12. Debt

Short-Term Debt

At September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the carrying value and the aggregate fair value of the Company’s short-term debt were as follows (in thousands):

	As of September 30, 2017				As of December 31, 2016
	Carrying Amount		Fair Value		Carrying Amount		Fair Value
Current Liabilities:
Related-party notes payable, short-term	$	2,200	$	2,200	$	—	$	—

On February 7, 2017, the Company entered into a short-term secured borrowing arrangement with William W. and Dieva L. Smith (“Smith”) and on February 8, 2017 entered into a short-term secured borrowing arrangement with Steven L. and Monique P. Elfman (“Elfman”) pursuant to which Smith and Elfman each loaned to the Company $1 million and the Company issued to each of them a Secured Promissory Note (the “Original Notes”) bearing interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The Original Notes were due on March 24, 2017 are secured by the Company’s accounts receivable and certain other assets. William W. Smith, Jr. is the Company’s Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Steven L. Elfman is a director of the Company.

On March 25, 2017, the Company entered into an Amendment to the Original Note issued to Smith that extended the Maturity Date of the Note to June 26, 2017.

On March 31, 2017, the Company entered into a new short-term secured borrowing arrangement with Elfman for $1 million which matured on June 23, 2017.

On June 30, 2017, the Company entered into a new short-term secured borrowing arrangement with each of Smith and Elfman to refinance the prior arrangement with each of them, which matured on June 26, 2017 and June 23, 2017, respectively. Under the new borrowing arrangements, the Company issued to each of Smith and Elfman a new Secured Promissory Note (“Replacement Notes”) with a principal balance of $1 million, bearing interest at the rate of 12% per annum, and maturing on September 25, 2017. The maturity date of the Replacement Note entered into with Smith may be extended by up to 180 days upon the mutual consent of the Company and Smith. Each of the Replacement Notes are secured by the Company’s accounts receivable and certain other assets.

On August 22, 2017, the Company entered into Amendments to the Replacement Notes issued to each of Smith and Elfman, which extended the Maturity Date of the Replacement Notes from September 25, 2017 to January 25, 2018. The amendments do not change any other terms of the Replacement Notes.

On August 23, 2017, the Company entered into a new borrowing arrangement with Smith, under which the Company borrowed $0.8 million and issued to Smith a new Secured Promissory Note, bearing interest at the rate of 12% per annum, and maturing on January 25, 2018.

On August 24, 2017, the Company entered into a new borrowing arrangement with Andrew Arno (“Arno”), under which the Company borrowed $0.3 million and issued to Arno new Secured Promissory Notes with an aggregate principal balance of $0.3 million, bearing interest at the rate of 12% per annum, and maturing on January 31, 2018. Andrew Arno is a director of the Company.

On September 29, 2017, the Company exchanged shares of the Company’s newly designated Series B 10% Convertible Preferred Stock (“Series B Preferred Stock”) for outstanding short-term indebtedness with a principal amount of $0.8 million owed to Smith and $0.1 million to Arno for 750 and 50 shares, respectively. See Note 19, Equity Transactions, for further details on the Series B Preferred Stock Offering.

The Company reviewed FASB ASC Topic No. 470-50, Debt Extinguishment, to evaluate the debt extinguishment gain incurred from the debt to equity transaction. Upon completion of the evaluation, it was determined that the gain associated with the short-term related party loan extinguishment to Preferred Stock should be accounted for as a capital contribution and was recorded to Stockholder’s Equity. The principal balance of the note and resulting fair value of the equity interest exchanged was $0.8 million. The fair value was reduced by allocated legal fees and other direct issuance costs of $0.1 million, resulting in a net fair value of $0.8 million. The capital contribution related to the gain was the difference between these two amounts, or $0.1 million.

The Company evaluated the refinancing of the short-term debt instruments under FASB ASU Topic No. 470-60, Troubled Debt Restructurings, to determine whether the modification of the debt instruments would be considered a troubled debt restructuring, using the two-step decision tree. The two steps included an assessment of whether the company is experiencing financial difficulties and if the creditors have provided concessions. Upon completion of this review, the Company concluded that the refinancing did not qualify as a troubled debt restructuring.

Long-Term Debt

At September 30, 2017, the aggregate fair value and the carrying value of the Company’s long-term debt was as follows (in thousands):

	As of September 30, 2017				As of December 31, 2016
	Carrying Amount		Fair Value		Carrying Amount		Fair Value
Long-term debt - related party	$	—	$	—	$	1,295	$	1,295
Long-term debt		1,492		1,492		1,295		1,295
Total long-term debt	$	1,492	$	1,492	$	2,590	$	2,590

The carrying value of $1.5 million and $2.6 million are net of debt discount of $0.4 million and $1.2 million and debt issuance costs of $0.1 million and $0.2 million as of September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively.

On September 2, 2016, we entered into a Note and Warrant Purchase Agreement with Unterberg Koller Capital Fund L.P. and William W. and Dieva L. Smith (collectively, the “Investors”), pursuant to which the Company issued and sold to the Investors in a private placement senior subordinated promissory notes in the aggregate principal amount of $4 million (the “Notes”). The Company completed the transactions contemplated by the Note and Warrant Purchase Agreement and issued the Notes on September 6, 2016. The Notes mature three years following the issuance date, or September 6, 2019, and bear interest at the rate of 10% of the outstanding principal balance of the Notes, payable quarterly in cash or shares of the Company’s common stock. The Notes are subordinate and junior in right of payment to the prior payment in full of all claims, whether now existing or arising in the future, of holders of senior debt of the Company, as described in the Notes.

On September 29, 2017, the Company exchanged shares of the Company’s newly designated Series B 10% Convertible Preferred Stock for outstanding long-term indebtedness with a principal amount of $2 million owed to Smith for 2,000 of the Series B Preferred Stock. See Note 19, Equity Transactions, for further details on the Series B Preferred Stock Offering.

The Company reviewed FASB ASC Topic No. 470-50, Debt Extinguishment, to evaluate the debt extinguishment loss incurred from the transaction. Upon completion of the evaluation, it was determined that the loss associated with the long-term related party loan extinguishment to Preferred Stock should be accounted through the Statement of Operations. The principal balance of the note and resulting fair value of the equity interest transferred was $2 million. The fair value was reduced by legal fees and other direct issuance costs of $0.1 million. The net carrying amount of the long-term note was $1.5 million, which was net of debt issuance costs of $0.1 million and discount of $0.4 million. The extinguishment loss associated with this note was the difference between the net fair value of the equity interest transferred and the net carrying amount of the note being extinguished, which was $0.4 million.

The Company evaluated the conversion of the long-term debt under FASB ASU Topic No. 470-60, Troubled Debt Restructurings, for determining whether the modification of the debt instruments would be considered a troubled debt restructuring, using the two-step decision tree. The two steps included an assessment of whether the company is experiencing financial difficulties and if the creditors have provided concessions. Upon completion of this review, the Company concluded that the refinancing did not qualify as troubled debt restructuring.