in
20-ounce clear glass bottles with primarily black and white
photograph labels, similar to the Jones Soda product
labels. In 2007, we introduced Jones Naturals in 14-ounce
clear glass bottles. The Jones Naturals line currently
consists of five flavors.
Whoop
Ass Energy
Drink®
We launched Whoop Ass in October 1999. Whoop Ass
is a citrus energy drink in an 8.4-ounce slim can containing
riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B6 and thiamin. In 2005, we launched
a 16-ounce version of our Whoop Ass Energy Drink. Whoop Ass
competes in the Energy Drink category of the New Age
beverage industry.
Discontinued
Product Jones Energy
In 2008, due to the increased competitive landscape of the
energy category and increased costs, we discontinued production
of Jones Energy, which had originally been launched in
November 2001. Jones Energy was a citrus energy drink
containing vitamin B6, riboflavin, niacin, thiamin, caffeine and
coQ-10 and was available in a 16-ounce can and in an 8.4-ounce
four-pack carrier format in three flavors.
2
Industry
Background
The
New Age or Alternative Beverage Category
Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm,
Jones
24Ctm,
Jones
GABAtm,
Jones
Organicstm,
Jones
Naturals®,
and Whoop Ass Energy
Drink®
which are classified as New Age or alternative beverages, as
well as other brands and products that we may develop in the
future, compete with beverage products of all types including
soft drinks, fruit juices and drinks, and bottled water. New Age
or alternative beverage markets are estimated at over
$26.0 billion in total annual sales.
New Age or alternative beverages are distinguishable from
mainstream carbonated soft drinks in that they tend to contain
natural ingredients combined with less sugar and carbonation. As
a general rule, three criteria have been established for the New
Age or alternative beverage classification: (1) relatively
new introduction to the market-place, (2) a perception by
consumers that consumption is healthful compared to mainstream
carbonated soft drinks, and (3) the use of natural
ingredients and flavors in the products. According to market
research, the New Age or alternative beverage categories
include: energy drinks, premium soda,
ready-to-drink
(RTD) coffee, RTD tea; RTD tea (nutrient-enhanced), shelf-stable
dairy (regular/diet), shelf-stable dairy (nutrient-enhanced),
single-serve-fruit beverages (regular/diet), single-serve-fruit
beverages (nutrient enhanced), smoothies, sparkling water,
sports drinks, vegetable/fruit juice blends, and other New Age
beverages.
The
Carbonated Soft Drink (CSD) Category
Our soda originated in the New Age category and our products
meet the above mentioned definitions for the New Age or
alternative beverage classification, but over time these
definitions evolve and categories overlap and blend together.
While we intend to maintain our niche alternative positioning,
we also strive to expand our sources of growth by attempting to
be within the consideration set of shoppers and drinkers of
mainstream brands so that it is easier for them to switch to our
brands. For that reason, we are endeavoring to expand our points
of availability within all stores, including the shelves that
are normally restricted to national mainstream brands
manufactured by companies such as The
Coca-Cola
Company and PepsiCo. Our primary package within the mainstream
aisle is the 12-ounce can multi-pack, but we have also
penetrated this space with the four-pack Jones Soda glass
package. These packages and shelf locations allow us to
penetrate the larger carbonated soft drink category, estimated
at $70 billion in annual sales, providing us access to the
important take home market.
In September 2006, we entered into an exclusive manufacturing
and distribution agreement with National Beverage Corp. to
manufacture and distribute Jones Soda 12-ounce cans to
the more mainstream channels and in-store locations. Beginning
in January 2007, National Beverage Corp. started selling
Jones Pure Cane Soda to retailers in the grocery and mass
merchant channels in the U.S.
Business
Strategy
Our business strategy is to increase sales by expanding
distribution of our brands in new and existing markets
(primarily within North America), stimulating consumer awareness
and trial of our products leading to increased relevance and
purchase intent of our brands. Our business strategy focuses on:
|
|
|
|
|
expanding points of distribution of our products;
|
|
|
|
creating strong alignment with our key distributors;
|
|
|
|
developing innovative beverage brands and products;
|
|
|
|
stimulating strong consumer demand for our existing brands and
products, with primary emphasis in the U.S. and Canada;
|
|
|
|
inviting consumers to participate in our brand through
submission of photographs to be placed on labels through our
interactive application of myJones.com;
|
|
|
|
licensing our brand equity for the creation of other beverage or
non-beverage products; and
|
|
|
|
licensing our patented custom-label process to non-competitive
products.
|
3
Key elements of our business strategy include the following:
Building
our Brand
We believe the market for alternative beverages is dependent to
a large extent on image as well as taste, and that this market
is driven by trendy, young consumers between the ages of 12 and
24. Accordingly, our strategy is to develop innovative brand
names, relevant programs and trade dress. In addition to
creative labeling on our products, we provide our distributors
with
point-of-sale
promotional materials and branded apparel items. We promote
interaction with our customers through the use of these
point-of-sale
items, such as posters, stickers, post cards, hats, pins, and
T-shirts. In addition, through the labels on our bottles, we
invite consumers to access our website and to send in
photographs to be featured on the Jones Soda and Jones
Naturals labels. We select photos throughout the year to be
placed on our bottles in distribution. We also invite consumers
to celebrate special occasions and memories by creating their
own label through myJones.com. In that space, consumers have the
ability to customize their own label and product with a photo
and short caption. We believe that our labeling, marketing and
promotional materials are important elements to creating and
increasing distributor, retailer and consumer awareness of our
brands and products.
In-House
Brand and Product Development
We understand the importance of creating new beverage items and
enhancing our existing beverage items to meet the ever changing
consumer taste profile. Our strategy is to be focused on
innovative products that will be accepted by retailers,
distributors and consumers. We believe this is accomplished by
keeping open dialog with our retail and distributor partners to
ensure we are current with the consumer trends in the beverage
industry.
We have developed and intend to continue to develop the majority
of our brands and products in-house. We used a similar process
initially to create the Jones Soda brand, and we intend
to continue utilizing this process in connection with the
creation of our future brands. This process primarily consists
of the following steps:
Market Evaluation. We evaluate the strengths
and weaknesses of certain categories and segments of the
beverage industry with a view to pinpointing potential
opportunities.
Distributor Evaluation. We analyze existing
and potential distribution channels, whether DSD or DTR. This
analysis addresses, among other things, which companies will
distribute particular beverage brands and products, where such
companies may distribute such brands and products, and what will
motivate these distributors to distribute such brands and
products.
Production Evaluation. We review all aspects
of production in the beverage industry, including current
contract packing capacity, strategic production locations, and
quality control, and prepare a cost analysis of the various
considerations that will be critical to producing our brands and
products.
Image and Design. In light of our market,
distributor and production evaluations, we create and develop
the concept for a beverage brand or product extension. Our
technical services department then works with various flavor
concentrate houses to test, choose and develop product flavors
for the brand.
Due to the limited life cycle of beverages in the New Age or
alternative category, we believe that the ongoing process of
creating new brands, products and product extensions will be an
important factor in our long-term success.
National
Beverage Corp.
In October 2004, we entered into a test of our Jones Soda
product in the 12-ounce can format under a two-year
exclusive marketing and distribution agreement with Target
Corporation. With the expiration of this exclusive agreement
with Target in December 2006, beginning in 2007 we expanded
distribution to the grocery and mass merchant channel in the
U.S. with our exclusive manufacturing and distribution
agreement with National Beverage Corp. Through this arrangement,
we identify and secure retailers across the U.S. for our
4
Jones Soda 12-ounce cans, and we are solely responsible
for all sales efforts, marketing, advertising and promotion.
Using concentrate supplied by Jones, National Beverage both
manufactures and sells on an exclusive basis the products
directly to retailers. National Beverage is responsible for the
manufacturing, delivery and invoicing of the sales of our
products in this can package.
Independent
Distributor Network (DSD)
We have focused our sales and marketing resources on the
expansion and penetration of our products through our
independent distributor network throughout the U.S. and
Canada. We have obtained listings for selected stock keeping
units (SKUs) of our Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm,
Jones
GABAtm,
Jones
24Ctm,
Jones
Organicstm,
Jones
Naturals®
and Whoop Ass Energy
Drink®
brands with certain key retail grocery, convenience and mass
merchandiser accounts, including but not limited to Quality Food
Centers (QFC), Target, Kmart, Meijer, 7-11, Stop &
Shop, Allsups Convenience Stores, The Kroger Co., Albertsons,
Speedway Super America LLC and key Canadian retailers such as
Loblaws, all of which are serviced through our independent
distributor network.
We grant certain independent distributors the exclusive right in
defined territories to distribute finished cases of one or more
of our brands through written agreements. These agreements
typically include invasion fee provisions to those distributors
in the event we provided product directly to one of our national
retailers located in the distributors region. We are also
obligated to pay termination fees for cancellations of most of
these written distributor agreements, which have terms ranging
from one to three years. We select distributors that we believe
will have the ability to get our brands and products on the
street level retail shelves in convenience stores,
delicatessens, sandwich shops and selected supermarkets.
Ultimately, we have chosen, and will continue to choose, our
distributors based on their perceived ability to build our brand
franchise. We currently maintain a network of approximately 175
distributors in 50 states in the United States and 9
provinces in Canada. We also have one distributor in the UK and
one in Australia.
Direct
to Retail National Accounts (DTR)
We launched our direct to retail business strategy in 2003 as a
complementary channel of distribution to our DSD channel,
targeting large national retail accounts. Through these programs
we negotiate directly with large national retailers, primarily
premier food-service based businesses, to carry our products
serviced through the retailers appointed distribution
system. As of the date of this Report, our most significant DTR
accounts are the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Barnes & Noble, Inc. launched in February
2003, currently for 5 flavors of Jones Naturals in all
Barnes & Noble stores in the United States;
|
|
|
|
Panera Bread Company launched in June 2003,
currently for 4 flavors of Jones Soda, 3 flavors of
Jones Naturals, and 2 flavors of Jones Organics in
Panera bakery-cafes in the United States;
|
|
|
|
Ruby Tuesday launched in February 2007, currently
for 3 flavors of Jones Soda;
|
|
|
|
Alaska & Horizon Airlines launched in
March 2008, currently for 4 flavors of Jones Soda in
12-ounce
cans and a seasonal offering; and
|
|
|
|
Costco Canada launched in March 2000, we offer a
24-count variety pack which includes six flavors of Jones
Soda.
|
Except for our supply agreement with Alaska Airlines &
Horizon Air which can be terminated with 120 days written
notice from either party, these arrangements are not long term
and are terminable at any time by these retailers or us. There
are no minimum purchase commitments for any of these retailers.
We will continue to look for new opportunities to service and
expand our direct to retail channel of business.
5
Sponsorship
Arrangements
We currently have three major sponsorship agreements with
professional sports franchises. We entered into Sponsorship
Agreements with Football Northwest LLC (d/b/a Seattle Seahawks)
of the National Football League and First and Goal, Inc.
effective July 2007; with Brooklyn Arena, LLC and New Jersey
Nets Basketball, LLC, effective November 2007; and with Trail
Blazer Inc, effective October 2008, all of which provide us with
the exclusive beverage rights to sell our beverages at sports
venues as well as signage, advertising and other promotional
benefits to enhance our brand awareness. We expect these
sponsorship arrangements will continue to increase the public
awareness and strength of our brand and provide us with other
cross-selling opportunities through our licensing business
strategy.
In June 2007, we announced our entry into a Sponsorship and
Beverage Availability Agreement with Football Northwest LLC
(d/b/a Seattle Seahawks) and First and Goal Inc. that provides
us with exclusive beverage rights for certain soft drinks at
Qwest Field in Seattle, Washington, as well as signage,
advertising and other promotional benefits to enhance our brand
awareness, including sponsorship and trademark rights regarding
the use of Seattle Seahawks trademarks. In consideration for our
rights under the agreement, we are obligated to pay annual
sponsorship fees. The agreement has an effective date of
July 1, 2007 and expires on February 28, 2012, and
provides Jones Soda with a right of first renewal with respect
to its renewal or extension. Generally, either party may
terminate the agreement only if the other breaches any material
term of the agreement and fails to cure such breach within
30 days of receiving notice of the breach. However, we may
terminate the agreement after the 2009 National Football League
season by giving written notice of termination by
February 10, 2010 and paying a termination fee. In
addition, the Seattle Seahawks may terminate the agreement if
Jones Soda fails to make a required payment and such failure
continues for 30 days after Jones Soda receives written
notice of the failure.
In November 2007, we announced our entry into a
Sponsorship & Beverage Availability Agreement with
Brooklyn Arena, LLC and New Jersey Nets Basketball, LLC. The
agreement has a commencement date of October 25, 2007. This
agreement provides us with exclusive beverage rights for all
carbonated soft-drinks and certain other non-alcoholic
beverages, as well as sponsorship, promotional, media,
hospitality and other rights in connection with the New Jersey
Nets basketball team and a proposed new sports and entertainment
arena that the Brooklyn Arena and the New Jersey Nets intend to
develop in Brooklyn, New York. In consideration for our rights
under the agreement, we are obligated to pay annual sponsorship
fees. The Brooklyn Arena and the New Jersey Nets may terminate
the agreement if we commit one of several events of default and
subsequently fail to cure such event of default within the
applicable cure period. We may terminate the agreement only if
the Brooklyn Arena and the New Jersey Nets commit one of several
events of default and subsequently fail to cure such event of
default within the applicable cure period, but only if equitable
adjustment, make-goods or other remedies implemented by the
Brooklyn Arena and the New Jersey Nets are not suitable or
appropriate for such event of default.
In October 2008, we announced our entry into a
Sponsorship & Beverage Availability Agreement with
Trail Blazers Inc. that provides us with beverage rights at the
Rose Garden and Memorial Coliseum in Portland, Oregon as well as
signage, advertising and other promotional benefits to enhance
our brand awareness, including sponsorship and trademark rights
regarding the use of Portland Trail Blazer trademarks. In
consideration for our rights under the agreement, we are
obligated to pay annual sponsorship fees. This agreement has an
effective date of October 1, 2008 and expires on
June 30, 2011 and may be extended by mutual agreement. The
agreement may be terminated prior to the expiration of the term
if either party materially defaults and subsequently fails to
cure such event of default within the applicable cure period.
Licensing
Arrangements
We launched our licensing business strategy in 2004 as a method
to extend our brand into non-alternative beverage products and
non-beverage products. We currently have licensing arrangements
with three companies. In September 2005, we entered into a
licensing agreement with Big Sky Brands, Inc. to manufacture and
distribute Jones Soda Flavor Booster hard candy. In February
2007, we entered into a licensing agreement with J&J Snack
Foods for the use of our flavors and brand name for their ICEE
and Slush Puppy iced
6
beverages. In December 2008, we entered into a licensing
agreement with FOG Studios for the use of hard line items such
as apparel, glassware and alternative products. With these
licensing agreements, we believe that we are able to partner
with companies that will manufacture Jones related products and
extend our Jones brand into select products that we feel enhance
our brand image.
Marketing,
Sales and Distribution
Marketing
The Jones marketing team has developed brand positioning and
architecture frameworks that we believe enable us to have
disciplined control over our brand identity and other marketing
parameters. The strategic frameworks steer us in the development
and selection of programs that allow direct consumer ownership
and participation in management of the brand while still
maintaining brand integrity. We have also developed channel,
package, price and promotion strategies designed to allow the
sales team to realize optimum price points.
Despite these disciplined approaches, our marketing content is
designed to be pure New Age and
Alternative. We have a successful history of
positioning ourselves in alternative outlets with the intent to
be where national mainstream brands were not sold including
skate board shops, tattoo parlors, beach surfer shacks and snow
board huts. We also have a program of sponsoring alternative
sport athletes to promote our products, and we market in youth
alternative sports such as surfing, hockey, roller derby, and
snowboard, skateboard and BMX bike arenas. We believe this
effort to position our products in alternative outlets has drawn
a younger generation of customers that value their independence,
irreverence and rebelliousness away from the larger soft drink
brands. We continue to develop our presence in these outlets,
and intend to introduce new outlets such as video game stores
and contemporary fashion stores.
Another core marketing pillar is the open source access
consumers have to define the brand. We invite our consumers to
send us photos of their lives for use on our label. Every
Jones Soda glass bottle has a picture provided to us by a
consumer.
We also maintain and utilize our website to allow our Jones
Soda consumers to create their own personalized 12-pack of
Jones Soda (12-ounce bottles) with their own photo in the
labels. The strategy of www.myjones.com is to provide a
personalized product offering to our consumers as well as
provide an innovative marketing opportunity for our Jones
Soda brand. Consumers can upload their photos through our
patented web-based process and crop and create their own
myJones labels. The personalized labels are
downloaded at our warehouse, applied to 12-packs of Jones
Soda and delivered to the consumer. We believe this strategy
has increased awareness for, as well as provided for increased
consumer interactivity with, the Jones Soda brand, and we
anticipate that it will continue to do so.
In December 2002, we received notice of issuance of a patent
(Patent No. 6,493,677) from the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office for our myJones.com customized branded label
process. The patent is titled Method and Apparatus for
Creating and Ordering Branded Merchandise over a Computer
Network. In January 2005, we were granted a second patent
by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Patent
No. 6,845,362 B2) which is also entitled Method and
Apparatus for Creating and Ordering Branded Merchandise over a
Computer Network.
In 2002, we launched the yourJones program, which allows
the customization of the front panel of the label of Jones
Soda in a manner similar to our myJones business, but
on a larger, commercial scale. The premise behind yourJones
is to create customized Jones Soda or Jones
Naturals bottles, with a personalized photo or brand image,
for cross promotion and co-branding purposes or for sale in
retail accounts. Like myJones.com, the Jones Soda
name always appears on the labels and customers add their
own photo/brand and words. We have negotiated arrangements with
our co-packing facilities to create short-run productions for
these purposes.
We participate in blogs as a way of live engagement with our
consumers and a way to better understand their needs and issues.
7
We use
point-of-sale
materials such as posters, stickers, postcards, hats, pins and
T-shirts to create and increase consumer awareness of our
proprietary products and brands. In response to consumer demand,
we also sell our products and our wearables on our website. In
selected cities, we participate at a grass roots
level at certain community and sporting events in an attempt to
create and increase brand awareness and loyalty. We use
recreational vehicles, vans and independent distributor vehicles
painted with the Jones colors and logos to create consumer
awareness and enthusiasm at these events and to assist
distributors as they open new retail accounts and markets. In
addition to these marketing techniques, we also pursue
cross-promotional campaigns with other companies.
We work with various public relations agencies and design firms
to support our marketing and public relations efforts. We
engaged a public relations firm that is active in developing
campaigns around custom programs like Campaign Cola, our
Presidential candidates-branded bottles and voter-awareness
campaign, or creating awareness about our various marketing
efforts with the Seattle Seahawks. We worked collaboratively on
creative branding projects for developing our Jones GABA
packaging.
Sales
Our products are sold in 50 states in the U.S. and 9
provinces in Canada, primarily in convenience stores,
delicatessens, sandwich shops and selected supermarkets, as well
as through our national accounts with several large retailers.
In 2008, we secured distribution in the UK and Australia with
independent distributors in those markets. In 2008, sales in the
U.S. represented approximately 79% of total sales, while
sales in Canada represented approximately 19%, and we had
approximately 2% in other international sales. In 2007, sales in
the U.S. represented approximately 85% of total sales,
while sales in Canada represented approximately 14%, and we had
approximately 1% in other international sales.
Distribution
For the year ended December 31, 2008, we experienced an
improved balance of business across the U.S. and Canada as
we developed more regions of those countries. Our top ten DSD
customers by revenue represent approximately 21% of total
revenue. We anticipate that, as consumer awareness of our brands
develops and increases, we will continue to upgrade and expand
our distributor network and DTR accounts, which may result in a
decreased dependence on any one or more of our independent
distributors or accounts.
We contract with independent trucking companies to have product
shipped from our contract packers to independent warehouses and
then on to our distributors and retail accounts. Distributors
then sell and deliver our products either to subdistributors or
directly to retail outlets. We recognize revenue upon receipt by
our distributors and customers of our products, net of discount
and allowances, and all sales are final; however, in limited
instances, due to credit issues, quality or damage issues, or
distributor changes, we may accept returned product.
Production
Contract
Packing Arrangements
We do not directly manufacture our products but instead
outsource the manufacturing process to third party bottlers and
contract packers (also sometimes referred to herein as
co-packers). For our bottle products, we purchase certain raw
materials such as concentrates, flavors, supplements, sugar,
bottles, labels, trays, caps and other ingredients. These raw
materials are delivered to our various third party co-packers.
We currently use six primary independent contract packers known
as co-packers to prepare, bottle and package our bottle
products. Our contract packers are located in the Canadian
Provinces of British Columbia and Ontario as well as in Oregon,
Washington, Minnesota, Tennessee and California. Once the
product is manufactured, we purchase and store the finished
product at that location or in nearby third party warehouses.
We continually review our contract packing needs in light of
regulatory compliance and logistical requirements and may add or
change co-packers based on those needs. A majority of our
co-packing is handled in Canada, and with the recent
strengthening of the Canadian dollar against the
U.S. dollar, our co-
8
packing costs have increased. We experienced increases in
co-packing fees for 2008 primarily related to fuel and energy
surcharge increases. While we expect these trends to continue in
2009, we believe we may see some stabilization or decreases in
our co-packing fees as a result of the global economic crisis.
We expect to continue to look for alternative or lower-cost
co-packing arrangements for our products in the U.S. and in
Canada. For example, in the fall of 2008 we reached an agreement
with Chism Hardy Enterprises, LLC (Hardy Bottling Company or
Hardy) in Memphis, Tennessee to co-pack products to improve our
freight costs for the Central, South Central and Southeast U.S..
Hardy began bottling product in February 2009.
Other than minimum case volume requirements per production run
for most co-packers, we do not typically have annual minimum
production commitments with our co-packers. Our co-packers may
terminate their arrangements with us at any time, in which case
we could experience disruptions in our ability to deliver
products to our customers.
With respect to our 12-ounce cans of Jones Soda sold by
National Beverage Corp. (National Beverage) through the grocery
products and mass merchant channel, National Beverage is
responsible for all manufacturing, packing and distribution.
Under the agreement, sales of product may be made only to our
authorized retail accounts purchasing through warehouse
distribution, and we are solely responsible for all sales
efforts, marketing, advertising and promotion. We sell
concentrate to National Beverage for the manufacture of the
product, and National Beverage is responsible for the
manufacture, storage, inventory, delivery, invoicing, customer
credit review and approval, and receivables collection with
respect to sales of products to our authorized accounts.
National Beverage carries, stores and maintains the finished
products.
Our agreement with National Beverage has an initial term of five
years, expiring on December 31, 2011. Thereafter, the
agreement automatically renews in perpetuity for successive
additional five-year periods unless terminated by either party
as specified in the agreement. We may not terminate the
agreement prior to that date unless National Beverage is in
material default, and National Beverage will have the right to
terminate our agreement upon six months notice at any time after
December 31, 2009. The agreement also provides National
Beverage the first right to pack and distribute any new products
that we desire to sell through warehouse distribution.
Raw
Materials
Substantially all of the raw materials used in the preparation,
bottling and packaging of our bottle products are purchased by
us or by our contract packers in accordance with our
specifications. The raw materials used in the preparation and
packaging of our products consist primarily of concentrate,
flavors, supplements, sugar, bottles, labels, trays, caps and
packaging. These raw materials are purchased from suppliers
selected by us or by our contract packers. We believe that we
have adequate sources of raw materials, which are available from
multiple suppliers.
For our Jones GABA product, which was introduced in
February 2009, we obtain the key ingredient, GABA, pursuant to
our supply agreement with Pharma Foods International
(PFI), Mitsubishi Corporation (MC) and
Mitsubishi International Food Ingredients (MIFI).
Under the supply agreement, as amended in March 2009, PFI agrees
to manufacture and sell, using MC and MIFI as international
intermediaries, Pharma GABA to us, and has granted us the
non-exclusive right to use Pharma GABA in specified beverage
applications throughout the world. We have certain purchase
obligations under the supply agreement which are described in
further detail in Part I, Item 7, of this report under
Contractual Obligations. The supply agreement
terminates on July 31, 2010, subject to earlier termination
if any party defaults in performing any of its obligations under
the agreement and fails to correct such default within one month
after notice of default. Although we believe we can obtain
adequate supplies of GABA from other sources in synthetic form,
Pharma GABA is the only naturally produced form of GABA on the
market at this time and we believe may give us a competitive
advantage over other beverage products that may include
synthetic forms of GABA. There can be no assurance, however,
that PFI will continue to supply us with Pharma GABA on
acceptable terms beyond the termination date of our current
supply agreement, in which case we would be required to obtain
synthetic forms of GABA in order to continue to produce our
products.
9
Currently, we purchase our flavor concentrate from our three
flavor concentrate suppliers. Generally, flavor suppliers hold
the proprietary rights to the flavors. Consequently, we do not
have the list of ingredients or formulae for our flavors. In
connection with the development of new products and flavors,
independent suppliers bear a large portion of the expense for
product development, thereby enabling us to develop new products
and flavors at relatively low cost. We anticipate that for
future flavors and additional products, we may purchase flavor
concentrate from other flavor houses with the intention of
developing other sources of flavor concentrate for each of our
products. If we have to replace a flavor supplier, we could
experience disruptions in our ability to deliver products to our
customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our
results of operations.
In addition, with our shift to production using pure cane sugar
rather than high fructose corn syrup, we utilize considerable
quantities of pure cane sugar. We have three pure cane sugar
suppliers and have entered into one to two year supply
agreements at fixed prices.
The prices of raw materials such as bottles, sugar and certain
other ingredients continued to increase in 2008. These increased
costs, together with increased costs primarily of energy, gas
and freight resulted in increases in certain product costs which
exerted pressure on our gross margins in 2008. For 2009, we have
one glass supplier with whom we entered into a two year supply
agreement at fixed prices. We are still subject to freight
surcharges in addition to these agreements, but anticipate a
stabilization or reduction of these costs in 2009 due to lower
fuel prices.
Quality
Control
Our products are made from high quality ingredients and natural
and/or
artificial flavors. We seek to ensure that all of our products
satisfy our quality standards. Contract packers are selected and
monitored by our own quality control representatives in an
effort to assure adherence to our production procedures and
quality standards. Samples of our products from each production
run undertaken by each of our contract packers are analyzed and
categorized in a reference library.
For every run of product, our contract packer undertakes
extensive on-line testing of product quality and packaging. This
includes testing levels of sweetness, carbonation, taste,
product integrity, packaging and various regulatory cross
checks. For each product, the contract packer must transmit all
quality control test results to us for reference following each
production run.
Testing includes microbiological checks and other tests to
ensure the production facilities meet the standards and
specifications of our quality assurance program. Water quality
is monitored during production and at scheduled testing times to
ensure compliance with beverage industry standards. The water
used to produce our products is filtered and is also treated to
reduce alkalinity. Flavors are pre-tested before shipment to
contract packers from the flavor manufacturer. We are committed
to an on-going program of product improvement with a view toward
ensuring the high quality of our product through a program for
stringent contract packer selection, training and communication.
Regulation
The production and marketing of our licensed and proprietary
beverages are subject to the rules and regulations of various
federal, provincial, state and local health agencies, including
in particular Health Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA
and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada also regulate labeling of
our products. From time to time, we may receive notifications of
various technical labeling or ingredient reviews with respect to
our licensed products. We believe that we have a compliance
program in place to ensure compliance with production, marketing
and labeling regulations on a going-forward basis.
Packagers of our beverage products presently offer
non-refillable, recyclable containers in the United States
and various other markets. Some of these packagers also offer
refillable containers, which are also recyclable. Legal
requirements have been enacted in jurisdictions in the United
States and Canada requiring that deposits or certain ecotaxes or
fees be charged for the sale, marketing and use of certain non-
10
refillable beverage containers. The precise requirements imposed
by these measures vary. Other beverage container
related deposit, recycling, ecotax
and/or
product stewardship proposals have been introduced in various
jurisdictions in the United States and Canada. We anticipate
that similar legislation or regulations may be proposed in the
future at local, state and federal levels, both in the United
States and Canada.
Trademarks,
Flavor Concentrate Trade Secrets and Patents
We own a number of trademarks, including, in the United States
and Canada, Jones Soda
Co.®,
Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm,
Jones
24Ctm,
Jones
GABAtm,
Jones
Naturals®,
Whoop Ass Energy
Drink®
and Jones
Energytm.
In the United States our trademarks expire 10 years from
the registration date and in Canada 15 years from the
registration date, although in both Canada and the United
States, they may be renewed for a nominal fee. In addition, we
have trademark protection in the United States and Canada for a
number of other trademarks for slogans and product designs,
including Ive Got A Jones For A
Jones®,
Jones Soda Co. and
Design®,
Whoop Ass and
Design®,
Corn Is For Cars... Sugar Is For
Soda®,
Run with the Little
Guy!®
and My
Jones®.
We have also applied for trademark protection for several marks,
including Jones Soda
Co.®,
in the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, and other foreign
jurisdictions.
We have the exclusive rights to 37 flavor concentrates developed
with our current flavor concentrate suppliers, which we protect
as trade secrets. We will continue to take appropriate measures,
such as entering into confidentiality agreements with our
contract packers and exclusivity agreements with our flavor
houses, to maintain the secrecy and proprietary nature of our
flavor concentrates.
We have two patents on our myJones.com web-based
customized branded label process. In December 2002, the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued us Patent
No. 6,493,677, and in January 2005 they issued to us Patent
No. 6,845,365 B2, both entitled Method and Apparatus
for Creating and Ordering Customized Branded Merchandise over a
Computer Network. The term of U.S. patents is
20 years from the date of filing. We intend to explore
potential licensing arrangements with third parties to
commercialize this patented methodology and defend against
patent violations.
We consider our trademarks, patents and trade secrets to be of
considerable value and importance to our business.
Competition
The beverage industry is highly competitive. Principal methods
of competition in the beverage industry include:
|
|
|
|
|
distribution;
|
|
|
|
shelf-management;
|
|
|
|
sponsorships;
|
|
|
|
licensing;
|
|
|
|
brand name;
|
|
|
|
brand image;
|
|
|
|
price;
|
|
|
|
labeling and packaging;
|
|
|
|
advertising;
|
|
|
|
product quality and taste;
|
|
|
|
trade and consumer promotions; and
|
|
|
|
development of new brands, products and product extensions.
|
11
We compete with other beverage companies not only for consumer
acceptance but also for shelf space in retail outlets and for
marketing focus by our distributors, all of whom also distribute
other beverage brands. Our products compete with all
non-alcoholic beverages, most of which are marketed by companies
with substantially greater financial resources than ours. We
also compete with regional beverage producers and private
label soft drink suppliers. Our direct competitors in the
alternative beverage industry include Cadbury Schweppes
(Stewarts and IBC) and Thomas Kemper. We also compete against
Coca Cola, Pepsi, Hansens, and other traditional soft
drink manufacturers and distributors, as well as against other
category leaders such as Red Bull and Monster for the energy
drink category. As of the date of this report, we believe we are
the only beverage company manufacturing and distributing product
containing GABA in the U.S.
In order to compete effectively in the beverage industry, we
believe that we must convince independent distributors that
Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm
is a leading brand in the premium soda segment of the
alternative or New Age beverage industry. In connection with or
as a
follow-up to
the establishment of an independent distributor relationship for
the Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm
brand, we sell Jones
24Ctm,
Jones
GABAtm,
Jones
Organicstm,
Jones
Naturals®,
and Whoop Ass Energy
Drink®,
as complementary products that may replace other non-carbonated
single-serve fruit beverages,
ready-to-drink
(RTD) teas or energy drinks. In addition, we have created
Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm
in a 12-ounce can format that allows us to compete directly
in the carbonated soft drink industry. As a means of maintaining
and expanding our distribution network, we introduce new
products and product extensions, and when warranted, new brands.
Although we believe that we will be able to continue to create
fashionable brands, there can be no assurance that we will be
able to do so or that other companies will not be more
successful in this regard over the long term.
In addition, in light of the competition for product placement
with independent distributors, we obtained several national
retail accounts as an additional distribution channel for our
products. We believe that this diversification strategy is
helpful in alleviating the risk inherent in competition for
independent distributors.
Pricing of the products is also important. We believe that our
Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm,
Jones
24Ctm,
Jones
GABAtm,
Jones
Organicstm,
Jones
Naturals®,
and Whoop Ass Energy
Drink®
products are priced in the same price range or higher than
competitive New Age beverage brands and products and compete on
quality through our premium product offerings.
Seasonality
As is typical in the beverage industry, our sales are seasonal.
In a typical year, approximately 57% of our sales occur from
April to September and approximately 43% occur from October to
March. As a result, our working capital requirements and cash
flow vary substantially throughout the year. Consumer demand for
our products is also affected by weather conditions.
Employees
As of December 31, 2008, we had 65 employees: 33 were
employed in sales and marketing capacities, 19 were
employed in administrative capacities, and 13 were employed in
customer service, manufacturing and quality control capacities.
None of our employees are represented by labor unions. We
believe that our relationships with our employees are good.
Securities
Exchange Act Reports and other Available Information
We make available on or through our website at
www.jonessoda.com (under About Jones
Investor Relations Financial Reports) certain
reports and amendments to those reports that we file with or
furnish to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in
accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
(Exchange Act). These include our annual reports on
Form 10-K,
our quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
our current reports on
Form 8-K,
and Section 16 filings and amendments thereof. We make this
information available on our website free of charge as soon as
reasonably practicable after we electronically file the
information with, or furnish it to, the SEC.
12
In addition, the following corporate governance materials are
also available on our website under About
Jones Investor Relations Corporate
Governance:
|
|
|
|
|
Audit Committee Charter
|
|
|
|
Compensation and Governance Committee Charter
|
|
|
|
Nominating Committee Charter
|
|
|
|
Code of Conduct applicable to all directors, officers and
employees of Jones Soda Co.
|
|
|
|
Code of Ethics for our CEO and senior financial officers.
|
A copy of any of the materials filed with or furnished to the
SEC or copies of the corporate governance materials described
above are available free of charge and can be mailed to you upon
request to Jones Soda Co., Corporate Offices, 234 Ninth Avenue
North, Seattle, Washington 98109.
EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS
Our executive officers as of December 31, 2008 are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Officer
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Since
|
|
Stephen C. Jones
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Jonathan J. Ricci
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
Chief Operating Officer and Director
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Michael R. OBrien
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Thomas P. ONeill
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice President of Sales
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Mr. Jones has served as our Chief Executive Officer
or Interim Chief Executive Officer since January 1, 2008,
and has served as one of the Companys directors since
March 2006. Mr. Jones will resign from his position as our
Chief Executive Officer effective May 1, 2009, but will
continue to serve as a member of our Board of Directors.
Mr. Jones is a former executive of The
Coca-Cola
Company (Coca Cola) where he spent 17 years from 1986 to
2003 in various marketing and operations roles. In addition to
operating
Coca-Cola in
Great Britain and Japan, Mr. Jones was Chief Executive
Officer of The Minute Maid Company in Houston and Chief
Marketing Officer of Coca Cola in Atlanta. Mr. Jones
founded Brand Ignition, which consults with companies regarding
growth strategies and private equity opportunities, in 2003 with
two other partners. In 2006, Mr. Jones partnered with
Denneen and Company, a Boston-based strategy consulting company
on several international consulting assignments. In June 2007,
Mr. Jones launched an artisan food production kitchen,
Calabria Mia Fine Foods in Toronto. Mr. Jones earned a
Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Toronto.
Mr. Ricci joined Jones Soda as Chief Operating
Officer in January 2008 and has served as one of the
Companys directors since June 2008. He will become our
President and Chief Executive Officer effective May 1, 2009.
From May 2003 to January 2008, Mr. Ricci served as
General Manager of Columbia Distributing Company, a beverage
distribution company, and previously served as its Vice
President of Process Improvement and Human Resources from
November 2002 to May 2003 and as its Regional Vice
President of Sales and Marketing from November 2000 until
October 2002. Mr. Ricci also spent 9 years at McNeil
Consumer Products in various sales and marketing roles.
Mr. Ricci received a B.S. in Business Education from Oregon
State University.
Mr. OBrien joined Jones Soda in September 2008
as Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary. Prior to
joining Jones Soda, he served as Chief Financial Officer of
Pyramid Breweries Inc., a craft beer brewer, from September 2006
until August 2008. Prior to that, Mr. OBrien served
as Chief Financial Officer of Medisystems Corporation, a
designer and manufacturer of disposable medical devices, from
2002 until September 2006. From 1999 to 2002,
Mr. OBrien held positions of Corporate Controller and
Chief Financial Officer of Flow International Corporation, which
develops and manufacturers ultra high-pressure waterjet
technology, and provides robotics and assembly equipment.
Mr. OBrien earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in
accounting from Western Washington University and a Masters of
Business Administration degree from Seattle University.
Mr. OBrien is also a certified public accountant.
13
Mr. ONeill joined Jones Soda in April 2008 as
Executive Vice President of Sales. Prior to joining Jones Soda,
Mr. ONeill had been Vice President of Global Sales
for SynergEyes, Inc., a contact lens manufacturer, since July
2006. From August 2005 until July 2006, he served as Vice
President of Sales for Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, a
pharmaceutical company, and from February 2002 to August 2005,
Mr. ONeill held a number of sales and marketing
positions in the consumer packaged goods and pharmaceutical
sectors of Johnson & Johnson. Mr. ONeill
received a Bachelor of Science in Business
Administration/Marketing from The University of Akron.
The following factors may materially adversely affect our
business, financial condition or results of operations. In that
event, the trading price of our common stock could decline and
shareholders may lose part or all of their investment.
Therefore, shareholders should carefully consider the risks
described below before making an investment decision.
Risk
Factors Relating to Our Company and Our Business
If we
are not able to manage our resources and successfully execute on
our operating plan, our financial condition and results of
operation could be materially adversely affected.
We have incurred net losses of $15.2 million and
$11.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2008
and 2007, respectively, and have used a significant amount of
our cash resources during this period to fund our net losses and
working capital and capital expenditure requirements. As of
December 31, 2008, we had cash, cash-equivalents and
short-term investment of approximately $12.6 million,
compared to approximately $27.8 million as of
December 31, 2007. Additionally, we had accumulated
deficits of $29.4 million and $14.2 million as of
December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Cash used in
operations for the years ended December 30, 2008 and 2007
was $14.5 million and $3.3 million, respectively.
Based on our current plans and amounts expected to be generated
from future operations, we believe that our cash and cash
equivalents, and net cash provided by operations will be
sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for working
capital and capital expenditures through the end of fiscal 2009
and beyond. This will depend, however, on our ability to execute
on our 2009 operating plan and to manage our costs in light of
developing economic conditions and the performance of our
business. We arrived at our revenue projections for our 2009
operating plan after careful consideration of the macroeconomic
factors stemming from the global economic crisis, with an
emphasis on our higher-margin, core products, including our
Jones Pure Cane Soda glass bottle business. Further, we
implemented cost containment measures in the fourth quarter of
2008 and early 2009, including reductions in workforce, to
further align our cost structure with our revenue projections.
Although we do not believe we are dependent on new product
launches to generate sufficient cash flow from operations in
2009, we believe the launch of Jones GABA during the
first quarter, plus corresponding line extensions of this
product, will help to enhance our sales growth into new markets
and consumer groups. We intend to continually monitor and adjust
our business plan as necessary to respond to developments in our
business, our markets and the broader economy and are prepared,
if necessary, to take further action to conserve cash, including
further cost reductions in sales, marketing and general and
administrative areas. Even with these measures, we do not
anticipate reaching profitability in 2009. Moreover, there can
be no assurance that we will be able to successfully execute on
our operating plan, which is subject to a number of risks
described in this Risk Factors section and elsewhere
in this Report. In that case, we may not be able to generate the
level of revenue that we expect or that is necessary to generate
the cash flow from operations that we will require. If that
happens, we may be required to seek additional financing to fund
our working capital and capital expenditure requirements.
With respect to additional financing sources, in November 2008,
our $15 million line of credit was terminated. Accordingly,
we no longer have this facility available to us to fund any cash
shortfall. Although we never drew on this facility, and our
current operating plan for 2009 does not depend on obtaining
financing, if we have financing requirements in the future there
can be no assurance that additional debt or equity financing
will be available to us on acceptable terms, particularly in
light of our financial condition, results of
14
operations and the global economic crisis. In that case, we may
be forced to delay, curtail or eliminate some or all of our
product development, marketing or distribution programs or other
aspects of our operations, including but not limited to a
further reduction in workforce. In addition, we may have to
pursue various other strategies to secure additional financing,
which may include, without limitation, public or private
offerings of debt or equity securities, joint ventures with one
or more strategic partners and other strategic alternatives.
There can be no assurance that our efforts in this regard will
result in any agreements or transactions. Our inability to
generate sufficient cash flow from operations, or to obtain
funds through additional financing, could have a materially
adverse impact on our financial conditions and results of
operations.
We
rely on our distributors, retailers and brokers, and this could
affect our ability to efficiently and profitably distribute and
market our products, maintain our existing markets and expand
our business into other geographic markets.
Our ability to establish a market for our brands and products in
new geographic distribution areas, as well as maintain and
expand our existing markets, is dependent on our ability to
establish and maintain successful relationships with reliable
distributors, retailers and brokers strategically positioned to
serve those areas. Most of our distributors, retailers and
brokers sell and distribute competing products, including
non-alcoholic and alcoholic beverages, and our products may
represent a small portion of their business. To the extent that
our distributors, retailers and brokers are distracted from
selling our products or do not employ sufficient efforts in
managing and selling our products, including re-stocking the
retail shelves with our products, our sales and profitability
will be adversely affected. Our ability to maintain our
distribution network and attract additional distributors,
retailers and brokers will depend on a number of factors, some
of which are outside our control. Some of these factors include:
|
|
|
|
|
the level of demand for our brands and products in a particular
distribution area;
|
|
|
|
our ability to price our products at levels competitive with
those of competing products; and
|
|
|
|
our ability to deliver products in the quantity and at the time
ordered by distributors, retailers and brokers.
|
We may not be able to meet all or any of these factors in any of
our current or prospective geographic areas of distribution. Our
inability to achieve any of these factors in a geographic
distribution area will have a material adverse effect on our
relationships with our distributors, retailers and brokers in
that particular geographic area, thus limiting our ability to
expand our market, which will likely adversely affect our
revenues and financial results.
We
generally do not have long-term agreements with our
distributors, and we incur significant time and expense in
attracting and maintaining key distributors.
Our marketing and sales strategy depends in large part on the
availability and performance of our independent distributors. We
have entered into written agreements with many of our
distributors in the U.S. and Canada, with terms ranging
from one to five years. We currently do not have, nor do we
anticipate in the future that we will be able to establish,
long-term contractual commitments from many of our distributors.
In addition, despite the terms of the written agreements with
many of our top distributors, there are no minimum levels of
purchases under many of those agreements, and most of the
agreements may be terminated at any time generally with a
termination fee. We may not be able to maintain our current
distribution relationships or establish and maintain successful
relationships with distributors in new geographic distribution
areas. Moreover, there is the additional possibility that we may
have to incur additional expenditures to attract and maintain
key distributors in one or more of our geographic distribution
areas in order to profitably exploit our geographic markets.
15
Because
our distributors are not required to place minimum orders with
us, we need to carefully manage our inventory levels, and it is
difficult to predict the timing and amount of our
sales.
Our independent distributors are not required to place minimum
monthly or annual orders for our products. In order to reduce
inventory costs, independent distributors endeavor to order
products from us on a just in time basis in
quantities, and at such times, based on the demand for the
products in a particular distribution area. Accordingly, there
is no assurance as to the timing or quantity of purchases by any
of our independent distributors or that any of our distributors
will continue to purchase products from us in the same
frequencies and volumes as they may have done in the past. In
order to be able to deliver our products on a timely basis, we
need to maintain adequate inventory levels of the desired
products, but we cannot predict the number of cases sold by any
of our distributors. If we fail to meet our shipping schedules,
we could damage our relationships with distributors
and/or
retailers, increase our shipping costs or cause sales
opportunities to be delayed or lost, which would unfavorably
impact our future sales and adversely affect our operating
results. In addition, if the inventory of our products held by
our distributors
and/or
retailers is too high, they will not place orders for additional
products, which would also unfavorably impact our future sales
and adversely affect our operating results.
Our
business plan and future growth is dependent in part on our
distribution arrangements directly with retailers and national
retail accounts. If we are unable to establish and maintain
these arrangements, our results of operations and financial
condition could be adversely affected.
We currently have distribution arrangements with several large
national retail accounts to distribute our products directly
through their venues; these retailers include Barnes &
Noble, Panera Bread Company, Ruby Tuesday and Alaska &
Horizon Airlines. We believe that our direct to
retail program has increased our national visibility among
consumers; however, there are several risks associated with this
distribution strategy. First, we do not have long-term
agreements in place with any of these accounts and thus, the
arrangements are terminable at any time by these retailers or
us. The exception is our agreement with Alaska &
Horizon Airlines which can be terminated with 120 days
written notice from either party. Accordingly, we may not be
able to maintain continuing relationships with any of these
national accounts. A decision by any of these retailers, or any
other large retail accounts we may obtain, to decrease the
amount purchased from us or to cease carrying our products could
have a material adverse effect on our reputation, financial
condition and consolidated results of operations. For example,
in 2008, Walmart stopped carrying our product line in its
stores, which negatively impacted our sales and results of
operations in 2008. In addition, we may not be able to establish
additional distribution arrangements with other national
retailers.
Second, as we become more dependent on national retail chains,
these retailers may assert pressure on us to reduce our pricing
to them or seek significant product discounts. In general, our
margins are lower on our sales to these customers because of
these pressures. Any increase in our costs for these retailers
to carry our product, reduction in price, or demand for product
discounts could have a material adverse effect on our profit
margin.
Finally, our direct to retail distribution
arrangements may have an adverse impact on our existing
relationships with our independent regional distributors, who
may view our direct to retail accounts as
competitive with their business, making it more difficult for us
to maintain and expand our relationships with independent
distributors.
Our
business plan and future growth depend in part on our launch of
Jones GABA. If we are unable to successfully implement this
strategy, our results of operations and financial condition
could be adversely affected.
We have allocated significant resources in our efforts to launch
Jones GABA in the first quarter of 2009, and our
financial condition and results of operation for 2009 will
depend, in part, on the success of this product. This success
depends in part on our ability to successfully launch Jones
GABA and market the products ability to enhance levels
of mental clarity and focus, as studies have shown. Jones
GABA is our first entry into beverage products containing
GABA and much of our success will depend on our ability to gain
16
new points of distribution through our DSD channel. We must also
be successful in developing DTR distribution for Jones GABA
through existing DTR customers and obtaining new listings in
customers that currently do not have points of distribution. Our
ability to develop points of distribution for Jones GABA
will depend on a number of factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the level of demand for our brands and products, including
Jones GABA, in particular regions;
|
|
|
|
our ability to price Jones GABA at competitive levels;
|
|
|
|
our ability to promote and advertise Jones GABA; and
|
|
|
|
our ability to deliver Jones GABA in the quantity and at
the time ordered by retailers.
|
We may not be able to perform on all or any of these factors in
any of our current or prospective geographic areas of
distribution, in which case our results of operations and
financial condition will suffer.
In addition, Jones GABA will be launched as a premium
priced item and part of a new emerging category of functional
beverages. The current economic climate may not support a
premium priced beverage entry at the level of our expectations
for the product line. If we are forced to lower price points due
to economic conditions, our efforts may prove to be unsuccessful
or unprofitable, in which case our results of operations and
financial condition will suffer.
We are
dependent on National Beverages production capacity and
capabilities to meet the demand for Jones products in the
grocery and mass merchant channel in the U.S.
In 2006, we entered into an agreement with National Beverage
pursuant to which, beginning in 2007, National Beverage
generally has the exclusive right in the United States to
manufacture and distribute Jones Soda 8-ounce and
12-ounce cans and 1-liter PET bottles in the grocery and mass
merchant channel. The agreement has an initial term of five
years, expiring on December 31, 2011, and we may not
terminate the agreement prior to that date unless National
Beverage is in material default. As a result, our success in the
CSD industry will depend to a significant extent on the
performance of National Beverage. If National Beverage fails to
perform adequately, because, for example, it is unable to
manufacture our products in sufficient quantities to meet demand
in a timely manner (due to a shortfall in agreed upon capacity
in one or all of their factories or significantly increased
demand or other reasons) or does not provide acceptable customer
service to our grocery and mass merchant customers, our ability
to gain market acceptance in the CSD industry could be
materially adversely affected and our results of operations
would suffer. In addition, National Beverage may be unable to
pass cost increases to retailers, thereby reducing our profits
from sales in the CSD channel.
Moreover, National Beverage will have the right to terminate our
agreement upon six months notice at any time after
December 31, 2009. If National Beverage were to terminate
the agreement, we would need to find alternative manufacturing
and distribution arrangements for the CSD channel, which we may
be unable to do in a timely manner or on favorable terms, which
could adversely affect our results of operations.
Finally, National Beverage Corp. purchases concentrate from us
in order to manufacture our products, and it places orders for
concentrate as required by its production and inventory needs.
National Beverage is not required to place any minimum monthly
or quarterly concentrate orders with us. This could lead to
fluctuating sales of concentrate during any given quarter or
year and have an adverse effect on our results of operations.
We
have dedicated, and will continue to dedicate, significant
resources to our sponsorship agreements and may not realize the
benefits expected from those agreements.
Our sponsorship agreements with the Seattle Seahawks, the New
Jersey Nets and to a lesser extent the Portland Trail Blazers,
require us to make substantial annual payments in exchange for
certain promotional and branding benefits. There can be no
assurance, however, that the benefit we anticipate from those
and similar agreements, including exclusive beverage rights and
other branding opportunities, will compensate for the annual
payment commitments required by the agreements. These
commitments are significant, totaling approximately
$10.6 million over the remaining terms of the agreements as
of December 31, 2008 (see the
17
table of Contractual Obligations included under
Item 7 of this Report). Moreover, there can be no assurance
that our association with these particular teams will have a
positive effect on our image and brand. There is a risk that we
will be unable to recover the costs associated with our
sponsorship agreements, which would have an adverse effect on
our results of operations.
We
rely on third-party packers of our products, and this dependence
could make management of our marketing and distribution efforts
inefficient or unprofitable.
We do not own the plants or the majority of the equipment
required to manufacture and package our beverage products and do
not anticipate increasing such capabilities in the future. As a
consequence, we depend on third parties and contract packers to
produce our beverage products and deliver them to distributors.
Our ability to attract and maintain effective relationships with
contract packers and other third parties for the production and
delivery of our beverage products in a particular geographic
distribution area is important to the achievement of successful
operations within each distribution area. Competition for
contract packers business is intense, especially in the
western United States, and this could make it more difficult for
us to obtain new or replacement packers, or to locate
back-up
contract packers, in our various distribution areas, and could
also affect the economic terms of our agreements with our
packers. Our contract packers may terminate their arrangements
with us at any time, in which case we could experience
disruptions in our ability to deliver products to our customers.
We may not be able to maintain our relationships with current
contract packers or establish satisfactory relationships with
new or replacement contract packers, whether in existing or new
geographic distribution areas. The failure to establish and
maintain effective relationships with contract packers for a
distribution area could increase our manufacturing costs and
thereby materially reduce profits realized from the sale of our
products in that area. In addition, poor relations with any of
our contract packers could adversely affect the amount and
timing of product delivered to our distributors for resale,
which would in turn adversely affect our revenues and financial
condition.
As is customary in the contract packing industry for comparably
sized companies, we are expected to arrange for our contract
packing needs sufficiently in advance of anticipated
requirements. To the extent demand for our products exceeds
available inventory and the capacities produced by contract
packing arrangements, or orders are not submitted on a timely
basis, we will be unable to fulfill distributor orders on
demand. Conversely, we may produce more product than warranted
by the actual demand for it, resulting in higher storage costs
and the potential risk of inventory spoilage. Our failure to
accurately predict and manage our contract packaging
requirements may impair relationships with our independent
distributors and key accounts, which, in turn, would likely have
a material adverse effect on our ability to maintain profitable
relationships with those distributors and key accounts.
Our
business and financial results depend on the continuous supply
and availability of raw materials.
The principal raw materials we use include aluminum cans and
glass bottles, labels and cardboard cartons, aluminum and steel
closures, juices, flavorings, sucrose/inverted cane sugar and
sucralose, and fortification ingredients which include vitamins,
minerals and Pharma GABA. The costs of our ingredients are
subject to fluctuation. In addition, with our shift to
production using pure cane sugar instead of high fructose corn
syrup, we utilize considerable quantities of pure cane sugar. If
our supply of these raw materials is impaired or if prices
increase significantly, our business would be adversely affected.
Due to the consolidations that have taken place in the glass
industry over the past few years, the prices of glass bottles
continue to increase. The prices of pure cane sugar, sucrose,
trays and labels increased in early 2008. In addition, certain
of our contract packing arrangements allow such contract packers
to increase their charges based on certain of their own cost
increases. Although we have mitigated this risk for 2009 through
fixed-price purchase commitments for sugar and glass, we are
uncertain whether the prices of any of the above or any other
raw materials or ingredients will continue to rise in the future
and whether we will be able to pass any such increases on to our
customers.
We have entered into a supply agreement to obtain the key
ingredient for our Jones GABA product, Pharma GABA. The
supply agreement terminates on July 31, 2010, subject to
earlier termination if any party
18
defaults in performing any of its obligations under the
agreement and fails to correct such default within one month
after notice of default. Although we believe we can obtain
adequate supplies of GABA from other sources in synthetic form,
Pharma GABA is the only naturally produced form of GABA on the
market at this time and we believe may give us a competitive
advantage over other beverage products that may include
synthetic forms of GABA. There can be no assurance, however,
that our supplier will continue to supply us with Pharma GABA on
acceptable terms beyond the termination date of our current
supply agreement, in which case we would be required to obtain
synthetic forms of GABA in order to continue to produce our
products. This may affect the quality or consumer acceptance of
our product, which could negatively affect our results of
operations and financial condition.
We may not correctly estimate demand for our products. Our
ability to estimate demand for our products is imprecise,
particularly with new products, and may be less precise during
periods of rapid growth, particularly in new markets. If we
materially underestimate demand for our products or are unable
to secure sufficient ingredients or raw materials including, but
not limited to, cans, glass, labels, flavors, supplements, and
certain sweeteners, or sufficient packing arrangements, we might
not be able to satisfy demand on a short-term basis. Moreover,
industry-wide shortages of certain concentrates, supplements and
sweeteners have been experienced and could, from time to time in
the future, be experienced, which could interfere with
and/or delay
production of certain of our products and could have a material
adverse effect on our business and financial results.
Disruption
of our supply chain could have an adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of
operations.
Our ability and that of our suppliers, business partners
(including packagers), contract manufacturers, independent
distributors and retailers to make, move and sell products is
critical to our success. Damage or disruption to our or their
manufacturing or distribution capabilities due to weather,
natural disaster, fire or explosion, terrorism, pandemics such
as avian flu, strikes or other reasons, could impair our ability
to manufacture or sell our products. Failure to take adequate
steps to mitigate the likelihood or potential impact of such
events, or to effectively manage such events if they occur,
could adversely affect our business, financial condition and
results of operations, as well as require additional resources
to restore our supply chain.
We
rely upon our ongoing relationships with our key flavor
suppliers. If we are unable to source our flavors on acceptable
terms from our key suppliers, we could suffer disruptions in our
business.
Currently, we purchase our flavor concentrate from three flavor
concentrate suppliers, and we anticipate that we will purchase
flavor concentrate from other flavor houses for future flavors
and additional products, with the intention of developing other
sources of flavor concentrate for each of our products. The
price of our concentrates is determined by our flavor houses and
us, and may be subject to change. Generally, flavor suppliers
hold the proprietary rights to their flavors. Consequently, we
do not have the list of ingredients or formulae for our flavors
and concentrates and we may be unable to obtain these flavors or
concentrates from alternative suppliers on short notice. If we
have to replace a flavor supplier, we could experience
disruptions in our ability to deliver products to our customers,
which could have a material adverse effect on our results of
operations.
If we
are unable to maintain brand image and product quality, or if we
encounter other product issues such as product recalls, our
business may suffer.
Our success depends on our ability to maintain brand image for
our existing products and effectively build up brand image for
new products and brand extensions. There can be no assurance,
however, that additional expenditures and our advertising and
marketing will have the desired impact on our products
brand image and on consumer preferences. Product quality issues,
real or imagined, or allegations of product contamination, even
when false or unfounded, could tarnish the image of the affected
brands and may cause consumers to choose other products.
19
In addition, because of changing government regulations or
implementation thereof, allegations of product contamination, we
may be required from time to time to recall products entirely or
from specific markets. Product recalls could affect our
profitability and could negatively affect brand image. Adverse
publicity surrounding obesity concerns, water usage and other
concerns could negatively affect our overall reputation and our
products acceptance by consumers.
The
inability to attract and retain key personnel would directly
affect our efficiency and results of operations.
Our success depends on our ability to attract and retain highly
qualified employees in such areas as production, distribution,
sales, marketing and finance. We compete to hire new employees,
and, in some cases, must train them and develop their skills and
competencies. Our operating results could be adversely affected
by increased costs due to increased competition for employees,
higher employee turnover or increased employee benefit costs. In
addition, there has been high turnover among our senior
executive officers, and all current executive officers began
their tenure at the Company in 2008. Any unplanned turnover,
particularly involving one of our key personnel, could
negatively impact our operations, financial condition and
employee morale.
Our
inability to protect our trademarks, patents and trade secrets
may prevent us from successfully marketing our products and
competing effectively.
Failure to protect our intellectual property could harm our
brand and our reputation, and adversely affect our ability to
compete effectively. Further, enforcing or defending our
intellectual property rights, including our trademarks, patents,
copyrights and trade secrets, could result in the expenditure of
significant financial and managerial resources. We regard our
intellectual property, particularly our trademarks, patents and
trade secrets to be of considerable value and importance to our
business and our success. We rely on a combination of trademark,
patent, and trade secrecy laws, confidentiality procedures and
contractual provisions to protect our intellectual property
rights. We are pursuing the registration of our trademarks in
the United States, Canada and internationally. There can be no
assurance that the steps taken by us to protect these
proprietary rights will be adequate or that third parties will
not infringe or misappropriate our trademarks, patented
processes, trade secrets or similar proprietary rights. In
addition, there can be no assurance that other parties will not
assert infringement claims against us, and we may have to pursue
litigation against other parties to assert our rights. Any such
claim or litigation could be costly. In addition, any event that
would jeopardize our proprietary rights or any claims of
infringement by third parties could have a material adverse
effect on our ability to market or sell our brands, profitably
exploit our products or recoup our associated research and
development costs.
As part of the licensing strategy of our brands, we enter into
licensing agreements under which we grant our licensing partners
certain rights to use our trademarks and other designs. Although
our agreements require that the licensing partners use of
our trademarks and designs is subject to our control and
approval, any breach of these provisions, or any other action by
any of our licensing partners that is harmful to our brands,
goodwill and overall image, could have a material adverse impact
on our business.
We have obtained two U.S. patents on our
myJones.com methodology. While the number of
business method patents issued by the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office has been growing substantially in recent years,
there is still a significant degree of uncertainty associated
with these patents. It is possible that our patent may be
construed by a court of competent jurisdiction in a very limited
manner such that it offers little or no basis for us to deter
competitors from employing similar processes or does not allow
us to defend against third party claims of patent infringement.
20
Litigation
or legal proceedings (including pending securities class
actions) could expose us to significant liabilities and damage
our reputation.
Securities class action derivative lawsuits have been filed
against us and current and former officers and members of the
Board of Directors. These lawsuits are described more fully in
Part I, Item 3. Legal Proceedings and in
Note 9 to our consolidated financial statements contained
in this
Form 10-K.
We may also become party to other litigation claims and legal
proceedings. Litigation involves significant risks,
uncertainties and costs, including distraction of management
attention away from our current business operations. We evaluate
litigation claims and legal proceedings to assess the likelihood
of unfavorable outcomes and to estimate, if possible, the amount
of potential losses. Based on these assessments and estimates,
we establish reserves
and/or
disclose the relevant litigation claims or legal proceedings, as
appropriate. These assessments and estimates are based on the
information available to management at the time and involve a
significant amount of management judgment. We caution you that
actual outcomes or losses may differ materially from those
envisioned by our current assessments and estimates. Our
policies and procedures require strict compliance by our
employees and agents with all United States and local laws and
regulations applicable to our business operations, including
those prohibiting improper payments to government officials.
Nonetheless, there can be no assurance that our policies,
procedures and related training programs will always ensure full
compliance by our employees and agents with all applicable legal
requirements. Improper conduct by our employees or agents could
damage our reputation in the United States and internationally
or lead to litigation or legal proceedings that could result in
civil or criminal penalties, including substantial monetary
fines, as well as disgorgement of profits.
Changes
in accounting standards and subjective assumptions, estimates
and judgments by management related to complex accounting
matters could significantly affect our financial
results.
Generally accepted accounting principles and related
pronouncements, implementation guidelines and interpretations
with regard to a wide variety of matters that are relevant to
our business, such as, but not limited to, revenue recognition,
stock-based compensation, trade promotions, sports sponsorship
agreements and income taxes are highly complex and involve many
subjective assumptions, estimates and judgments by our
management. Changes to these rules or their interpretation or
changes in underlying assumptions, estimates or judgments by our
management could significantly change our reported results.
If we
are unable to build and sustain proper information technology
infrastructure, our business could suffer.
We depend on information technology as an enabler to improve the
effectiveness of our operations and to interface with our
customers, as well as to maintain financial accuracy and
efficiency. If we do not allocate and effectively manage the
resources necessary to build and sustain the proper technology
infrastructure, we could be subject to transaction errors,
processing inefficiencies, the loss of customers, business
disruptions, or the loss of or damage to intellectual property
through security breach. Our information systems could also be
penetrated by outside parties intent on extracting information,
corrupting information or disrupting business processes. Such
unauthorized access could disrupt our business and could result
in the loss of assets.
We
face currency risks associated with fluctuating foreign currency
valuations.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, approximately 19% of
our sales were denominated in the Canadian dollar which exposes
us to foreign currency exchange rate risk with respect to our
sales, expenses, profits, assets and liabilities. As of
December 31, 2008, we have not entered into foreign
currency contracts or other derivatives to mitigate the
potential impact of foreign currency fluctuations. As a result,
our reported earnings may be affected by changes in the Canadian
dollar.
21
Risk
Factors Relating to Our Industry
We
compete in an industry that is brand-conscious, so brand name
recognition and acceptance of our products are critical to our
success.
Our business is substantially dependent upon awareness and
market acceptance of our products and brands by our target
market, consumers between the ages of 12 and 24. In addition,
our business depends on acceptance by our independent
distributors and retailers of our brands as beverage brands that
have the potential to provide incremental sales growth. Although
we believe that we have been relatively successful in
establishing our brands as recognizable brands in the New Age
beverage industry, it may be too early in the product life cycle
of these brands to determine whether our products and brands
will achieve and maintain satisfactory levels of acceptance by
independent distributors and retail consumers. We believe that
the success of the Jones 24C, Jones GABA. Jones
Organics, Jones Naturals, and Whoop Ass brands will
also be substantially dependent upon acceptance of the Jones
Pure Cane Soda brand. Accordingly, any failure of our
Jones Pure Cane Soda brand to maintain or increase
acceptance or market penetration would likely have a material
adverse effect on our revenues and financial results.
Competition
from traditional non-alcoholic beverage manufacturers may
adversely affect our distribution relationships and may hinder
development of our existing markets, as well as prevent us from
expanding our markets.
The beverage industry is highly competitive. We compete with
other beverage companies not only for consumer acceptance but
also for shelf space in retail outlets and for marketing focus
by our distributors, all of whom also distribute other beverage
brands. Our products compete with a wide range of drinks
produced by a relatively large number of manufacturers, most of
which have substantially greater financial, marketing and
distribution resources than ours. Some of these competitors are
placing severe pressure on independent distributors not to carry
competitive alternative or New Age beverage brands such as ours.
We also compete with regional beverage producers and
private label soft drink suppliers.
Our direct competitors in the alternative beverage industry
include Cadbury Schweppes (Stewarts and IBC) and Thomas Kemper.
We also compete against Coca Cola, Pepsi, Hansens and
other traditional soft drink manufacturers and distributors. We
compete against other category leaders such as Red Bull and
Monster for the energy drink category. These national and
international competitors have advantages such as lower
production costs, larger marketing budgets, greater financial
and other resources and more developed and extensive
distribution networks than ours. There can be no assurance that
we will be able to grow our volumes or be able to maintain our
selling prices in existing markets or as we enter new markets.
Increased competitor consolidations, market-place competition,
particularly among branded beverage products, and competitive
product and pricing pressures could impact our earnings, market
share and volume growth. If, due to such pressure or other
competitive threats, we are unable to sufficiently maintain or
develop our distribution channels, we may be unable to achieve
our current revenue and financial targets. As a means of
maintaining and expanding our distribution network, we intend to
introduce product extensions and additional brands. There can be
no assurance that we will be able to do so or that other
companies will not be more successful in this regard over the
long term. Competition, particularly from companies with greater
financial and marketing resources than ours, could have a
material adverse effect on our existing markets, as well as on
our ability to expand the market for our products.
We
compete in an industry characterized by rapid changes in
consumer preferences and public perception, so our ability to
continue developing new products to satisfy our consumers
changing preferences will determine our long-term
success.
Our current market distribution and penetration may be too
limited with respect to the population as a whole to determine
whether the brand has achieved initial consumer acceptance, and
there can be no assurance that this acceptance will ultimately
be achieved. Based on industry information and our own
experience, we believe that, in general, alternative or New Age
beverage brands and products may be successfully marketed for
five to nine years after the product is introduced in a
geographic distribution area before consumers taste
22
preferences change, although some brands or products have longer
lives. In light of the limited life of alternative or New Age
beverage brands and products, a failure to introduce new brands,
products or product extensions into the marketplace as current
ones mature could prevent us from achieving long-term
profitability. In addition, customer preferences also are
affected by factors other than taste, such as health and
nutrition considerations and obesity concerns, shifting consumer
needs, changes in consumer lifestyles, increased consumer
information and competitive product and pricing pressures. Sales
of our products may be adversely affected by the negative
publicity associated with these issues. If we do not adjust to
respond to these and other changes in customer preferences, our
sales may be adversely affected.
Our
results of operations may fluctuate from quarter to quarter for
many reasons, including seasonality.
As is typical in the beverage industry, our sales are seasonal.
In a typical year, approximately 57% of our sales occur from
April to September and approximately 43% occur from October to
March. As a result, our working capital requirements and cash
flow vary substantially throughout the year. Consumer demand for
our products is also affected by weather conditions. Cool, wet
spring or summer weather could result in decreased sales of our
beverages and could have an adverse effect on our results of
operations.
We have experienced significant fluctuations in quarterly
results that have been the result of many factors. In
particular, like many other companies in the beverage industry,
we generate a substantial percentage of our revenues during the
warm weather months of April through September. Management
believes that the demand for our products will continue to
reflect such seasonal consumption patterns.
In addition, our operating results may fluctuate due to a number
of other factors including, but not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
Our ability to develop and expand distribution channels for
current and new products, particularly with respect to Jones
GABA, develop favorable arrangements with third party
distributors of our products and minimize or reduce issues
associated with engaging new distributors and retailers,
including, but not limited to, transition costs and expenses and
down time resulting from the initial deployment of our products
in each new distributors network;
|
|
|
|
Our ability to manage our operating expenses to sufficiently
support general operating activities, slotting fees, promotion
and sales activities, and capital expansion, and our ability to
sustain profitability;
|
|
|
|
Our ability to meet the competitive response by much larger,
well-funded and established companies currently operating in the
beverage industry, as we introduce new competitive products,
such as cola, diet cola, lemon lime, vitamin-enhanced water
beverages, and functional tea juice blends and enter into
sponsorship agreements;
|
|
|
|
Our ability to develop, expand and implement our
direct-to-retail
sales channels and national retail accounts, as well as our
myJones programs;
|
|
|
|
Our ability to increase distribution in our four core regions
consisting of the Northwest, the Southwest, the Midwest and
Canada, and our ability to expand and manage distributor growth
in areas outside of the core regions;
|
|
|
|
Unilateral decisions by distributors, grocery store chains,
specialty chain stores, club stores, mass merchandisers and
other customers to discontinue carrying all or any of our
products that they are carrying at any time;
|
|
|
|
Competitive products and pricing pressures and our ability to
gain or maintain share of sales in the marketplace as a result
of actions by competitors; and
|
|
|
|
Our ability to develop and market various products under our
sports sponsorship agreements.
|
Due to these and other factors, our results of operations have
fluctuated from period to period and may continue to do so in
the future, which could cause our operating results in a
particular quarter to fail to meet market expectations.
23
The
global economic crisis may adversely impact our business and
results of operations.
The beverage industry can be affected by macro economic factors,
including changes in national, regional, and local economic
conditions, employment levels and consumer spending patterns.
The recent disruptions in the overall economy and financial
markets as a result of the global economic crisis have adversely
impacted our two primary markets: the U.S. and Canada. This
has reduced consumer confidence in the economy and could
negatively affect consumers willingness to purchase our
products as they reduce their discretionary spending. Moreover,
current economic conditions may adversely affect the ability of
our distributors to obtain the credit necessary to fund their
working capital needs, which could negatively impact their
ability or desire to continue to purchase products from us in
the same frequencies and volumes as they have done in the past.
We also may be unable to access credit markets on favorable
terms or at all. There can be no assurances that government
responses to the disruptions in the financial markets will
restore consumer confidence, stabilize the markets or increase
liquidity and the availability of credit. If the current
economic conditions persist or deteriorate, sales of our
products could be adversely affected, the credit status of our
customers could be impacted, collectibility of accounts
receivable may be compromised and we may face obsolescence
issues with our inventory, any of which could have a material
adverse impact on our operating results and financial condition.
We
could be exposed to product liability claims for personal injury
or possibly death.
Although we have product liability insurance in amounts we
believe are adequate, there can be no assurance that the
coverage will be sufficient to cover any or all product
liability claims. To the extent our product liability coverage
is insufficient, a product liability claim would likely have a
material adverse effect upon our financial condition. In
addition, any product liability claim successfully brought
against us may materially damage the reputation of our products,
thus adversely affecting our ability to continue to market and
sell that or other products. Additionally, we may be required
from time to time to recall products entirely or from specific
co-packers, markets or batches. Product recalls could adversely
affect our profitability and our brand image. We do not maintain
recall insurance.
Our
business is subject to many regulations and noncompliance is
costly.
The production, marketing and sale of our beverages, including
contents, labels, caps and containers, are subject to the rules
and regulations of various federal, provincial, state and local
health agencies. If a regulatory authority finds that a current
or future product or production run is not in compliance with
any of these regulations, we may be fined, or production may be
stopped, thus adversely affecting our financial condition and
results of operations. Similarly, any adverse publicity
associated with any noncompliance may damage our reputation and
our ability to successfully market our products. Furthermore,
the rules and regulations are subject to change from time to
time and while we closely monitor developments in this area, we
have no way of anticipating whether changes in these rules and
regulations will impact our business adversely. Additional or
revised regulatory requirements, whether labeling,
environmental, tax or otherwise, could have a material adverse
effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Significant
additional labeling or warning requirements may inhibit sales of
affected products.
Various jurisdictions may seek to adopt significant additional
product labeling or warning requirements relating to the
chemical content or perceived adverse health consequences of
certain of our products. These types of requirements, if they
become applicable to one or more of our major products under
current or future environmental or health laws or regulations,
may inhibit sales of such products. In California, a law
requires that a specific warning appear on any product that
contains a component listed by the state as having been found to
cause cancer or birth defects. This law recognizes no generally
applicable quantitative thresholds below which a warning is not
required. If a component found in one of our products is added
to the list, or if the increasing sensitivity of detection
methodology that may become available under this law and related
regulations as they currently exist, or as they may be amended,
results in the detection of an infinitesimal quantity of a
listed substance in one of our beverages produced for sale in
California, the resulting warning requirements or adverse
publicity could affect our sales.
24
Risk
Factors Related to Our Common Stock
The
price of our common stock may be volatile, and a
shareholders investment in our common stock could suffer a
decline in value.
There has been significant volatility in the volume and market
price of our common stock, and this volatility may continue in
the future. In addition, factors such as quarterly variations in
our operating results, changes in financial estimates by
securities analysts or our failure to meet our or their
projected financial and operating results, litigation involving
us, general trends relating to the beverage industry, actions by
governmental agencies, national economic and stock market
considerations as well as other events and circumstances beyond
our control could have a significant impact on the future market
price of our common stock and the relative volatility of such
market price.
If we
are not able to achieve our objectives for our business, the
value of an investment in our company could be negatively
affected.
In order to be successful, we believe that we must, among other
things:
|
|
|
|
|
increase the sales volume and gross margins for our brands and
products;
|
|
|
|
achieve and maintain efficiencies in operations;
|
|
|
|
manage our operating expenses to sufficiently support operating
activities;
|
|
|
|
maintain fixed costs at or near current levels; and
|
|
|
|
avoid significant increases in variable costs relating to
production, marketing and distribution.
|
We may not be able to meet these objectives, which could have a
material adverse affect on our results of operations. We have
incurred significant operating expenses in the past and may do
so again in the future and, as a result, will need to increase
revenues in order to improve our results of operations. Our
ability to increase sales will depend primarily on success in
expanding our current markets, improving our distribution base,
entering into direct to retail arrangements with
national accounts, and introducing new brands, products or
product extensions to the market. Our ability to successfully
enter new distribution areas and obtain national accounts will,
in turn, depend on various factors, many of which are beyond our
control, including, but not limited to, the continued demand for
our brands and products in target markets, the ability to price
our products at competitive levels, the ability to establish and
maintain relationships with distributors in each geographic area
of distribution and the ability in the future to create, develop
and successfully introduce one or more new brands, products, and
product extensions.
We may
not be able to maintain the listing of our common stock on the
Nasdaq Capital Market, which would make it more difficult for
investors to sell shares of our common stock.
Our common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market. The
Nasdaq Capital Market has several quantitative and qualitative
requirements companies must comply with to maintain this
listing, including a $1.00 minimum bid price per share and
$35 million minimum value of listed securities. Nasdaq has
suspended the minimum bid price requirement for all listed
companies through April 20, 2009. The level of trading
activity of our common stock may decline if it is no longer
listed on Nasdaq Capital Market. As such, if our common stock
ceases to be listed for trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market for
any reason, it may harm our stock price, increase the volatility
of our stock price, or make it more difficult to for investors
to buy or sell shares of our common stock. In addition, if we
are not listed the Nasdaq Capital Market
and/or if
our public float remains below $75 million, we may be
limited in our ability to file new shelf registration statements
on SEC
Form S-3
and/or to
fully use one or more registration statements on SEC
Form S-3
which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to
raise capital.
|
|
ITEM 1B.
|
UNRESOLVED
STAFF COMMENTS.
|
None.
25
We lease approximately 13,534 feet square of office space
in Seattle, Washington for our principal executive and
administrative offices, and for warehouse purposes. The lease
term of five years expires in August 2011, and does not include
an option to extend the lease. We believe our leased premises
are suitable and adequate for their use. We do not own real
property.
|
|
ITEM 3.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS.
|
On September 4, 2007, a putative class action complaint was
filed against us, our then serving chief executive officer, and
our then serving chief financial officer in the
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington,
alleging claims under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. The case is entitled Saltzman v.
Jones Soda Company, et al., Case
No. 07-cv-1366-RSL,
and purports to be brought on behalf of a class of purchasers of
our common stock during the period March 9, 2007 to
August 2, 2007. Six substantially similar complaints
subsequently were filed in the same court, some of which alleged
claims on behalf of a class of purchasers of our common stock
during the period November 1, 2006 to August 2, 2007.
Some of the subsequently filed complaints added as defendants
certain current and former directors and another former officer
of the Company. The complaints generally alleged violations of
federal securities laws based on, among other things, false and
misleading statements and omissions about our financial results
and business prospects. The complaints sought unspecified
damages, interest, attorneys fees, costs, and expenses. On
October 26, 2007, these seven lawsuits were consolidated as
a single action entitled In re Jones Soda Company Securities
Litigation, Case No.
07-cv-1366-RSL.
On March 5, 2008, the Court appointed Robert Burrell lead
plaintiff in the consolidated securities case. On May 5,
2008, the lead plaintiff filed a First Amended Consolidated
Complaint, which purports to allege claims on behalf of a class
of purchasers of our common stock during the period of
January 10, 2007, to May 1, 2008, against the Company
and Peter van Stolk, our former Chief Executive Officer, former
Chairman of the Board, and current director. The First Amended
Consolidated Complaint generally alleges violations of federal
securities laws based on, among other things, false and
misleading statements and omissions about our agreements with
retailers, allocation of resources, and business prospects.
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on
July 7, 2008. After hearing oral argument on
February 3, 2009, the Court granted the motion to dismiss
in its entirety on February 9, 2009. The Courts
dismissal order requires plaintiffs to file a motion for leave
to file any amended complaint. Plaintiffs deadline to file
a motion to amend is March 25, 2009.
In addition, on September 5, 2007, a shareholder derivative
action was filed in the Superior Court for King County,
Washington, allegedly on behalf of and for the benefit of the
Company, against certain of our current officers and current and
former directors. The case is entitled Cramer v. van
Stolk, et al., Case
No. 07-2-29187-3
SEA (Cramer Action). The Company also was named as a nominal
defendant. Four other shareholders filed substantially similar
derivative cases. Two of these actions were filed in Superior
Court for King County, Washington. One of these two Superior
Court actions has been voluntarily dismissed and the other has
been consolidated with the Cramer Action under the caption In re
Jones Soda Co. Derivative Litigation, Lead Case
No. 07-2-31254-4
SEA. On April 28, 2008, plaintiffs in the consolidated
action filed an amended complaint based on the same basic
allegations of fact as in the federal securities class actions
and alleging, among other things, that certain of our current
and former officers and directors breached their fiduciary
duties to the Company and were unjustly enriched in connection
with the public disclosures that are the subject of the federal
securities class actions. On May 2, 2008, the Court signed
a stipulation and order staying the proceedings in the
consolidated Cramer Action until all motions to dismiss in the
consolidated federal securities class action have been
adjudicated.
The two remaining shareholder derivative actions were filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Washington. On April 10, 2008, the Court presiding over the
federal derivative cases consolidated them under the caption
Sexton v. van Stolk, et al., Case
No. 07-1782RSL
(Sexton Action), and appointed Bryan P. Sexton lead plaintiff.
The Court also established a case schedule, which, among other
things, sets the close of fact discovery as January 4,
2009, and sets a trial date of May 4, 2009. The actions
comprising the consolidated Sexton Action are based on the same
basic allegations of fact as in the securities class actions
26
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Washington and the Cramer Action, filed in the Superior Court
for King County. The actions comprising the Sexton Action
allege, among other things, that certain of our current and
former directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties to
the Company and were unjustly enriched in connection with the
public disclosures that are the subject of the federal
securities class actions. The complaints seek unspecified
damages, restitution, disgorgement of profits, equitable and
injunctive relief, attorneys fees, costs, and expenses. On
June 3, 2008, the parties filed a joint motion to stay the
Sexton Action until all motions to dismiss in the federal
securities class action have been adjudicated. On June 5,
2008, the Court granted the motion and stayed the Sexton action.
The Cramer Action and Sexton Action are derivative in nature and
do not seek monetary damages from the Company. However, the
Company may be required, throughout the pendency of the action,
to advance payment of legal fees and costs incurred by the
defendants and the litigation may result in significant
obligations for payment of defense costs and indemnification.
On August 27, 2008, Advanced Business Strategies filed a
Complaint for Damages against us in the Circuit Court for the
State of Oregon for breach of contract and breach of implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing, seeking damages in
excess of $1.1 million. Advanced Business Strategies has
alleged that we improperly terminated their agreement to provide
us with certain sales and marketing services. On October 1,
2008, we filed a Notice of Removal from the State Court to the
United States District Court, District of Oregon. Our answer to
the claims was filed on October 8, 2008; we asserted that
Advanced Business Strategies is in breach of the agreement and
has failed to mitigate its alleged damages. There is no trial
date currently set and discovery is ongoing.
We are unable to predict the outcome of any of the actions
described above.
In addition to the matters above, we are or may be involved from
time to time in various claims and legal actions arising in the
ordinary course of business, including proceedings involving
product liability claims and other employee claims, and tort and
other general liability claims, for which we carry insurance, as
well as trademark, copyright, and related claims and legal
actions. In the opinion of our management, the ultimate
disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse
effect on our consolidated financial position, results of
operations or liquidity.
|
|
ITEM 4.
|
SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
|
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during
the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008.
27
PART II
|
|
ITEM 5.
|
MARKET
FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.
|
Market
Information
Our common stock is currently traded on the NASDAQ Capital
Market under the symbol JSDA. Effective
February 20, 2009, we delisted from the TSX Venture
Exchange in Canada (symbol JSD).
On November 28, 2005, we qualified for trading on the
NASDAQ Capital Market. Prior to that time, our common stock had
been traded on the OTC Bulletin Board since June 23,
2000. The following table shows, for each quarter of fiscal 2008
and 2007, the high and low closing sales prices as reported by
the NASDAQ Capital Market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nasdaq Capital Market
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
$
|
1.55
|
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
|
3.17
|
|
|
|
1.28
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
|
3.82
|
|
|
|
2.72
|
|
First quarter
|
|
|
7.41
|
|
|
|
2.38
|
|
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
$
|
12.32
|
|
|
$
|
5.94
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
|
17.93
|
|
|
|
8.80
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
|
31.54
|
|
|
|
13.83
|
|
First quarter
|
|
|
22.20
|
|
|
|
11.67
|
|
As of March 6, 2009, there were 26,454,391 shares of
common stock issued and outstanding, held by approximately 317
holders of record, although there are a much larger number of
beneficial owners. The last reported sale price per share on
March 6, 2009 was $0.78.
Dividends
We have never declared or paid any cash dividends with respect
to our common stock. We do not anticipate paying cash dividends
on our common stock in the foreseeable future. Any future
determination with regard to the payment of dividends will be at
the discretion of the Board of Directors and will be dependent
upon our future earnings, financial condition, applicable
dividend restrictions and capital requirements and other factors
deemed relevant by the Board of Directors.
Stock
Repurchases
The following table contains information for shares repurchased
during the fourth quarter of 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of
|
|
|
Approximate Dollar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased
|
|
|
Value of Shares That
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as Part of Publicly
|
|
|
May Yet Be Purchased
|
|
|
|
Total Number of
|
|
|
Average Price
|
|
|
Announced Plans or
|
|
|
Under the Plans or
|
|
Fiscal Period
|
|
Shares Purchased(1)
|
|
|
Paid per Share(1)
|
|
|
Programs
|
|
|
Programs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in $ 000)
|
|
|
October 1 to October 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 1 to November 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 1 to December 31, 2008
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
$
|
.36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
$
|
.36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The number of shares reported above as purchased are
attributable to shares withheld by the Company as payment for
withholding taxes due in connection with the vesting of
restricted stock awards issued under the Jones Soda Co.
2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan. The average price
paid per share reflects the average market value per share of
the shares withheld for tax purposes. No shares were repurchased
in 2007. |
28
Performance
Graph
COMPARISON
OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Among Jones Soda Co., The S&P 500 Index
And A Peer Group
|
|
|
* |
|
$100 invested on 12/31/03 in stock or index, including
reinvestment of dividends.
Fiscal year ending December 31. |
|
|
|
Copyright©
2009 S&P, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All
rights reserved. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/03
|
|
|
12/04
|
|
|
12/05
|
|
|
12/06
|
|
|
12/07
|
|
|
12/08
|
Jones Soda Co.
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
|
165.07
|
|
|
|
|
258.37
|
|
|
|
|
588.52
|
|
|
|
|
355.98
|
|
|
|
|
15.31
|
|
S&P 500
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
|
110.88
|
|
|
|
|
116.33
|
|
|
|
|
134.70
|
|
|
|
|
142.10
|
|
|
|
|
89.53
|
|
Peer Group
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
|
114.15
|
|
|
|
|
179.39
|
|
|
|
|
279.74
|
|
|
|
|
312.61
|
|
|
|
|
235.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The graph above compares the cumulative
5-year total
return of holders of Jones Soda Co.s common stock with the
cumulative total returns of the S&P 500 Index and the
following group of peer companies from the beverage industry
selected by us: Clearly Canadian Beverage Corp., Cott Corp.,
Hansen Natural Corp., Leading Brands Inc. and National Beverage
Corp. The graph assumes that the value of a $100 investment in
our common stock, in the peer group and on the S&P 500 on
December 31, 2003 would provide a cumulative total return
(including stock appreciation plus reinvestment of dividends) as
indicated through December 31, 2008. The stock prices
included in this graph are not necessarily indicative of future
stock price performance.
Sales
of Unregistered Securities
None.
29
|
|
ITEM 6.
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
|
The following selected financial and operating data are derived
from our consolidated financial statements and should be read in
conjunction with Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and our
consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Consolidated statements of operation data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
35,918
|
|
|
$
|
39,831
|
|
|
$
|
39,035
|
|
|
$
|
33,511
|
|
|
$
|
27,450
|
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
(28,551
|
)
|
|
|
(30,387
|
)
|
|
|
(23,730
|
)
|
|
|
(21,916
|
)
|
|
|
(17,886
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
7,367
|
|
|
|
9,444
|
|
|
|
15,305
|
|
|
|
11,595
|
|
|
|
9,564
|
|
Licensing revenue
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
334
|
|
|
|
684
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
109
|
|
Promotion and selling expenses
|
|
|
(12,292
|
)
|
|
|
(11,857
|
)
|
|
|
(8,480
|
)
|
|
|
(7,667
|
)
|
|
|
(5,956
|
)
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(10,661
|
)
|
|
|
(8,893
|
)
|
|
|
(4,750
|
)
|
|
|
(3,347
|
)
|
|
|
(2,426
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(15,416
|
)
|
|
|
(10,972
|
)
|
|
|
2,759
|
|
|
|
1,305
|
|
|
|
1,291
|
|
Other income, net
|
|
|
384
|
|
|
|
1,498
|
|
|
|
913
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before income taxes
|
|
|
(15,032
|
)
|
|
|
(9,474
|
)
|
|
|
3,672
|
|
|
|
1,334
|
|
|
|
1,344
|
|
Income tax (expense) benefit
|
|
|
(203
|
)
|
|
|
(2,155
|
)
|
|
|
902
|
|
|
|
(51
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
|
(15,235
|
)
|
|
|
(11,629
|
)
|
|
|
4,574
|
|
|
|
1,283
|
|
|
|
1,330
|
|
Basic and diluted net (loss) income per share
|
|
$
|
(0.58
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.45
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance sheet data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, short term investments and accounts
receivable
|
|
$
|
15,054
|
|
|
$
|
32,268
|
|
|
$
|
37,139
|
|
|
$
|
4,876
|
|
|
$
|
3,168
|
|
Fixed assets, net
|
|
|
2,099
|
|
|
|
2,498
|
|
|
|
2,171
|
|
|
|
663
|
|
|
|
682
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
24,315
|
|
|
|
41,625
|
|
|
|
47,952
|
|
|
|
10,453
|
|
|
|
7,851
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
396
|
|
|
|
474
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
17,674
|
|
|
|
31,482
|
|
|
|
39,474
|
|
|
|
5,699
|
|
|
|
3,780
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
288-ounce equivalent case sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finished products case sales
|
|
|
2,886,000
|
|
|
|
3,126,000
|
|
|
|
2,592,000
|
|
|
|
2,569,000
|
|
|
|
2,258,000
|
|
Concentrate case sales
|
|
|
1,501,000
|
|
|
|
2,670,000
|
|
|
|
2,167,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total case sales
|
|
|
4,387,000
|
|
|
|
5,796,000
|
|
|
|
4,759,000
|
|
|
|
2,569,000
|
|
|
|
2,258,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
ITEM 7.
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS.
|
The following discussion of our financial condition and
results of operations contains forward-looking statements that
involve risks and uncertainties, such as statements of our
plans, objectives, expectations and intentions. As described at
the beginning of this Annual Report, our actual results could
differ materially from those anticipated in these
forward-looking statements. Factors that could contribute to
such differences include those discussed below and in the
section above entitled Risk Factors. You should not
place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which
apply only as of the date of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update
publicly any forward-looking statements to reflect new
information, events or circumstances after the date of this
Report, or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events You
should read the following discussion and analysis in conjunction
with our consolidated financial statements and the accompanying
notes thereto included elsewhere in this Report.
Overview
We develop, produce, market and distribute a range of premium
beverages. With the addition of Jones
GABAtm
in the first quarter of 2009, our premium beverages include the
following six brands:
|
|
|
|
|
Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm,
a premium carbonated soft drink;
|
|
|
|
Jones
24Ctm,
an enhanced water beverage;
|
|
|
|
Jones
GABAtm,
a functional tea juice blend;
|
|
|
|
Jones
Organicstm,
a ready-to-drink organic tea;
|
|
|
|
Jones
Naturals®,
a non-carbonated juice & tea; and
|
|
|
|
WhoopAss®,
a citrus energy drink.
|
We sell and distribute our products primarily throughout the
United States (U.S.) and Canada through our network of
independent distributors, which we refer to as our direct store
delivery (DSD) channel, national retail accounts, which we refer
to as our direct to retail (DTR) channel, as well as through
licensing and distribution arrangements. We do not directly
manufacture our products but instead outsource the manufacturing
process to third party bottlers and contract packers.
In September 2006, we entered into an exclusive manufacturing
and distribution agreement with National Beverage Corp.
(National Beverage) to manufacture and distribute Jones Soda
12-ounce cans to the more mainstream channels and in-store
locations in an effort to expand our points of availability
within all stores including the shelves that are normally
restricted to national mainstream brands manufactured by
companies such as The
Coca-Cola
Company and PepsiCo. Beginning in January 2007, National
Beverage Corp. started selling Jones Pure Cane Soda to
retailers in the grocery and mass merchant channels in the
U.S. Through this arrangement, we identify and secure
retailers across the U.S. for Jones Soda 12-ounce
cans, and we are solely responsible for all sales efforts,
marketing, advertising and promotion. Using concentrate supplied
by Jones, National Beverage both manufactures and sells on an
exclusive basis the products directly to retailers. Finally, we
also sell various products on-line which we refer to as our
interactive channel and sell customized soda, wearables, candy
and other items.
Our products are sold in 50 states in the U.S. and 9
provinces in Canada, primarily in convenience stores,
delicatessens, sandwich shops and selected supermarkets, as well
as through our national accounts with several large retailers.
We have focused our sales and marketing resources on the
expansion and penetration of our products through our
independent distributor network and national retail accounts in
our core markets consisting of the Northwest, Southwest and
Midwest U.S. and Canada, as well as targeted expansion into
our less penetrated markets consisting of the Northeast and
Southeast U.S. In addition we are expanding our
international business outside of North America and have entered
the markets of Ireland, the United Kingdom (UK) and Australia
through independent distributors.
31
Beginning in 2004, we launched our licensing business strategy
as a method to extend our brand into non-alternative beverage
products and non-beverage products. We currently have licensing
arrangements with three companies. With these licensing
agreements, we believe that we are able to partner with
companies that will manufacture Jones related products and
extend our Jones brand into select products that we feel enhance
our brand image. We do not expect this business to be a material
part of our operations in 2009.
Our business strategy is to increase sales by expanding
distribution of our brands in new and existing markets
(primarily within North America), stimulating consumer awareness
and trial of our products leading to increased relevance and
purchase intent of our brands. Our business strategy focuses on:
|
|
|
|
|
expanding points of distribution for our products;
|
|
|
|
creating strong alignment with our key distributors;
|
|
|
|
developing innovative beverage brands and products;
|
|
|
|
stimulating strong consumer demand for our existing brands and
products, with primary emphasis in the U.S. and Canada;
|
|
|
|
inviting consumers to participate in our brand through
submission of photographs to be placed on labels through our
interactive application of my Jones.com;
|
|
|
|
licensing our brand equity for the creation of other beverage or
non-beverage products; and
|
|
|
|
licensing our patented custom-label process to non-competitive
products.
|
In order to compete effectively in the beverage industry, we
believe that we must convince independent distributors that
Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm
is a leading brand in the premium soda segment of the
alternative or New Age beverage industry. Additionally, as a
means of maintaining and expanding our distribution network, we
introduce new products and product extensions, and when
warranted, new brands. In February 2009, we launched Jones
GABA, our first line of beverage products containing Pharma
GABA, offered in a 12-ounce can. We will market this tea and
juice blended beverage by focusing on the benefits of enhanced
focus and clarity that studies have shown GABA provides.
We have allocated significant resources in our efforts to launch
Jones GABA in the first quarter of 2009. Our results with
respect to Jones GABA depend in part on our ability to
successfully launch Jones GABA and market the
products ability to enhance levels of mental clarity and
focus, as studies have shown. Jones GABA is our first
entry into beverage products containing GABA and much of our
success will depend on our ability to gain new points of
distribution through our DSD channel. We must also be successful
in developing DTR distribution for Jones GABA through
existing DTR customers and obtain new listings with customers
that currently do not have points of distribution. Jones GABA
will be launched as a premium priced item and part of a new
emerging category of functional beverages. The current economic
environment may not support a premium priced beverage entry at
the level of our expectations for the product line.
The beverage industry can be affected by macro economic factors,
including changes in national, regional, and local economic
conditions, employment levels and consumer spending patterns.
The recent disruptions in the overall economy and financial
markets as a result of the global economic crisis have adversely
impacted our two primary markets: the U.S. and Canada. This
has reduced consumer confidence in the economy and could
negatively affect consumers willingness to purchase our
products as they reduce their discretionary spending. Moreover,
current economic conditions may adversely affect the ability of
our distributors to obtain the credit necessary to fund their
working capital needs, which could negatively impact their
ability or desire to continue to purchase products from us in
the same frequencies and volumes as they have done in the past.
There can be no assurances that government responses to the
disruptions in the financial markets will restore consumer
confidence, stabilize the markets or increase liquidity and the
availability of credit. If the current economic conditions
persist or deteriorate, sales of our products could be adversely
affected, collectability of accounts receivable may be
compromised and we may face obsolescence issues with our
inventory, any of which could have a material adverse impact on
our operating results and financial condition.
32
Based on our current plans and amounts expected to be generated
from future operations, we believe that our cash and cash
equivalents, and net cash provided by operations will be
sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for working
capital and capital expenditures through the end of fiscal 2009
and beyond. This will depend, however, on our ability to execute
on our 2009 operating plan and to manage our costs in light of
developing economic conditions and the performance of our
business. We arrived at our revenue projections for our 2009
operating plan after careful consideration of the macroeconomic
factors stemming from the global economic crisis, with an
emphasis on our higher-margin, core products, including our
Jones Pure Cane Soda glass bottle business. Further, we
implemented cost containment measures in the fourth quarter of
2008 and early 2009, including reductions in workforce, to
further align our cost structure with our revenue projections.
Although we do not believe we are dependent on new product
launches to generate sufficient cash flow from operations in
2009, we believe our new higher-margin product introductions in
2009, including the launch of Jones GABA during the first
quarter, will help to enhance our sales growth into new markets
and consumer groups. We intend to continually monitor and adjust
our business plan as necessary to respond to developments in our
business, our markets and the broader economy. Even with these
measures, we do not anticipate reaching profitability in 2009.
Refer to Liquidity and Capital Resources included in
Item 7 of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Results
of Operations
Years
Ended December 31, 2008 and 2007
Revenue
For the year ended December 31, 2008, revenue was
approximately $35.9 million, a decrease of
$3.9 million, or 9.8% from $39.8 million in revenue
for the year ended December 31, 2007. The decrease in
revenue was primarily attributable to a 7.7% decrease in case
sales through our DTR and DSD channels to 2.9 million cases
as well as a 43.8% decrease in case sales of concentrate to
National Beverage to 1.5 million cases due to the
nationwide launch of cans in 2007 which resulted in sufficient
inventory levels through the initial launch and reduced the
demand for new orders in 2008. These decreases were offset by a
reduction of 11.3%, or $580,000, in promotion allowances and
slotting fees, which are a reduction to revenue, to
$4.5 million from $5.1 million. This resulted from
fewer promotion allowance programs in the latter part of 2008
due to lower sales volumes and our cost containment measures
which are anticipated to contribute to a continued decline in
promotion allowance programs in 2009. Revenues in our DSD
channel decreased in 2008 compared to the prior year as a result
of lower shipments of Jones Soda glass bottles, our core
product, due to a discontinuation of distribution points at some
key retailers but this decrease was partially offset by the
benefit of a full year of sales of 24C which was launched
in September 2007. DTR channel revenue was negatively impacted
in 2008 compared to 2007 due to a reduction in the number of
retail stores carrying Jones Soda as well as the
discontinuance of the Jones Soda 12-ounce bottles at a
major retailer.
Gross
Profit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
$
|
7,367
|
|
|
$
|
9,444
|
|
|
|
(22.0
|
)%
|
% of Revenue
|
|
|
20.5
|
%
|
|
|
23.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2008, gross profit
decreased by approximately $2.1 million or 22.0% as
compared to $9.4 million in gross profit for the year ended
December 31, 2007. This was primarily a result of lower
sales volumes in our DTR channel due to a reduction in the
number of retail stores carrying Jones Soda as well as
the discontinuance of the Jones Soda 12-ounce bottles at
a major retailer. Also contributing to the decrease in gross
profit was an increase in freight costs and the shutdown of our
St. Louis co-packer which resulted in longer shipping
distances to customers in our Midwest and Southeast markets. In
2008, gross profit as a percentage of revenue decreased to 20.5%
from 23.7% in 2007.
33
Licensing
Revenue
Licensing revenue decreased 49%, or $164,000 to $170,000 for the
year ended December 31, 2008, from $334,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2007, and consisted primarily of our
exclusive licensing arrangements with Big Sky Brands for
Jones Soda Flavor Booster Hard Candy. We believe
licensing revenue was down due to the negative impact on sales
resulting from the economic downturn. We do not expect licensing
revenue to represent a material portion of our overall revenues
in 2009.
Promotion
and Selling Expenses
Promotion and selling expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2008 were $12.3 million, an increase of
$435,000, or 3.7%, over $11.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007. Promotion and selling expenses as a
percentage of revenue increased to 34.2% for the year ended
December 31, 2008, from 29.8% in 2007. The increase in
promotion and selling expenses was primarily due to an increase
in selling expenses year over year of $539,000, to
$7.2 million, or 20.0% of revenue. This increase was
primarily due to increases in sales personnel in conjunction
with the emphasis on the CSD channel until the strategic refocus
in the fourth quarter of 2008 resulting in a reduction in force.
The effect of the workforce reduction is expected to reduce
ongoing promotion and selling expenses in 2009. Also
contributing to the increase in promotion and selling expenses
was an increase in marketing expenses of $99,000 to
$4.8 million, or 13.2% of revenue, for 2008 from
$4.7 million in 2007. This was primarily due to increases
in brand building efforts including promotional events and
sponsorships which were offset by a decrease in marketing
expense.
General
and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2008 were $10.7 million, an increase of
$1.8 million or 19.9%, compared to $8.9 million for
the year ended December 31, 2007. General and
administrative expenses as a percentage of revenue increased to
29.7% for the year ended December 31, 2008 from 22.4% in
2007. The increase in general and administrative expenses was
primarily due to an increase in professional fees, including
legal fees relating to our securities litigation matter and
accounting fees, as well as executive transition expenses of
approximately $423,000.
Other
Income, Net
Other income, net decreased to $384,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2008, from $1.5 million in 2007,
primarily due to a decrease in interest income due to lower
levels of cash and short-term investments and lower levels of
effective interest rates compared to 2007.
Income
Tax (Expense) Benefit
Provision for income taxes for the years ended December 31,
2008 and 2007 was $203,000 and $2.2 million, respectively.
The tax provision for the year ended December 31, 2008
relates primarily to the tax provision on income from our
Canadian operations. No tax benefit is recorded for the loss in
our U.S. operations as we have recorded a full valuation
allowance on our U.S. net deferred tax assets. We expect to
continue to record a full valuation allowance on our
U.S. net deferred tax assets until we sustain an
appropriate level of taxable income through improved
U.S. operations. Our effective tax rate is based on
recurring factors, including the forecasted mix of income before
taxes in various jurisdictions, estimated permanent differences
and the recording of a full valuation allowance on our
U.S. net deferred tax assets.
Net
Loss
Net loss for the year ended December 31, 2008 increased to
$15.2 million from a net loss of $11.6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2007. This was primarily due to
lower sales in our DTR and DSD channels combined with increased
promotion and selling expenses in conjunction with the emphasis
on the CSD channel as well as an increase in general and
administrative expense primarily resulting from our securities
litigation matter and executive transition expenses.
34
Results
of Operations
Years
Ended December 31, 2007 and 2006
Revenue
For the year ended December 31, 2007, revenue was
approximately $39.8 million, an increase of $796,000, or
2.0% from $39.0 million in revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2006. The increase in revenues was primarily
attributable to a 21.8% increase in case sales through our DTR,
DSD and CSD channels to 5.8 million cases. The increase in
case sales was primarily due to an increase in case sales of
Jones Soda 12-ounce bottles and 24C, our enhanced
water beverage launched in the first quarter 2007, through our
DTR and DSD network, as well as a higher overall price per case
in 2007. Concentrate case sales to National Beverage for the
year ended December 31, 2007 were higher than in 2006, as
sales in 2007 include sales of concentrate of Jones Pure Cane
Soda and Jones Energy, while concentrate case sales
in fiscal 2006 consisted solely of Jones Energy
concentrate sales during the second quarter of 2006 and
Jones Soda concentrate sales in the fourth quarter of
2006. The increase in concentrate sales of Jones Pure Cane
Soda to National Beverage in 2007 was primarily in
preparation of the launch of our 12-ounce cans in 2007. The
increases in revenue were offset by an increase in promotion
allowances and slotting fees, which are a reduction to revenue,
to $5.1 million from $480,000 in 2006, primarily resulting
from the slotting fees incurred to gain entry into the CSD
channel for our 12-ounce cans.
Gross
Profit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
$
|
9,444
|
|
|
$
|
15,305
|
|
|
|
(38.3
|
)%
|
% of Revenue
|
|
|
23.7
|
%
|
|
|
39.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2007, gross profit
decreased by approximately $5.9 million or 38.3% as
compared to $15.3 million in gross profit for the year
ended December 31, 2006. This decrease was primarily as a
result of increased promotion allowances and slotting fees to
$5.1 million in 2007 from $480,000 in 2006 due to the
nationwide launch of cans in 2007 through our CSD channel. The
decrease was also due to inventory provisions and write-downs of
approximately $1.7 million related to, among other items,
the transition from high fructose corn syrup to pure cane sugar
production during the first three quarters, the discontinuance
of our 16-ounce Jones Soda cans and certain special packs
and flavors in the fourth quarter. Changes in product mix and
sales mix in the DSD and DTR channels also contributed to the
lower gross profit as we shipped more product to our DTR
customers, where we receive lower gross profit than shipments to
our distributors. Additionally, in 2007 we continued to
experience higher co-packing costs for some of our products due
to increases in energy costs, co-packing fees and freight costs.
In response, we continued to shift a portion of our bottling
requirements to our U.S co-packers in an effort to reduce
freight and co-packing costs. In 2007, gross profit as a
percentage of revenue decreased to 23.7% from 39.2% in 2006.
Licensing
Revenue
Licensing revenue decreased 51.2%, or $350,000, to $334,000 for
the year ended December 31, 2007 from $684,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2006 and consisted primarily of our
exclusive arrangements with Big Sky Brands for Jones Soda
Flavor Booster Hard Candy and remaining royalties on the
sale of remaining high fructose corn syrup inventory through
Target Corporation. In contrast, for the year ended
December 31, 2006, licensing revenue consisted primarily of
royalty payments on the sale of 12-ounce cans pursuant to our
exclusive licensing arrangement with Target Corporation that
expired on December 31, 2006, and to a lesser extent our
licensing arrangement with Big Sky Brands.
Promotion
and Selling Expenses
Promotion and selling expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2007 were $11.9 million, an increase of
$3.4 million, or 39.8%, over $8.5 million for the year
ended December 31, 2006. Promotion and selling
35
expenses as a percentage of revenue increased to 29.8% for the
year ended December 31, 2007, from 21.7% in 2006. The
increase in promotion and selling expenses was primarily due to
increased promotion expenses resulting from our entry into the
CSD channel and our introduction of 24C in various
markets in our DSD channel and increased headcount in senior
sales and marketing positions in 2007. The increase in promotion
and selling expenses in 2007 was also due to hiring a national
advertising agency to develop an advertising campaign for our
Jones Soda products. Further, 2007 was the first year we
incurred expenses related to our Sponsorship Agreement with the
Seahawks and New Jersey Nets which included amounts amortized
relating to the sponsorship fees, product development costs and
marketing costs.
General
and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2007 were $8.9 million, an increase of
$4.1 million or 87.2%, compared to $4.8 million for
the year ended December 31, 2006. General and
administrative expenses as a percentage of revenue increased to
22.4% for 2007 from 12.2% in 2006. The increase in general and
administrative expenses was primarily due to the executive
transition expenses of approximately $1.1 million, a
significant increase in legal fees relating to our securities
litigation matter, increased negotiation costs of various
customer and supplier agreements, audit and consulting fees
related to Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404 compliance,
depreciation and amortization and stock-based compensation.
Other
Income, Net
For the year ended December 31, 2007, other income, net was
approximately $1.5 million compared to approximately
$913,000 in 2006 primarily due to interest income from the funds
we received from our June 2006 equity offering that were
available for the entire year and foreign currency translation
gains. Interest income consists of interest income earned on
cash on-hand and short-term investments which were invested in
money market and short-term fixed-income instruments.
Income
Taxes (Expense) Benefit
For the year ended December 31, 2007, we recorded a
valuation allowance on our deferred taxes in the fourth quarter
and, thus, recorded a net income tax expense of
$2.2 million compared to an income tax benefit of $903,000
in 2006. The tax provision for the year ended December 31,
2007, is based on an expected annual effective tax rate of
(22.35)%, compared to a U.S. statutory rate of 34%. The
actual effective tax rate for the year ended December 31,
2007 differs from 2006 due primarily to the recording of the
valuation allowance on the U.S. deferred tax assets. The
tax provision for the year ended December 31, 2006 is based
on an effective tax rate of (25.6)% compared to a
U.S. statutory rate of 34%. Our effective tax rate is based
on recurring factors, including the forecasted mix of income
before taxes in various jurisdictions, estimated permanent
differences and the related effective tax rates in those
jurisdictions.
Net
(Loss) Income
Net loss for the year ended December 31, 2007 was
approximately $11.6 million compared to net income of
$4.6 million in 2006. The decrease in net income was due to
an increase in slotting fees costs, promotion allowances and
operating expenses. Operating expenses increased due to
increased trade promotion spending for CSD and DSD channels,
increased expenses related to increased hiring in sales,
marketing and operations departments, depreciation and
amortization and legal and compliance costs.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, we had cash,
cash-equivalents and short-term investment of approximately
$12.6 million and $27.8 million, respectively and
working capital of $17.7 million and $31.5 million,
respectively. Accumulated deficit increased to
$29.4 million as of December 31, 2008 over the prior
years deficit of $14.2 million. This increase in our
accumulated deficit is due to net losses from operations that we
have incurred in each of the last six fiscal quarters. During
these periods, we have used a significant amount of our cash
resources to fund our net losses and working capital
requirements.
36
Net cash used in operating activities in 2008 increased to
$14.5 million compared to $3.3 million in 2007, for a
year-over-year increase of $11.2 million. This increase in
net cash used in operating activities was primarily due to the
increase in our net loss, excluding the one-time non-cash
deferred income tax expense in the prior year, driven by lower
sales in our DTR and DSD channels combined with increased
promotion and selling expenses in connection with the emphasis
on the CSD channel in the first three quarters of 2008. Also
contributing to net cash used in operating activities was an
increase in general and administrative expense primarily
resulting from our securities litigation matter and executive
transition. Additionally, significant decreases from
December 31, 2007 to December 31, 2008 in accounts
payable (due in part to the decrease in trade spend expenses as
a result of cost containment measures in late 2008) were
partially offset by decreases in accounts receivable (due
primarily to the decline in DTR and DSD channel revenue)
contributed to the increase in cash used by operations.
Net cash provided by investing activities totaled approximately
$8.5 million and $5.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, primarily due to
sale of short-term investments offset to a lesser extent, by
purchases of fixed assets.
Net cash used in financing activities was approximately $88,000
for the year ended December 31, 2008, and consisted
primarily of payments on our capital lease obligations compared
to net cash provided by financing activities for the year ended
December 31, 2007 of $1.5 million comprised primarily
of proceeds from exercises of stock options.
In early October 2008, we implemented a reduction in workforce
that reduced our staff by approximately 30% whose annualized
salaries and benefits were approximately $2.6 million. The
workforce reduction was implemented in an effort to reduce
ongoing operating expenses and improve our overall efficiency.
Severance and termination benefits to the affected employees
were not material to our financial results for the fourth
quarter of 2008.
In November 2008, our $15 million line of credit with Key
Bank National Association was terminated after discussions that
were initiated by Key Bank given the current economic climate
and our financial condition and operating results. We considered
different borrowing alternatives with Key Bank but these
alternatives would have required us to maintain a fully secured
position at all times on the loan, which we did not consider to
be an effective lending position. As a result, we elected not to
pursue such alternatives. We remained in compliance with all
covenants through the termination date.
Based on our current plans and amounts expected to be generated
from future operations, we believe that our cash and cash
equivalents and net cash provided by operations will be
sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for working
capital and capital expenditures through the end of fiscal 2009
and beyond. This will depend, however, on our ability to execute
on our 2009 operating plan and to manage our costs in light of
developing economic conditions and the performance of our
business. We arrived at our revenue projections for our 2009
operating plan after careful consideration of the macroeconomic
factors stemming from the global economic crisis, with an
emphasis on our higher-margin core products, including our
Jones Pure Cane Soda glass bottle business. Further, we
implemented cost containment measures in the fourth quarter of
2008 and early 2009, including reductions in workforce, to
further align our cost structure with our revenue projections.
Although we do not believe we are dependent on new product
launches to generate sufficient cash flow from operations in
2009, we believe the launch of Jones GABA during the
first quarter, plus corresponding the extensions of this
product, will help to enhance our sales growth into new markets
and consumer groups. We intend to continually monitor and adjust
our business plan as necessary to respond to developments in our
business, our markets and the broader economy and are prepared,
if necessary, to take further action to conserve cash, including
further cost reductions in sales, marketing and general and
administrative areas. Even with these measures, we do not
anticipate reaching profitability in 2009.
Our current operating plan for 2009 does not depend on obtaining
financing; however, if we are unable to generate sufficient cash
flow from operations to cover our working capital and capital
expenditure requirements, we may need to obtain funds through
additional financing or securing a replacement credit facility,
which may not be available to us on acceptable terms, if at all.
In addition, we may have to explore various strategies to secure
any necessary additional financing, which may include, without
limitation, public or private offerings of
37
debt or equity securities, joint ventures with one or more
strategic partners and other strategic alternatives. There can
be no assurance that our efforts in this regard will result in
any agreements or transactions.
Contractual
Obligations
Our commitments as of December 31, 2008 with respect to
known contractual obligations were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More Than
|
|
Contractual Obligations
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
2-3 Years
|
|
|
4-5 Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
$
|
539
|
|
|
$
|
186
|
|
|
$
|
285
|
|
|
$
|
68
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Operating lease obligations
|
|
|
494
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sponsorships
|
|
|
10,562
|
|
|
|
1,224
|
|
|
|
5,633
|
|
|
|
3,330
|
|
|
|
375
|
|
Purchase obligations
|
|
|
8,684
|
|
|
|
7,217
|
|
|
|
1,467
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
|
$
|
20,279
|
|
|
$
|
8,827
|
|
|
$
|
7,679
|
|
|
$
|
3,398
|
|
|
$
|
375
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our sponsorship obligations include commitments under our
Sponsorship Agreements with the Seattle Seahawks, the New Jersey
Nets and the Portland Trail Blazers. These obligations vary in
terms and commit us to payments from 2008 to 2016. We describe
these arrangements in Part I, Item 1 (Business) of
this report.
Purchase obligations reflected in the table above include
approximately $5 million in sugar under our supply
agreements with our three pure cane sugar suppliers and
approximately $1.8 million in glass under our supply
agreement with our glass supplier. They are include commitments
under our Pharma GABA supply agreement to order approximately
$1.8 million of Pharma GABA by December 31, 2008 and,
on or before January 31, 2009, to pay 50% of that amount,
with the remaining portion to be paid in six equal monthly
installments commencing on February 24, 2009 and ending
July 26, 2009.
In addition, we are required to use our commercially reasonable
best efforts to purchase an additional $8.4 million of
Pharma GABA through the end of the term of the agreement in July
2010 according to the following schedule: (1) approximately
$3.4 million of Pharma GABA by July 31, 2009 and
(2) an additional approximately $5.1 million of Pharma
GABA by July 31, 2010. The $8.4 million is not
included in the table above because it does not represent a firm
commitment.
We have no off-balance sheet arrangements.
Contingencies
We are subject to the possibility of losses from various
contingencies. See Item 3 Legal Proceedings for
disclosure of the Federal Securities Class Action and
Shareholder Derivative Litigation as well as other matters. We
are unable to predict the outcome of these actions. These
actions could result in significant liability and could have a
material adverse effect on our business, results of operations,
or financial condition.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and
results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial
statements, which have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
The preparation of these financial statements requires us to
make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of
assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going
basis, we evaluate our estimates based on historical experience
and on various other assumptions that we believe to be
reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form
our basis for making judgments about the carrying values of
assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other
sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions, or if management made
different judgments or utilized different estimates. Many of our
estimates or judgments are based on anticipated future events or
performance, and as such are forward-looking in nature, and are
subject to many risks and uncertainties, including those
discussed below and elsewhere in this Report. We do not
undertake any obligation to update or revise this discussion to
reflect any future events or circumstances.
38
There are certain critical accounting estimates that we believe
require significant judgment in the preparation of our
consolidated financial statements. We have identified below our
accounting policies and estimates that we consider critical to
our business operations and the understanding of our results of
operations. This is not a complete list of all of our accounting
policies, and there may be other accounting policies that are
significant to us. For a detailed discussion on the application
of these and our other accounting policies, see Note 1 to
the Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Report.
Revenue
Recognition
We recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement
exists, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or
determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured. Revenue
is recorded net of provisions for discounts, slotting fees and
allowances in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
No. 01-9,
Accounting for Consideration Given by a Vendor to a Customer
(Including a Reseller of the Vendors Products).
Such incentives are recognized as a reduction in revenue at the
later of the date on which the related revenue is recognized or
a commitment is made, except in the case of slotting which is
recognized when the commitment is made.
With respect to our DSD and DTR channels, our products are sold
on various terms for cash or credit. Our credit terms, which are
established in accordance with local and industry practices,
typically require payment within 30 days of delivery. We
recognize revenue upon receipt of our products by our
distributors and retail customers in accordance with written
sales terms, net of provisions for discounts and allowances. All
sales to distributors and customers are final sales; however, in
limited instances, due to product quality issues or distributor
terminations, we may accept returned product.
With respect to our CSD channel, we recognize revenue from the
sale of concentrate to National Beverage Corp. on a gross basis
upon receipt of concentrate by National Beverage. The selling
price and terms of sale of concentrate to National Beverage are
determined in accordance with our manufacturing and distribution
agreement with them. Our credit terms from the sale of
concentrate typically require payment within 30 days of
delivery. Generally we do not accept returns on sales of
concentrate to National Beverage; however, in limited instances,
due to product quality or other custom package commitments, we
may accept returned product.
Licensing revenue is recorded when we receive a sale
confirmation from the third party.
Inventory
We hold raw materials and finished goods inventories, which are
manufactured and procured based on our sales forecasts. We value
inventory at the lower of cost or market, which is based on
estimated net realizable value, and include adjustments for
estimated obsolescence, on a first in-first out basis. These
valuations are subject to customer acceptance, planned and
actual product changes, demand for the particular products, and
our estimates of future realizable values based on these
forecasted demands. We regularly review inventory detail to
determine whether a write-down is necessary. We consider various
factors in making this determination, including recent sales
history and predicted trends, industry market conditions and
general economic conditions. The amount and timing of
write-downs for any period could change if we make different
judgments or use different estimates. We also determine whether
an allowance for obsolescence is required on products that are
over 12 months from production date or any changes related
to market conditions, slow-moving inventory or obsolete products.
Deferred
Income Taxes
The determination of our provision of income taxes requires
significant judgment, the use of estimates, and the
interpretation and application of complex tax laws. To the
extent management believes it is more likely than not that we
will not be able to utilize some or all of our deferred tax
assets prior to their expiration, we are required to establish
valuation allowances against that portion of deferred tax
assets. The determination of required valuation allowances
involves significant management judgment and is based upon our
best estimate of anticipated taxable profits in various
jurisdictions with which the deferred tax assets are associated.
Changes in expectations could result in significant adjustments
to the valuation allowance and material changes to our provision
for income taxes.
39
During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007, we concluded that it
was appropriate to record a charge of approximately
$5.5 million to establish a full valuation allowance
against the tax benefits arising from losses in our
U.S. operations. As of December 31, 2007, we had
incurred cumulative losses in recent years with respect to our
U.S. operations, and we increased our cumulative losses in
our U.S. operations by $15.1 million in 2008. In
accordance with the relevant accounting guidance, we considered
future projections of U.S. pretax income as a material
factor in our analysis of the realizability of our
net U.S. deferred tax assets. Nonetheless, it was
difficult to overcome the cumulative losses and thus, we
continue to establish a full valuation allowance against our
U.S. deferred tax assets. This is due to the fact that the
relevant accounting guidance puts more weight on the negative
objective evidence of cumulative losses in recent years than the
positive subjective evidence of future projections of pretax
income. We analyze the realizability of our deferred tax assets
on a quarterly basis, but reasonably expect to continue to
record a full valuation allowance on future U.S. tax
benefits until we sustain an appropriate level of taxable income
through improved U.S. operations and tax planning
strategies. No valuation allowance was recorded for deferred tax
assets recorded in the Canadian subsidiary, as this subsidiary
remains profitable.
We adopted the provisions of Financial Accounting Standards
Board Interpretation No. 48 (FIN 48) on
January 1, 2007. The adoption of FIN 48 did not impact
the consolidated financial condition, results of operations or
cash flows. We believe that we have appropriate support for the
income tax positions taken and to be taken on our tax returns
and that our accruals for tax liabilities are adequate for all
open years based on an assessment of many factors including past
experience and interpretations of tax law applied to the facts
of each matter. No accruals exist under FIN 48 as of
December 31, 2008.
|
|
ITEM 7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK.
|
In the normal course of our business, our financial position is
routinely subject to a variety of risks. The principal market
risks (i.e., the risk of loss arising from adverse changes in
market rates and prices) to which we are exposed are
fluctuations in energy and commodity prices affecting the cost
of raw materials (including, but not limited to, increases in
the price of bottles, PET plastic bottles, as well as cane
sugar), and the limited availability of certain raw materials
and co-packer capacity. We are also subject to market risks with
respect to the cost of commodities because our ability to
recover increased costs through higher pricing is limited by the
competitive environment in which we operate.
We mitigate the risk of fluctuations in commodity prices through
the purchase commitments we have for glass and sugar, which
provide for a majority of our forecasted material demand. We
have entered into fixed price purchase commitments with three
pure cane sugar suppliers and one glass supplier for one to two
year terms. We are still subject to freight surcharges in
addition to these agreements, but anticipate a reduction in 2009
due to lower fuel prices.
With respect to foreign currency risk, approximately 21% of
sales are international and primarily are comprised of sales to
Canada. As a result, we are subject to risk from changes in
foreign exchange rates. These changes result in cumulative
translation adjustments, which are included in accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss). We do not consider the potential
loss resulting from a hypothetical 10% adverse change in quoted
Canadian exchange rates, as of December 31, 2008, to be
material.
Additionally, we may be subject to interest rate risk on our
investment portfolio to the extent we maintain an investment
portfolio. We are also subject to other risks associated with
the business environment in which we operate, including the
collectibility of accounts receivable and obsolescence of
inventory due to changes in market conditions or new product
initiatives. We believe that our exposure to these risks as of
December 31, 2008 is not material.
We do not use derivative financial instruments to protect
ourselves from fluctuations in interest rates or foreign
currency fluctuations. We have entered into one-to to two-year
agreements with our sugar suppliers for the supply of sugar at
fixed prices. We have also entered into a two year agreement
with our glass supplier for the supply of glass at fixed prices.
We do not use futures contracts to hedge against fluctuations in
commodity prices.
40
|
|
ITEM 8.
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
Consolidated Financial Statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
41
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Jones Soda Co.
Seattle, Washington
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of
Jones Soda Co. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of
December 31, 2008 and the related consolidated statement of
operations, shareholders equity, and cash flows for the
year then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated
financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such 2008 consolidated financial statements
present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position
of Jones Soda Co. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008,
and the results of their operations and their cash flows for the
year then ended in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2008, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission and our report dated March 13, 2009 expressed an
unqualified opinion on the Companys internal control over
financial reporting.
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Seattle, Washington
March 13, 2009
42
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Jones Soda Co.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Jones Soda Co. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007,
and the related consolidated statements of operations,
shareholders equity, and cash flows for each of the years
in the two-year period ended December 31, 2007. These
consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our
audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred
to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of Jones Soda Co. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2007, and the results of its operations and
its cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period
ended December 31, 2007, in conformity with United States
generally accepted accounting principles.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Chartered Accountants
Vancouver, Canada
March 13, 2008
43
JONES
SODA CO.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
11,736
|
|
|
$
|
17,858
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
890
|
|
|
|
9,935
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $330,000 and $317,000
|
|
|
2,428
|
|
|
|
4,475
|
|
Taxes receivable
|
|
|
258
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory
|
|
|
5,654
|
|
|
|
5,746
|
|
Deferred income tax asset, current portion
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
822
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
22,118
|
|
|
|
38,836
|
|
Deferred income tax asset
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
Fixed assets
|
|
|
2,099
|
|
|
|
2,498
|
|
Intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
24,315
|
|
|
$
|
41,625
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
1,469
|
|
|
$
|
1,939
|
|
Accrued liabilities
|
|
|
2,788
|
|
|
|
5,055
|
|
Taxes payable
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
203
|
|
Capital lease obligations, current portion
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
4,444
|
|
|
|
7,354
|
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
|
474
|
|
Long term liabilities other
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, no par value:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized 100,000,000 issued and outstanding
shares 26,460,409 and 26,251,183 at
December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively
|
|
|
43,924
|
|
|
|
43,856
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
5,044
|
|
|
|
3,991
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income
|
|
|
(79
|
)
|
|
|
129
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(29,414
|
)
|
|
|
(14,179
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
19,475
|
|
|
|
33,797
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$
|
24,315
|
|
|
$
|
41,625
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
44
JONES
SODA CO.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
35,918
|
|
|
$
|
39,831
|
|
|
$
|
39,035
|
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
28,551
|
|
|
|
30,387
|
|
|
|
23,730
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
7,367
|
|
|
|
9,444
|
|
|
|
15,305
|
|
Licensing revenue
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
334
|
|
|
|
684
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Promotion and selling
|
|
|
12,292
|
|
|
|
11,857
|
|
|
|
8,480
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
10,661
|
|
|
|
8,893
|
|
|
|
4,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,953
|
|
|
|
20,750
|
|
|
|
13,230
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from operations
|
|
|
(15,416
|
)
|
|
|
(10,972
|
)
|
|
|
2,759
|
|
Other income, net
|
|
|
384
|
|
|
|
1,498
|
|
|
|
913
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before income taxes
|
|
|
(15,032
|
)
|
|
|
(9,474
|
)
|
|
|
3,672
|
|
Income tax (expense) benefit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
(168
|
)
|
|
|
(293
|
)
|
|
|
(242
|
)
|
Deferred
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
(1,862
|
)
|
|
|
1,144
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(203
|
)
|
|
|
(2,155
|
)
|
|
|
902
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(15,235
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,629
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,574
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss ) earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.58
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.45
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
26,339,449
|
|
|
|
25,977,832
|
|
|
|
23,890,313
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
26,339,449
|
|
|
|
25,977,832
|
|
|
|
24,629,318
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
45
JONES
SODA CO.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
Years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Shareholders
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
(Loss) Income
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
21,616,596
|
|
|
$
|
12,491
|
|
|
$
|
765
|
|
|
$
|
108
|
|
|
$
|
(7,016
|
)
|
|
$
|
6,348
|
|
Cumulative effects of adjustments resulting from the adoption of
SAB No. 108 (note 11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(108
|
)
|
|
|
(108
|
)
|
Shares issued for PIPE
|
|
|
3,157,895
|
|
|
|
28,078
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,078
|
|
Cash received for options exercised
|
|
|
863,000
|
|
|
|
1,224
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,224
|
|
Stock options exercised, including income tax benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
1,011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,109
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,057
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,057
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,574
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income, unrealized loss on
available-for-sale short-term investments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,562
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
25,637,491
|
|
|
|
41,891
|
|
|
|
2,833
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
(2,550
|
)
|
|
|
42,270
|
|
Cash received for options exercised
|
|
|
613,692
|
|
|
|
1,604
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,604
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
361
|
|
|
|
(361
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,519
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,519
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,629
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss, realized gain on available-for-sale
short-term investments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss, unrealized gain on available-for-sale
short-term investments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,596
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2007
|
|
|
26,251,183
|
|
|
|
43,856
|
|
|
|
3,991
|
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
(14,179
|
)
|
|
|
33,797
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
87,500
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
121,726
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,053
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,053
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,235
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss, realized gain on available-for-sale
short-term investments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss, foreign currency translation loss, net
of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(186
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,443
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2008
|
|
|
26,460,409
|
|
|
$
|
43,924
|
|
|
$
|
5,044
|
|
|
$
|
(79
|
)
|
|
$
|
(29,414
|
)
|
|
$
|
19,475
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
46
JONES
SODA CO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(15,235
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,629
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,574
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash (used)
provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,060
|
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
256
|
|
Inventory write-offs
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
679
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
1,053
|
|
|
|
1,519
|
|
|
|
1,057
|
|
Loss (gain) on available for sale investments
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
Impairment of intangible assets
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long term liabilities other
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-cash charges and credits
|
|
|
(159
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
211
|
|
Change in allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
Excess tax benefit from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,109
|
)
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
1,862
|
|
|
|
(1,144
|
)
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
2,034
|
|
|
|
2,308
|
|
|
|
(3,292
|
)
|
Taxes receivable
|
|
|
(258
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
(642
|
)
|
|
|
(1,171
|
)
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
(329
|
)
|
|
|
(155
|
)
|
|
|
(566
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(514
|
)
|
|
|
(261
|
)
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
Accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(2,267
|
)
|
|
|
1,808
|
|
|
|
1,610
|
|
Taxes payable
|
|
|
(169
|
)
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used) provided by operating activities
|
|
|
(14,498
|
)
|
|
|
(3,278
|
)
|
|
|
656
|
|
INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments net
|
|
|
9,045
|
|
|
|
6,383
|
|
|
|
(16,318
|
)
|
Purchase of fixed assets
|
|
|
(581
|
)
|
|
|
(630
|
)
|
|
|
(1,728
|
)
|
Purchase of intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(175
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
8,464
|
|
|
|
5,753
|
|
|
|
(18,221
|
)
|
FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of options
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
1,604
|
|
|
|
1,224
|
|
Repayment of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
(156
|
)
|
|
|
(127
|
)
|
|
|
(117
|
)
|
Net proceeds from PIPE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,078
|
|
Excess tax benefit from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,110
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
|
(88
|
)
|
|
|
1,477
|
|
|
|
30,295
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(6,122
|
)
|
|
|
3,952
|
|
|
|
12,730
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
|
|
17,858
|
|
|
|
13,906
|
|
|
|
1,176
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
|
|
$
|
11,736
|
|
|
$
|
17,858
|
|
|
$
|
13,906
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash financing and investing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets acquired under capital leases
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
673
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid (received) during year for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$
|
(577
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,685
|
)
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
592
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
47
JONES
SODA CO.
Years
Ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006
|
|
1.
|
Nature of
Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies
|
Jones Soda
Co.®
develops, produces, markets, licenses and distributes premium
beverages and related products. Our primary product lines
include the brands Jones Pure Cane
Sodatm,
a premium soda; Jones
24Ctm,
an enhanced water beverage; Jones
GABAtm,
a functional tea, juice blend launched in February 2009,
Jones
Organicstm,
a ready to drink organic tea; Jones
Naturals®,
a non-carbonated juice and tea drink; and Whoop Ass Energy
Drink®,
a high energy drink. We are a Washington corporation and have
three operating subsidiaries, Jones Soda Co. (USA) Inc., Jones
Soda (Canada) Inc., myJones.com, Inc. as well as one
non-operating subsidiary, Whoopass USA Inc.
Basis
of presentation and consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). The
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the
Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All intercompany
transactions between the Company and its subsidiaries have been
eliminated in consolidation.
Use of
estimates
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements
requires management to make a number of estimates and
assumptions relating to the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements
and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the
reporting period. Significant items subject to such estimates
and assumptions include, but are not limited to, inventory
valuation, depreciable lives of capital assets, valuation
allowances for receivables, trade promotion liabilities,
stock-based compensation expense, valuation allowance for
deferred income tax assets and contingencies. Actual results
could differ from those estimates.
Cash
and cash equivalents
We consider all highly liquid short-term investments with an
original or remaining maturity of three months or less at the
date of purchase to be cash equivalents.
Short
term investments
Short-term investments have a remaining maturity of less than
twelve months. All short-term investments are classified as
available-for-sale securities and are recorded at fair value.
Unrealized holding gains and losses are recorded, net of tax, as
a separate component of accumulated other comprehensive income.
The estimate of fair value is based on publicly available market
information or other estimates determined by management.
Interest income on our short term investments of $495,000,
$1.4 million and $922,000 for the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively, and was
recorded in other income, net on our consolidated statements of
operations.
Fair
value of financial instruments
The carrying amounts for cash and cash equivalents, receivables
and payables approximate fair value due to the short-term
maturity of these instruments. The carrying value of other
long-term liabilities approximated fair values because the
underlying interest rates approximate market rates at the
balance sheet dates.
Accounts
receivable
Our accounts receivable balance includes balances from trade
sales. The allowance for doubtful accounts is our best estimate
of the amount of probable credit losses in our existing accounts
receivable. We determine
48
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the allowance for doubtful accounts based on historical
write-off experience. Account balances that are deemed
uncollectible, are charged off against the allowance after all
means of collection have been exhausted and the potential for
recovery is considered remote. Allowances for doubtful accounts
of $330,000, and $317,000 as of December 31, 2008 and 2007,
are netted against accounts receivable. Activity in the
allowance for doubtful accounts consists of the following as of
December 31 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year:
|
|
$
|
317
|
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
107
|
|
Net charges to bad debt expense
|
|
|
591
|
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
Write-offs
|
|
|
(607
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
0
|
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of year
|
|
$
|
330
|
|
|
$
|
317
|
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
Inventories consist of raw materials and finished goods and are
stated at the lower of cost or estimated net realizable value
and include adjustments for estimated obsolescence. Cost is
based on actual cost on a
first-in
first-out basis. The provisions for obsolete or excess inventory
are based on estimated forecasted usage of inventories. A
significant change in demand for certain products as compared to
forecasted amounts may result in recording additional provisions
for obsolete inventory. Provisions for obsolete inventory are
recorded as cost of goods sold.
Fixed
assets
Fixed assets are recorded at cost and depreciated on the
declining balance basis over the estimated useful lives of the
assets as follows:
|
|
|
Asset
|
|
Rate
|
|
Equipment
|
|
20% to 30%
|
Vehicles and office and computer equipment
|
|
30%
|
Equipment under capital lease
|
|
Lease term which approximates its useful life
|
Intangible
assets
The Companys intangible assets include costs associated
with securing trademarks, acquired distribution rights and
patents for the Companys products and are amortized on a
straight-line basis over 3 to 10 years. As of
December 31, 2008, the Company recorded a provision for
impairment of the remaining intangible asset totaling $140,000.
Amortization expense of $33,000, $35,000 and $35,000 was
recognized for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and
2006, respectively.
Impairment
of long-lived assets
Long-lived assets, which include capital and intangible assets,
are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may
not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be held and used
is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of the assets
to future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated
by the assets. If such assets are considered to be impaired, the
impairment to be recognized is measured by the amount by which
the carrying amount of the assets exceeds the fair value of the
assets. Assets to be disposed of are reported at the lower of
the carrying amount or fair value less costs to sell. We have
not recorded any long-lived asset impairments except for the
impairment of the remaining intangible asset during the year
ended December 31, 2008.
49
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Foreign
currency translation
The functional currency of our Canadian subsidiary is the
Canadian dollar. We translate assets and liabilities related to
these operations to U.S. dollars at the exchange rate in
effect at the date of the consolidated balance sheet; we convert
revenues and expenses into U.S. dollars using the average
monthly exchange rates. Translation gains and losses are
reported as a separate component of accumulated other
comprehensive income.
Revenue
recognition
We recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement
exists, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or
determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. Revenue
is recorded net of provisions for discounts, slotting fees and
allowances in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
No. 01-9,
Accounting for Consideration Given by a Vendor to a Customer
(Including a Reseller of the Vendors Products).
Such incentives are recognized as a reduction in revenue at the
later of the date on which the related revenue is recognized or
a commitment is made, except in the case of slotting which is
recognized when the commitment is made. For the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, our revenue was reduced
by $4.5 million, $5.1 million, and $480,000,
respectively for slotting fees, promotion allowances and cash
consideration. All sales to distributors and customers are
final; however, in limited instances, due to product quality
issues or distributor terminations, we may accept returned
product.
Licensing revenue is recorded when we receive a sale
confirmation from the third party.
Advertising
costs
Advertising costs, which also includes promotions and
sponsorships, are expensed as incurred. During the years ended
December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, we incurred advertising
costs of $4.6 million, $5.4 million, and
$4.4 million, respectively.
We entered into sponsorship agreements with Football Northwest
LLC (d/b/a Seattle Seahawks) and First & Goal, Inc. on
May 22, 2007; Brooklyn Arena LLC and New Jersey Nets
Basketball, LLC on November 8, 2007; and with Trail Blazer
Inc, effective October 2008; all of which provide us with the
exclusive beverage rights for certain soft drinks as well as
signage, advertising and other promotional benefits to enhance
our brand awareness. We have allocated amounts under the
agreements to the identifiable benefits including signage,
advertising and other promotional benefits based on their fair
value and are recognizing such costs in promotion and selling
expenses based on our existing policy for such expenses. The
remaining amounts due under the agreement in excess of the fair
value of the identifiable benefits, if any, are recorded as a
reduction to revenue in accordance with
EITF 01-9.
Income
taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes. The objectives of accounting
for incomes taxes are to recognize the amount of taxes payable
for the current year and deferred tax assets and liabilities for
future tax consequences of events at enacted tax rates that have
been recognized in the Companys financial statements or
tax returns. We perform periodic evaluations of recorded tax
assets and liabilities and maintain a valuation allowance, if
considered necessary. The determination of taxes payable for the
current year includes estimates.
Effective January 1, 2007, we adopted the provisions of
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Financial
Interpretation (FIN) No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty
in Income Taxes, which clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes including whether to file or not to
file a return in a particular jurisdiction. We recognize
interest and penalties associated with uncertain tax positions
in income tax expense. We believe that we have appropriate
support for the income tax positions taken, and to be taken, on
our tax
50
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
returns and that our accruals for tax liabilities are adequate
for all open years based on an assessment of many factors
including past experience and interpretations of tax law applied
to the facts of each matter. No reserves for an uncertain income
tax position have been recorded pursuant to FIN 48 during
the year.
Net
(loss) earnings per share
Basic net (loss) earnings per share is computed using the
weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the
periods, excluding reacquired stock and common stock held in
escrow that is subject to cancellation if certain criteria are
not achieved. Diluted earnings per share are computed by
adjusting the weighted average number of common shares by the
effective net exercise or conversion of all dilutive securities.
In 2008, due to the net loss, all outstanding equity options are
anti-dilutive.
Seasonality
Our sales are seasonal and we experience significant
fluctuations in quarterly results as a result of many factors.
We generate a substantial percentage of our revenues during the
warm weather months of April through September. Timing of
customer purchases will vary each year and sales can be expected
to shift from one quarter to another. As a result, management
believes that period-to-period comparisons of results of
operations are not necessarily meaningful and should not be
relied upon as any indication of future performance or results
expected for the fiscal year.
Recent
accounting pronouncements
In December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) ratified the Emerging Issues Task Forces (EITF)
Consensus for Issue
No. 07-1,
Accounting for Collaborative Arrangements
(EITF 07-1),
which defines collaborative arrangements and establishes
reporting requirements for transactions between participants in
a collaborative arrangement and between participants in the
arrangement and third parties.
EITF 07-1
will become effective beginning with our first quarter of 2009.
The adoption of EIT
07-1 will
not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 141R (revised 2007),
Business Combinations, which establishes principles and
requirements for how an acquirer recognizes and measures in its
financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the
liabilities assumed, any noncontrolling interest in the acquiree
and the goodwill acquired. SFAS 141R also establishes
disclosure requirements to enable the evaluation of the nature
and financial effects of the business combination. This
statement is effective for us beginning January 1, 2009. We
do not expect the impact of the adoption of SFAS 141R to
have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Effective January 1, 2008 we adopted FASB issued
SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements. This
statement clarifies the definition of fair value to provide
greater consistency and clarity on existing accounting
pronouncements that require fair value measurements, provides a
framework for using fair value to measure assets and liabilities
and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
FAS No. 157 was required to be applied for fiscal
years beginning after November 15, 2007 and interim periods
within that year, but the FASB issued Staff Position (FSP)
SFAS No. 157-2,
Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157, which
defers the effective date of SFAS No. 157 to fiscal
years beginning on or after November 15, 2008 for all
non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except those
that are recognized and disclosed at fair value on a recurring
basis. The adoption of FAS No. 157 did not have a
material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In
accordance with FSP
SFAS No. 157-2,
we have deferred application of SFAS No. 157 until
fiscal year 2009, in relation to nonrecurring nonfinancial
assets and nonfinancial liabilities, long-lived asset
impairments and exit and disposal activities. Additionally, in
October 2008, the FASB issued FSP
SFAS No. 157-3,
Determining the Fair Value of a Financial Asset When the
Market for that Asset is Not Active, which is effective upon
issuance, including prior periods for which the financial
statements have not been issued, and
51
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
clarifies the application of SFAS No. 157 in a market
that is not active and provides an example to illustrate key
considerations in determining the fair value of a financial
asset when the market for that financial asset is not active.
The adoption of FSP
SFAS No. 157-3
did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162, The
Hierarchy of General Accepted Accounting Principles. This
statement documents the hierarchy of the various sources of
accounting principles and the framework for selecting the
principles used in preparing financial statements and is
effective 60 days following the Securities and Exchange
Commissions approval of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board amendments to AU Section 411, The
Meaning of Present Fairly in Conformity With Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles. SFAS No. 162 will not have
a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Liquidity
As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, we had cash,
cash-equivalents and short-term investments of approximately
$12.6 million and $27.8 million, respectively and
working capital of $17.7 million and $31.5 million,
respectively. Cash used in operations during 2008 and 2007
totaled $14.5 million and $3.3 million, respectively
and we incurred net losses of $15.2 million and
$11.6 million, respectively. Accumulated deficit increased
to $29.4 million as of December 31, 2008 over the
prior years deficit of $14.2 million.
In early October 2008, we implemented a reduction in workforce
that reduced our staff by approximately 30% whose annualized
salaries and benefits were approximately $2.6 million. The
workforce reduction was implemented in an effort to reduce
ongoing operating expenses and improve our overall efficiency.
Severance and termination benefits to the affected employees
were not material to our financial results for the fourth
quarter of 2008.
In November 2008, our $15 million line of credit with Key
Bank National Association was terminated after discussions that
were initiated by Key Bank given the current economic climate
and our financial condition and operating results. We considered
different borrowing alternatives with Key Bank but these
alternatives would have required us to maintain a fully secured
position at all times on the loan, which we did not consider to
be an effective lending position. As a result, we elected not to
pursue such alternatives. We remained in compliance with all
covenants through the termination date.
Based on our current plans and amounts expected to be generated
from future operations, we believe that our cash and cash
equivalents, and net cash provided by operations will be
sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for working
capital and capital expenditures through the end of fiscal 2009
and beyond. This will depend, however, on our ability to execute
on our 2009 operating plan and to manage our costs in light of
developing economic conditions and the performance of our
business. We arrived at our revenue projections for the 2009
operating plan after careful consideration of the macroeconomic
factors stemming from the global economic crisis with an
emphasis on our higher-margin, core products, including our
Jones Pure Cane Soda glass bottle business. Further, we
implemented cost containment measures in the fourth quarter of
2008 and early 2009, including reductions in workforce, to
further align our cost structure with our revenue projections.
Although we do not believe we are dependent on new product
launches to generate sufficient cash flow from operations in
2009, we believe the launch of Jones GABA during the
first quarter, plus corresponding fine extensions of this
product, will help to enhance our sales growth into new markets
and consumer groups. We intend to continually monitor and adjust
our business plan as necessary to respond to developments in our
business, our markets and the broader economy and are prepared,
if necessary, to take further action to conserve cash, including
further cost reductions in sales, marketing and general and
administrative areas. Even with these measures, we do not
anticipate reaching profitability in 2009. We believe that our
cash flow from operating activities, focused cost management
efforts and cash management should provide adequate working
capital to meet our needs.
52
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Our current operating plan for 2009 does not depend upon
obtaining financing; however, if we are unable to generate
sufficient cash flow from operations to cover our working
capital and capital expenditure requirements, we may need to
obtain funds through additional financing or securing a
replacement credit facility, which may not be available to us on
acceptable terms, if at all. We may have to explore various
strategies to secure any necessary additional financing, which
may include, without limitation, public or private offerings of
debt or equity securities, joint ventures with one or more
strategic partners and other strategic alternatives. There can
be no assurance that our efforts in this regard will result in
any agreements or transactions.
Reclassifications
Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior year
balances to conform to the current year presentation.
Inventory consists of the following as of December 31 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
$
|
3,709
|
|
|
$
|
3,798
|
|
Raw materials
|
|
|
1,945
|
|
|
|
1,948
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,654
|
|
|
$
|
5,746
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finished goods primarily include product ready for shipment, as
well as promotional merchandise held for sale. Raw materials
primarily include ingredients, concentrate and packaging.
Fixed assets consists of the following as of December 31 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Vehicles
|
|
$
|
447
|
|
|
$
|
419
|
|
Equipment
|
|
|
3,525
|
|
|
|
3,440
|
|
Office and computer equipment
|
|
|
1,491
|
|
|
|
1,265
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,463
|
|
|
|
5,124
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(3,364
|
)
|
|
|
(2,626
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,099
|
|
|
$
|
2,498
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in fixed assets are assets under capital leases with
costs of $673,000 and $982,000 as of December 31, 2008 and
2007, respectively, and accumulated depreciation of $251,000 and
$426,000, respectively.
53
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Accrued expenses consist of the following as of December 31 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Employee benefits
|
|
$
|
858
|
|
|
$
|
1,240
|
|
Promotion and selling
|
|
|
1,056
|
|
|
|
1,918
|
|
Other accruals
|
|
|
874
|
|
|
|
1,897
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,788
|
|
|
$
|
5,055
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In August 2007, we entered into a Loan Agreement providing for a
revolving line of credit in principal amount of up to
$15 million. The credit facility replaced the
$5 million revolving line of credit which expired in August
2007, with no borrowings outstanding upon the expiration of the
term. Although we had not borrowed any amounts under the credit
facility during 2008, in November 2008, the credit facility was
terminated prior to its original maturity date in August 2009
after discussions that were initiated by Key Bank given the
current economic climate and our financial condition and
operating results. We considered different borrowing
alternatives with Key Bank but these alternatives would have
required us to maintain a fully secured position at all times on
the loan, which we did not consider to be an effective lending
position. As a result, we elected not to pursue such
alternatives. Through the date the line was removed, we were in
compliance with these financial covenants. Concurrently with the
Loan Agreement we entered into a Security Agreement. The
Security Agreement contained customary representation and
warranties, affirmative and negative covenants and events of
default.
Our scheduled payments, including interest ranging from 5% to 8%
at December 31, 2008 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leases
|
|
|
Leases
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2009
|
|
$
|
186
|
|
|
$
|
200
|
|
|
$
|
386
|
|
2010
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
337
|
|
2011
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
243
|
|
2012
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments
|
|
$
|
539
|
|
|
$
|
495
|
|
|
$
|
1,034
|
|
Less amount representing interest
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Present value of total minimum capital lease payments
|
|
$
|
474
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less current portion of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital lease obligations excluding current portion
|
|
$
|
321
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the year ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, the
Company incurred rental expenses of $208,000, $185,000, and
$113,000, respectively.
On June 8, 2006, we completed a private placement in public
equity (PIPE) of 3,157,895 shares of our common
stock at a price of $9.50 per share, and received
$28.1 million in net proceeds after underwriting costs and
expenses.
54
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In 2002 we adopted a stock option plan that provides for the
issuance of incentive and non-qualified stock options to
officers, directors, employees and consultants (the 2002 Plan).
On May 18, 2006, at the annual shareholders meeting, the
shareholders approved an amendment to the 2002 Plan to increase
the total number of shares of common stock authorized for
issuance during the life of the plan from an aggregate
3,750,000 shares to 4,500,000 shares. On May 31,
2007, at the annual shareholders meeting, the shareholders
approved the amendment to the 2002 Plan to permit awards of
restricted stock grants, and the 2002 Plan was renamed the
2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan.
Under the terms of our 2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock
Plan, our Board of Directors may grant options or restricted
stock awards to employees, officers, directors and consultants.
The plan provides for granting of options or restricted stock at
the fair market value of our stock at the grant date.
Historically, options generally vested over a period of eighteen
months, with the first 25% vesting at the date of grant and the
balance vesting in equal amounts every six months thereafter.
Effective during the quarter ended September 30, 2006, we
changed the vesting schedule for our prospective stock option
grants, to vest over a period of forty-two months, with the
first 1/7th vesting six months from the grant date and the
balance vesting in equal amounts every six months thereafter. We
determine the term of each option at the time it is granted,
historically, options granted generally have a five-year or
ten-year term.
(a) Stock
options:
A summary of our stock option activity is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
1,782,000
|
|
|
$
|
1.83
|
|
Option granted
|
|
|
585,400
|
|
|
|
7.08
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
(863,000
|
)
|
|
|
(1.42
|
)
|
Options cancelled/expired
|
|
|
(80,375
|
)
|
|
|
(5.02
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
1,424,025
|
|
|
$
|
4.05
|
|
Option granted
|
|
|
339,500
|
|
|
|
19.19
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
(613,692
|
)
|
|
|
(2.61
|
)
|
Options cancelled/expired
|
|
|
(77,097
|
)
|
|
|
(14.60
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
1,072,736
|
|
|
$
|
8.91
|
|
Option granted
|
|
|
988,250
|
|
|
|
2.55
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
(87,500
|
)
|
|
|
(0.79
|
)
|
Options cancelled/expired
|
|
|
(514,128
|
)
|
|
|
(9.46
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
1,459,358
|
|
|
$
|
4.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable, December 31, 2008
|
|
|
672,882
|
|
|
$
|
5.92
|
|
Vested and expected to vest
|
|
|
1,816,163
|
|
|
$
|
3.93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table summarizes information about stock options
outstanding and exercisable under our stock incentive plans at
December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Life (Years)
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Life (Years)
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
$0.25 to $0.50
|
|
|
170,000
|
|
|
|
9.94
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.94
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
$1.10 to $2.99
|
|
|
257,000
|
|
|
|
4.98
|
|
|
|
1.59
|
|
|
|
119,857
|
|
|
|
4.98
|
|
|
|
1.98
|
|
$3.00 to $4.00
|
|
|
638,607
|
|
|
|
7.51
|
|
|
|
3.46
|
|
|
|
261,893
|
|
|
|
7.51
|
|
|
|
3.78
|
|
$4.01 to $5.01
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$5.02 to $9.33
|
|
|
241,429
|
|
|
|
2.87
|
|
|
|
6.85
|
|
|
|
222,668
|
|
|
|
2.87
|
|
|
|
6.71
|
|
$9.34 to $22.95
|
|
|
152,322
|
|
|
|
3.34
|
|
|
|
18.43
|
|
|
|
68,464
|
|
|
|
3.34
|
|
|
|
18.44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,459,358
|
|
|
|
6.15
|
|
|
$
|
4.90
|
|
|
|
672,882
|
|
|
|
5.10
|
|
|
$
|
5.92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(b) Restricted
stock awards:
During the year ended December 31, 2008, the Board of
Directors granted 68,850 in restricted stock to certain
employees under our revised 2002 Stock Option and Restricted
Stock Plan, which was approved by our shareholders in May 2007.
No monetary payment is required from the employees upon receipt
of the restricted stock. The restricted stock vests over a
period of forty-two months in equal amounts every six months.
A summary of our restricted stock activity is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Life
|
|
|
Non-vested restricted stock at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
129,500
|
|
|
$
|
10.12
|
|
|
|
3.28 yrs
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
68,850
|
|
|
|
3.21
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(31,851
|
)
|
|
|
8.63
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled/expired
|
|
|
(85,521
|
)
|
|
|
(2.55
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested restricted stock at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
80,978
|
|
|
$
|
6.48
|
|
|
|
2.37 yrs
|
|
Of the vested shares, a total of 8,913 shares were withheld
by the Company as payment for withholding taxes due in
connection with the vesting of restricted stock awards issued
under the 2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan. The
average price paid per share of $3.07, reflects the average
market value per share of the shares withheld for tax purposes.
No shares were repurchased in 2007.
(c) Stock-based
compensation expense:
We account for stock-based compensation in accordance with
SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, using the
fair-value based method. Stock-based compensation expense is
recognized using the straight-line attribution method over the
employees requisite service period.
56
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table summarizes the stock-based compensation
expense (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Type of awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options
|
|
$
|
882
|
|
|
$
|
1,369
|
|
|
$
|
1,057
|
|
Restricted stock
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,053
|
|
|
$
|
1,519
|
|
|
$
|
1,057
|
|
Income statement account
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Promotion and selling
|
|
$
|
330
|
|
|
$
|
525
|
|
|
$
|
323
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
723
|
|
|
|
994
|
|
|
|
734
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,053
|
|
|
$
|
1,519
|
|
|
$
|
1,057
|
|
We employ the following key weighted average assumptions in
determining the fair value of stock options, using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected stock price volatility
|
|
|
73.9
|
%
|
|
|
55.9
|
%
|
|
|
55.5
|
%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
2.45
|
%
|
|
|
4.38
|
%
|
|
|
4.82
|
%
|
Expected term (in years)
|
|
|
4.5 years
|
|
|
|
4.4 years
|
|
|
|
2.75 years
|
|
Weighted-average grant date fair-value
|
|
$
|
1.50
|
|
|
$
|
8.58
|
|
|
$
|
2.82
|
|
During the year ended December 31, 2008, no material
modifications were made to outstanding stock options.
Additionally, there were no stock-based compensation costs
capitalized as part of the cost of any asset as of
December 31, 2008.
The aggregate intrinsic value of stock options outstanding at
December 31, 2008 and 2007 was $0 and $2.1 million and
for options exercisable was $0 and $2.1 million,
respectively. The intrinsic value of outstanding and exercisable
stock options is calculated as the quoted market price of the
stock at the balance sheet date less the exercise price of the
option. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during
the year ended December 31, 2008 and 2007 was $275,000 and
$8.7 million.
Restricted stock is valued at the grant date market price of the
underlying securities, and the compensation expense is
recognized on a straight-line basis over the forty-two months
vesting period based on the estimated number of awards expected
to vest. At December 31, 2008 the restricted stock had an
intrinsic value of nil.
SFAS 123R also requires that we recognize compensation
expense for only the portion of stock options or restricted
stock that are expected to vest. Therefore, we apply estimated
forfeiture rates that are derived from historical employee
termination behavior. If the actual number of forfeitures
differs from those estimated by management, additional
adjustments to stock-based compensation expense may be required
in future periods.
At December 31, 2008, the unrecognized compensation expense
related to stock options and non-vested restricted stocks were
$1.7 million and $941,000, respectively, which are to be
recognized over weighted-average periods of 2.49 years and
2.31 years, respectively.
57
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
We have a 401(k) plan whereby eligible employees who have
completed one hour of service per month in three consecutive
months of employment may enroll. Employees can elect to
contribute up to 100% of their eligible compensation to the
401(k) plan subject to Internal Revenue Services limitations.
Beginning January 1, 2009, we instituted an employee match
under our safe harbor 401(k) plan and will match employee
contributions up to 4% of the employees compensation at
the rate of 100% for the first 3% contributed and at the rate of
50% for the next 2%. Accordingly, there were no matching
contributions for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007
or 2006.
|
|
9.
|
Commitments
and contingencies
|
Commitments
During the year ended December 31, 2008 we had commitments
to various suppliers of raw materials, including for sugar and
glass as well as commitments under our supply agreement relating
to Pharma GABA. We also had commitments for finished goods and
to co-packers for production equipment and commitments under our
Sponsorship Agreements with the Seattle Seahawks, the Portland
Trailblazers, and the New Jersey Nets in exchange for exclusive
beverage rights for certain soft drinks at Qwest Field, Rose
Garden and Memorial Coliseum, and the proposed new arena in
Brooklyn, New York, respectively, as well as signage,
advertising and other promotional benefits to enhance our brand
awareness.
These obligations vary in terms. Purchase obligations in future
periods under these commitments are expected to occur as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2014 and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase Obligations
|
|
$
|
8,684
|
|
|
$
|
7,217
|
|
|
$
|
1,467
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sponsorships
|
|
|
10,562
|
|
|
|
1,224
|
|
|
|
2,747
|
|
|
|
2,886
|
|
|
|
1,641
|
|
|
|
1,689
|
|
|
|
375
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
19,246
|
|
|
$
|
8,441
|
|
|
$
|
4,214
|
|
|
$
|
2,886
|
|
|
$
|
1,641
|
|
|
$
|
1,689
|
|
|
$
|
375
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal
proceedings
On September 4, 2007, a putative class action complaint was
filed against us, our then serving chief executive officer, and
our then serving chief financial officer in the
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington,
alleging claims under Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. The case is entitled Saltzman v.
Jones Soda Company, et al., Case
No. 07-cv-1366-RSL,
and purports to be brought on behalf of a class of purchasers of
our common stock during the period March 9, 2007 to
August 2, 2007. Six substantially similar complaints
subsequently were filed in the same court, some of which alleged
claims on behalf of a class of purchasers of our common stock
during the period November 1, 2006 to August 2, 2007.
Some of the subsequently filed complaints added as defendants
certain current and former directors and another former officer
of the Company. The complaints generally alleged violations of
federal securities laws based on, among other things, false and
misleading statements and omissions about our financial results
and business prospects. The complaints sought unspecified
damages, interest, attorneys fees, costs, and expenses. On
October 26, 2007, these seven lawsuits were consolidated as
a single action entitled In re Jones Soda Company Securities
Litigation, Case
No. 07-cv-1366-RSL.
On March 5, 2008, the Court appointed Robert Burrell lead
plaintiff in the consolidated securities case. On May 5,
2008, the lead plaintiff filed a First Amended Consolidated
Complaint, which purports to allege claims on behalf of a class
of purchasers of our common stock during the period of
January 10, 2007, to May 1, 2008, against the Company
and Peter van Stolk, our former Chief Executive Officer, former
Chairman of the Board, and current director. The First Amended
Consolidated Complaint generally alleges violations of federal
securities laws based on, among other things, false and
misleading
58
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
statements and omissions about our agreements with retailers,
allocation of resources, and business prospects. Defendants
filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on July 7,
2008. After hearing oral argument on February 3, 2009, the
Court granted the motion to dismiss in its entirety on
February 9, 2009. The Courts dismissal order requires
plaintiffs to file a motion for leave to file any amended
complaint. Plaintiffs deadline to file a motion to amend
is March 25, 2009.
In addition, on September 5, 2007, a shareholder derivative
action was filed in the Superior Court for King County,
Washington, allegedly on behalf of and for the benefit of the
Company, against certain of our current officers and current and
former directors. The case is entitled Cramer v. van
Stolk, et al., Case
No. 07-2-29187-3
SEA (Cramer Action). The Company also was named as a nominal
defendant. Four other shareholders filed substantially similar
derivative cases. Two of these actions were filed in Superior
Court for King County, Washington. One of these two Superior
Court actions has been voluntarily dismissed and the other has
been consolidated with the Cramer Action under the caption In re
Jones Soda Co. Derivative Litigation, Lead Case
No. 07-2-31254-4
SEA. On April 28, 2008, plaintiffs in the consolidated
action filed an amended complaint based on the same basic
allegations of fact as in the federal securities class actions
and alleging, among other things, that certain of our current
and former officers and directors breached their fiduciary
duties to the Company and were unjustly enriched in connection
with the public disclosures that are the subject of the federal
securities class actions. On May 2, 2008, the Court signed
a stipulation and order staying the proceedings in the
consolidated Cramer Action until all motions to dismiss in the
consolidated federal securities class action have been
adjudicated.
The two remaining shareholder derivative actions were filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Washington. On April 10, 2008, the Court presiding over the
federal derivative cases consolidated them under the caption
Sexton v. van Stolk, et al., Case
No. 07-1782RSL
(Sexton Action), and appointed Bryan P. Sexton lead plaintiff.
The Court also established a case schedule, which, among other
things, sets the close of fact discovery as January 4,
2009, and sets a trial date of May 4, 2009. The actions
comprising the consolidated Sexton Action are based on the same
basic allegations of fact as in the securities class actions
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Washington and the Cramer Action, filed in the Superior Court
for King County. The actions comprising the Sexton Action
allege, among other things, that certain of our current and
former directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties to
the Company and were unjustly enriched in connection with the
public disclosures that are the subject of the federal
securities class actions. The complaints seek unspecified
damages, restitution, disgorgement of profits, equitable and
injunctive relief, attorneys fees, costs, and expenses. On
June 3, 2008, the parties filed a joint motion to stay the
Sexton Action until all motions to dismiss in the federal
securities class action have been adjudicated. On June 5,
2008, the Court granted the motion and stayed the Sexton action.
The Cramer Action and Sexton Action are derivative in nature and
do not seek monetary damages from the Company. However, the
Company may be required, throughout the pendency of the action,
to advance payment of legal fees and costs incurred by the
defendants and the litigation may result in significant
obligations for payment of defense costs and indemnification.
On August 27, 2008, Advanced Business Strategies filed a
Complaint for Damages against us in the Circuit Court for the
State of Oregon for breach of contract and breach of implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing, seeking damages in
excess of $1.1 million. Advanced Business Strategies has
alleged that we improperly terminated their agreement to provide
us with certain sales and marketing services. On October 1,
2008, we filed a Notice of Removal from the State Court to the
United States District Court, District of Oregon. Our answer to
the claims was filed on October 8, 2008; we asserted that
Advanced Business Strategies is in breach of the agreement and
has failed to mitigate its alleged damages. There is no trial
date currently set and discovery is ongoing.
59
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
We are unable to predict the outcome of any of these actions
described above. However, we do not anticipate these actions
will result in significant liability or will have a material
adverse effect on our business, results of operations, or
financial condition.
In addition to the matters above, we are or may be involved from
time to time in various claims and legal actions arising in the
ordinary course of business, including proceedings involving
product liability claims and other employee claims, and tort and
other general liability claims, for which we carry insurance, as
well as trademark, copyright, and related claims and legal
actions. In the opinion of our management, the ultimate
disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse
effect on our consolidated financial position, results of
operations or liquidity.
The provision (recovery) for income taxes consisted of the
following for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
65
|
|
|
$
|
(3
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
State
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
6
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
297
|
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
|
293
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
|
1,930
|
|
|
|
(712
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
45
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
(477
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
1,862
|
|
|
|
(1,144
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
$
|
203
|
|
|
$
|
2,155
|
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before provision for income taxes was as follows
for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
(15,071
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10,688
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,705
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
1,043
|
|
|
|
827
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
(15,032
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,645
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,532
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The items accounting for the difference between income taxes
computed at the federal statutory rate and the provision for
income taxes are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Federal statutory rate
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
Effect of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Permanent differences
|
|
|
(0.27
|
)%
|
|
|
(0.71
|
)%
|
|
|
6.28
|
%
|
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
1.55
|
%
|
|
|
1.22
|
%
|
|
|
0.29
|
%
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
(31.02
|
)%
|
|
|
(56.85
|
)%
|
|
|
(69.97
|
)%
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(5.62
|
)%
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)%
|
|
|
3.85
|
%
|
CND Rate Differential
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
(1.35
|
)%
|
|
|
(22.35
|
)%
|
|
|
(25.56
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes reflect the tax effects of temporary
differences between the carrying amounts of assets and
liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts
used for income tax purposes. Significant components of the
Companys deferred income taxes were as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating loss carry forwards
|
|
$
|
8,350
|
|
|
$
|
4,172
|
|
|
$
|
1,401
|
|
Capital assets
|
|
|
127
|
|
|
|
189
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible assets
|
|
|
284
|
|
|
|
333
|
|
|
|
385
|
|
Inventory adjustment and reserve
|
|
|
426
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock based compensation
|
|
|
739
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
402
|
|
|
|
907
|
|
|
|
198
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax asset
|
|
|
10,328
|
|
|
|
5,601
|
|
|
|
1,984
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(10,145
|
)
|
|
|
(5,483
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax asset
|
|
$
|
183
|
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
$
|
1,984
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(84
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax asset balance
|
|
$
|
99
|
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
$
|
1,935
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Classified as current
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,507
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term asset
|
|
$
|
98
|
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
$
|
428
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior to the second quarter of 2006, we maintained a valuation
allowance for all of the U.S. and foreign deferred taxes in
accordance with SFAS 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes, due to the uncertainty regarding the full utilization
of our deferred tax asset. During the second quarter of 2006, we
re-evaluated our valuation allowance after recording taxable
income for two successive years and we determined that was more
likely than not we would realize the deferred tax assets.
Accordingly, during the year ended December 31, 2006, we
recorded a tax benefit in the amount of $2.5 million by
reversing the valuation allowance and recording the tax benefit
against the 2006 tax provision resulting in a net deferred
income tax benefit of $1.1 million.
During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007, we recognized a full
valuation allowance against our net U.S. deferred tax
assets in the amount of approximately $5.5 million. During
the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007, the Company experienced
significant losses in its U.S. operations due to lower
margins, the recording of
61
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
charges such as severance costs, marketing and promotions costs,
slotting fee costs, inventory provisions for discontinued
product and legal and professional fees which negatively
impacted U.S. pretax income and caused the Company to be in
a loss position as of December 31, 2007 and of having
cumulative losses in recent years with respect to its
U.S. operations. These are one time costs that the Company
does not expect to incur in future years. However, the Company
does not know if these investments are an aberration yet and the
success of our incremental investments in the business remains
unknown. In accordance with the relevant accounting guidance,
the Company did consider future projections of U.S. pretax
income as a material factor in its analysis of the realizability
of its net U.S. deferred tax assets, however, it was
difficult to overcome the cumulative loss. The negative events
mentioned above, while not recurring in nature
and/or
beneficial to the Companys long-term future prospects,
were material to the Companys decision to establish a full
valuation allowance against its net U.S. deferred tax
assets. This is due to the fact that the relevant accounting
guidance puts more weight on the negative objective evidence of
cumulative losses in recent years than the positive subjective
evidence of future projections of pretax income. As of
December 31, 2008, the valuation allowance increased by
$4.7 million. The amount of the excess tax deductions from
stock based compensation arrangements that is allocated to
contributed capital if the future tax benefits are subsequently
recognized is $3.6 million.
The Company continually analyzes the realizability of its
deferred tax assets, but reasonably expects to continue to
record a full valuation allowance on future U.S. tax
benefits until the Company sustains an appropriate level of
taxable income through improved U.S. operations and tax
planning strategies.
No valuation allowance was recorded for deferred tax assets
recorded in the Canadian subsidiary, as this subsidiary remains
profitable.
At December 31, 2008, the Company has net operating loss
carry-forwards for income tax purposes in the United States of
$26.4 million which expire at various times commencing in
2020 and in various states of $3.5 million which expire at
various times commencing in 2013 . Net operating loss
carry-forwards may be subject to certain limitations under
Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code.
There are no uncertain tax positions to recognize as of
December 31, 2008.
The tax years that remain open to examination by the taxing
authorities are
2004-2008,
generally. The net operating losses from prior years are subject
to adjustment under examination to the extent they remain
unutilized in an open year.
A provision had not been made at December 31, 2008, for the
U.S. or additional foreign withholding taxes on
undistributed earnings from the foreign subsidiary. It is the
present intention of management to reinvest the undistributed
earnings indefinitely in foreign operations. Generally, such
earnings become subject to U.S. tax upon the remittance of
dividends and under certain other circumstances. It is not
practical to estimate the amount of deferred tax liability on
such undistributed earnings.
|
|
11.
|
Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 108
|
In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 108, Considering the Effects of
Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in
Current Year Financial Statements (SAB 108), to
address diversity in practice in quantifying financial statement
misstatements. SAB 108 requires the quantification of
misstatements based on their impact to both the balance sheet
and the income statement to determine materiality. SAB 108
was effective beginning in the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2006.
The transition provisions of SAB 108 provide for a one-time
cumulative effect adjustment on deficit to correct for
misstatements of errors relating to prior periods that were not
deemed material under the Companys prior approach, but are
material under the SAB 108 approach. Effective the
beginning of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, the
Company adopted SAB 108. In accordance with SAB 108
during 2006,
62
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the Company has adjusted opening deficit for fiscal 2006 in the
accompanying consolidated financial statements for the items
described below. The Company considers these adjustments to be
immaterial to prior periods.
Intercompany
balances
During 2006, the Company adjusted its beginning retained
earnings for fiscal 2006 for a historical misstatement in
intercompany balances of intangible transfers and accounts
receivable balances. These differences had accumulated over a
period of several years and were not material in any one year.
Impact
of adjustments
The impact of each of the items noted above on the fiscal 2006
beginning balances are presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction of intangibles
|
|
$
|
70,979
|
|
Reduction of receivable balances
|
|
|
36,756
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in deficit
|
|
$
|
107,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.
|
Segmented
information and export sales
|
We have one operating segment with operations during 2008
primarily in the United States and Canada. Sales are assigned to
geographic locations based on the location of customers. Segment
information for the years ended December 31 is as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
28,379
|
|
|
$
|
33,949
|
|
|
$
|
34,208
|
|
Canada
|
|
|
6,892
|
|
|
|
5,393
|
|
|
|
4,662
|
|
Other Countries
|
|
|
647
|
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
$
|
35,918
|
|
|
$
|
39,831
|
|
|
$
|
39,035
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Fixed assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
2,099
|
|
|
$
|
2,472
|
|
|
$
|
2,112
|
|
Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed assets
|
|
$
|
2,099
|
|
|
$
|
2,498
|
|
|
$
|
2,171
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006,
three of our customers represented approximately 26%, 27% and
23%, respectively of revenues, one of which represented
approximately 11%, 13% and 10%, respectively of revenues.
In March 2009, we entered retroactively effective July 31,
2008 into an amendment to our supply agreement with Pharma Foods
International Co., LTD., of Kyoto, Japan; Mitsubishi Corporation
(MC), of Tokyo, Japan; and Mitsubishi International Food
Ingredients, Inc. (MIFI), of Dublin, Ohio that terminates our
rights of exclusivity in the United States, Canada and Mexico
for the use of Pharma GABA in specified beverage applications,
as of December 31, 2008. We continue under the supply
agreement to have non-exclusive rights to use Pharma GABA in the
specified beverage applications throughout the world through the
63
JONES
SODA CO.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
expiration of the agreement on July 13, 2010. The amendment
also modified our purchase commitment with respect to the
$1.8 million of Pharma GABA that we were required to
purchase by July 31, 2008 (or, in lieu thereof, to pay the
corresponding amount) (the Committed Amount). Our obligation to
purchase the Committed Amount was amended as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
We were required to place our order for the Committed Amount by
December 31, 2008, and, on or before January 31, 2009,
to pay $984,000, approximately half of the purchase price for
such amount.
|
|
|
|
We are required to pay the remaining purchase price for the
Committed Amount, $891,000, in six equal monthly installments
commencing on February 24, 2009 and ending on July 26,
2009. We were required by the terms of the amendment to furnish
a standby letter of credit in the amount of $891,000, which will
be reduced monthly in increments of $148,000 from February
through July 2009 as payments are made with respect to this
purchase commitment.
|
Effective February 20, 2009, we delisted from the TSX
Venture Exchange in Canada (symbol JSD).
|
|
14.
|
Selected
Quarterly Financial Information (unaudited)
|
Summarized quarterly financial information for fiscal years 2008
and 2007 is as follows (dollars in thousands, except per share
data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
2008 quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
9,404
|
|
|
$
|
11,699
|
|
|
$
|
8,684
|
|
|
$
|
6,131
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
1,922
|
|
|
|
2,981
|
|
|
|
966
|
|
|
|
1,498
|
|
Loss from operations
|
|
|
(3,889
|
)
|
|
|
(2,670
|
)
|
|
|
(5,196
|
)
|
|
|
(3,661
|
)
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(3,853
|
)
|
|
|
(2,733
|
)
|
|
|
(5,260
|
)
|
|
|
(3,389
|
)
|
Basic and diluted loss per share
|
|
|
(0.15
|
)
|
|
|
(0.10
|
)
|
|
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
2007 quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
9,189
|
|
|
$
|
13,012
|
|
|
$
|
11,737
|
|
|
$
|
5,893
|
|
Gross profit (loss)
|
|
|
3,517
|
|
|
|
4,449
|
|
|
|
3,362
|
|
|
|
(1,884
|
)
|
Loss from operations
|
|
|
(428
|
)
|
|
|
(504
|
)
|
|
|
(2,670
|
)
|
|
|
(7,370
|
)
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
(1,523
|
)
|
|
|
(10,205
|
)
|
Basic and diluted (loss) earnings per share
|
|
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
0.00
|
|
|
|
(0.06
|
)
|
|
|
(0.39
|
)
|
64
|
|
ITEM 9.
|
CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
|
None.
|
|
ITEM 9A.
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES.
|
Disclosure
Control and Procedures
Management, under the supervision and with the participation of
our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer,
evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in
Rule 13a-15(e)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act)) as of
December 31, 2008, the end of the period covered by this
report. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer
and our Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of December 31,
2008.
Managements
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined
in Exchange Act
Rule 13a-15(f)
under the Exchange Act). Internal control over financial
reporting is a process to provide reasonable assurance regarding
the reliability of our financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America. Internal control over financial reporting includes
those policies and procedures that: (i) in reasonable
detail accurately and fairly reflect our transactions;
(ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary for preparation of our financial
statements; (iii) provide reasonable assurance that our
receipts and expenditures are made in accordance with management
authorization; and (iv) provide reasonable assurance
regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized
acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a
material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting, however well designed and operated can
provide only reasonable, and not absolute, assurance that the
controls will prevent or detect misstatements. In addition, the
design of any control system is based in part upon certain
assumptions about the likelihood of future events. Because of
these and other inherent limitations of control systems, there
is only the reasonable assurance that our controls will succeed
in achieving their goals under all potential future conditions.
Management, under the supervision and with the participation of
our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer,
conducted an evaluation of our internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2008, based on the framework
in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(or the COSO criteria). Based on our evaluation
under the COSO framework, management concluded that our internal
control over financial reporting was effective as of
December 31, 2008.
Remediation
of Previously Reported Material Weakness and Changes in Internal
Control over Financial Reporting
A material weakness is a significant deficiency (as defined in
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Auditing Standard
No. 5), or combination of significant deficiencies, that
results in more than a remote likelihood that a material
misstatement of our annual or interim consolidated financial
statements will not be prevented or detected on at timely basis.
As of December 31, 2007, our assessment of the
effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and
internal control over financial reporting identified a material
weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, which
our management reported in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2007. This material
weakness, which did not result in a material misstatement in our
audited consolidated financial statements, was the result of
limited accounting personnel with sufficient expertise,
accounting knowledge and training in generally accepted
accounting principles and financial reporting
65
requirements. Specifically, we lacked sufficient personnel to
anticipate, identify, resolve and review complex accounting
issues and to complete a timely review of the financial
statements. Throughout the year, we made improvements to our
policies, procedures, systems and staff who have significant
roles in internal control, to address the internal control
deficiencies identified by us and our independent registered
public accounting firm. Management concluded that, as of
December 31, 2008, the Company has remediated the
previously reported material weakness in internal control over
financial reporting as a result of the following remedial
actions:
|
|
|
|
|
We hired accounting and finance staff with the commensurate
knowledge, experience, and training necessary to complement the
current staff in the financial reporting functions, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Chief Financial Officer, hired in the third quarter of 2008
|
|
|
|
A Controller, hired in the fourth quarter of 2008
|
|
|
|
A Manager of Legal Affairs, hired in the first quarter of 2008
|
|
|
|
An Information Technology System Administrator, hired in the
fourth quarter of 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have and will continue to focus on improving the skill sets
of our accounting and finance staff through education and
training.
|
|
|
|
With the additions to our accounting and finance staff, we
believe we have the requisite expertise to sufficiently review
both the inputs and outputs of engaged qualified professional
consultants for the services provided to us.
|
The changes we made to remedy the prior year material weakness
described above were the only changes in our internal control
over financial reporting during the last fiscal quarter that
materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Our internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2008 has been audited by Deloitte &
Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as
stated in the report below.
66
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Jones Soda Co.
Seattle, Washington
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of
Jones Soda Co. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of
December 31, 2008, based on the criteria established in the
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. The Companys management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Report of
Management on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on the Companys
internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed by, or under the supervision of, the
companys principal executive and principal financial
officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected
by the companys board of directors, management, and other
personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over
financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or
improper management override of controls, material misstatements
due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the
effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting
to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may
become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the
degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2008, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2008 of the Company and our report dated
March 13, 2009 expressed an unqualified opinion on those
consolidated financial statements.
/s/ DELOITTE &
TOUCHE LLP
Seattle, Washington
March 13, 2009
67
|
|
ITEM
9B.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION.
|
On March 11, 2009, we entered into an amendment to our
Pharma GABA supply contract, the terms of which were made
effective as of July 31, 2008 (Amendment Agreement). We
entered into the original supply contract (Original Agreement)
on June 20, 2007 with Pharma Foods International Co., Ltd.
(PFI), Mitsubishi International Food Ingredients, Inc. (MIFI)
and Mitsubishi Corporation (MC).
Under the Original Agreement, PFI agreed to manufacture and
sell, using MC and MIFI as international intermediaries, Pharma,
a naturally produced form of the amino acid gamma amino butyric
acid, or GABA (the Product), to the Company, and granted the
Company the right to use the Product in specified beverage
applications (the Final Products) on an exclusive basis in the
United States, Canada and Mexico, subject to specified purchase
obligations, and on a non-exclusive basis outside of the
exclusive territory. In order to maintain its exclusive rights
in the United States, Canada and Mexico, we were required to
purchase at least $3.4 million of the Product from
August 1, 2008 to July 31, 2009. In addition, we
agreed to certain purchase obligations in the Original Agreement
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
We were required to purchase $1.8 million of the Product by
July 31, 2008 (or, in lieu thereof, to pay the
corresponding amount) (the Committed Amount).
|
|
|
|
We were required to use our commercially reasonable best efforts
to purchase an additional $8.4 million of the Product
during the term of the contract according to the following
schedule: (1) $3.4 million of the Product by
July 31, 2009 and (2) an additional $5.1 million
of the Product by July 31, 2010.
|
Under the Amendment Agreement, our exclusive right to use the
Product in the United States, Canada and Mexico was terminated
and became non-exclusive, effective December 31, 2008, and
our obligation to purchase the Committed Amount was amended as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
We were required to order the Committed Amount by
December 31, 2008 and, on or before January 31, 2009,
to pay $984,000, approximately half of the purchase price for
such amount,
|
|
|
|
We are required to pay the remaining purchase price for the
Committed Amount $891,000 in six equal monthly installments
commencing on February 24, 2009 and ending July 26,
2009, which payments are secured by a standby letter of credit
arranged by the Company with KeyBank National Association.
|
The Original Agreement, as amended, terminates on July 31,
2010 (which is the original term of the agreement), subject to
earlier termination if any party defaults in performing any of
its obligations under the agreement and fails to correct such
default within one month after notice of default.
On March 12, 2009, the Company announced that
Stephen C. Jones notified the Board of Directors on
March 11, 2009 that he will resign his position as Chief
Executive Officer effective May 1, 2009. Mr. Jones
will continue to serve as a member of the Board of Directors. On
March 11, 2009, the Board of Directors appointed
Jonathan J. Ricci, the Companys current Chief
Operating Officer, to the position of Chief Executive Officer
and President, effective May 1, 2009. Mr. Ricci will
also continue as a member of the Board of Directors.
Biographical information regarding Mr. Ricci is included in
Part I, Item 1 of this report under the heading
Executive Officers. The Company expects to enter
into an employment letter or agreement with Mr. Ricci
outlining the terms of his employment as the Companys
President and Chief Executive Officer, and will disclose the
terms of such letter or agreement once it is finalized.
PART III
|
|
ITEM 10.
|
DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE.
|
Information regarding our Code of Ethics, as well as a listing
of and certain information about our executive officers as of
March 17, 2009, is included in Item 1 of Part I,
and that information is incorporated by reference herein.
The other information called for by Part III, Item 10,
is included in our proxy statement relating to our 2009 annual
meeting of shareholders, and is incorporated herein by reference
to the sections captioned
68
Nominees, Section 16(a) Beneficial
Ownership Reporting Compliance, Board Meetings and
Committees, and Audit Committee. The proxy
statement will be filed within 120 days of
December 31, 2008, our fiscal year end.
|
|
ITEM 11.
|
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION.
|
Information called for by Part III, Item 11, is
included in our proxy statement relating to our 2009 annual
meeting of shareholders, and is incorporated herein by reference
to the sections captioned Executive Compensation,
Compensation Committee Report, Compensation
Discussion and Analysis, and Compensation of
Directors. The proxy statement will be filed within
120 days of December 31, 2008, our fiscal year end.
|
|
ITEM 12.
|
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND
RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS.
|
Certain information called for by Part III, Item 12,
is included in our proxy statement relating to our 2009 annual
meeting of shareholders, and is incorporated herein by reference
to the section captioned Security Ownership Of Certain
Beneficial Owners And Management. The proxy statement will
be filed within 120 days of December 31, 2008, our
fiscal year end.
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The following table gives information as of December 31,
2008, the end of the most recently completed fiscal year, about
shares of common stock that may be issued under our 2002 Stock
Option and Restricted Stock Plan and 2007 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, both of which have been approved by shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. of
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
|
Shares to be
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
Issued Upon
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Remaining Available
|
|
|
|
Exercise of
|
|
|
Price of
|
|
|
for Issuance Under Equity
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Compensation Plans
|
|
|
|
Stock Options,
|
|
|
Stock Options,
|
|
|
(Excluding Securities
|
|
|
|
Warrants and
|
|
|
Warrants and
|
|
|
Reported in Column
|
|
Plan Category
|
|
Rights
|
|
|
Rights
|
|
|
(a))
|
|
|
Equity Compensation Plans Approved by Shareholders
|
|
$
|
1,459,358
|
|
|
$
|
4.90
|
|
|
$
|
948,075
|
(1)
|
Equity Compensation Plans Not Approved by Shareholders
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
|
$
|
1,459,358
|
|
|
$
|
4.90
|
|
|
$
|
948,075
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes 948,075 shares available for issuance under the
2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan, under which we may
grant restricted stock awards in addition to stock options. Each
non-employee director receives an annual stock option grant of
up to 20,000 shares of common stock pursuant to a program
administered under our 2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock
Plan. Also includes 300,000 shares available for issuance
under the 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. |
|
|
ITEM 13.
|
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE.
|
Information called for by Part III, Item 13, is
included in our proxy statement relating to our 2009 annual
meeting of shareholders, and is incorporated herein by reference
to the sections captioned Transactions With Related
Persons, Board Meetings and Committees and
Independence of the Board of Directors. The proxy
statement will be filed within 120 days of
December 31, 2008, our fiscal year end.
69
|
|
ITEM 14.
|
PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES.
|
Information called for by Part III, Item 14, is
included in our proxy statement relating to our 2009 annual
meeting of shareholders and is incorporated herein by reference
to the sections captioned Policy for Approval of Audit and
Permitted Non-Audit Services and Audit and Related
Fees. The proxy statement will be filed within
120 days of December 31, 2008, our fiscal year end.
PART IV
|
|
ITEM 15.
|
EXHIBITS AND
FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES.
|
(a) Documents filed as part of this Report are as follows:
1) Financial Statements: The consolidated financial
statements, related notes and report of independent registered
public accounting firm are included in Item 8 of
Part II of this 2008 Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
2) Financial Statement Schedules: All schedules have been
omitted because they are not applicable or not required, or the
required information is included in the financial statements or
notes thereto.
3) Exhibits: The required exhibits are included at the end
of this report and are described in the exhibit index.
70
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
JONES SODA CO.
Stephen C. Jones
Chief Executive Officer
Dated: March 13, 2009
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Capacities
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ STEPHEN
C. JONES
Stephen
C. Jones
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive
Officer) and Director
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ MICHAEL
R. OBRIEN
Michael
R. OBrien
|
|
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting
Officer)
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JONATHAN
J. RICCI
Jonathan
J. Ricci
|
|
Chief Operating Officer and Director
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ MILLS
A. BROWN
Mills
A. Brown
|
|
Director
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ RICHARD
S. EISWIRTH, JR.
Rick
Eiswirth, Jr.
|
|
Director
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ MICHAEL
M. FLEMING
Michael
M. Fleming
|
|
Director
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ MATTHEW
K. KELLOGG
Matthew
K. Kellogg
|
|
Director
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ SUSAN
A. SCHRETER
Susan
A. Schreter
|
|
Director
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ PETER
M. VAN STOLK
Peter
M. van Stolk
|
|
Director
|
|
March 13, 2009
|
71
EXHIBIT INDEX
The following exhibits are filed as part of this Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
or are incorporated herein by reference. Where an exhibit is
incorporated by reference, the document to which it is cross
referenced is made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Articles of Incorporation of Jones Soda Co. (Previously filed
with, and incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 3.1
to our annual report on
Form 10-KSB
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000, filed on
March 30, 2001; File
No. 333-75913.)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Bylaws of Jones Soda Co. (Previously filed with, and
incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 3.2 to our
annual report on
Form 10-KSB
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000, filed on
March 30, 2001; File
No. 333-75913.)
|
|
10
|
.1++
|
|
Bottling Agreement dated January 1, 2002, between Jones
Soda Co. and Polaris Water Company Inc. (Previously filed with,
and incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1 to
our annual report on
Form 10-KSB
for the year ended December 31, 2001, filed on
April 1, 2002; File
No. 333-75913.)
|
|
10
|
.2++
|
|
Bottling Agreement dated December 13, 2001, between Jones
Soda Co. and J. Lieb Foods Inc. (Previously filed with, and
incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.2 to our
annual report on
Form 10-KSB
for the year ended December 31, 2001, filed on
April 1, 2002; File
No. 333-75913.)
|
|
10
|
.3++
|
|
Supply Agreement dated January 1, 2004, between Jones Soda
Co. and Zuckerman-Honickman, Inc. (Previously filed with, and
incorporated herein by reference to, the Companys
quarterly report on
Form 10-QSB
for the quarter ended Jun 30, 2004, filed on August 6,
2004; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.4++
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Supply Agreement, dated June 27,
2004, between Jones Soda Co. and Zuckerman-Honickman, Inc.
(Previously filed with, and incorporated herein by reference to,
the Companys quarterly report on
Form 10-QSB
for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, filed on
August 6, 2004; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
Lease Agreement dated September 15, 2006, between R2H2 LLC
and Jones Soda Co. (Previously filed with, and incorporated
herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1 to our current report
on
Form 8-K,
filed on September 22, 2006; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.6*
|
|
Separation Agreement and Release, dated February 13, 2008,
by and between the Company and Peter M. van Stolk. (Previously
filed with, and incorporated herein by reference to,
Exhibit 10.1 to our current report on
Form 8-K,
filed on February 20, 2008; File
No. 000-28820)
|
|
10
|
.7*
|
|
Jones Soda Co. 2002 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan.
(Previously filed with, and incorporated herein by reference to,
Appendix B to our definitive proxy statement for our 2007
annual meeting of shareholders, filed on April 18, 2007,
File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.8++
|
|
Supply Agreement with Panera, LLC, dated May 28, 2003.
(Previously filed with, and incorporated herein by reference to,
Exhibit 10.1 A to our quarterly report on
Form 10-QSB
for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, filed on May 16,
2005; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.9++
|
|
First Amendment to Supply Agreement with Panera, LLC, dated
May 27, 2004. (Previously filed with, and incorporated
herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1B to our quarterly
report on
Form 10-QSB
for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, filed on May 16,
2005; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.10++
|
|
Second Amendment to Supply Agreement with Panera, LLC, dated
April 1, 2005. (Previously filed with, and incorporated
herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1C to our quarterly
report on
Form 10-QSB
for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, filed on May 16,
2005; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.11++
|
|
Co-Packers and Distribution Agreement, dated September 18,
2006, among Jones Soda Co., National Retail Brands Inc. and
Shasta Beverages Inc. (Previously filed with, and incorporated
herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1 to our quarterly
report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, filed on
November 14, 2006; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.12++
|
|
Sponsorship Agreement among Jones Soda Co., Football Northwest,
LLC (d/b/a Seattle Seahawks) and First & Goal, Inc.,
entered into May 22, 2007. (Previously filed with, and
incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1 to our
quarterly report on
Form 10-Q,
filed August 9, 2007; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.13++
|
|
Sponsorship and Beverage Availability Agreement among Brooklyn
Arena, LLC, New Jersey Basketball, LLC and Jones Soda Co., dated
effective October 29, 2007. (Previously filed with, and
incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.2 to our
quarterly report on
Form 10-Q,
filed November 9, 2007; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.14*
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement under 2002 Stock Option and
Restricted Stock Plan (Previously filed with, and incorporated
herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.24 to our annual report
on
Form 10-K,
filed March 17, 2008; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.15*
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement under 2002 Stock
Option and Restricted Stock Plan. (Previously filed with, and
incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1 to our
quarterly report on
Form 10-Q,
filed August 8, 2008; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.16*
|
|
Jones Soda Co. 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. (Previously
filed with, and incorporated herein by reference to, the
Companys definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A,
filed on April 18, 2007; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.17*
|
|
Compensation for Directors of Jones Soda Co. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
10
|
.18*
|
|
Employment Letter, dated January 3, 2008, between the
Company and Joth Ricci. (Previously filed with, and incorporated
herein by reference to, Exhibit 99.2 to our current report
on
Form 8-K,
filed January 9, 2008; File
No. 000-28820)
|
|
10
|
.19*
|
|
Separation Agreement and Release, dated February 13, 2008,
by and between the Company and Peter Burns. (Previously filed
with, and incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.3
to our quarterly report on
Form 10-Q,
filed on May 12, 2008; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.20*
|
|
Employment Letter, dated March 10, 2008, between the
Company and Tom ONeill. (Previously filed with, and
incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.3 to our
quarterly report on
Form 10-Q,
filed on May 12, 2008; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.21*
|
|
Employment Offer Letter between Stephen C. Jones and Jones Soda
Co., dated June 3, 2008. (Previously filed with, and
incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1 to our
current report on
Form 8-K,
filed June 9, 2008; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.22*
|
|
Employment Offer Letter between Michael OBrien and Jones
Soda Co., dated August 15, 2008. (Previously filed with,
and incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.1 to
our current report on
Form 8-K,
filed August 18, 2008; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.23*
|
|
Separation Agreement and Release between Hassan Natha and Jones
Soda Co., dated August 18, 2008. (Previously filed with,
and incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 10.2 to
our quarterly report on
Form 10-Q,
filed November 10, 2008; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
Pharma GABA Sales Contract, dated June 20, 2007, among
Pharma Foods International Co., Ltd., Jones Soda Co., Mitsubishi
International Food Ingredients, Inc. and Mitsubishi Corporation.
(Filed herewith.)
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
Amendment Agreement, dated July 31, 2008, by an among
Pharma Foods International Co., Ltd., Jones Soda Co., Mitsubishi
International Food Ingredients, Inc. and Mitsubishi Corporation.
(Filed herewith.)
|
|
10
|
.26*
|
|
First Amendment to Employment Offer Letter, dated
December 29, 2008, between Jones Soda Co. and Stephen C.
Jones. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
10
|
.27*
|
|
First Amendment to Employment Offer Letter, dated
December 29, 2008, between Jones Soda Co. and Joth Ricci.
(Filed herewith.)
|
|
10
|
.28*
|
|
First Amendment to Employment Offer Letter, dated
December 29, 2008, between Jones Soda Co. and Tom
ONeill. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
10
|
.29*
|
|
First Amendment to Employment Offer Letter, dated
December 29, 2008, between Jones Soda Co. and Michael
OBrien. (Filed herewith.)
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of Jones Soda Co. (Previously filed with,
and incorporated herein by reference to, Exhibit 21.1 to
our annual report on
Form 10-KSB
for the year ended December 31, 2002, filed on
March 28, 2003; File
No. 000-28820.)
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP (Filed herewith.)
|
|
23
|
.2
|
|
Consent of KPMG LLP (Filed herewith.)
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification by Stephen C. Jones, Chief Executive Officer,
pursuant to
Rule 13a-14(a),
pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Filed herewith.)
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification by Michael R. OBrien, Chief Financial
Officer, pursuant to
Rule 13a-14(a),
pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Filed herewith.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification by Stephen C. Jones, Chief Executive Officer,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Filed herewith.)
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification by Michael R. OBrien, Chief Financial
Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (Filed herewith.)
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement. |
|
++ |
|
Portions of the marked exhibits have been omitted pursuant to
requests for confidential treatment filed with the SEC. |