Derivative Liabilities

3 Months Ended

Apr. 30, 2017

Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities Disclosure [Abstract]

Derivative Liabilities

NOTE 7 – Derivative Liabilities

The embedded conversion feature in the convertible debt instruments that the Company issued beginning in August 2013 (See Note 8), and became convertible beginning in February 2014, qualified it as a derivative instrument since the number of shares issuable under the note is indeterminate based on guidance in FASB ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. This convertible note tainted all other equity linked instruments including outstanding warrants and fixed rate convertible debt on the date that the instrument became convertible.

The valuation of the derivative liability of the warrants was determined through the use of a Monte Carlo options model that values the liability of the warrants based on a risk-neutral valuation where the price of the option is its discounted expected value. The technique applied generates a large number of possible (but random) price paths for the underlying common stock via simulation, and then calculates the associated exercise value (i.e. “payoff”) of the option for each path. These payoffs are then averaged and discounted to a current valuation date resulting in the fair value of the option.

The valuation of the derivative liability attached to the convertible debt was arrived at through the use of a Monte Carlo model that values the derivative liability within the notes. The technique applied generates a large number of possible (but random) price paths for the underlying (or underlyings) via simulation, and then calculates the associated payment value (cash, stock, or warrants) of the derivative features. The price of the underlying common stock is modeled such that it follows a geometric Brownian motion with constant drift, and elastic volatility (increasing as stock price decreases). The stock price is determined by a random sampling from a normal distribution. Since the underlying random process is the same, for enough price paths, the value of the derivative is derived from path dependent scenarios and outcomes. The features in the notes that were analyzed and incorporated into the model included the conversion features with the reset provisions, the call/redemption/prepayment options, and the default provisions. Based on these features, there are six primary events that can occur; payments are made in cash; payments are made with stock; the note holder converts upon receiving a redemption notice; the note holder converts the note; the issuer redeems the note; or the Company defaults on the note. The model simulates the underlying economic factors that influenced which of these events would occur, when they were likely to occur, and the specific terms that would be in effect at the time (i.e. stock price, conversion price, etc.). Probabilities were assigned to each variable such as redemption likelihood, default likelihood, and timing and pricing of reset events over the remaining term of the notes based on management projections. This led to a cash flow simulation over the life of the note. A discounted cash flow for each simulation was completed, and it was compared to the discounted cash flow of the note without the embedded features, thus determining a value for the derivative liability.

During the three months ended April 30, 2017, none of the convertible promissory notes had become convertible under their terms, thus no derivative liability existed during the period.

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in the fair value of the Company’s derivative liability:

	Three months ended April 30,
	2017		2016
Beginning balance	$	—	$	3,293
Total losses		—		5,512
Settlements		—		(64,379	)
Additions		—		62,160
Ending balance	$	—	$	6,586
Change in unrealized losses  included in earnings relating to derivatives still held as of April 30, 2017 and 2016	$	—	$	(5,512	)