XML 36 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
Nature of Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2010
Nature of Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Note 1 Nature of Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Nature of Operations
 
MusclePharm Corporation (the “Company”, or “MP”), was organized as a limited liability company in the State of Colorado on April 22, 2008.  On February 18, 2010, the Company executed a reverse recapitalization with Tone in Twenty, Inc. and changed its name to MP (See Note 3).
 
The Company markets branded sports nutrition products.

Risks and Uncertainties

The Company operates in an industry that is subject to rapid change and intense competition. The Company's operations will be subject to significant risk and uncertainties including financial, operational, technological, regulatory and other risks, including the potential risk of business failure.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.

Making estimates requires management to exercise significant judgment. It is at least reasonably possible that the estimate of the effect of a condition, situation or set of circumstances that existed at the date of the financial statements, which management considered in formulating its estimate could change in the near term due to one or more future non confirming events. Accordingly, the actual results could differ significantly from estimates.

Principles of Consolidation

All inter-company accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid instruments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less and money market accounts to be cash equivalents.  At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had no cash equivalents.

The Company minimizes its credit risk associated with cash by periodically evaluating the credit quality of its primary financial institution. The balance at times may exceed federally insured limits.  At December 31, 2010 and 2009, there were no balances that exceeded the federally insured limit.
 
Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Accounts receivable represents trade obligations from customers that are subject to normal trade collection terms. The Company periodically evaluates the collectability of its accounts receivable and considers the need to establish an allowance for doubtful accounts based upon historical collection experience and specific customer information. Accordingly, the actual amounts could vary from the recorded allowances.

The Company does not charge interest on past due receivables. Receivables are determined to be past due based on the payment terms of the original invoices.

Accounts receivable at December 31, 2010 and 2009 was as follows:

Accounts receivable
  $ 542,863     $ 112,297  
Less: allowance for doubtful accounts
    (116,102 )     ( 821 )
Accounts receivable – net
  $ 426,761     $ 111,476  

The Company recorded bad debt expense of $119,468 and $0 for the years ending December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

During 2010 and 2009, the Company had the following concentrations of accounts receivable with customers:

Customer
 
2010
   
2009
 
A
    40 %     32 %
B
    24 %     - %
C
    11 %     - %
D
    - %     30 %
E
    - %     20 %
F
    - %     11 %

Inventory

During 2009, the Company maintained finished goods inventory of $4,245, which was stated at the lower of cost or market. Costs were determined by the first-in first-out or average cost methods. The Company also had deposits on inventory of $32,116, which was delivered in 2010.

At December 31, 2010, the Company did not manufacture or physically hold any inventory.  Inventory is held and distributed by the Company’s co-manufacturers.
 
Property and Equipment
   
Property and equipment are stated at cost and depreciated to their estimated residual value over their estimated useful lives. When assets are retired or otherwise disposed of, the assets and related accumulated depreciation are relieved from the accounts and the resulting gains or losses are included in operating income in the statements of operations. Repairs and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. Depreciation is provided using the straight-line method for all property and equipment.

Website Development Costs
 
Costs incurred in the planning stage of a website are expensed, while costs incurred in the development stage are capitalized and amortized over the estimated useful life of the asset.

Long-Lived Assets

The Company reviews long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances, such as service discontinuance or technological obsolescence, indicate that the carrying amount of the long-lived asset may not be recoverable. When such events occur, the Company compares the carrying amount of the asset to the undiscounted expected future cash flows related to the asset. If the comparison indicates that an impairment is present, the amount of the impairment is calculated as the difference between the excess of the carrying amount over the fair value of the asset. If a readily determinable market price does not exist, fair value is estimated using discounted expected cash flows attributable to the asset.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The Company measures assets and liabilities at fair value based on an expected exit price as defined by the authoritative guidance on fair value measurements, which represents the amount that would be received on the sale of an asset or paid to transfer a liability, as the case may be, in an orderly transaction between market participants. As such, fair value may be based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. The authoritative guidance on fair value measurements establishes a consistent framework for measuring fair value on either a recurring or nonrecurring basis whereby inputs, used in valuation techniques, are assigned a hierarchical level.
 
The following are the hierarchical levels of inputs to measure fair value:

 
·
Level 1: Observable inputs that reflect quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets.

 
·
Level 2: Inputs reflect quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in markets that are not active; quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the assets or liabilities; or inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.

 
·
Level 3: Unobservable inputs reflecting the Company’s assumptions incorporated in valuation techniques used to determine fair value. These assumptions are required to be consistent with market participant assumptions that are reasonably available.
 
The following are the major categories of liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, using quoted prices in active markets for identical liabilities (Level 1); significant other observable inputs (Level 2); and significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):
 
       
2010
   
2009
 
Derivative liabilities
 
Level 2
  $ 622,944     $ -  

The Company's financial instruments consisted primarily of cash, accounts receivable, prepaids, accounts payable, accrued liabilities, and short term debt. The carrying amounts of the Company's financial instruments generally approximated their fair values as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, due to the short-term nature of these instruments.

Revenue Recognition

The Company records revenue when all of the following have occurred; (1) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, (2) product has been shipped or delivered, (3) the sales price to the customer is fixed or determinable, and (4) collectability is reasonably assured. 

Depending on individual customer agreements, sales are recognized either upon shipment of products to customers or upon delivery.  The Company records sales allowances and discounts as a direct reduction of sales.  Sales for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 are as follows:

   
2010
   
2009
 
Sales
  $ 4,199,959     $ 1,385,117  
Discounts
    152,664       367,201  
Sales – net
  $ 4,047,295     $ 1,017,916  

The Company has an informal 7-day right of return for products. However, there were nominal returns in 2010 and 2009.
 
During 2010 and 2009, the Company had the following concentrations of revenues with customers:

Customer
 
2010
   
2009
 
A
    42 %     20 %
B
    12 %     - %
C
    - %     19 %
D
    - %     14 %
E
    - %     13 %

Deferred Revenue

As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had received $75,733 and $15,018 from international customers in advance of shipping products.

Cost of Sales

Cost of sales represents costs directly related to the production and manufacturing of the Company’s products. 

Shipping and Handling

Product sold is typically shipped directly to the customer from the manufacturer.  Any freight billed to customers is offset against shipping costs and included in cost of goods sales.

Advertising

The Company expenses advertising costs when incurred.

Advertising for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 are as follows:

2010
   
2009
 
$ 7,084,955     $ 1,069,308  

Income Taxes

In 2009 and through February 18, 2010, the Company was taxed as a pass-through entity (LLC) under the Internal Revenue Code and was not subject to federal and state income taxes; accordingly, no provision had been made. The financial statements reflect the LLC’s transactions without adjustment, if any, required for income tax purposes for the year ended December 31, 2009 and through February 18, 2010. In computing the expected tax benefit, the Company reflected a net loss of $19,169,454 for the period from February 18, 2010 to December 31, 2010
 
From February 18, 2010 through December 31, 2010, income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. Beginning with the adoption of FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, (included in FASB ASC Subtopic 740-10, Income Taxes — Overall), as of January 1, 2009, the Company recognizes the effect of income tax positions only if those positions are more likely than not of being sustained. Recognized income tax positions are measured at the largest amount that is greater than 50% likely of being realized. Changes in recognition or measurement are reflected in the period in which the change in judgment occurs.
 
The Company records interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense. There were none for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.

Beneficial Conversion Feature
 
For conventional convertible debt where the rate of conversion is below market value, the Company records a "beneficial conversion feature" ("BCF") and related debt discount.

When the Company records a BCF, the relative fair value of the BCF would be recorded as a debt discount against the face amount of the respective debt instrument. The discount would be amortized to interest expense over the life of the debt.

Derivative Liabilities

Fair value accounting requires bifurcation of embedded derivative instruments such as conversion features in convertible debt or equity instruments, and measurement of their fair value for accounting purposes. In determining the appropriate fair value, the Company uses the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. In assessing the convertible debt instruments, management determines if the convertible debt host instrument is conventional convertible debt and further if there is a beneficial conversion feature requiring measurement. If the instrument is not considered conventional convertible debt, the Company will continue its evaluation process of these instruments as derivative financial instruments.
 
Once determined, derivative liabilities are adjusted to reflect fair value at each reporting period end, with any increase or decrease in the fair value being recorded in results of operations as an adjustment to fair value of derivatives. In addition, the fair value of freestanding derivative instruments such as warrants, are also valued using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
 
Debt Issue Costs and Debt Discount

The Company may pay debt issue costs, and record debt discounts in connection with raising funds through the issuance of convertible debt.  These costs are amortized over the life of the debt to interest expense. If a conversion of the underlying debt occurs, a proportionate share of the unamortized amounts is immediately expensed.

Original Issue Discount

For certain convertible debt issued, the Company provides the debt holder with an original issue discount.  The original issue discount is recorded to debt discount, reducing the face amount of the note and is amortized to interest expense over the life of the debt.

Share-based payments

Generally, all forms of share-based payments, including stock option grants, warrants, restricted stock grants and stock appreciation rights are measured at their fair value on the awards’ grant date, based on estimated number of awards that are ultimately expected to vest.  Share-based compensation awards issued to non-employees for services rendered are recorded at either the fair value of the services rendered or the fair value of the share-based payment, whichever is more readily determinable.

Earnings per Share

Basic earnings (loss) per share is computed by dividing net income (loss) by weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during each period.  Diluted earnings (loss) per share is computed by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock, common stock equivalents and potentially dilutive securities outstanding during the period.

Since the Company reflected a net loss in 2010 and 2009, respectively, the effect of considering any common stock equivalents, if exercisable, would have been anti-dilutive. A separate computation of diluted earnings (loss) per share is not presented.

The Company has the following common stock equivalents at December 31, 2010 and 2009:

   
2010
   
2009
 
Stock options (exercise price - $0.50/share)
    2,767,500       -  
Warrants (exercise price - $1.50/share)
    750,000       -  
Convertible debt
    11,197,139       571,486  
Total common stock equivalents
    14,714,639       571,486  

In the above table, some of the outstanding convertible debt from 2010 contains ratchet provisions that would cause variability in the exercise price at the balance sheet date.  As a result, common stock equivalents could change at each reporting period.

In connection with the reverse recapitalization, all share and per share amounts have been retroactively restated.
 
Reclassification

In connection with the reverse recapitalization, common stock and additional paid in capital have been changed to reflect the transaction to the earliest period presented, as well as other reclassifications to conform 2009 to the 2010 financial statement presentation. There is no impact to operations or cash flows.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued updated guidance to amend the disclosure requirements related to recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements. This update requires new disclosures on significant transfers of assets and liabilities between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy (including the reasons for these transfers) and the reasons for any transfers in or out of Level 3. This update also requires a reconciliation of recurring Level 3 measurements about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements on a gross basis. In addition to these new disclosure requirements, this update clarifies certain existing disclosure requirements. For example, this update clarifies that reporting entities are required to provide fair value measurement disclosures for each class of assets and liabilities rather than each major category of assets and liabilities. This update also clarifies the requirement for entities to disclose information about both the valuation techniques and inputs used in estimating Level 2 and Level 3 fair value measurements. This update will become effective for the Company with the interim and annual reporting period beginning January 1, 2010, except for the requirement to provide the Level 3 activity of purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis, which will become effective for the Company with the interim and annual reporting period beginning January 1, 2011. The Company will not be required to provide the amended disclosures for any previous periods presented for comparative purposes. Other than requiring additional disclosures, adoption of this update will not have a material effect on the Company's financial statements.

In July 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-20, Receivables (Topic 310): Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. ASU 2010-20 is to provide financial statement users with greater transparency about an entity’s allowance for credit losses and the credit quality of its financing receivables. The disclosures about activity that occurs during the reporting period are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2010.  The Company does not expect the provisions of ASU 2010-20 to have a material effect on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In August 2010, the FASB issued an exposure draft on lease accounting that would require entities to recognize assets and liabilities arising from lease contracts on the balance sheet. The proposed exposure draft states that lessees and lessors should apply a “right-of-use model” in accounting for all leases. Under the proposed model, lessees would recognize an asset for the right to use the leased asset, and a liability for the obligation to make rental payments over the lease term. The lease term is defined as the longest possible term that is “more likely than not” to occur. The accounting by a lessor would reflect its retained exposure to the risks or benefits of the underlying leased asset. A lessor would recognize an asset representing its right to receive lease payments based on the expected term of the lease. Comments on this exposure draft were due by December 15, 2010 and the final standard is expected to be issued in the second quarter of 2011. The Company believes that the proposed standard, as currently drafted, will have neither a material impact on its reported financial position and reported results of operations, nor a material impact on the liquidity of the Company.
 
In August 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2010-05, Measuring Liabilities at Fair Value, or ASU 2010-05, which amends ASC 820 to provide clarification of a circumstance in which a quoted price in an active market for an identical liability is not available. A reporting entity is required to measure fair value using one or more of the following methods: 1) a valuation technique that uses a) the quoted price of the identical liability when traded as an asset or b) quoted prices for similar liabilities (or similar liabilities when traded as assets) and/or 2) a valuation technique that is consistent with the principles of ASC 820. ASU 2010-05 also clarifies that when estimating the fair value of a liability, a reporting entity is not required to adjust to include inputs relating to the existence of transfer restrictions on that liability. The adoption did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements

In December 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-29, Business Combinations (Topic 805) – Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations. This ASU requires a public entity to disclose pro forma information for business combinations that occurred in the current reporting period. The disclosures include pro forma revenue and earnings of the combined entity for the current reporting period as though the acquisition date for all business combinations that occurred during the year had been as of the beginning of the annual reporting period. If comparative financial statements are presented, the pro forma revenue and earnings of the combined entity for the comparable prior reporting period should be reported as though the acquisition date for all business combinations that occurred during the current year had been as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period. ASU 2010-29 affects any public entity as defined by Topic 805 that enters into business combinations that are material on an individual or aggregate basis. ASU 2010-29 is effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010.  Early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect the provisions of ASU 2010-29 to have an effect on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows.