Form 10-Q for VERDE SCIENCE, INC.
Quarterly Report
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
The information set forth in this section contains certain “forward-looking statements,” including, among other things, (i) expected changes in our revenues and profitability, (ii) prospective business opportunities, and (iii) our strategy for financing our business. Forward-looking statements are statements other than historical information or statements of current condition. Some forward-looking statements may be identified by use of terms such as “believes,” “anticipates,” “intends,” or “expects.” These forward-looking statements relate to our plans, objectives and expectations for future operations. Although we believe that our expectations with respect to the forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions within the bounds of our knowledge of our business and operations, in light of the risks and uncertainties inherent in all future projections, the inclusion of forward-looking statements in this report should not be regarded as a representation by us or any other person that our objectives or plans will be achieved.
PLAN OF OPERATION – CONTINUING OPERATIONS
Company changed its business as of April 1, 2014 to the medical science consulting business from the oil and gas business, initially targeting on the pharmaceutical benefits of marijuana. Currently, we are in the process of establishing agreements with certain scientists.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2015, the Company’s loss from continuing operations was $521,162, as compared to $2,063,079 for the nine months ended September 30, 2014. The decrease in loss of $1,541,917 was a result of decreased consulting expenses to $298,275 for the nine months ended September 30, 2015 from $1,821,367 for the nine months ended September 30, 2014.
During the three months ended September 30, 2015, the Company’s net loss and loss from continuing operations was $106,605, as compared to $371,757 for the three months ended September 30, 2014. The decrease in loss of $265,152 was a result of decreased consulting expenses to $84,746 for the three months ended September 30, 2015 from $199,963 for the three months ended September 30, 2014 and decreased interest expense to $36,270 for the three months ended September 30, 2015 from $118,308 for the three months ended September 30, 2014.
On May 7, 2014, the Company shifted its business to the business of the business of providing pharmaceutical applications initially from marijuana. To this end the Company has been conducting due diligence on several acquisition targets.
As we are in the process of changing businesses a number of the risks of the new business are discussed as follows:
Because we have no operating history in the cannabis industry, we may not succeed.
While our CEO, Harp Sangha, has experience in real estate transactions and in the public markets, we have no specific operating history or experience in procuring, building out or leasing real estate for agricultural purposes, specifically marijuana grow facilities, or with respect to any other activity in the cannabis industry. Moreover, we are subject to all risks inherent in a developing a new business enterprise. Our likelihood of success must be considered in light of the problems, expenses, difficulties, complications, and delays frequently encountered in connection with establishing a new business and the competitive and regulatory environment in which we operate. For example, the medical marijuana industry is new and may not succeed, particularly should the federal government change course and decide to prosecute those dealing in medical marijuana. If that happens there may not be an adequate market for our properties or other activities we propose to engage in.
You should further consider, among other factors, our prospects for success in light of the risks and uncertainties encountered by companies that, like us, are in their early stages. For example, unanticipated expenses, delays and or complications with build outs, zoning issues, legal disputes with neighbors, local governments, communities and or tenants. We may not successfully address these risks and uncertainties or successfully implement our operating strategies. If we fail to do so, it could materially harm our business to the point of having to cease operations and could impair the value of our common stock to the point investors may lose their entire investment.
Because we may be unable to identify and/or successfully develop or acquire assets which are suitable for our business, our financial condition may be negatively affected.
Our business plan involves the identification and the successful pharmaceutical applications utilizing marijuana. We do not know whether we will be successful in identifying or successfully developing or acquiring assets of economic value.
Because our business is dependent upon continued market acceptance by consumers, any negative trends will adversely affect our business operations.
We are substantially dependent on continued market acceptance and proliferation of consumers of medical marijuana. We believe that as marijuana becomes more accepted the stigma associated with marijuana use will diminish and as a result consumer demand will continue to grow. And while we believe that the market and opportunity in the marijuana space continues to grow, we cannot predict the future growth rate and size of the market. Any negative outlook on the marijuana industry will adversely affect our business operations.
In addition, it is believed by many that large well-funded businesses may have a strong economic opposition to the cannabis industry. We believe that the pharmaceutical industry clearly does not want to cede control of any product that could generate significant revenue. For example, medical marijuana will likely adversely impact the existing market for the current “marijuana pill” sold by the mainstream pharmaceutical industry, should marijuana displace other drugs or encroach upon the pharmaceutical industry’s products. The pharmaceutical industry is well funded with a strong and experienced lobby that eclipses the funding of the medical marijuana movement. Any inroads the pharmaceutical industry could make in halting the impending cannabis industry could have a detrimental impact on our proposed business.
Because marijuana is illegal under federal law, we could be subject to criminal and civil sanctions for engaging in activities that violate those laws.
The U.S. Government classifies marijuana as a schedule-I controlled substance. As a result, marijuana is an illegal substance under federal law. Even in those jurisdictions in which the use of medical marijuana has been legalized at the state level, its prescription is a violation of federal law. The United States Supreme Court has ruled in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers’ Coop. and Gonzales v. Raich that it is the federal government that has the right to regulate and criminalize cannabis, even for medical purposes. Therefore, federal law criminalizing the use of marijuana pre-empts state laws that legalizes its use for medicinal purposes.
As of November 12, 2014, 22 states and the District of Columbia allow its citizens to use medical marijuana. Additionally, voters in the states of Colorado, Alaska, Oregon and Washington approved ballot measures to legalize cannabis for adult use. The state laws are in conflict with the federal Controlled Substances Act, which makes marijuana use and possession illegal on a national level. The Obama administration has effectively stated that it is not an efficient use of resources to direct law federal law enforcement agencies to prosecute those lawfully abiding by state-designated laws allowing the use and distribution of medical marijuana. However, there is no guarantee that the administration will not change its stated policy regarding the low-priority enforcement of federal laws. Additionally, any new administration that follows could change this policy and decide to enforce the federal laws strongly. Any such change in the federal government’s enforcement of current federal laws could cause significant financial damage to us and our shareholders.
We will require medical marijuana for our research facilities. Consequently we will be required to follow the strict guidelines required by regulation for the management of our facilities.
Laws and regulations affecting the regulated marijuana industry are constantly changing, which could detrimentally affect our proposed operations, and we cannot predict the impact that future regulations may have on us.
Local, state and federal medical marijuana laws and regulations are broad in scope and subject to evolving interpretations, which could require us to incur substantial costs associated with compliance or alter our business plan. In addition, violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could disrupt our business and result in a material adverse effect on its operations. In addition, it is possible that regulations may be enacted in the future that will be directly applicable to our proposed business. We cannot predict the nature of any future laws, regulations, interpretations or applications, nor can we determine what effect additional governmental regulations or administrative policies and procedures, when and if promulgated, could have on our business.
FDA regulation of marijuana and the possible registration of facilities where medical marijuana is grown could negatively affect the cannabis industry which would directly affect our financial condition.
Should the federal government legalize marijuana for medical use, it is possible that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would seek to regulate it under the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act of 1938. Additionally, the FDA may issue rules and regulations including cGMPs (certified good manufacturing practices) related to the growth, cultivation, harvesting and processing of medical marijuana. Clinical trials may be needed to verify efficacy and safety. It is also possible that the FDA would require that facilities where medical marijuana is grown be registered with the FDA and comply with certain federally prescribed regulations. In the event that some or all of these regulations are imposed, we do not know what the impact would be on the medical marijuana industry, what costs, requirements and possible prohibitions may be enforced. If we or our tenants are unable to comply with the regulations and or registration as prescribed by the FDA, we and/or our tenants may be unable to continue to operate their and our business in its current form or at all.
Because our business model depends upon the availability of private financing, any change in our ability to raise money will adversely affect our financial condition.
Our ability to operate laboratory and manufacturing facilities, engage in the business activities that we have planned and achieve positive financial performance depends, in large measure, on our ability to obtain financing in amounts and on terms that are favorable. The capital markets in the United States have recently undergone a turbulent period in which lending was severely restricted. Although there appears to be signs that financial institutions are resuming lending, the market has not yet returned to its pre-2008 state. Obtaining favorable financing in the current environment remains challenging.
Because we are liable for hazardous substances on our properties, environmental liabilities are possible and can be costly.
Federal, state and local laws impose liability on a landowner for releases or the otherwise improper presence on the premises of hazardous substances. This liability is without regard to fault for, or knowledge of, the presence of such substances. A landowner may be held liable for hazardous materials brought onto a property before it acquired title and for hazardous materials that are not discovered until after it sells the property. Similar liability may occur under applicable state law. Sellers of properties may make only limited representations as to the absence of hazardous substances. If any hazardous materials are found within our properties in violation of law at any time, we may be liable for all cleanup costs, fines, penalties and other costs. This potential liability will continue after we sell the properties and may apply to hazardous materials present within the properties before we acquire the properties. If losses arise from hazardous substance contamination which cannot be recovered from a responsible party, the financial viability of the properties may be adversely affected. It is possible that we will purchase properties with known or unknown environmental problems which may require material expenditures for remediation.
Because we may not be adequately insured, we could experience significant liability for uninsured events.
While we intend to carry comprehensive insurance on our properties, including fire, liability and extended coverage insurance, there are certain risks that may be uninsurable or not insurable on terms that management believes to be economical. For example, management may not obtain insurance against floods, terrorism, mold-related claims, or earthquake insurance. If such an event occurs to, or causes the damage or destruction of, a property, we could suffer financial losses.
If we are found non-compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, we will be subject to significant liabilities.
If any of our properties are not in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (the “ADA”), we may be required to pay for any required improvements. Under the ADA, public accommodations must meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by disabled persons. The ADA requirements could require significant expenditures and could result in the imposition of fines or an award of damages to private litigants. We cannot assure that ADA violations do not or will not exist at any of our properties.
The following table provides selected financial data about our company as of September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014.
September 30, December 31,
Balance Sheet Data 2015 2014
Cash $ 812 $ 128
Liabilities $ 1,053,265 $ 794,638
Stockholders’ Deficit $ (1,045,786 ) $ (794,510 )
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Our cash balance at September 30, 2015 was $812 with outstanding liabilities of $1,053,265. Management believes our current cash balance will be unable to sustain operations for the next 12 months. We will be forced to raise additional funds by issuing new debt or equity securities or otherwise. If we fail to raise sufficient capital when needed, we will not be able to complete our business plan. We are a development stage company and have generated no revenue to date.
PLAN OF OPERATION
Our cash balance is $812 as of September 30, 2015. We believe our cash balance is insufficient to fund our levels of operations for the next twelve months. As a result we will be forced to raise additional funds by issuing new debt or equity securities or otherwise. If we fail to raise sufficient capital when needed, we will not be able to complete our business plan. We have generated no revenue to date.
This means that there is substantial doubt that we can continue as an on-going business for the next twelve months unless we obtain additional capital to pay our bills. This is because we have generated minimal revenues to date. There is no assurance we will ever achieve profitability.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
We do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that is material to investors.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
In June 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-10, which eliminated certain financial reporting requirements of companies previously identified as “Development Stage Entities” (Topic 915). The amendments in this ASU simplify accounting guidance by removing all incremental financial reporting requirements for development stage entities. The amendments also reduce data maintenance and, for those entities subject to audit, audit costs by eliminating the requirement for development stage entities to present inception-to-date information in the statements of income, cash flows, and shareholder equity. Early application of each of the amendments is permitted for any annual reporting period or interim period for which the entity’s financial statements have not yet been issued (public business entities) or made available for issuance (other entities). Upon adoption, entities will no longer present or disclose any information required by Topic
915. The Company has adopted this standard.
In June 2014, the FASB issued an accounting standard which provides new guidance that requires share-based compensation to meet a specific performance target to be achieved in order for employees to become eligible to vest in the awards and that could be achieved after an employee completes the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. As such, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant date fair value of the award. Compensation costs should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which the requisite service has already been rendered. If the performance target becomes probable of being achieved before the end of the requisite service period, the remaining unrecognized compensation cost should be recognized prospectively over the remaining requisite service period. The total amount of compensation cost recognized during and after the requisite service period should reflect the number of awards that are expected to vest and should be adjusted to reflect those awards that ultimately vest. The requisite service period ends when the employee can cease rendering service and still be eligible to vest in the award if the performance target is achieved. This new guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. Entities may apply the amendments in this Update either (a) prospectively to all awards granted or modified after the effective date or (b) retrospectively to all awards with performance targets that are outstanding as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements and to all new or modified awards thereafter. The adoption of ASU 201412 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In August 2014, the FASB issued an accounting standard that requires management to assess an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern by incorporating and expanding upon certain principles that are currently in U.S. auditing standards. Specifically, the standard (1) provide a definition of the term substantial doubt, (2) require an evaluation every reporting period including interim periods, (3) provide principles for considering the mitigating effect of management’s plans, (4) require certain disclosures when substantial doubt is alleviated as a result of consideration of management’s plans, (5) require an express statement and other disclosures when substantial doubt is not alleviated, and (6) require an assessment for a period of one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued). The standard in this Update is effective for the annual period ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. The adoption of ASU 201415 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In November 2014, the FASB issued new guidance for determining when separation of certain embedded derivative features in a hybrid financial instrument is required. That is, an entity will continue to evaluate whether the economic characteristics and risks of the embedded derivative feature are clearly and closely related to those of the host contract, among other relevant criteria. The amendments clarify how current GAAP should be interpreted in evaluating the economic characteristics and risks of a host contract in a hybrid financial instrument that is issued in the form of a share. The effects of initially adopting the amendments in this Update should be applied on a modified retrospective basis to existing hybrid financial instruments issued in the form of a share as of the beginning of the fiscal year for which the amendments are effective. Retrospective application is permitted to all relevant prior periods. The adoption of ASU 201416 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In November 2014, the FASB issued guidance to provide an acquired entity with an option to apply pushdown accounting in its separate financial statements upon occurrence of an event in which an acquirer obtains control of the acquired entity. After the effective date, an acquired entity can make an election to apply the guidance to future change-in-control events or to its most recent change-in-control event. However, if the financial statements for the period in which the most recent change-in-control event occurred already have been issued or made available to be issued, the application of this guidance would be a change in accounting principle. The amendments in this Update are effective on November 18, 2014. The adoption of ASU 201417 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
During the second quarter of 2015, the Company adopted guidance codified in ASU 2015-03, Interest – Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30), Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs. The guidance simplifies the presentation of debt issuance costs by requiring debt issuance costs to be presented as a deduction from the corresponding liability, consistent with debt discounts. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs is not affected. Therefore, these costs will continue to be amortized as interest expense using the effective interest method pursuant to ASC 835-30-35-2 through 35-3. The Company elected to early adopt the requirements of ASU 2015-03 effective during the second quarter ended June 30, 2015 and applied this guidance retrospectively to all prior periods presented in the Company’s financial statements. The reclassification does not impact net income (loss) as previously reported or any prior amounts reported on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) or the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.
MAPH Enterprises, LLC | (305) 414-0128 | 1501 Venera Ave, Coral Gables, FL 33146 | new@marijuanastocks.com
