12. ECONOMIC DEPENDENCY

9 Months Ended

Jul. 31, 2012

Risks and Uncertainties [Abstract]

ECONOMIC DEPENDENCY

NOTE 12 -ECONOMIC DEPENDENCY:

Approximately 63% of the Company’s sales were derived from one customer during the nine months ended July 31, 2012.  This customer also accounted for approximately $6,886,000 of the Company’s accounts receivable balance at July 31, 2012.  Approximately 54% of the Company’s sales were derived from one customer during the nine months ended July 31, 2011.  This customer also accounted for approximately $4,900,000 of the Company’s accounts receivable balance at July 31, 2011.  Concentration of credit risk with respect to other trade receivables is limited due to the short payment terms generally extended by the Company, by ongoing credit evaluations of customers, and by maintaining an allowance for doubtful accounts that management believes will adequately provide for credit losses.

For the nine months ended July 31, 2012, approximately 62% of the Company’s purchases were from four vendors.  These vendors accounted for approximately $3,057,000 of the Company’s accounts payable at July 31, 2012.  For the nine months ended July 31, 2011, approximately 62% of the Company’s purchases were from four vendors.  These vendors accounted for approximately $4,200,000 of the Company’s accounts payable at July 31, 2011. Management does not believe the loss of any one vendor would have a material adverse effect of the Company’s operations due to the availability of many alternate suppliers.

Approximately 63% of the Company’s sales were derived from one customer during the three months ended July 31, 2012.  Approximately 56% of the Company’s sales were derived from one customer during the three months ended July 31, 2011.

For the three months ended July 31, 2012, approximately 65% of the Company’s purchases were from four vendors.  For the three months ended July 31, 2011, approximately 61% of the Company’s purchases were from four  vendors.  Management does not believe the loss of any one vendor would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s operations due to the availability of many alternate suppliers.