Annual report pursuant to Section 13 and 15(d)

FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

v3.8.0.1
FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Fair Value Of Financial Instruments  
FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

NOTE 10: FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

 

Pursuant to the accounting guidance for fair value measurement and its subsequent updates, fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (i.e., the “exit price”) in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The accounting guidance establishes a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring the use of observable market data when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on active market data. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances.

 

The fair value hierarchy is broken down into the three input levels summarized below:

 

Level 1 —Valuations are based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities and readily accessible by us at the reporting date.

 

Level 2 —Valuations based on inputs other than the quoted prices in active markets that are observable either directly or indirectly in active markets.

 

Level 3 —Valuations based on unobservable inputs in which there are little or no market data, which require the Company to develop its own assumptions.

 

There were no financial assets outstanding that were required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis at December 31, 2017 or December 31, 2016.

 

Warrants issued in the April 3, 2017 offering, which are discussed further in Note 11, contained provisions that could have required the Company to settle the warrants in cash in an event outside the Company’s control or had price protection rights and were therefore accounted for as liabilities while they were outstanding, with changes in the fair values included in net loss for the respective periods. Because some of the inputs to the valuation model were either not observable or were not derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means, the warrant liability was classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.

 

The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s Level 3 warrant liability for the year ended December 31, 2017:

 

Warrant liability        
Beginning balance   $    
Issuances of warrants     1,612,413  
Warrant exercises     (1,893,160 )
Change in fair value     280,747  
Ending balance   $    

 

The Company’s intangible assets are classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. Refer to Note 3 for further discussion. 

 

There were no transfers between Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 for the years ended December 31, 2017 or December 31, 2016.