(1)

Fair value was determined by applying a discounted cash flow analysis to the straight note with a hypothetical yield of 11%, volatility of 62.7% and a Monte Carlo simulation for the value of the conversion feature. A change in yield of + or – 2% would result in a fair value of $224.1 million and $238.9 million, respectively.

(2)

Fair value was determined by applying a discounted cash flow analysis with a hypothetical yield of 12%. A change in yield of + or – 2% would result in a fair value of $35.0 million and $36.0 million, respectively.

(3)

Fair value was determined by applying a discounted cash flow analysis with a hypothetical yield of 13% and volatility of 62.7% to the straight note and a binomial option pricing model for the value of the conversion feature. A change in yield of + or – 2% would result in a fair value of $14.2 million and $14.7 million, respectively.

(4)

Fair value was determined by applying a Monte Carlo simulation method for the calculation of the potential payment and the Geometric Brownian Motion forecasting model to estimate the underlying revenue. Market based inputs and other level 3 inputs were used to forecast future revenue. The key inputs used included a risk-free rate of 3.88%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 50%, period of 8 years and credit risk of 17%.

(5)

Fair value was determined by using the Monte Carlo simulation method for the calculation of the potential payment and the Geometric Brownian Motion forecasting model to estimate the underlying revenue. Market based inputs and other level 3 inputs were used to forecast future revenue. The key inputs used included a risk-free rate of 4.01%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 43%, period of 15 years and credit risk of 17%.

(6)

Fair value was determined by applying a discounted cash flow analysis with a hypothetical yield of 9.5%.

(1)

Fair value was determined by applying a discounted cash flow analysis to the straight note with a hypothetical yield of 13%, volatility of 75.8% and a Monte Carlo simulation for the value of the conversion feature. A change in yield of + or – 2% would result in a fair value of $245.0 million and $263.4 million, respectively.

(2)

Fair value was determined by applying a discounted cash flow analysis with a hypothetical yield of 12%. A change in yield of + or – 2% would result in a fair value of $40.0 million and $42.4 million, respectively.

(3)

Fair value was determined by applying a discounted cash flow analysis with a hypothetical yield of 13% and volatility of 77.8% to the straight note and a binomial option pricing model for the value of the conversion feature. A change in yield of + or – 2% would result in a fair value of $20.5 million and $21.2 million, respectively.

(4)

Fair value was determined by applying a Monte Carlo simulation method for the calculation of the potential payment and the Geometric Brownian Motion forecasting model to estimate the underlying revenue. Market based inputs and other level 3 inputs were used to forecast future revenue. The key inputs used included a risk-free rate of 3.99%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 50%, period of 8 years and credit risk of 17%.

(5)

Fair value was determined by using the Monte Carlo simulation method for the calculation of the potential payment and the Geometric Brownian Motion forecasting model to estimate the underlying revenue. Market-based inputs and other level 3 inputs were used to forecast future revenue. The key inputs used included a risk-free rate of 4.01%, dividend yield of 0%, volatility of 43%, period of 15 years and credit risk of 17%.

(6)

Fair value was determined by applying a discounted cash flow analysis with a hypothetical yield of 10%.