UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
x |
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31,
2014
¨ |
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Transition Period From _____
to _____
Commission File Number
000-27727
SAVICORP
(Exact name of small business issuer as
specified in its charter)
Nevada |
91-1766174 |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
|
|
|
|
|
2530 S. Birch Street
Santa Ana, California |
|
92707 |
|
(877) 611-7284 |
(Address of principal executive office) |
|
(Postal Code) |
|
(Issuer's telephone number) |
Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:
Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:
Common Stock, $0.001 par value
Indicate by check mark whether the issuer
(1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such
filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes x
No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes ¨
No x
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of
delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-B is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment
to Form 10-K.
Yes ¨
No x Delinquent filers are disclosed herein.
The aggregate market value of the Common
Stock held by non-affiliates (as affiliates are defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act) of the registrant, computed by reference
to the closing price on June 30, 2014, was $13,873,791.
As of June 16, 2015 there were 6,280,561,383 shares of issuer’s
common stock outstanding.
SAVICORP
FORM 10-K
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31,
2014
|
|
Page |
|
|
Part I |
|
|
Item 1. Description of Business. |
1 |
|
|
Item 2. Description of Property. |
15 |
|
|
Item 3. Legal Proceedings. |
15 |
|
|
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders. |
16 |
|
|
Part II |
|
|
Item 5. Market for Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters. |
17 |
|
|
Item 6. Management's Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation. |
18 |
|
|
Item 7. Financial Statements |
22 |
|
|
Item 8. Changes In and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure. |
22 |
|
|
Item 8A. Controls and Procedures. |
22 |
|
|
Item 8B. Other Information. |
22 |
|
|
Part III |
|
|
|
Item 9. Directors, Executive Officers, Promoters and Control Persons; Compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. |
22 |
|
|
Item 10. Executive Compensation. |
23 |
|
|
Item 11. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
24 |
|
|
Item 12. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions. |
28 |
|
|
Item 13. Exhibits. |
29 |
|
|
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services. |
30 |
|
|
Signatures. |
31 |
PART I
FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
This Annual Report of SaviCorp on Form
10-K contains forward-looking statements, particularly those identified with the words "anticipates," "believes,"
"expects," "plans," “intends”, “objectives” and similar expressions. These statements
reflect management's best judgment based on factors known at the time of such statements. The reader may find discussions containing
such forward-looking statements in the material set forth under "Legal Proceedings" and "Management's Discussion
and Analysis and Plan of Operations," generally, and specifically therein under the captions "Liquidity and Capital Resources"
as well as elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Actual events or results may differ materially from those discussed herein.
ITEM 1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS.
Overview
In 2014, SaviCorp continued to expand its
revenue from new business activities in international markets. We were still devoting substantial efforts to business planning
and the search for sources of capital to fund our efforts. We have acquired all rights to certain technology for the production
of a gasoline and diesel engine emission reduction device which we believe delivers superior emission reduction technology and
operating performance. This technology is an emission reduction device believed to reduce harmful exhaust emissions in gasoline
and diesel engines, and increase fuel efficiency.
History
We were originally incorporated as Energy
Resource Management, Inc. on August 13, 2002 and subsequently adopted name changes to Redwood Energy Group, Inc. and Redwood Entertainment
Group, Inc., upon completion of a recapitalization on August 26, 2002. The re-capitalization occurred when we acquired the non-operating
public shell of Gene-Cell, Inc., a public company. Gene-Cell had no significant assets or operations at the date of acquisition
and we assumed all liabilities that remained from its prior discontinued operation as a biopharmaceutical research company. The
historical financial statements presented herein are those of Redwood Entertainment Group, Inc. and its predecessors, Redwood Energy
Group, Inc. and Energy Resource Management, Inc.
The public entity used to recapitalize
the Company was originally incorporated as Becniel in 1986 and subsequently adopted name changes to Tzaar Corporation, Gene-Cell,
Inc., Redwood Energy Group, Inc., Redwood Entertainment Group, Inc., and finally its current name, Savi Media Group, Inc. In 2012,
Savi Media Group, Inc. changed its name to SaviCorp.
Automotive Ventilation Systems
During a normal compression in an automotive
engine, a small amount of gases in the combustion chamber escape past the pistons. Approximately 70% of these gases, known as blow-by
gases, are unburned fuel that can dilute and contaminate the engine oil, causing corrosion to critical engine parts, and cause
a build-up on sludge. As the engine speed increases, the pressure in the crankcase increases as a result of the blow-by gases.
When the pressure gets too great in the crankcase, it can cause oil to leak past seals and gaskets, causing oil leaks. If the pressure
is not relieved, it would cause all of the oil to blow out of the engine. Prior to 1963, cars used road draft tubes that just let
the hydrocarbon emissions from the crankcase out into the open air. In 1963, automobiles created a positive crankcase ventilation,
which consists of a valve, called the PCV valve, which creates a metered opening, and a hose that runs to the car’s intake
manifold. The intake manifold has a vacuum effect that sucks the blow-by gases from the crankcase into the intake manifold, where
the gases are burned. This process reduces the emissions produced by the engine as only the results of the burned gases are emitted.
Our Product
SaviCorp’s primary business is the
sale of two inventions: the DynoValve & DynoValve Pro. The DynoValve is an OEM replacement for the present Positive Crankcase
Ventilation (“PCV”) valve installed on most gasoline engines in the United States and in most other countries of the
world. After exhaustive research and patent pending applications, on September 10, 2010, the Air Resources Board of the California
Environmental Protection Agency issued Executive Order D-677, permitting the advertisement, sales and installation of the DynoValve
on certain gas-powered vehicles in California. The savings, in both fuel economy and emissions, have surpassed the Company's expectation
and our products are available now on the market. The Company believes this is "Green Technology" and substantially reduces
automobiles’ "carbon footprint".
DynoValve & DynoValve Pro have the
following positive features:
|
- |
Addresses carbon footprint (substantially reduces carbon monoxide emissions through smog emission tacking); |
|
- |
Improves fuel use and mileage; |
|
- |
Increases engine performance (Dynamometer readings show a dramatic increase in overall engine performance); |
|
- |
Fuel use and oil consumption is substantially reduced; |
|
o |
The savings in over-all fuel, oil and engine service requirements are significant; |
|
o |
Carbon Credits are generated by the use of the DynoValve & DynoValve Pro; |
|
o |
The expense of fitting DynoValve is recaptured with short use and dependent on mileage use (within 6 to 12 months for passenger cars but 2 months with a taxi); |
|
o |
Useable with marine engines as well; |
|
o |
The Company hopes to have the DynoValve Pro (diesel) available in 2015, which should be used by large fleet owners, locomotive, heavy equipment, stationary engines and marine engines as well as ocean liners. |
|
- |
Suitable for original factory applications on new engines as well as retrofitting used vehicles. |
The Company’s mission is to become
a leading provider of multiple fuel efficiency and emission reduction technologies and related systems that solve practical emission
reduction and engine combustion system problems. The Company’s strategy is to have a broad and highly competitive product
line, skilled professional management and attain international brand recognition and market acceptance. Our main objective is to
design, develop, manufacture and distribute exhaust emission and fuel efficiency technologies to world markets to significantly
increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions around the globe.
SaviCorp’s management team has over
80 years of combined experience in entrepreneurial ventures, technology development companies, venture financing, management, product
development & marketing and administration. In addition, the Company’s strategic plan is structured to attract the best
management for directing the development and growth of its organization in order to fulfill the Company’s aggressive market
penetration mission.
Market Opportunities: SaviCorp is evolving
from an aftermarket fuel-saving and emission-reduction product development company into a market-driven company. Our Management
has comprehensive experience in introducing new products and technologies and is seeking to capitalize on our capabilities within
our chosen market. The company is developing dynamic internal/external sales and marketing staff that will be charged with expanding
distribution channels and penetrating high-value markets. Brand name recognition and broad market acceptance are the primary objectives
of SaviCorp’s business development efforts.
Overall, there are numerous competing products
on the market for consumers. It is no secret that fuel prices will remain high for the foreseeable future and, as a result, there
are many fuel-saving devices under development by entrepreneurs and assorted technology companies. In this economic environment,
most consumers are looking for products that will reduce their overall fuel and vehicle operating costs, allowing them to stay
within their current household budgets. Most fuel-saving devices currently in the marketplace are variants of magnetic control
devices, purporting to improve fuel economy by realigning fuel molecules as they pass through a magnetic field. Gasoline is a mixture
of hydrocarbon molecules that vary in size and shape. Longer molecules tend to burn slower and incompletely while leaving unburned
hydrocarbons that eventually form various exhaust pollutants. The magnetic devices on the market seek to delay the burning of short
hydrocarbons and hasten the burning of the longer hydrocarbons (by reducing long molecules to short molecules). The general theory
regarding a magnetic field’s possible effect on fuel may have some merit; however, in practice it has been found that any
effect that the magnets may have with respect to changing the molecular composition of gasoline is minor and vanishes well before
gasoline actually enters a vehicle’s engine because the molecules do not stay aligned after leaving the magnetic field. The
EPA, Popular Mechanics, and even the Discovery Channel’s “Mythbusters” program have undertaken independent tests
of such products. None of the tests conducted by these organizations showed any benefit from magnetic field devices.
Aside from the magnetic field devices described
above there are many other types of “fad” or pseudo-scientific fuel-saving devices currently on the market that have
been shown not to work; this has produced significant skepticism that taints legitimate devices that are under development. There
are, however, some good products that have demonstrated their efficacy through rigorous independent and verifiable laboratory testing.
SaviCorp’s DynoValve® product
is an example of a product that is grounded in solid science and engineering know-how that has demonstrated its efficacy in both
laboratory and field tests.
Although SaviCorp believes that we have
no direct competition in the marketplace, retail pricing may be dictated by the average consumer’s disposable income. In
order for the DynoValve® to attain a leadership role in the industry, SaviCorp will need to price the product to reflect the
value brought to end-users. As the market expands, future products should be priced more aggressively to increase market penetration
and achieve a position of planned-for market dominance. SaviCorp’s goal of establishing sales and marketing partnerships
and/or alliances will further our market penetration.
A major key to our longer-term success
is our ability to arrange for sales and installations with customers operating large numbers of vehicles, commonly referred to
as “fleets.” For our purposes, fleets can vary in size from 25 to 15,000 vehicles. Fleets can be located in specific
geographical areas, such as within a city, within a county or two, part of a state, within a state or multiple states in a region
of the US, or nationwide. For now, the Company is focused on fleets within the US. There are few product sales in Canada. We have
patents pending in many “industrial” countries, including Mexico and Canada.
Typically, in the early stage, our relationship
with a fleet size customer involves “proving” our technology on a test basis with a few vehicles operating as part
of the customer’s fleet. We guarantee a 10% improvement in fuel efficiency. Once a customer has experienced “real time”
results out in the field, our products gain acceptance and the rate of sales and installations take off at a faster pace. In almost
all cases to date, we have exceeded the 10% guarantee. Generally, the longer vehicles are driven with our product in place, the
more performance improves with the passage of time. Our results to date have varied from an 8% to 100% improvement. Currently,
we have no fleets with less than a 15% rate of improvement. Fleets with Ford F-150s (4.6 litre engines) and Chevy light trucks
(4.7 litre) are getting between 30% and 49% fuel savings.
In 2013, we have made major inroads in
the United Arab Emirates and others. We have a 5 year licensing agreement with DynoGreen Tech (“DGT”) that we entered
into in 2013. Regarding our progress, our original commitment for 2,000 DynoValves (sold at $250 each) equate to $500,000. In order
for DGT to fulfill and maintain this 5 year licensing agreement, they are required to purchase 500 additional DynoValves per quarter
(an additional 2,000 DynoValves / $500,000 per year) for a total of $2,500,000 over a 5 year span. With the initial investment
of $500,000, this totals $3,000,000 for their 5 year licensing agreement. We have already delivered 2,000 of those DynoValves.
The areas that are included in this agreement are UAE, Malaysia, India, and Africa. DGT has not made any additional purchases since
2013 and thus has not met their minimum volume requirements for 2014 or the first quarter of 2015.
We sent a mechanic to Dubai to convince
the Dubai Department of Standardization to mandate the DynoValve on all government vehicles and eventually to the general population
(“the mandate”). When any country attempts to mandate a new individual product, there are usually issues. Understandably,
there should not be certain vehicle exclusions for this particular mandate, therefore the DynoValve needs to be installable on
all makes and models.
In our case, one issue is that many vehicles
in these Middle Eastern countries are not compatible with the DynoValve or it simply does not fit. In order to resolve this compatibility
issue, we’ve created a new product called the “DynoCap.” The DynoCap is an oil cap that has a fitting which fits
directly on top of the oil cap allowing the DynoValve to sit either horizontally or vertically thus making it adaptable to virtually
any gas driven engine that has a place to add oil, not limited to automobiles.
The new cap is now being tested at our
corporate headquarters in Santa Ana, CA. We have vehicles travelling all over California to ensure performance is as effective
as our standard DynoValve, when connected directly to the vehicle’s crankcase ventilation system. We have provided a few
DynoCaps to DGT to demonstrate how the compatibility issue has been resolved, and provided samples for their own testing with the
device in their own countries. A provisionary patent and trademarks for the name have been filed with the US Trade and Patent Office
and a PCT will be filed for the whole world.
The second issue is the wiring harness,
which was originally created for the USA and met compliance regulations according to American standards. The Department of Standardization
and the UAE affiliates did not approve of the exposed colored wires. As a result, we modified the wiring harness and completely
molded all the connectors, improving the appearance which is actually beneficial for us. This brand new wiring harness was delivered
to DGT for their approval. The group loved it and guaranteed 100% that Savvy Green (our associate company in Dubai) would be given
confirmation and status on the mandate (Preferred Vendor Status).
If SaviCorp gets this mandate, we may increase
sales by possibly 50,000 units every 90 days or less. If this works as well as the DynoValve, it will cut installation time by
at least 50%. Once tested, we will continue the process of obtaining an executive order for the DynoCap. We will also have quick
release hoses as well as the vertical and horizontal versions. We hope it will also work on other fuels as well, and will expand
our testing regarding this as soon as we can.
Our Company spokesperson, Lauren Fix AKA
“The Car Coach,” has appeared on several local TV shows. With her recent appearance with John Stossel on Fox Business
Channel, we received many calls as well as made several sales. Hopefully with her connections and her network of followers, we
can obtain more sales.
“The DynoValve Pro Lite” is
ready to go. This unit is very similar to the standard DynoValve Pro, with the exception of the oil separator, making it a much
smaller unit since natural gas is much cleaner than diesel fuel. We are able to convert these, and we have some testing scheduled
for Fullerton, CA School District for their co-generation plant as well as their school buses, which run on CNG (Compressed Natural
Gas). This product is now being manufactured. We hope to take some of these test samples and begin installations and testing for
results so we can introduce this to all CNG fleets out there. Most trucks and buses in California are now being converted to CNG.
Hopefully, we will be able to hit that market and be able to offer the DynoValve Pro Lite CNG version. We also have a very large
food supplier that is willing to lend some of their vehicles for testing.
If all goes well in the Middle East, it
appears that DynoGreen Tech, LLC (“DGT“) as well as Savvy Green would like to have an exclusive distribution agreement
to supply to all of Africa, Russia, and Europe. We believe it is too premature to make a commitment at this time without seeing
their success with the existing countries they are currently licensed for. Although, they’ve been extremely successful in
a short period of time, so we are hopeful and looking forward to revisiting this again.
The goal of the Company is to try to spread
ourselves with the DynoValve Pro Lite and DynoCap right now. Hopefully we will increase business in the US and be able to branch
out completely in the Middle East as well as eventually promote in Europe and other countries. We are speaking with the Philippines
on some potential agreements.
The DynoCap looks very promising because
it reduces installation time and it becomes more compatible to 2 stroke engines, motorcycles, small bikes, or large polluting 2
stroke and diesel engines. It will be less expensive to introduce without worries of having to separate the oil or clean the oil
because all we are doing is capturing the vapor and recycling it. We are hoping to make the DynoCap in a smaller version to fit
2 stroke vehicles.
We at SaviCorp are doing everything we
can to build our capabilities to service an expanding customer base and help clean up the planet one vehicle at a time.
DynoValve Overview
Dyno: an instrument designed to measure power, exhaust emissions,
and fuel economy.
Valves: devices that regulate the flow of gases through apertures
by opening and closing.
In the 1960's, the PCV system appeared
on new American domestic cars. The PCV system allows gases to escape in a controlled manner from the crankcase of an internal combustion
engine. We believe that our DynoValve products are the most significant advances in PCV valve technology since the first engine
exhaust emission control system.
We also believe the DynoValve (gasoline)
& DynoValve Pro (diesel) are the first and only electronically controlled PCV/Crankcase Oil Recovery Emission Control Systems
available.
DynoValve
The DynoValve products are electronically
controlled PCV/ Crankcase Oil Recovery Emission Control Systems (“COREC”). Independent test results by Environmental
Testing Corporation, CEE, of California show that with DynoValve products, there is a reduction of all exhaust emissions, especially
in nitrogen oxide (“NOx”) while simultaneously reducing fuel and oil consumption. There are currently two types of
DynoValve products – DynoValve and DynoValve Pro.
DynoValve is a patented PCV valve and designed
for use in automotive gasoline powered vehicles. The DynoValve replaces Original Equipment Manufacturer (“OEM”) PCV
valves. DynoValve eliminates the vacuum problems associated with today’s standard PCV valves by optimally regulating the
flow of engine blow-by-gases. This ventilation is accomplished with the use of an electronically controlled reprogrammable microprocessor.
The electronically-controlled DynoValve regulates the flow of blow-by gases returning to the engine intake system, thereby improving
fuel mileage and reducing hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) exhaust emissions.
DynoValve Pro
DynoValve Pro is a closed crankcase emission
control and oil recovery system designed for diesel engines. It filters particles and oil droplets from the blow-by gases. The
filtered gas is then returned to the air intake system of the crankcase and the filtered oil is returned to the engine crankcase.
By recycling the crankcase emissions through DynoValve Pro, harmful gases and oil film that causes engine and environmental problems
is filtered. Maintenance costs may be lowered with the reduction of oily residue that coats the engine and its components or the
prevention of clogged radiators and air cleaners. DynoValve Pro helps engines operate at full efficiency while improving performance
and lowering the costs of operation. We currently are seeking the required approvals from the Air Resources Board of the California
Environmental Protection Agency to advertise, sell and install DynoValve Pro in California.
Both DynoValve and DynoValve Pro can regulate
the flow of gases depending on engine speed. This is accomplished by designing the DynoValve products & IP to be electronically
activated by using a reprogrammable microprocessor that processes data from the engines' revolutions per minute (RPM).
Both DynoValve and DynoValve Pro are available
in various sizes and versions and can be installed by a mechanic in approximately 1 to 2 ½ hours.
The DynoValve products are an improvement
on the current pollution positive crankcase ventilation reduction controls, including the implementation of cleaner fuels
and related hardware. While these measures have had the intended effect of reducing pollution causing emissions, they have not
eliminated the emissions to an acceptable level. Our technology is more effective than passive systems currently in use, provides
excellent fuel efficiency and virtually eliminates fugitive crankcase emissions. The goal of the Crankcase Ventilation System technology
is to provide a more aggressive method of emission reduction that is not possible by
passive means and improves fuel efficiency.
Independent Testing
We have sought out and have received independent
testing results, which have validated our claims. At our request, tests were conducted by California Environmental Engineering,
a greater Los Angeles area based leading independent environmental testing firm, over the last eight years. Overall, California
Environmental Engineering is a consulting firm specializing in the testing of environmental and engine instrumentation. California
Environmental Engineering provided a written conclusion after testing that provides, in part:
“We have evaluated the data from
the test runs in the demonstration of the Crankcase Ventilation System. We can attest to the positive effect of the Crankcase Ventilation
System. In conclusion, the technology has demonstrated that it has both economic and environmental benefits".
In 2014, the Company began a series of
independent third-party tests with ECO Logic at the EPA laboratories located at Olson Eco-Logic laboratories. These tests will
continue at least into FY- 2015.
Additional testing has been performed by
KLD Environmental Consultations with similarly positive results.
The Company has filed the EPA Section 511
application which seeks to obtain ISO-9001 manufacturing certification for its DynoValve family of automotive products. This is
an expense and resource-intensive process which will continue well into FY-2015.
Pricing
We have been selling DynoValves on a retail
basis for $399, with some discounts given to early adopters and test clients. Installation fees typically run around $100. Wholesale
prices have been in the $200 to $300 range.
Marketing Strategy
Our initial market segment focuses on developing
and maintaining strategic partnering and marketing relationships with high profile, name-brand organizations. Initially, we will
market through a select group of commercial retailers and focus to sign agreements with strategic partners or major commercialization
partners. This will allow us to rapidly access our market through pre-existing relationships and to minimize overhead during the
development of a sustainable revenue base.
In order to widen our market channels,
we have and continue to implement an ongoing marketing campaign in parallel to our negotiation with major retail distributors and
strategic partners so that we can respond effectively to the needs of the market while creating a direct access to its potential
clients/and/or customers and insuring prompt delivery of our products. The target market will be local cities across the nation
and major cities worldwide. As disclosed, we are also marketing our products directly to corporate fleets, municipalities, government
entities and OEM’s.
We sell directly to retail customers and distributors. The targeted
channels for this would be:
The goal will be to establish
strategic partnerships and marketing relationships with high profile, name brand organizations. We could private label, co-label
or customize our products, allowing partners to rapidly penetrate their customer base by using their name and reputation.
|
2. |
Catalog, Retail & OEM. |
The goal will be to establish
sales and marketing partnerships with compatible companies that directly sell and ship goods to consumers through catalog sales.
This will be a further means of market penetration. Catalogs increase overall outreach into the marketplace, providing a venue
in which products can be directly positioned against competition, and influence buyer awareness and acceptance on an extremely
broad scale. We will work with catalog partners to stretch marketing and advertising budgets through co-op marketing means, including
direct mail efforts.
Ongoing direct mail will also
be an important sales technique to further penetrate the consumer market once our product lines are established. By concentrating
on magazine circulation research and mailing list data, we will be able to quickly pinpoint buyers, fine tune our message for specific
demographic segments and maximize sales through advertising and direct mail. Also, using a third party order entry provider will
ensure timely response and turnaround of prospect queries and orders and give the Company the flexibility to further increase sales.
Much of the work accomplished
for direct mail and information distribution can be directly applied to the Company’s Web Site. This will make the products,
Company, and technical information more cost effective and accessible in a timely fashion. It will also enable a more timely distribution
of product information updates and potentially increase sales of our products. We plan to use social networking (i.e. Twitter,
Facebook, etc.) as a way to further market our products. Currently we do have a small number of product sales generated from our
website. See www.savicorp.com.
It is estimated there were 248 million
vehicles on the road in the US alone at the end of 2010. The average age of these vehicles is estimated by the National Automobile
Dealers Association to be ten and a half years. Since the introduction of the Industrial Age, the United States has been the biggest
producer of CO2 emissions on the planet. The US produced 22% of the World’s greenhouse gas emissions in 1995. Current estimates
predict this will rise to more than 15% by 2035, topped at that point by China’s 17% and Eastern Europe/former Soviet Unions’
19%.
The Company believes the scope of business
opportunities within the State of California alone is significant. California has 36 first, second and third-tier cities with over
100,000 residents. This does not include 217 fourth-tier cities with 25,000 to 100,000 residents. Each of these cities operates
numerous municipal, corporate and small business fleets of vehicles that are potential customers for SaviCorp’s products
and services. SaviCorp management believes that this is a viable market for devices designed to mitigate the effects of blow-by
gases using crankcase ventilation system and emission reduction products.
Although SaviCorp believes that we have
no direct competition in the marketplace, retail pricing since 2008 has been largely driven by the average consumer’s disposable
income. In order for the DynoValve® to achieve primacy in the industry, SaviCorp has been compelled to price its products to
reflect the value brought to end-users. As the market expands, future products should be priced more aggressively to increase market
penetration and achieve a position of planned-for market dominance. SaviCorp’s goal of establishing sales and marketing partnerships
and/or alliances will supplement market penetration.
Used
Car Retail Sales:
Car dealerships selling used and new vehicles
are prime candidates constituting a viable but as yet untapped market for SaviCorp’s products. Used cars are normally identified
as certified pre-owned vehicles, age ranging from one to 5 years old. A common car dealership sales tactic is to offer aftermarket
products to buyers during the loan application process. In recent years, the sale of used cars has become a major source of profits
for car dealerships in the wake of shrinking margins on new cars. To make them acceptable to more customers, most dealerships promote
certified pre-owned vehicles to customers who want a warranty on their used car. This often raises the price, but in return provides
customers with peace of mind. In the current economic environment, the relative demand for used cars has increased as sales of
new cars have declined. Due to the fact that the product has the potential to lower operating costs as well as extend the useful
life of a vehicle—a proposition that is very appealing to consumers—the DynoValve marketing campaign is being targeted
to include the used car retail market.
Fleet
Sales:
As the year 2014 progressed, our customer
base expanded. A major key to our longer-term success is our ability to arrange for sales and installations with customers operating
large numbers of vehicles, commonly referred to as “fleets.” For our purposes, fleets can vary in size from 25 to 15,000
vehicles. Fleets can be located in specific geographical areas, such as within a city, within a county or two, as part of a state,
within a state or across multiple states in a region of the US, or nationwide. For now, the Company is focused on fleets within
the US. There are few product sales in Canada. To pave the way for future market expansion related to fleet sales, the Company
has arranged to license patents pending in many “industrial” countries, including Mexico and Canada.
Typically, in the early stage, our relationship
with a fleet size customer involves “proving” our technology on a test basis with a few vehicles operating as part
of the customer’s fleet. We guarantee a 10% improvement in fuel efficiency. Once a customer has experienced “real time”
results out in the field, our products gain acceptance and the rate of sales and installations take off at a faster pace. In almost
all cases to date, we have exceeded the 10% guarantee. Generally, the longer vehicles are driven with our product in place, the
more performance improves with the passage of time. Our results to date have varied from an 8% to 100% improvement. Currently,
we have no fleets with less than a 15% rate of improvement. Fleets with Ford F-150s (4.6 liter engines) and Chevy light trucks
(4.7 liters) are getting between 30% and 49% fuel savings.
State
of California Fleet Vehicles:
We believe our business opportunities within
the State of California alone are enormous. The state has 36 cities with over 100,000 residents and 217 cities with 25,000 to 100,000
residents. Each of these cities operates numerous municipal, corporate and small business fleets of vehicles that are potential
customers for SaviCorp. SaviCorp management believes that this is a viable market for blow-by gases related crankcase ventilation
system and emission reduction products.
Pilot
Tests:
Typically, in the early stage, our relationship
with a fleet size customer involves “proving” our technology on a test basis with a few vehicles operating as part
of the customer’s fleet. We guarantee a 10% improvement in fuel efficiency. Once a customer has experienced “real time”
results out in the field, our products gain acceptance and the rate of sales and installations takes off at a faster pace. In almost
all cases to date, we have exceeded the 10% guarantee. Generally, the longer vehicles are driven with our product in place, the
more performance improves with the passage of time. Our results to date have varied from an 8% to 100% improvement. Currently,
we have no fleets with less than a 15% rate of improvement. Fleets with Ford F-150s (4.6 litre engines) and Chevy light trucks
(4.7 liter) are getting between 30% and 49% fuel savings.
Dubai
- Licensed Product Marketing:
In 2013, we made major inroads in the Middle
Eastern country of the United Arab Emirates and others. The Company executed a 5-year licensing agreement with Dubai-based DynoGreen
Tech, LLC (“DGT”) in Q2. The original licensing commitment provided for the purchase and sale of 2,000 DynoValves (sold
at $250 each), which equates to an initial order of $500,000. In order for DGT to fulfill and maintain this 5-year licensing agreement,
they are obliged to purchase 500 additional DynoValves per quarter (an additional 2,000 DynoValves / $500,000 per year) for a total
of $2,500,000 over a 5-year span. With the initial investment of $500,000, this totals a $3,000,000 commitment for their 5-year
licensing agreement. The first order of 2,000 DynoValves has been delivered. The Exclusive Marketing and License Agreement includes
10 sub-classes of territories which include UAE, Malaysia, India, and Africa.
Seeking
a Mandate In Dubai:
The Company sent a team of technical specialists
to Dubai to convince the Dubai Department of Standardization to mandate the DynoValve on all government-owned vehicles and eventually
to the general population (“the mandate”). When any country attempts to mandate a new individual product, numerous
political and cultural issues have to be dealt with. Understandably, there should not be certain vehicle exclusions for this particular
mandate, therefore the DynoValve needs to be installable on all makes and models.
The wiring harness originally created for
use in the USA met compliance regulations according to American standards. However, the Department of Standardization and the UAE
affiliates did not approve of the exposed colored wires supplied with the product. As a result, we modified the wiring harness
and completely molded all the connectors, improving the units appearance. This new architecture for the wiring harness was delivered
to DGT for their approval. The group loved it and guaranteed that Savvy Green (our marketing and distribution associate company
in Dubai) would be given confirmation and status on the mandate (Preferred Vendor Status).
DGT as well as Savvy Green have requested
an exclusive distribution agreement to supply DynoValve products to all of Africa, Russia, and Europe. We believe it is too premature
to make a commitment at this time without seeing their success with the existing countries they are currently licensed for. Nevertheless,
if SaviCorp is awarded the UAE mandate, we could increase sales by possibly 50,000 units every 90 days or less.
LA County
Fire Department:
On October 2010, a 24-month field test
was concluded with the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD). LACoFD retrofitted 10 gasoline-powered vehicles with the “DynoValve®.”
During the test, three vehicles were removed from service for various reasons unrelated to the beta field test. The remaining seven
vehicles, after installation and adjustments to fine-tune and optimize the DynoValve® to each particular vehicle, successfully
completed field-testing without any adverse impact on vehicle performance and/or maintainability. Overall, the vehicles achieved
a significant reduction in emissions during the 24 months of testing.
The test vehicles exhibited substantial
reductions in the following pollutants: hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), and oxides of nitrogen (NOx). The LACoFD has expressed
interest in testing the DynoValve Pro®, a product that is intended for use on diesel engines, as soon as the company is ready
to release the product for testing and evaluation. The opportunity with the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) is potentially
very large; the agency has 190 stations with 22 battalions covering 2,200 square miles and 58 cities.
McCarthy
Construction Company:
On December 9, 2010, SaviCorp announced
that McCarthy Construction Company (St Louis, MO) had completed six weeks of testing on five randomly chosen vehicles from within
its fleet. The results for each vehicle were significant emissions reduction, improved engine performance, and reduced fuel consumption.
Following these initial results, McCarthy Construction Company decided to test an additional five vehicles at another facility.
These additional tests went well, and we proceeded with the installation of our DynoValve® on some 250 vehicles that service
its Newport Beach, California facility. McCarthy Construction Company believes that the device has the potential to extend the
useful life of its vehicles by one or two years while also reducing the company’s fuel costs. McCarthy Construction Company
employs 2,000 people and operates in all 50 states. McCarthy is headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri with regional offices in Phoenix,
Arizona; Las Vegas, Nevada; Seattle, Washington; Portland, Oregon; Dallas, Texas; Sacramento, San Francisco and Newport Beach,
California. The 136-year-old company is involved in large projects, having constructed airports, bridges, highways, hospitals,
office buildings, retail/industrial centers, universities and research centers throughout the US. Here’s a link to a press
release about McCarthy: (http://www.savicorp.com/news/23-mccarthy-construction-leaving-green-footprints-with-savicorps-dynovalve.aspx
).
North
Carolina Police Department:
North Carolina’s Stallings Police
Dept’s 25 Ford Crown Victoria (2011) fleet experienced a MPG Increase of 31.58% after the installation of DynoValve. This
is the type of success we hope to translate into contracts with larger public service entities nationwide.
Berg
Electric:
Berg Electric is another ongoing Company
success story - “As a large consumer of gasoline [it’s] our hope this small step, coupled with a number of other ongoing
green initiatives will, not only help reduce our operating costs, but ultimately help reduce our carbon footprint; our consumption
of fossil fuels; and improve our position as a good corporate citizen in America,” stated Robert Moreno, a Berg Electric
spokesperson. “The product does a good job at increasing efficiency in existing technology, with little impact and minimal
up-front costs, so we see it as a cost-effective option,” Moreno continued. “It’s important to us to find green
solutions and products because, we recognize our responsibility as a corporate citizen and the positive impact we can have on the
communities in which we do business.” http://www.savicorp.com/news/52-savicorp-awarded-bergelectric-fleet-contract.aspx.
You can read the press releases on our web
Market
Options Under Active Investigation and Development:
| 1. | Western Regional Ford Dealerships |
| 2. | Eastern Region GM Dealerships |
| 3. | Consolidated Edison Fleet Testing |
| 4. | United States Postal Service Tests |
| 5. | LAPD Ford Interceptor Tests |
| 6. | City of Los Angeles Fleet Tests |
| 7. | City of Fontana Police Vehicle Roundup |
Suppliers
We currently have all of the production
completed by His Divine Vehicle (“HDV”), a related entity owned by our CEO Serge Monros as determined by our licensing
agreements.
Intellectual Property
We also own certain trademarks associated
with the marketing of our products. DynoValve and DynoValve Pro have been registered with the US Patent and Trademark Office. We
also claim copyright to certain white papers and marketing pieces. Due to our inability to generate commercial sales of our products,
all patent costs were fully impaired in 2006.
The DynoValve products are the subject
of several pending U.S. patent applications (US-2010/0076664-A1 and US-2010/0180872-A1) held by Serge V. Monros, Chief Executive
Officer and Chairman of the Board of the Company. There are corresponding applications that have been filed in a number of foreign
countries. HDV, an affiliate of Mr. Monros, manufactures the “DynoValve” and “DynoValve Pro” products based
on these patent applications and then sells them to the Company for resale pursuant to the Product Licensing Agreement dated November
15, 2008, as amended on December 16, 2009. Under the Product Licensing Agreement, the price at which HDV sells the products to
the Company is subject to change at any time upon written notice. The Company may determine the prices that it charges to its customers.
The Product Licensing Agreement is non-exclusive and automatically renews on an annual basis provided certain sales volumes are
achieved and the Company is otherwise not in breach. HDV may, after an applicable cure period, terminate the Product Licensing
Agreement earlier if it believes that the Company is deficient in meeting its responsibilities. HDV may amend the Product Licensing
Agreement at any time by giving notice to the Company, unless the Company objects within ten days of such notice.
As consideration for HDV entering into
the Product Licensing Agreement, the Company agreed to issue to Mr. Monros and HDV, if and when available, an aggregate of 500
Million shares of Common Stock, 5 Million shares of Series A Preferred Stock and 5 Million shares of Series C Preferred Stock.
In July, 2011, HDV and Mr. Monros entered into a revised licensing agreement which modified the prior consideration paid to an
aggregate of 600 Million shares of Common Stock, 6.5 Million shares of Series A Preferred Stock and 2.5 Million shares of Series
C Preferred Stock.
Mr. Monros has continued the process of
preparing patent applications for the other versions of the DynoValve products & related IP. In March, 2013, the Company entered
into a five (5) year Master Distribution Agreement with His Divine Vehicle to sell the DynoValve and DynoValve Pro in various international
territories. The consideration for the agreement was guaranteeing a minimum annual volume, payment for the DynoValves acquired
and a three percent (3%) royalty payment. The Company has entered into an agreement with DynoGreen Tech, LLC ("DGT")
to sell the DynoValve products in the licensed territories. As part of the license agreement, DGT agreed to acquire 100,000,000
shares of common stock in SaviCorp for $100,000 and was provided options to acquire an additional 400,000,000 shares at $0.001
if exercised within 30 days, or $0.002 if exercised within 60 days. DGT exercised its options and acquired an additional 400,000,000
common shares for $400,000. Due to these investments, DGT is considered a related party. In addition, the stock purchase and stock
options provided for in the licensing agreement were considered a sales discount. DynoValve sales to DGT totaling $715,000 in 2013
were discounted in full due to these sales discounts.
In March, 2015, the Company entered into
an exclusive licensing and distribution agreement for North America, China, the Middle East and South Korea and a non-exclusive
license worldwide with DynoValve Mfg, LLC, an affiliate of Mr. Monros. The consideration for the agreement was payment for the
DynoValves acquired and a three percent (3%) royalty payment.
Competition
Numerous competing products are currently
offered under various brand names. There are many fuel-saving devices currently under development by entrepreneurs and assorted
technology companies whose projects are described via the World Wide Web and the Internet. In this economic environment, most consumers
are looking for products that will reduce their overall fuel and vehicle operating costs while allowing them to stay within their
current household budgets. Taken as a whole, however, the inventory of competitive offerings has proven to be something less than
effective when retrofitted to existing rolling stock.
The industry is marked by competition in
two industry segments: emission reduction and fuel efficiency. The DynoValve family of products is designed to compete within both
segments. We face competition from numerous foreign and domestic companies of various sizes, most of which are larger and have
greater capital resources than are currently available to SaviCorp. Competition in these areas is further complicated by possible
shifts in market share due to emerging technological innovations, changes in product emphasis and applications, and new entrants
with greater capabilities or better prospects.
Passive crankcase ventilation systems are
mandated as part of every vehicle’s emission-control system in the US. The Environmental Protection Agency is responsible
for setting emissions standards that all vehicles must meet. These emissions standards must be met by all new vehicles produced
and sold in the US. All manufacturers of automobiles and light duty trucks are constantly engaged in the process of developing
technologies designed to lower emissions and augment fuel efficiency.
Competing
Products:
Additionally, the Company competes against
other companies that develop after-market products touted to lower emissions and/or increase fuel efficiency. Some of these competitors’
products include (a) Racor’s CCV, (b) Majestic SAFE-T-PRODUCTS Refilter™, (c) Save the World Air, (d) Inc’s Mark
I ZEFS device, and (e) Indigo Electronics CVS for boats. We are aware of no products that compete directly with the DynoValve.
The marketplace is replete with products that compete in the realm of fuel saving products, fuel additives, and cigarette lighter
plug-in devices. Examples of some of our competitors’ products include:
|
1. |
Racor Crankcase Ventilation Device: list price: $368.00, manufactured by Parker Hannifin Corporation, Racor Division, Cleveland, Ohio 44124. Racor’s marketing literature claims that ‘…Racor CCV systems offer superior protection against contaminated crankcase blow-by and provide engine operators a highly effective solution.’ Racor provides no publicly verifiable independently tested performance results that compare with the DynoValve. During our own in-house tests of the Racor products, the patented DynoValve system demonstrates superior oil coalescence and crankcase pressure control under the most severe conditions. |
|
2. |
Refilters™ Device: Majestic Companies, Ltd. is incorporated in Maryland. No data on the device exists online. According to EDGAR online, Refilters™ could be retrofitted to existing heavy-duty diesel engines. http://sec.edgar-online.com/majestic-safe-t-products-ltd/sb-2-securities-registration-small-business/2002/11 /12/section21.aspx |
|
3. |
Mark I ZEFS Device: Save the World Air,
Inc. Price: unknown. According to its manufacturer, the ZEFS devices create magnetic fields to reduce the size of the fuel molecules
passing from the carburetor or center point fuel injector of the vehicle to the inlet manifold prior to combustion. They claim
that this creates an atomization process that enhances the efficiency of combustion, which reduces harmful toxic emissions and
increases fuel economy. ZEFS device has been granted a patent [see United States Patent Application No. 10/275946]. Save the World
Air Inc. makes a Zero Emission Fuel Saver (ZEFS) technology that is intended to reduce tailpipe pollutants and increase fuel efficiency
in gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles. No independently validated test results are available to confirm their claims.
RAND Corporation has conducted independent
tests but cannot confirm the benefits of ZEFS. "RAND's analysis of laboratory testing data provided by Save the World Air
that deals with the performance of the ZEFS device installed in vehicles found at best mixed results from the tests and therefore
could not confirm the effectiveness of the technology in actual use," said Michael Toman, director of the Environment Energy
and Economic Development program at RAND, which carried out the study. |
|
4. |
Atomic 4 AT-4CVS Crankcase Ventilation system device: Complete Retrofit Kit is $240.00 to $265.00 (Indigo Electronics, Williamsburg, VA 23185). The product (according to Indigo Electronics) completely eliminates Crankcase ‘smoke’. The product claims to eliminate fouling of carburetor air passages and improve overall performance. No independent test data or results have been published. |
Government Regulations
We believe that we are in compliance with
all applicable regulations that apply to our business as it is presently conducted. Our individual manufactured products, as such,
are not subject to certification or approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or other governmental agencies domestically
or internationally before they are sold. However, such agencies may test and certify a sample engine fitted with our devices before
we are allowed to engage in certain activities, like selling or marketing our products in certain jurisdictions. For example, on
September 10, 2010, the Air Resources Board of the California Environmental Protection Agency issued Executive Order D-677, permitting
the advertisement, sales and installation of the DynoValve on certain gas-powered vehicles based on emissions test data generated
on two vehicles. We intend to seek a similar order for DynoValve Pro. Our sales and marketing activities may be limited until we
receive the necessary authorizations from the applicable environmental regulations.
Depending upon whether we manufacture or
license our devices in the future and in which countries such devices are manufactured or sold, we may be subject to regulations,
including environmental regulations at such time. However, we are not aware of any existing or probable governmental regulations
that may have a material effect on the normal operations of our business. There also are no relevant environmental laws that require
compliance by us that we have not complied with that may have a material effect on the normal operations of the business.
Employees
During 2014, we had consulting agreements
with all management and staff members. We regularly utilize the services of consultants on an as-needed basis. As of June 1, 2015,
the Company had 8 full time employees. In addition, we hire independent contractor labor on an as needed basis. Historically none
of our employees belonged to a collective bargaining union. We have not experienced a work stoppage and historically our employee
relations have been good.
RISKS RELATED TO BUSINESS
You should carefully consider the following
risk factors and all other information contained herein as well as the information included in this Annual Report in evaluating
our business and prospects. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties,
other than those we describe below, that are not presently known to us or that we currently believe are immaterial, may also impair
our business operations. If any of the following risks occur, our business and financial results could be harmed. You should refer
to the other information contained in this Annual Report, including our financial statements and the related notes.
Risks Relating to Our Business:
We Have a Limited Operating History Upon Which You Can Base
An Investment Decision.
Our company was formed on August 13, 2002,
and through December 31, 2010 we had not sold any products and did not have any agreements for the sale of our products or licensing
of our technology. Therefore we have a limited operating history upon which you can make an investment decision, or upon which
we can accurately forecast future sales, if any. Furthermore, once we begin producing products for sale we may not be able to market
our technology and products sufficiently to generate public interest in our goods. If only a small portion of the population decides
to use our products, we will experience limits on our revenues and our ability to achieve profitability. You should, therefore,
consider us subject to the business risks associated with a new business. The likelihood of our success must be considered in light
of the expenses, difficulties and delays frequently encountered in connection with the formation and initial operations of a new
business.
We Have a History Of Losses
Which May Continue, Which May Negatively Impact Our Ability to Achieve Our Business Objectives.
We incurred net operating losses of $9,494,263
for the year ended December 31, 2014 and $6,961,318 for the year ended December 31, 2013. We cannot assure you that we can achieve
or sustain profitability on a quarterly or annual basis in the future. Our operations are subject to the risks and competition
inherent in the establishment of a business enterprise. There can be no assurance that future operations will be profitable. Revenues
and profits, if any, will depend upon various factors, including whether we will be able to generate revenue. To date we have not
generated any revenues from our business activities. As a result of continuing losses, we may exhaust all of our resources prior
to completing the development of our products. Additionally, as we continue to incur losses, our accumulated deficit will continue
to increase, which might make it harder for us to obtain financing in the future. We may not achieve our business objectives and
the failure to achieve such goals would have an adverse impact on us, which could result in reducing or terminating our operations.
If We Are Unable to Obtain Additional
Funding Our Business Operations Will be Harmed.
We will require additional funds to sustain
and expand our research and development activities. As of December 31, 2014, we anticipate that we will require up to approximately
$2,000,000 to fund our operations for the next twelve months, depending on revenue from operations. Additional capital will be
required to effectively support the operations and to otherwise implement our overall business strategy. Even if we do receive
additional financing, it may not be sufficient to sustain or expand our research and development operations or continue our business
operations. There can be no assurance that financing will be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. The
inability to obtain additional capital will restrict our ability to grow and may reduce our ability to continue to conduct business
operations. If we are unable to obtain additional financing, we will likely be required to curtail our research and development
plans.
If We Do Obtain Additional Financing
Our Then Existing Shareholders May Suffer Substantial Dilution.
In the event we are able to find addition
financing, such additional funds will likely be obtained through additional equity financing. If we raise additional funds by issuing
equity securities, existing stockholders may experience a dilution in their ownership. In addition, as a condition to giving additional
funds to us, future investors may demand, and may be granted, rights superior to those of existing stockholders.
Our Independent Auditors Have Expressed
Substantial Doubt About Our Ability to Continue As a Going Concern, Which May Hinder Our Ability to Obtain Future Financing.
In their report dated June 3, 2015, our
independent auditors stated that our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014 were prepared assuming that we would
continue as a going concern. Our ability to continue as a going concern is an issue raised due to our accumulated deficit of $300,301,024
at December 31, 2014. In addition, at December 31, 2014, we were in a negative working capital position of $14,242,023 and had
a stockholders' deficit of $14,220,829. Our ability to continue as a going concern is subject to our ability to generate a profit
and/or obtain necessary funding from outside sources, including obtaining additional funding from the sale of our securities, generating
sales or obtaining loans and grants from various financial institutions where possible. Our continued net operating losses increase
the difficulty in meeting such goals and there can be no assurances that such methods will prove successful.
Many of Our Competitors are Larger and
Have Greater Financial and Other Resources than We do and Those Advantages Could Make it Difficult for Us to Compete With Them.
The general market for our products and
services is extremely competitive and includes several companies which have achieved substantially greater market shares than we
have, have longer operating histories, have larger customer bases, and have substantially greater financial, development and marketing
resources than we do. If overall demand for our products should decrease it could have a materially adverse effect on our operating
results.
Competition in the US Market is Fierce,
With Significant Technical Developments Occurring Within the Past Several Years.
The market place is becoming more competitive
with other product offerings including fuel additives, fuel line magnetic devices, inline catalytic converters, liquid injection
systems and oil additives. While none appear to be offering the type of emission reduction technology and quality solution that
we are producing, this may change as new emission type technology and related approaches emerge.
We Acquired Rights to Our Technology
from One of the Founding Investors Without a Valuation Opinion or Arm’s Length Negotiations.
We acquired rights to our technology from
one of the founding investors for a price and consideration which we believe to be reasonable but this price was not negotiated
on an arm’s length basis nor was the transaction based upon a valuation opinion supporting that price. As a result, there
is no assurance that price paid nor terms are reasonable. If the price paid was not reasonable or the terms of such transaction
were not reasonable, we may have incurred costs which do not reflect the true value of the assets acquired and such costs may have
unreasonably limited our likelihood of achieving our financial goals.
A Manufacturer's Inability to Produce
Our Goods on Time and to Our Specifications Could Result in Lost Revenue and Net Losses.
While our new facility has limited manufacturing
abilities, we will depend upon independent third parties, including His Divine Vehicle, an entity owned by our CEO, for the manufacture
of substantially all of our products. Our products will be manufactured to our specifications by domestic or foreign manufacturers.
The inability of a manufacturer to ship orders of our products in a timely manner or to meet our quality standards could cause
us to miss the delivery date requirements of our customers for those items, which could result in cancellation of orders, refusal
to accept deliveries or a reduction in purchase prices, any of which could have a material adverse effect as our revenues would
decrease and we would incur net losses as a result of loss of sales of the product, if any sales could be made. Further, because
quality is a leading factor when customers and retailers accept or reject goods, any decline in quality by our third-party manufacturers
could be detrimental not only to a particular order, but also to our future relationship with that particular customer.
As a Result of Our Industry, We Need
to Maintain Substantial Insurance Coverage, Which Could Become Very Expensive or Have Limited Availability.
Our marketing and sale of products and
services creates an inherent risk of claims for liability. As a result, we have secured and will continue to maintain insurance
in amounts we consider adequate to protect us from claims. We cannot, however, be assured to have resources sufficient to satisfy
liability claims in excess of policy limits if required to do so. Also, there is no assurance that our insurance provider will
not drop our insurance or that our insurance rates will not substantially rise in the future, resulting in increased costs to us
or forcing us to either pay higher premiums or reduce our coverage amounts which would result in increased liability to claims.
Any Inability to Adequately Protect
Our Proprietary Technology Could Harm Our Ability to Compete.
Our future success and ability to compete
depends in part upon our proprietary technology, patents and trademarks, which we attempt to protect with a combination of patent,
copyright, trademark and trade secret laws, as well as with our confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions. These legal
protections afford only limited protection and are time-consuming and expensive to obtain and/or maintain. Further, despite our
efforts, we may be unable to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating our intellectual property.
Any patents that are issued to us could
be invalidated, circumvented or challenged. If challenged, our patents might not be upheld or their claims could be narrowed. Our
intellectual property may not be adequate to provide us with competitive advantage or to prevent competitors from entering the
markets for our products. Additionally, our competitors could independently develop non-infringing technologies that are competitive
with, equivalent to, and/or superior to our technology. Monitoring infringement and/or misappropriation of intellectual property
can be difficult, and there is no guarantee that we would detect any infringement or misappropriation of our proprietary rights.
Even if we do detect infringement or misappropriation of our proprietary rights, litigation to enforce these rights could cause
us to divert financial and other resources away from our business operations.
Our Products may Infringe Upon the Intellectual
Property Rights of Others and Resulting Claims Against Us Could be Costly and Require Us to Enter Into Disadvantageous License
or Royalty Arrangements.
The automotive parts industry is characterized
by the existence of a large number of patents and frequent litigation based on allegations of patent infringement and the violation
of intellectual property rights. Although we attempt to avoid infringing upon known proprietary rights of third parties, we may
be subject to legal proceedings and claims for alleged infringement by us or our licensees of third-party proprietary rights, such
as patents, trade secrets, trademarks or copyrights, from time to time in the ordinary course of business. Any claims relating
to the infringement of third-party proprietary rights, even if not successful or meritorious, could result in costly litigation,
divert resources and our attention or require us to enter into royalty or license agreements which are not advantageous to us.
In addition, parties making these claims may be able to obtain injunctions, which could prevent us from selling our products. Furthermore,
former employers of our employees may assert that these employees have improperly disclosed confidential or proprietary information
to us. Any of these results could harm our business. We may be increasingly subject to infringement claims as the number of products
and the numbers of features grow.
If We Are Unable to Retain the Services
of Mr. Monros or If We Are Unable to Successfully Recruit Qualified Personnel, We May Not Be Able to Continue Our Operations.
Our success depends to a significant extent
upon the continued service of Mr. Serge Monros, our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Technology Officer.
Loss of the services of Mr. Monros could have a material adverse effect on our growth, revenues, and prospective business. We do
not maintain key-man insurance on the life of Mr. Monros. In addition, in order to successfully implement and manage our business
plan, we will be dependent upon, among other things, successfully recruiting qualified personnel. Competition for qualified individuals
is intense. There can be no assurance that we will be able to find, attract and retain existing employees or that we will be able
to find, attract and retain qualified personnel on acceptable terms.
If We Become Subject to Additional Laws
or Regulations Related to Our Products, We May Not Be Able to Continue Our Operations.
We are or may be subject to numerous federal,
state, local and foreign laws and regulations governing our operations, including the handling, transportation and disposal of
our products and our non-hazardous and hazardous substances and wastes, as well as emissions and discharges into the environment,
including discharges to air, surface water and groundwater. Failure to comply with such laws and regulations could result in costs
for corrective action, penalties or the imposition of other liabilities. Changes in environmental laws or the interpretation thereof
or the development of new facts could also cause us to incur additional capital and operation expenditures to maintain compliance
with environmental laws and regulations. We also may be subject to laws and regulations that impose liability and cleanup responsibility
for releases of hazardous substances into the environment without regard to fault or knowledge about the condition or action causing
the liability. Under certain of these laws and regulations, such liabilities can be imposed for cleanup of previously owned or
operated properties. The presence of contamination from such substances or wastes could also adversely affect our ability to utilize
our leased properties. Compliance with environmental laws and regulations has not had a material effect upon our earnings or financial
position; however, if we violate any environmental obligation, it could have a material adverse effect on our business or financial
performance.
Risks Relating to our Convertible
Debt and Warrants:
There Are a Large Number of Shares Underlying
Our Convertible Debentures and Warrants That May be Available for Future Sale and the Sale of These Shares May Depress the Market
Price of Our Common Stock.
As of December 31, 2014, we had 5,982,260,958
shares of common stock issued and outstanding, convertible debentures outstanding that may be converted into a maximum of 3,387,656,900
shares of common stock and outstanding warrants to purchase 130,000,000 shares of common stock. All of the shares, including all
of the shares issuable upon conversion of the convertible debentures and upon exercise of our warrants, may be sold pending removal
of any restrictions. The sale of these shares may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
The Issuance of Shares Upon Conversion
of the Convertible Debentures and Exercise of Outstanding Warrants May Cause Immediate and Substantial Dilution to Our Existing
Stockholders.
The issuance of shares upon conversion
of the secured convertible debentures and exercise of warrants may result in substantial dilution to the interests of other stockholders.
Although the convertible debt holders may not convert their convertible notes if such conversion would cause them to own more than
4.99% of our outstanding common stock, this restriction does not prevent them from converting and/or exercising some of their holdings
and then converting the rest of their holdings. In this way, the debt and warrant holders could sell more than their limit while
never holding more than this limit.
Risks Relating to Our Common Stock:
There Are a Large Number of Shares Underlying
Our Series A and C Convertible Preferred Stock and the Issuance of Shares Upon Conversion of the Series A, B and C Convertible
Preferred Stock Would Cause Immediate and Substantial Dilution to Our Existing Stockholders.
As of December 31, 2014, we had 5,982,260,958
shares of common stock issued and outstanding and series A, B and C convertible preferred stock that may be converted into 6,379,603,967
shares of our common stock. The issuance of shares upon conversion of the series A, B and C convertible preferred stock would result
in substantial dilution to the interests of other stockholders.
Our Directors can re-elect the Board
And Investors Did Not Have Any Voice in Our Management.
On May 26, 2015, SaviCorp filed
a Certificate of Designation with the Nevada Secretary of State establishing a Series D Preferred Stock ("Series
D Preferred"); par value $0.001 per share.. Series D Preferred allows for the issuance of up to ten shares of super
voting stock, one share to each member of the Company's Board of Directors. Series D Preferred shares constitute 50.1%
of the outstanding voting shares of the Company at any time they are voted in a Shareholder meeting or as part of a Shareholder
consent without a meeting. They can be voted to increase the authorized common shares of the Company, to re-elect the
Board of Directors and for other purposes as reasonably determined by the Board of Directors. Series D Preferred shares are
automatically revoked when the Shareholder meeting is concluded.
As a result of the Board’s ability
to issue Series D Preferred stock, our directors collectively are able to influence all matters requiring stockholder approval,
including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions.
If We Fail to Remain Current in Our
Reporting Requirements, We Could be Removed From the OTC Markets Which Would Limit the Ability of Broker-Dealers to Sell Our Securities
and the Ability of Stockholders to Sell Their Securities in the Secondary Market.
Companies trading on the OTC Markets, such
as us, must be reporting issuers under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and must be current in their
reports under Section 13, in order to maintain price quotation privileges on the OTC Markets. If we fail to remain current on our
reporting requirements, we could be removed from the OTC Markets. As a result, the market liquidity for our securities could be
severely adversely affected by limiting the ability of broker-dealers to sell our securities and the ability of stockholders to
sell their securities in the secondary market.
We Could be Removed From the OTC Markets
Which Would Limit the Ability of Broker-Dealers to Sell Our Securities and the Ability of Stockholders to Sell Their Securities
in the Secondary Market.
The Company received a letter from the
Securities and Exchange Commission, Los Angeles Regional Office, dated May 9, 2011. The letter informed us that the SEC had entered
into a “formal order of investigation” into “Savi Media Group, Inc.” The letter included a “Subpoena
DucesTecum,” meaning the Company was given a prescribed period of time to produce all requested documents and information
contained in the subpoena. An index of the source of all such produced information and an authentication declaration were also
to be supplied. The stated purpose of the investigation is a fact-finding inquiry to assist the SEC staff in determining if the
Company has violated federal securities laws. The SEC states there is no implication of negativity or guilt at this stage of the
investigation. The SEC investigation appears to be ongoing since all info has been supplied to the best of the company’s
knowledge. There is a risk that the SEC could take action adverse to the ability of the company to continue marketing its stock
in the secondary markets.
Our Common Stock is Subject to the "Penny
Stock" Rules of the SEC and the Trading Market in Our Securities is Limited, Which Makes Transactions in Our Stock Cumbersome
and May Reduce the Value of an Investment in Our Stock.
The Securities and Exchange Commission
has adopted Rule 15g-9 which establishes the definition of a "penny stock," for the purposes relevant to us, as any equity
security that has a market price of less than $5.00 per share or with an exercise price of less than $5.00 per share, subject to
certain exceptions. For any transaction involving a penny stock, unless exempt, the rules require:
|
· |
that a broker or dealer approve a person's account for transactions in penny stocks; and |
|
· |
the broker or dealer receive from the investor a written agreement to the transaction, setting forth the identity and quantity of the penny stock to be purchased. |
In order to approve a person's account
for transactions in penny stocks, the broker or dealer must:
|
· |
obtain financial information and investment experience objectives of the person; and |
|
· |
make a reasonable determination that the transactions in penny stocks are suitable for that person and the person has sufficient knowledge and experience in financial matters to be capable of evaluating the risks of transactions in penny stocks. |
The broker or dealer must also deliver,
prior to any transaction in a penny stock, a disclosure schedule prescribed by the Commission relating to the penny stock market,
which, in highlight form:
|
· |
sets forth the basis on which the broker or dealer made the suitability determination; and |
|
· |
that the broker or dealer received a signed, written agreement from the investor prior to the transaction. |
Generally, brokers may be less willing
to execute transactions in securities subject to the "penny stock" rules. This may make it more difficult for investors
to dispose of our common stock and cause a decline in the market value of our stock.
Disclosure also has to be made about the
risks of investing in penny stocks in both public offerings and in secondary trading and about the commissions payable to both
the broker-dealer and the registered representative, current quotations for the securities and the rights and remedies available
to an investor in cases of fraud in penny stock transactions. Finally, monthly statements have to be sent disclosing recent price
information for the penny stock held in the account and information on the limited market in penny stocks.
ITEM 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY.
We do not own any real property. We currently
lease our 40,000 square foot corporate headquarters located at 2530 South Birch Street, Santa Ana, CA 92707. Our telephone number
at that office is (877) 611-7284 and our facsimile number is (714) 641-7113. The lease is for a one-year period with an annual
lease payment of $110,000. We believe that these facilities are adequate for our current and immediately foreseeable operating
needs.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
From time to time, we may become party
to litigation or other legal proceedings that we consider to be a part of the ordinary course of our business.
The Company received a letter from the
Securities and Exchange Commission, Los Angeles Regional Office, dated May 9, 2011. The letter informed us that the SEC had entered
into a “formal order of investigation” into “Savi Media Group, Inc.” The letter included a “Subpoena
DucesTecum,” meaning the Company was given a prescribed period of time to produce all requested documents and information
contained in the subpoena. An index of the source of all such produced information and an authentication declaration were also
to be supplied. The stated purpose of the investigation is a fact-finding inquiry to assist the SEC staff in determining if the
Company has violated federal securities laws. The SEC states there is no implication of negativity or guilt at this stage of the
investigation.
We hired the Los Angeles law firm of Troy
Gould to represent us in the matter of this investigation. As of the date of this filing, we believe we have provided all requested
material to the SEC. Updates on the investigation will be supplied by supplemental filings hereto.
Status of prior private investments; $0
in 2007 (although HDV sold $13,000 of its shares), $0 in 2008 (although HDV sold $445,750 of its shares), $0 in 2009 (although
HDV sold $448,000 of its shares), $910,742 in 2010, $1,827,543 in 2011, and $629,500 in the first three quarters of 2012. There
is concern that these private placement securities sales were not made in compliance with applicable law (lack of material disclosure
and/or failure to file securities sales notices as required by federal law) and the Company may need to offer rescission rights
to the investors.
In 2006, the Company issued shares for
services valued at $611,768. There were issued shares for services valued at $1,416,060 in 2007; shares for services valued at
$14,625 in 2008, shares for services valued at $380,500 in 2009, shares for services valued at $236,920 in 2010, shares for services
valued at $3,370,273 in 2011, and shares for services valued at $3,165,039 during the first 3 quarters of 2012. We have no plans
to offer rescission for these share issuances.
We offered rescission to many of the 2011
investors in late 2011 (“2011 rescission offer”). The legal sustainability of these rescission offers is also being
looked at by Counsel. The results of our rescission offers, in terms of rescission offers accepted by shareholders, were very encouraging.
We had five rescissions offers accepted and refunded $14,000 plus interest.
Generally, we believe we have good relationships
with our shareholders. Our plan is to offer rescission to most shareholders obtaining privately offered shares from us since January
1, 2007 through 2011. The Company has pledged to use our best efforts, in good faith, to honor any accepted rescission offer. However,
there is no assurance that rescission offer acceptances will not have a material effect on our finances or that we will be able
to re-pay those electing to rescind in a complete and timely manner. As of the date hereof, the Company has postponed their plans
to offer rescission to earlier purchasing shareholders, deeming it advisable to wait until the common stock price increases and
they have more operating cash available to pay for the cost of undertaking this endeavor. The Company has booked a liability to
account for this rescission liability and marks the liability to market on a quarterly basis. The rescission liability as of December
31, 2014 is $444,833.
The Company received a letter dated June
7, 2013 with a Civil Complaint titled Arnold Lamarr Weese, et al v. SaviCorp filed in the Northern District of West Virginia. In
addition to SaviCorp, Serge Monros and Craig Waldrop are being sued individually. Settlement discussions failed and Plaintiff's
counsel began service of Process. The Company and Mr. Monros have hired Shustak and Partners to defend the claim. The defendants
sued for breach of contract, fraud, vicarious liability, and unlawful sale by an unregistered broker. The lawsuit attempted to
hold the Company and Mr. Monros responsible for alleged improprieties of Waldrop. The Company finalized a negotiated settlement
and received court approval on April 7, 2015. The Company has recorded a $1,101,179 liability based on the settlement agreement.
This consists of $100,000 cash payment for legal fees paid over a period of five months and net common shares to be issued of 296,050,421
valued at $1,001,179. The lawsuit has been settled and dismissed.
The Company received an Order of Suspension
of Trading on June 17, 2015 from the Security and Exchange Commission. The SEC indicated that there is a lack of current and accurate
information concerning the securities of the Company and therefore ordered that trading in the securities of the Company be suspended
from June 17, 2015 through June 30, 2015.
We may become involved in material legal
proceedings in the future.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE
OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
Pursuant to a written consent of a majority
of stockholders dated May 28, 2015, in lieu of a special meeting of the stockholders, the majority of stockholders approved the
following actions:
1. |
|
To elect three directors to the Company's Board of Directors, to hold office until their successors are elected and qualified or until their earlier resignation or removal; |
2. |
|
To amend the Company's Articles of Incorporation, as amended, to: |
(a) |
|
increase the number of authorized shares of common stock, par value $.001 per share (the “Common Stock”), of the Company from 6,000,000,000 shares to 8,000,000,000 shares; |
There have been no stockholders meeting
since May 28, 2015.
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR COMMON EQUITY AND
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.
MARKET INFORMATION
Our common stock is quoted on the OTC Markets
under the symbol “SVMI”.
For the periods indicated, the following
table sets forth the high and low closing prices per share of common stock.
| |
Fiscal Year 2014 |
| |
High | |
Low |
First Quarter | |
$0.0035 | |
$0.0025 |
Second Quarter | |
$0.0029 | |
$0.0020 |
Third Quarter | |
$0.0070 | |
$0.0018 |
Fourth Quarter | |
$0.0063 | |
$0.0033 |
| |
Fiscal Year 2013 |
| |
High | |
Low |
First Quarter | |
$0.0050 | |
$0.0008 |
Second Quarter | |
$0.0080 | |
$0.0030 |
Third Quarter | |
$0.0067 | |
$0.0036 |
Fourth Quarter | |
$0.0038 | |
$0.0019 |
HOLDERS
As of June 1, 2015, we had approximately
858 holders of our common stock. The number of record holders was determined from the records of our transfer agent and does not
include beneficial owners of common stock whose shares are held in the names of various security brokers, dealers, and registered
clearing agencies. The transfer agent of our common stock is Worldwide Stock Transfer, LLC, located at 1 University Plaza, Suite
505, in Hackensack, NJ 07601.
DIVIDENDS
We have never declared or paid any cash
dividends on our common stock. We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends to stockholders in the foreseeable future. In addition,
any future determination to pay cash dividends will be at the discretion of the Board of Directors and will be dependent upon our
financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements, and such other factors as the Board of Directors deem relevant.
RECENT SALE OF UNREGISTERED SECURITIES
For the year ended December 31, 2014, the
Company issued the following:
In January 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 1,703,333 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $95,000.
In February 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 2,850,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $150,000.
In March 2014, the Board of Directors authorized
the issuance of 200,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $10,000.
In April 2014, the Board of Directors authorized
the issuance of 4,916,666 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $187,500.
In May 2014, the Board of Directors authorized
the issuance of 300,000 Preferred A shares and 6,250 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $40,000.
In June 2014, the Board of Directors authorized
the issuance of 6,667 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $1,000.
In July 2014, the Board of Directors authorized
the issuance of 250,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $25,000.
In August 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 25,000 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $100,000.
In September 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 1,975,000 Preferred A shares and 45,056 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors
for total proceeds of $305,000.
In October 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 100,000 Preferred A shares and 36,500 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors
for total proceeds of $175,000.
In November 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 25,000 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $100,000.
In December 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 22,040 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $81,000.
Throughout the year, the Board of Directors
also authorized the issuance of 500,000 common shares, 1,700,000 Preferred A shares and 94,950 Preferred B shares for services
rendered by independent contractors. These issuances were valued based on the market value of the stock totaling $3,496,150.
Since 2014, the Board of Directors authorized
the issuance of an aggregate of 172,214 shares of its Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $695,000. In addition, the Board of Directors has authorized the issuance of an aggregate of 47,500 shares of its Preferred
B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for services rendered valued at an aggregate of $1,710,000. No sales commissions
were paid in connection with these issuances and all investors reviewed or had access to all of the Company’s filing pursuant
to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
ITEM 6. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION
AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION
The following information should be read
in conjunction with the financial statements and the notes thereto contained elsewhere in this report. The Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995 provides a "safe harbor" for forward-looking statements. Information in this Item 6, "Management's
Discussion and Analysis or Plan of Operation," and elsewhere in this 10-K that does not consist of historical facts, are "forward-looking
statements." Statements accompanied or qualified by, or containing words such as "may," "will," "should,"
"believes," "expects," "intends," "plans," "projects," "estimates,"
"predicts," "potential," "outlook," "forecast," "anticipates," "presume,"
and "assume" constitute forward-looking statements, and as such, are not a guarantee of future performance. The statements
involve factors, risks and uncertainties including those discussed in the “Risk Factors” section contained elsewhere
in this report, the impact or occurrence of which can cause actual results to differ materially from the expected results described
in such statements. Risks and uncertainties can include, among others, fluctuations in general business cycles and changing economic
conditions; changing product demand and industry capacity; increased competition and pricing pressures; advances in technology
that can reduce the demand for the Company's products, as well as other factors, many or all of which may be beyond the Company's
control. Consequently, investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements as predictive of future results.
The Company disclaims any obligation to update the forward-looking statements in this report.
Business History
We were originally incorporated as Energy
Resource Management, Inc. on August 13, 2002 and subsequently adopted name changes to Redwood Energy Group, Inc. and Redwood Entertainment
Group, Inc., upon completion of a recapitalization on August 26, 2002. The re-capitalization occurred when we acquired the non-operating
entity of Gene-Cell, Inc. Gene-Cell had no significant assets or operations at the date of acquisition and we assumed all liabilities
that remained from its prior discontinued operation as a biopharmaceutical research company. The historical financial statements
presented herein are those of SaVi Media Group, Inc. and its predecessors, Redwood Entertainment Group, Inc., Redwood Energy Group,
Inc. and Energy Resource Management, Inc.
The public entity we used to recapitalize
was originally incorporated as Becniel in 1986 and subsequently adopted name changes to Tzaar Corporation, Gene-Cell, Inc., Redwood
Energy Group, Inc., Redwood Entertainment Group, Inc., Savi Media Group, Inc., and finally to SaviCorp.
Business Summary
Until 2011, we were considered a development
stage enterprise because we had no significant operations, had not yet generated revenue from new business activities and were
devoting substantially all of our efforts to business planning and the search for sources of capital to fund our efforts. We had
acquired all rights to "blow-by gas and crankcase engine emission reduction technology" which we intended to develop
and market on a commercial basis.
This technology is an emission reduction
device believed to reduce harmful exhaust emissions in gasoline and diesel engines, and increase fuel efficiency. Phase one testing
at California Environmental Engineering indicated notable reduction in tailpipe emissions and Particulate Matter (PM) while improving
fuel economy. The reductions were 5.1% in hydrocarbons, 5.1% in carbon monoxide, 5.5% in nitrogen oxides, while increasing fuel
economy by 0.3%.
We currently have the right to market and
distribute the DynoValve and DynoValve Pro products, which provides for increased fuel economy and reduced emissions in automotive
applications for both new and existing vehicles and may be used in other non-automotive applications. Personal watercraft, small
engine powered lawn equipment, and stand-alone power generation engines are additional markets that we intend to develop. The technology
may be sold internationally and we are pursuing opportunities simultaneously domestically and internationally.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial
condition and results of operations are based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make
estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses, and related disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and our estimates are based on historical experience
and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. These estimates and assumptions provide
a basis for our judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources.
Actual results may differ from our estimates under different assumptions or conditions, and these differences may be material.
We believe that the following critical
accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements:
Income Taxes
We use the liability method of accounting
for income taxes. Under this method, deferred income taxes are recorded to reflect the tax consequences on future years of temporary
differences between the tax basis of assets and liabilities and their financial amounts at year-end. We provide a valuation allowance
to reduce deferred tax assets to their net realizable value.
Stock-Based Compensation
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company
adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (SFAS 123R),
and began expensing at fair value on a straight-line basis the costs resulting from share-based payment transactions.
Prior to 2006, the Company elected to follow
Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees (APB 25) and related interpretations
in accounting for stock options granted to employees as permitted by SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation
(SFAS 123), as amended by SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation—Transition and Disclosure. Under
APB 25, the Company did not recognize share-based payment expense in its financial statements because the stock option awards qualified
as fixed awards and the exercise price of the Company’s employee stock options equaled the market price of the underlying
stock on the date of grant.
Convertible Notes - Derivative Financial Instruments
The convertible notes issued to His Divine
Vehicle, Inc. and DS Enterprises, Inc. in 2009, and to Steve Botkin in 2012 have been accounted for in accordance with SFAS No.
133 and EITF No. 00-19, "Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company's
Own Stock."
The Company has identified that these debenture
have embedded derivatives. These embedded derivatives have been bifurcated from the host debt contract and accounted for as derivative
liabilities in accordance with EITF 00-19. When multiple derivatives exist within the convertible notes, they have been bundled
together as a single hybrid compound instrument in accordance with SFAS No. 133 Derivatives Implementation Group Implementation
Issue No. B-15, "Embedded Derivatives: Separate Accounting for Multiple Derivative Features Embedded in a Single Hybrid Instrument."
The embedded derivatives within the convertible
notes have been recorded at fair value at the date of issuance and are marked-to-market each reporting period with changes in fair
value recorded to the Company's income statement as "Net change in fair value of derivative liabilities." The Company
has utilized a third party valuation firm to fair value the embedded derivatives using a lattice model with layered discounted
probability-weighted cash flow methods.
The fair value of the derivative liabilities
are subject to the changes in the trading value of the Company's common stock, as well as other factors. As a result, the Company's
financial statements may fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter based on factors, such as the price of the Company's stock at the balance
sheet date and the amount of shares converted by note holders. Consequently, our financial position and results of operations may
vary from quarter-to-quarter based on conditions other than our operating revenues and expenses.
Plan of Operations
We believe that there are several critical
elements for the building of a successful company that has the capacity to utilize the technology we have licensed for the implementation
of immediate and long-term solutions to the global challenges of air, water, and land pollution.
|
1. |
People - this includes a qualified board
of directors, advisory board members, management, employees, sales people, project managers, installers and consultants, etc.;
|
|
2. |
Projects - a credible portfolio of projects
that have the appropriate risk-return ratio in order to generate potentially significant shareholder value;
|
|
3. |
Capital - based upon the reputation of
the people and the quality of the projects, there must be sufficient capital in order to launch the company and to provide for
additional financing;
|
|
4. |
Technology - the most advanced interpretation
methods, techniques and methods should be utilized in order to maximize the potential for finding and developing immediate and
long term solutions to the global challenges of air, water, and land pollution;
|
|
5. |
Favorable positioning - the international
influence of the oil and gas companies along with the automotive & diesel industries requires a combination of secured relationships
with their appointed leadership in these various industries as well as with all the various local and international governmental
entities; and
|
|
6. |
Distribution and installation- the competitive nature of the automotive &diesel industry requires a unique approach and a significant capital commitment in order to secure the latest in hi-tech equipment to expedite large scale distribution and installation of our products. |
Complete testing phases in order
to secure revenues, licensing agreements, and contracts.
We are continuing to test our emission
control devices on select engines in order to obtain certification and validation of our technology.
Become a technology partner to the
various entities that are focused on environmental solutions.
We are presently participating in a consortium
of companies with emission reduction technologies for the problem solving of both our local environmental challenges and to assist
in China’s pursuit of immediate solutions to the particular needs in their environment.
Complete distribution/licensing agreements
for various entities and geographic areas.
We are continuing to expand our partners
both internationally and domestically through various licensing and/or distribution agreements for the sale of our products to
specific industries or markets. We have continued to test our emission control devices on select engines in order to obtain validation
of our technology for the target vehicles of each of these partners. Completion of these steps will lead to revenue growth and
profitability for SaviCorp.
During the years ended December 31, 2014
and 2013, we had limited sales and we expect to require additional cash of a minimum of approximately $2,000,000 over the next
twelve months. Those funds, if available, will be used for continued operation as we grow sales. Additional financing will need
to be obtained. Sources of funding may not be available on terms that are acceptable to management and existing stockholders, or
may include terms that will result in substantial dilution to existing stockholders.
Results of Operations
During the period from inception, August
13, 2002, to December 31, 2010, we had not generated any revenue from operations. During the year ended December 31, 2013, we generated
$764,000 in gross revenues. The majority of the sales were with DynoGreen Tech (“DGT”), a distributor in the Middle
East. In addition to acquiring in excess of $700,000 of DynoValve products in 2013, DGT acquired Company stock and were issued
short term stock options under their licensing agreement. Under GAAP guidance, the stock options were considered a sales incentive
and were netted against DGT sales with the excess value expensed as stock based compensation. DGT is considered a related party.
Due to this discount to sales, the gross profit for 2013 was negative as the costs of goods related to the sales were expensed.
Excluding related party revenue, sales decreased from $41,475 in 2013 to $26,164 in 2014. This was primarily because the company
focused on growing international markets, specifically focus was shifted to implementing the China license agreement with Beijing
FlyingGlob. In addition, during 2014, expenses far exceed revenue as loss from operations for 2014 was $5,199,107, an increase
of 5.9% over 2013 loss from operations of $4,907,773.
During the year ended December 31, 2014,
we incurred $4,295,156 in Other Expense. During the year ended December 31, 2013, we incurred $2,053,545 in Other Expense. Other
Expense consists of change in fair value of derivative instruments, interest expense, loss on debt settlement, loss on legal settlement
and change in fair value of rescission liability. The primary reason for the increase in Other Expense from 2013 to 2014 was due
to the loss on debt settlement and a reduction in the change in the fair value of the rescission liability compared to 2013.
Net loss for the year ended December 31,
2014 was 9,494,263. This is a drop from the net loss for the year ended December 31, 2013 of $6,961,318. The drop in net profit
is primarily due to an increase in the Other Expense as discussed above.
At December 31, 2014, we are in a negative
working capital position of $14,242,023 and had a stockholders' deficit of $14,220,829. Our auditors have opined that such matters
raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. We financed our operations mainly through the sale of
common stock and have been entirely dependent on outside sources of financing for continuation of operations. We will continue
to pursue funding for our business. There is no assurance that we will continue to be successful in obtaining additional funding
on attractive terms or at all, nor that the projects towards which additional capital is assigned will generate revenues at all.
Plan of Operation
During the year ended December 31, 2014,
we incurred losses from operations and we expect to require additional cash of approximately $2,000,000 over the next twelve
months. Those funds will be used to expand sales.
Our plan of operations will require sources
of funding that may not be available on terms that are acceptable to management and existing stockholders, or may include terms
that will result in substantial dilution to existing stockholders.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of December 31, 2014, the Company had
$32,373 in cash, no accounts receivable, $249,593 in inventory, $21,194 in net fixed assets and $27,833 in pre-paid assets.
Total current liabilities were $14,551,822
as of December 31, 2014, consisting of convertible debt, net, of $715,742, derivative liabilities of $9,039,061, accounts payable
and accrued liabilities of $2,976,798, notes payable of $25,778, settlement payable of $1,101,179, rescission liability of $444,833
and accounts payable assumed in recapitalization of $159,295.
We had a negative working capital of $14,242,023
as of December 31, 2014.
As a result, our independent registered
public accounting firm, in its report dated June 3, 2015, has expressed substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going
concern.
Our average monthly operational expenses have been $373,739
per month for the year ended December 31, 2014.
Our ability to continue as a going concern
is dependent upon several factors. These factors include our ability to:
|
· |
further implement our business plan; |
|
· |
obtain additional financing or refinancing as may be required; |
|
· |
and increase revenues. |
We believe it is imperative that we raise
an additional $5,000,000 of capital in order to implement our business plan. We are attempting to raise additional funds through
debt and/or equity offerings. We intend to use any funds raised to pay down debt and to provide us with working capital. There
can be no assurance that any new capital would be available to us or that we would have adequate funds for our operations, whether
from our revenues, financial markets, or other arrangements will be available when needed or on terms satisfactory to us. Any additional
financing may involve dilution to our then-existing shareholders.
We have no other commitments from officers,
directors or affiliates to provide funding. If we are unable to obtain debt and/or equity financing upon terms that we deem sufficiently
favorable, or at all, it would have a materially adverse impact upon our ability to pursue our business strategy and maintain our
current operations. As a result, it may require us to delay, curtail or scale back some or all of our operations.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements
that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
There were no recent accounting pronouncements
that have had or are likely to have a material effect on our financial position or results of operations.
ITEM 7. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
See Financial Statements beginning on
F-1 this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
ITEM 8. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS
WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
During the fiscal years ended December
31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, neither the Company nor anyone acting on its behalf has consulted with M&K with respect to
(i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed, or the type of audit opinion
that might be rendered on the Company's financial statements, and neither a written report nor oral advice was provided to the
Company that M&K concluded was an important factor considered by the Company in reaching a decision as to any accounting, auditing,
or financial reporting issue or (ii) any matter that was either the subject of a "disagreement" or "reportable event"
as those terms are defined in Item 304(a)(1) of Regulation S-K.
ITEM 8A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
a) |
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. As of December 31, 2014, the Company’s management carried out an evaluation, under the supervision of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s system of disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to the Securities and Exchange Act, Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act). Based upon that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were ineffective, as of the date of their evaluation, for the purposes of recording, processing, summarizing and timely reporting material information required to be disclosed in reports filed by the Company under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This assessment was made based on the need to amend prior filings due to embedded derivatives within various convertible securities and the lack of sufficient personnel to process transactions. We have hired an outside expert to evaluate and value derivative financial instruments in any and all convertible securities and when we obtain additional financing will hire additional personnel and implement procedures to properly account for and disclose all transactions. |
b) |
Changes in internal controls. There were no changes in internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is likely to materially effect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. |
ITEM 8B. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
ITEM 9. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS,
PROMOTERS AND CONTROL PERSONS.
The following information sets forth the names of our officers
and directors, their present positions with us, and their biographical information.
Names: |
Ages |
Officer Titles |
Board of Directors |
Serge Monros |
64 |
Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Technology Officer |
Director |
Phil Pisanelli |
67 |
|
Director |
Rudy Rodriguez |
63 |
Secretary and Treasurer |
Director |
Directors are elected to serve until the
next annual meeting of stockholders and until their successors are elected and qualified. Currently there are five seats on our
board of directors.
Currently, our Directors are not compensated
for their services, although their expenses in attending meetings are reimbursed. Officers are elected by the Board of Directors
and serve until their successors are appointed by the Board of Directors. Biographical resumes of each officer and director are
set forth below.
Mr. Serge Monros has been the Chief
Technology Officer and a director since August 2004. Since January, 2007, Mr. Monros has also served as the Chief Executive Officer.
Since January, 2009, Mr. Monros has also served as the Chief Financial Officer. Since 2004, Mr. Monros has been the owner of His
Divine Vehicle, a Santa Ana, California technology company.
Mr. Rudy Rodriguez has been our
Chief Operating Officer since June 2005 and a director since November 2005. Since February 2000, Mr. Rodriguez has been the procurement
manager for American Range, a commercial cooking equipment manufacturer located in Pacoima, California. Prior to February 2000,
Mr. Rodriguez was the director of purchasing at Wilbur Curtis Company, Inc., a commercial coffee and tea equipment manufacturer
located in Los Angeles, California.
Mr. Phil Pisanelli has been a director
since August 2004. Since January 1981, Mr. Pisanelli has been the calibration manager for Boeing, Inc., located in Palmdale, California.
Audit Committee
The Board of Directors was reconfigured
in January, 2007. The previous members of the Audit Committee of the Board as of December 31, 2005 are no longer directors. The
present Board has not appointed an Audit Committee. None of the current Board of Directors is qualified to serve as an “audit
committee financial expert”, as defined in the Regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Phil Pisanelli is our
only “independent director”, as defined in the Regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Code of Ethics
The Company has adopted a “Code of
Business Ethics for Savi Media Group, Inc.” The Code is applicable to all employees of the Company, including its principal
executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer, or persons performing similar functions. The Company
will provide a copy of the Code of Ethics, without charge, to any person who submits a request in writing to the President of the
Company.
COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16(A) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) requires the Company's directors and executive officers, and persons who own more
than ten percent of a registered class of the Company's equity securities, to file with the Commission initial reports of ownership
and reports of changes in ownership of the Company's Common Stock and other equity securities of the Company. Officers, directors
and greater than ten percent shareholders are required by the Commission's regulations to furnish the Company with copies of all
Section 16(a) forms they filed.
We have been provided with copies of all
forms (3, 4 and 5) filed by officers, directors, or ten percent shareholders within three days of such filings. Based on our review
of such forms that we received, or written representations from reporting persons that no Forms 5s were required for such persons,
we believe that, during fiscal 2007, all Section 16(a) filing requirements have been satisfied on a timely basis for members of
the Board of Directors and Executive Officers.
ITEM 10. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.
The following tables set forth certain
information regarding our CEO and each of our most highly-compensated executive officers whose total annual salary and bonus for
the fiscal years ending December 31, 2014, 2013, and 2012 exceeded $100,000. Of the salaries shown during 2014, 2013, and 2012,
$51,954, $19,300, and $10,800 were paid. The remaining was accrued as of December 31, 2014:
SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE
ANNUAL COMPENSATION
Name &
Principal
Position |
|
Year |
|
Salary ($) |
|
|
Bonus ($) |
|
|
Annual
Compensation ($) |
|
|
Restricted
Stock
Awards($) |
|
|
Options
SARs
(#) |
|
|
Other
LTIP
Payouts($) |
|
|
All Other
Compensation |
|
| |
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |
Serge Monros | |
2014 | |
| 240,000 | | |
| – | | |
| 240,000 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
CEO, CFO | |
2013 | |
| 216,000 | | |
| – | | |
| 216,000 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
2012 | |
| 144,000 | | |
| – | | |
| 144,000 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
Employment/Consultant Agreements
We have no employment or consulting agreements
with any of our officers.
Remuneration of Directors
We currently do not have in effect a policy
regarding compensation for serving on our board of directors. However, we do reimburse our directors for their reasonable expenses
incurred in attending meetings of our board and our non-employee directors are periodically granted shares or options to purchase
shares of our common stock.
Stock Option Plans
The 2005 Incentive Stock Plan was adopted
by the Board of Directors and approved by the stockholders in August 2005. The 2005 Plan provides for the issuance of up to 25,000,000
shares and/or options.
2005 Incentive Stock Plan
The primary purpose of the 2005 Incentive
Stock Plan is to attract and retain the best available personnel for us in order to promote the success of our business and to
facilitate the ownership of our stock by employees. The 2005 Incentive Stock Plan is administered by our Board of Directors. Under
the 2005 Incentive Stock Plan, key employees, officers, directors and consultants are entitled to receive awards. The 2005 Incentive
Stock Plan permits the granting of incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options and shares of common stock with the purchase
price, vesting and expiration terms set by the Board of Directors.
Option/Stock Appreciation Right Grants
in 2014
None.
Aggregate Option/SAR Exercises in 2013 and December 31, 2014
Option Values
None.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
| |
Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, warrants and rights (a) | | |
Weighted- average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights (b) | | |
Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a)) (c) | |
| |
| | |
| | |
| |
Equity compensation plans approved by holders | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 25,000,000 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
Total | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 25,000,000 | |
ITEM 11. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN
BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS.
The following tables sets forth, as of
December 31, 2014, the number of and percent of our common stock beneficially owned by
| · | by each person who is known by us to beneficially own more than 5%
of our common stock; |
| · | by each of our officers and directors; and |
| · | by all of our officers and directors as a group. |
| · | by each person who is known by us to beneficially own more than 5%
of each of our preferred stock classes; |
We believe that all persons named in the
table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common stock beneficially owned by them.
A person is deemed to be the beneficial
owner of securities that can be acquired by him within 60 days from December 31, 2014 upon the exercise of options, warrants or
convertible securities. Each beneficial owner's percentage ownership is determined by assuming that options, warrants or convertible
securities that are held by him, but not those held by any other person, and which are exercisable within 60 days of December 31,
2014 have been exercised and converted.
Name |
| |
Class | |
Beneficially
Owned(1) | | |
Percent of
Class(2) | | |
Title or Nature of Relationship |
|
| |
| |
| | |
| | |
|
Serge Monros |
(3) | |
Common Stock | |
| 298,514,822 | | |
| 4.80% | | |
CEO/CFO/Director |
2530 S. Birch Street |
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Santa Ana, California 92707 |
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Phil Pisanell |
(4) | |
Common Stock | |
| 31,000,000 | | |
| * | | |
Director |
2530 S. Birch Street |
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Santa Ana, California 92707 |
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Rudy Rodriguez |
(5) | |
Common Stock | |
| 202,000,000 | | |
| 3.35% | | |
COO/Director |
2530 S. Birch Street |
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Santa Ana, California 92707 |
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
All Officers and Directors
As a Group (3 persons) |
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
531,514,822
|
|
|
|
8.42%
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Lucius Blanchard |
(6) | |
Common Stock | |
| 1,450,000,000 | | |
| 19.51% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Clarke Family Trust |
(7) | |
Common Stock | |
| 964,000,000 | | |
| 14.27% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Joseph Gimbel |
(8) | |
Common Stock | |
| 676,900,000 | | |
| 10.26% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Saheed Kottoth |
(9) | |
Common Stock | |
| 528,666,667 | | |
| 8.55% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Neal Shindel & Joan Dengrove |
(10) | |
Common Stock | |
| 315,000,000 | | |
| 5.00% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Saheed Kottoth |
| |
Common Stock | |
| 328,666,667 | | |
| 5.49% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Lucius Blanchard |
| |
Preferred A | |
| 4,500,000 | | |
| 16.14% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Joseph Gimbel |
| |
Preferred A | |
| 3,490,000 | | |
| 12.52% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Neal Shindel & Joan Dengrove |
| |
Preferred A | |
| 2,625,000 | | |
| 9.42% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Ira Gaines |
| |
Preferred A | |
| 1,666,666 | | |
| 5.98% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Lucius Blanchard |
| |
Preferred B | |
| 100,000 | | |
| 36.42% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Clarke Family Trust |
| |
Preferred B | |
| 77,500 | | |
| 28.22% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Joseph Gimbel |
| |
Preferred B | |
| 14,290 | | |
| 5.20% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Saheed Kottoth |
| |
Preferred C | |
| 2,000,000 | | |
| 23.65% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Chul Chung |
| |
Preferred C | |
| 1,088,500 | | |
| 12.87% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
John Orrock |
| |
Preferred C | |
| 750,000 | | |
| 8.87% | | |
|
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Alexander M. Haig Jr. |
| |
Preferred C | |
| 500,000 | | |
| 5.91% | | |
Advisory Board Member |
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Rudy Rodriguez |
| |
Preferred C | |
| 500,000 | | |
| 5.91% | | |
COO/Director |
|
| |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
|
Alexander P. Haig |
| |
Preferred C | |
| 433,000 | | |
| 5.12% | | |
Advisory Board Member |
* Less than 1%.
|
(1) |
Beneficial Ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities. Shares of common stock subject to options or warrants currently exercisable or convertible, or exercisable or convertible within 60 days of December 31, 2014 are deemed outstanding for computing the percentage of the person holding such option or warrant but are not deemed outstanding for computing the percentage of any other person. |
|
(2) |
For purposes of calculating the percentage beneficially owned, the number of shares of each class of stock deemed outstanding includes 5,982,260,958 common shares; 27,880,143 Preferred A Shares; 274,602 Preferred B Shares and 8,455,697 Preferred C Shares outstanding as of December 31, 2014. |
|
(3) |
Includes 28,514,606 shares of common stock and includes the conversion of the principal amount of $204,302 plus accrued interest through 12/31/14 of $82,486 converting into common shares at the conversion rate of $0.0003 subject to ownership limitations, owned by His Divine Vehicle, Inc., of which Mr. Monros is the Chief Executive Officer. |
|
(4) |
Includes 21,000,000 shares of common stock and 10,000,000 shares of common stock underlying series A convertible preferred stock. |
|
(5) |
Includes 152,000,000 shares of common stock and 50,000,000 shares of common stock underlying series C convertible preferred stock. |
|
(6) |
Includes 450,000,000 shares of common stock underlying series A convertible preferred stock and 1,000,000,000 shares of common stock underlying series B convertible preferred stock. |
|
(7) |
Includes 189,000,000 shares of common stock and 775,000,000 shares of common stock underlying series B convertible preferred stock. |
|
(8) |
Includes 60,000,000 shares of common stock and 349,000,000 shares of common stock underlying series A convertible preferred stock and 142,900,000 shares of common stock underlying series B convertible preferred stock and 125,000,000 warrants to acquire common stock at an exercise price of $0.0004. |
|
(9) |
Includes 328,666,667 shares of common stock and 200,000,000 shares of common stock underlying series C convertible preferred stock. |
|
(10) |
Includes 262,500,000 shares of common stock and 52,500,000 shares of common stock underlying series B convertible preferred stock. |
Series A, B, C and D Voting Rights
Each share of Series A, B and C convertible
preferred stock shall be entitled to cast that number of votes per share as is equal to the number of votes that holder would be
entitled to cast had such holder converted his shares into shares of Common Stock on the record date for such vote. Each share
of Series A and Series C convertible preferred stock is convertible into 100 shares of common stock. Each share of Series B convertible
preferred stock is convertible into 10,000 shares of common stock.
Series D Preferred Shares are authorized
to vote on matters such as an increase in the authorized common shares and re-election of Board members. The Series D Preferred
Shares, when cast at a Shareholder meeting or included within a Shareholder Consent constitute 50.1% of the outstanding voting
shares of the Company.
DESCRIPTION OF SECURITIES
COMMON STOCK
As of December 31, 2014, we were authorized
to issue up to 6,000,000,000 shares of Common Stock, $0.001 par value. As of December 31, 2014, there were 5,982,260,962 shares
of common stock issued and outstanding. Holders of the common stock are entitled to one vote per share on all matters to be voted
upon by the stockholders. Holders of common stock are entitled to receive ratably such dividends, if any, as may be declared by
the Board of Directors out of funds legally available therefor. Upon the liquidation, dissolution, or winding up of our company,
the holders of common stock are entitled to share ratably in all of our assets which are legally available for distribution after
payment of all debts and other liabilities and liquidation preference of any outstanding common stock. Holders of common stock
have no preemptive, subscription, redemption or conversion rights.
We have engaged Worldwide Stock Transfer,
LLC as independent transfer agent or registrar.
PREFERRED STOCK
We are authorized to issue 40,000,000 shares
of preferred stock, $0.001 par value per share. As of December 31, 2014, there were 27,880,143 shares of series A preferred stock
issued and outstanding, 274,602 shares of series B preferred stock issued and outstanding, and 8,455,697 shares of series C preferred
stock issued and outstanding. The shares of preferred stock may be issued in series, and shall have such voting powers, full or
limited, or no voting powers, and such designations, preferences and relative participating, optional or other special rights,
and qualifications, limitations or restrictions thereof, as shall be stated and expressed in the resolution or resolutions providing
for the issuance of such stock adopted from time to time by the board of directors. The board of directors is expressly vested
with the authority to determine and fix in the resolution or resolutions providing for the issuances of preferred stock the voting
powers, designations, preferences and rights, and the qualifications, limitations or restrictions thereof, of each such series
to the full extent now or hereafter permitted by the laws of the State of Nevada.
The series A and series C preferred stock
provides for conversion on the basis of 100 shares of common stock for each share of preferred stock converted, with conversion
at the option of the holder or mandatory conversion upon restructure of the common stock and holders of the series A and series
C preferred stock vote their shares on an as-converted basis. The series B preferred stock provides for conversion on the basis
of 10,000 shares of common stock for each share of preferred stock converted, with conversion at the option of the holder or mandatory
conversion upon restructure of the common stock and holders of the series B preferred stock vote their shares on an as-converted
basis. Holders of the series A, series B and series C preferred stock participates on distribution and liquidation pari passu with
the holders of the common stock.
WARRANTS
In connection with a repayment agreement
dated July 28, 2011, we issued YA Global warrants to purchase an aggregate of 25,000,000 shares of common stock, exercisable for
a period of three years at a price of $0.0119.
The warrants issued to YA Global provide
for certain anti-dilution protection in the event that (i) we issue shares of our common stock for a purchase price below the exercise
price of the various warrants or in the event we issue options or other convertible securities with a conversion price below the
exercise price, (ii) we effectuate a stock split, stock dividend or other form of recapitalization, or (iii) we declare a dividend
payment to the holders of our common stocks. The exercise price was reset on August 8, 2011 to $0.0005. The exercise price was
reset on January 30, 213 to $0.0003 and the number of warrants increased to 991,666,667. The holder exercised 80,362,450 warrants
on a cashless basis and were issued 71,433,289 shares of common stock. The remaining warrants expired on July 24, 2014.
In May 2010, the Company issued 5,000,000
warrants at an exercise price of $0.01 exercisable for a period of 5 years to a law firm for services rendered. These warrants
expire on May 1, 2015.
In April 2012, the Company issued 666,667
warrants at an exercise price of $0.015 exercisable for a period of six months to a law firm for services rendered. These warrants
expired on October 4, 2014.
In May 2013 as part of the DynoGreen Tech
licensing agreement for the Middle East, the Company issued 400,000,000 warrants at an exercise price of $0.001 if exercised within
30 days and an exercise price of $0.002 if exercised within 60 days. All these warrants were exercised within 30 days.
In December 2014, as part of a private
placement, the company issued 125,000,000 warrants at an exercise price of $0.0004 for a period of one year.
OPTIONS
There are no stock options outstanding
as of December 31, 2013 or December 31, 2014.
CONVERTIBLE SECURITIES
On December 15, 2009, the Company converted
accounts payable due to His Divine Vehicle, Inc. and DS Enterprises, Inc. into convertible promissory notes. The notes bear interest
at 8%, matured on April 15, 2010, and convert into common shares at the conversion rate of $0.003 subject to anti-dilution protection.
In August, 2011, the conversion rate was reset to $0.0005. In January, 2013, the conversion rate was reset to $0.0003.
On July 20, 2014, the Company issued a
convertible promissory note in the amount of $15,000 to Lamar Pierce. The note bears interest of $2,500 for the first thirty days
and 12% per thirty days thereafter. The note was converted in Series B convertible preferred stock on December 20, 2014 based on
a common share conversion rate of $0.0003.
INDEMNIFICATION FOR SECURITIES ACT LIABILITIES
Our Articles of Incorporation, as amended,
provide to the fullest extent permitted by Nevada law, our directors or officers shall not be personally liable to us or our shareholders
for damages for breach of such director's or officer's fiduciary duty. The effect of this provision of our Articles of Incorporation,
as amended, is to eliminate our rights and our shareholders (through shareholders' derivative suits on behalf of our company) to
recover damages against a director or officer for breach of the fiduciary duty of care as a director or officer (including breaches
resulting from negligent or grossly negligent behavior), except under certain situations defined by statute. We believe that the
indemnification provisions in our Articles of Incorporation, as amended, are necessary to attract and retain qualified persons
as directors and officers.
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities
arising under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Act” or “Securities Act”) may be permitted to directors,
officers or persons controlling us pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, we have been advised that in the opinion
of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Act and is, therefore,
unenforceable.
ITEM 12. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED
TRANSACTIONS.
Other than as disclosed below, there have
been no transactions, or proposed transactions, which have materially affected or will materially affect us in which any director,
executive officer or beneficial holder of more than 10% of the outstanding common stock, or any of their respective relatives,
spouses, associates or affiliates, has had or will have any direct or material indirect interest. We have no policy regarding entering
into transactions with affiliated parties.
We, having previously issued 4,000 shares
of common stock towards the acquisition of Savi Group, holder of patents from Serge Monros, subsequently issued 5,000,000 shares
of common stock, 5,000,000 shares of Series A preferred stock and 125,000,000 three-year stock options (to acquire shares of our
common stock at $0.00025 per share) to Serge Monros to complete the acquisition of the rights to the patents. Serge Monros also
received 100,000 shares of common stock as compensation for his role as our chief technology officer. We also issued 17,560,000
shares of common stock to associates of Serge Monros that were involved in the initial development of the patents that he owns.
As consideration for HDV entering into
the Product License Agreement, the Company agreed to issue to Mr. Monros and HDV, if and when available, an aggregate of 500 Million
shares of Common Stock, 5 Million shares of Series A Preferred Stock and 5 Million shares of Series C Preferred Stock. In September,
2009, HDV was awarded 300,000,000 common shares and 2,500,000 Preferred C shares for services rendered. In July, 2011, HDV and
Mr. Monros entered into a revised licensing agreement which modified the prior consideration paid to an aggregate of 600 Million
shares of Common Stock, 6.5 Million shares of Series A Preferred Stock and 2.5 Million shares of Series C Preferred Stock.
Mr. Monros has continued the process of
preparing patent applications for the other versions of the DynoValve products & related IP. In March, 2013, the Company entered
into a five (5) year Master Distribution Agreement with His Divine Vehicle to sell the DynoValve and DynoValve Pro in various internationally
territories. The consideration for the agreement was a guaranteeing a minimum annual volume, payment for the DynoValves acquired
and a three percent (3%) royalty payment.
In March, 2015, the Company entered into
a seven (7) year Master Distribution Agreement with DynoValve Mfg, LLC, the current holder of the patents for the DynoValve products
and related IP and a related party to Mr. Monros, our CEO. The agreement is an exclusive agreement for North America, China, South
Korea and the Middle East and a non-exclusive agreement for the rest of the world. The consideration for the agreement was payment
for products acquired and a three percent (3%) royalty payment.
We have no policy regarding entering into
transactions with affiliated parties.
ITEM 13. EXHIBITS.
Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, filed March 1, 2005, filed as an exhibit to the registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) on June 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation, as amended and restated, filed April 22, 2005, filed as an exhibit to the registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on June 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
Certificate of Designation of Series A Preferred Stock, filed as an exhibit to the registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on June 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
Certificate of Designation of Series B Preferred Stock, filed as an exhibit to the registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on June 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
Certificate of Designation of Series C Preferred Stock, filed as an exhibit to the registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on June 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
By-laws, filed as an exhibit to the registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on June 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
Certificate of Designation of Series D Preferred Stock, filed as an exhibit to the Form 8-K filed with the Commission on June 5, 2015 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
Certificate of Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation, filed as an exhibit to the Form 8-K filed with the Commission on June 5, 2015 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
Secured Convertible Debenture issued to Cornell Capital Partners, L.P., dated July 10, 2006, filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
4.3 |
|
Warrant to purchase 1,000,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
Warrant to purchase 1,000,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
Warrant to purchase 300,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
Warrant to purchase 200,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
Warrant to purchase 150,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
Warrant to purchase 100,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
Warrant to purchase 60,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.10 |
|
Warrant to purchase 40,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
4.11 |
|
Warrant to purchase 30,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.12 |
|
Warrant to purchase 20,000,000 shares of Common Stock, dated July 10, 2006, issued to Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.13 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated July 10, 2006, by and between Savi Media Group, Inc. and Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.14 |
|
Security Agreement, dated July 10, 2006, by and between Savi Media Group, Inc. and Cornell Capital Partners L.P., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
4.15 |
|
Pledge and Escrow Agreement, dated July 10, 2006, by and among Savi Media Group, Inc., Cornell Capital Partners L.P., New Creation Outreach, Inc. and David Gonzalez, Esq. as escrow agent., filed as an exhibit to the current report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 14, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
Agreement, dated as of April 6, 2005, by and between the Company and His Divine Vehicle, Inc., filed as an exhibit to the registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on June 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
Agreement, dated as of June 17, 2005, amending the April 6, 2005 agreement between the Company and His Divine Vehicle, Inc., filed as an exhibit to the registration statement on Form SB-2 filed with the Commission on June 27, 2005 and incorporated herein by reference. |
31.1 |
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14 and Rule 15d-14(a), promulgated under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended |
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14 and Rule 15d 14(a), promulgated under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended |
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Chief Executive Officer) |
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND
SERVICES.
Audit Fees
The aggregate fees billed by our auditors,
for professional services rendered for the audit of the Company's annual financial statements for the years ended December 31,
2014 and 2013, and for the reviews of the financial statements included in the Company's Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q during
the fiscal years were $20,000 and $44,000, respectively.
Audit Related
Our auditors billed us $20,000 and $44,000
for audited related work during fiscal years 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Tax Fees
Our auditors billed us $0 and $0 for tax
related work during fiscal years 2014 and 2013, respectively.
All Other Fees
Our auditors did not bill us for any other
services during fiscal years 2014 or 2013.
The Board of Directors has considered whether
the provision of non-audit services is compatible with maintaining the principal accountant's independence.
SIGNATURES
In accordance with the requirements of
the Exchange Act, the registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
SAVI MEDIA GROUP, INC.
Date: June 17, 2015 |
By: /s/ SERGE MONROS |
|
Serge Monros |
|
President, Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer), Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer), Chief Technology Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities
and on the dates indicated.
In accordance with
the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, this registration statement was signed by the following persons in the capacities
and on the dates stated.
Name |
Position |
Date |
|
|
|
/s/ SERGE MONROS
Serge Monros |
Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Technology Officer and Director |
June 17, 2015 |
|
|
|
/s/ PHIL PISANELLI
Phil Pisanelli |
Director |
June 17, 2015 |
|
|
|
/s/ RUDY RODRIGUEZ
Rudy Rodriguez |
Chief Operating Officer and Director |
June 17, 2015 |
|
|
|
SAVICORP
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
Page(s) |
|
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
F-2 |
|
|
Balance Sheets at December 31, 2014 and 2013 |
F-3 |
|
|
Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 |
F-4 |
|
|
Statement of Stockholders' Deficit for the period from December 31, 2012 to December 31, 2014 |
F-5 |
|
|
Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 |
F-6 |
|
|
Notes to Financial Statements |
F-7 |
|
|
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Stockholders and Directors
SaviCorp
We have audited
the accompanying balance sheets of SaviCorp (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 and the related
statements of operations, stockholders' deficit and cash flows for the twelve month periods then ended. These financial statements
are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based
on our audits.
We conducted our
audits in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that
we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.
The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting.
Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are
appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles
used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe
that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion,
the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of SaviCorp as of December
31, 2014 and 2013 and the results of its operations and cash flows for the periods described above in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
The accompanying
financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the
financial statements, the Company has an accumulated deficit, has negative working capital, and has a stockholders’ deficit.
These conditions raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans
in regard to these matters are described in Note 2 to the financial statements. The financial statements do not include any adjustments
that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
/s/ M&K CPAS, PLLC
www.mkacpas.com
Houston, Texas
June 17, 2015
SaviCorp
BALANCE SHEETS
December 31, 2014 and 2013
| |
December 31,
2014 | | |
December 31,
2013 | |
ASSETS | |
| | | |
| | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Current assets: | |
| | | |
| | |
Cash and cash equivalents | |
$ | 32,373 | | |
$ | 60,612 | |
Accounts Receivable | |
| – | | |
| 6,615 | |
Inventory | |
| 249,593 | | |
| 51,325 | |
Prepaid expenses | |
| 27,833 | | |
| 18,333 | |
Total current assets: | |
| 309,799 | | |
| 136,885 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Long term assets: | |
| | | |
| | |
Net fixed assets | |
| 21,194 | | |
| 22,233 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Total assets | |
$ | 330,993 | | |
$ | 159,118 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT | |
| | | |
| | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Current liabilities: | |
| | | |
| | |
Convertible debt, net of unamortized discount of $0 and $0, in default | |
$ | 511,440 | | |
$ | 511,440 | |
Related party convertible debt, net of unamortized discount of $0 and $0, in default | |
| 204,302 | | |
| 204,302 | |
Notes payable, $10,778 in default | |
| 99,914 | | |
| 10,778 | |
Notes payable, related party, in default | |
| 15,000 | | |
| 15,000 | |
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities | |
| 2,976,798 | | |
| 2,388,059 | |
Accounts payable assumed in recapitalization | |
| 159,295 | | |
| 159,295 | |
Settlements payable | |
| 1,101,179 | | |
| 1,101,179 | |
Rescission Liability | |
| 444,833 | | |
| 784,809 | |
Derivative liabilities - embedded derivatives | |
| 8,788,254 | | |
| 3,848,923 | |
Derivative liabilities - warrants | |
| 250,807 | | |
| 1,382,612 | |
Total current liabilities | |
| 14,551,822 | | |
| 10,406,397 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Long term liabilities: | |
| | | |
| | |
Convertible debt, net of unamortized discount of $0 and $0 | |
| – | | |
| 32,600 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Total liabilities | |
| 14,551,822 | | |
| 10,438,997 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Commitments and contingencies | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Stockholders' deficit: | |
| | | |
| | |
Series A convertible preferred stock; $0.001 par value,
28,000,000 shares authorized, 27,880,143 and 12,963,477 issued and outstanding at December 31, 2014 and 2013,
respectively |
|
|
27,880 |
|
|
|
12,963 |
|
Series B convertible preferred stock; $0.001 par value,
1,000,000 shares authorized, 274,602 and 0 issued and outstanding at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively |
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
– |
|
Series C convertible preferred stock; $0.001 par value,
10,000,000 shares authorized, 8,455,697 and 8,755,697 issued and outstanding at December 31, 2014 and 2013,
respectively |
|
|
8,456 |
|
|
|
8,756 |
|
Common stock: $0.001 par value, 6,000,000,000 shares authorized,
5,982,260,958 and 5,970,327,673 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively |
|
|
5,982,261 |
|
|
|
5,970,328 |
|
Stock payable | |
| 1,420,384 | | |
| 1,420,384 | |
Additional paid-in capital | |
| 278,640,939 | | |
| 273,114,451 | |
Accumulated deficit | |
| (300,301,024 | ) | |
| (290,806,761 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Total stockholders' deficit | |
| (14,220,829 | ) | |
| (10,279,879 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Total liabilities and stockholders' deficit | |
$ | 330,993 | | |
$ | 159,118 | |
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of the financial statements
SaviCorp
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2014 and 2013
| |
December 31, 2014 | | |
December 31, 2013 | |
| |
| | |
| |
Revenue | |
$ | 26,164 | | |
$ | 41,475 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Cost of Goods Sold | |
| 25,368 | | |
| 464,384 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Gross Profit | |
| 796 | | |
| (422,909 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Operating costs and expenses: | |
| | | |
| | |
General and administrative expenses | |
$ | 5,199,903 | | |
$ | 4,484,864 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Loss from operations | |
$ | (5,199,107 | ) | |
$ | (4,907,773 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Other income and (expenses): | |
| | | |
| | |
Gain/(loss) on debt settlement | |
| (441,959 | ) | |
| 104,669 | |
Gain on legal settlement | |
| – | | |
| 479,073 | |
Change in fair value of financial instruments | |
| (4,012,010 | ) | |
| (3,950,096 | ) |
Change in fair value of rescission liability | |
| 339,976 | | |
| 1,398,735 | |
Interest expense | |
| (181,163 | ) | |
| (85,926 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Total other income and (expenses), net | |
| (4,295,156 | ) | |
| (2,053,545 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Net profit (loss) | |
$ | (9,494,263 | ) | |
$ | (6,961,318 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Weighted average shares outstanding | |
| 5,948,153,156 | | |
| 5,733,919,110 | |
Weighted average shares outstanding-diluted | |
| 5,948,153,156 | | |
| 5,733,919,110 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Net profit (loss) per common share - basic | |
$ | (0.00 | ) | |
$ | (0.00 | ) |
Net profit (loss) per common share - diluted | |
$ | (0.00 | ) | |
$ | (0.00 | ) |
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of the financial statements
SaviCorp
STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' DEFICIT
For the Period From December 31, 2012
to December 31, 2014
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
Additional | | |
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
Preferred Stock A | | |
Preferred Stock B | | |
Preferred Stock C | | |
Common Stock | | |
Paid-In | | |
Stock | | |
Accumulated | | |
| |
| |
Shares | | |
Amount | | |
Shares | | |
Amount | | |
Shares | | |
Amount | | |
Shares | | |
Amount | | |
Capital | | |
Payable | | |
Deficit | | |
Total | |
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |
Balance at December
31, 2012 | |
| 5,953,233 | | |
$ | 5,953 | | |
| – | | |
$ | – | | |
| 4,409,609 | | |
$ | 4,409 | | |
| 4,756,016,619 | | |
$ | 4,756,017 | | |
| 269,428,248 | | |
$ | 1,406,768 | | |
| (283,845,442 | ) | |
$ | (8,244,047 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Common stock issued in exchange
for consulting services and employee compensation | |
| 1,351,667 | | |
| 1,352 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 60,000 | | |
| 60 | | |
| 749,900,000 | | |
| 749,900 | | |
| 1,189,705 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 1,941,017 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Common and preferred stock
issued for cash under Regulation D offering | |
| 9,450,000 | | |
| 9,450 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 4,488,500 | | |
| 4,489 | | |
| 567,652,694 | | |
| 567,653 | | |
| 786,858 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 1,368,450 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Conversion of Preferred
A to common | |
| (300,000 | ) | |
| (300 | ) | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 30,000,000 | | |
| 30,000 | | |
| (29,700 | ) | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Conversion of debt for common | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 50,000,000 | | |
| 50,000 | | |
| 131,708 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 181,708 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Stock options issued with
license agreement | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 1,500,683 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 1,500,683 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Imputed interest on related
party debt | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 13,261 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 13,261 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Stock bought back from investors | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (3,500,000 | ) | |
| (3,500 | ) | |
| (10,500 | ) | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (14,000 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Net stock received in settlement
agreements | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (12,156,250 | ) | |
| (12,156 | ) | |
| (53,475 | ) | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (65,631 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Common stock repaid by Company | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 78,414,606 | | |
| 78,414 | | |
| 773,354 | | |
| (851,768 | ) | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Common and preferred stock
loaned to Company | |
| (3,491,423 | ) | |
| (3,491 | ) | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (202,412 | ) | |
| (202 | ) | |
| (246,000,000 | ) | |
| (246,000 | ) | |
| (615,691 | ) | |
| 865,384 | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Net
income | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (6,961,318 | ) | |
| (6,961,318 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Balance at December
31, 2013 | |
| 12,963,477 | | |
$ | 12,963 | | |
| – | | |
$ | – | | |
| 8,755,697 | | |
$ | 8,756 | | |
| 5,970,327,669 | | |
$ | 5,970,328 | | |
| 273,114,451 | | |
$ | 1,420,384 | | |
| (290,806,761 | ) | |
$ | (10,279,879 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Common stock issued
in exchange for consulting services and employee compensation | |
| 1,700,000 | | |
| 1,700 | | |
| 94,950 | | |
| 95 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 500,000 | | |
| 500 | | |
| 3,493,855 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 3,496,150 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Common and preferred stock
issued for cash under Regulation D offering | |
| 12,301,666 | | |
| 12,302 | | |
| 159,846 | | |
| 160 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 1,257,038 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 1,269,500 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Conversion of common to
Preferred A | |
| 700,000 | | |
| 700 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (70,000,000 | ) | |
| (70,000 | ) | |
| 69,300 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Shares issued with debt | |
| 215,000 | | |
| 215 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 60,135 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 60,350 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Imputed interest on related
party debt | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 3,409 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 3,409 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Stock issued upon exercise
of warrants | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 71,433,289 | | |
| 71,433 | | |
| 93,128 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 164,561 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Stock bought back from shareholders | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (20,000,000 | ) | |
| (20,000 | ) | |
| 3,000 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (17,000 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Tainted warrants and convertible
debt issued | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (330,112 | ) | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (330,112 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Conversion of Preferred
C to common | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (300,000 | ) | |
| (300 | ) | |
| 30,000,000 | | |
| 30,000 | | |
| (29,700 | ) | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Conversion of debt for Preferred
B | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 19,806 | | |
| 20 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 906,435 | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| 906,455 | |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Net
income | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| – | | |
| (9,494,263 | ) | |
| (9,494,263 | ) |
| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | |
Balance at December
31, 2014 | |
| 27,880,143 | | |
$ | 27,880 | | |
| 274,602 | | |
$ | 275 | | |
| 8,455,697 | | |
$ | 8,456 | | |
| 5,982,260,958 | | |
$ | 5,982,261 | | |
| 278,640,939 | | |
$ | 1,420,384 | | |
| (300,301,024 | ) | |
$ | (14,220,829 | ) |
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of the financial statements
SaviCorp
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2014 and 2013
| |
December 31, 2014 | | |
December 31, 2013 | |
Cash flows from operating activities: | |
| | | |
| | |
Net profit(loss) | |
| (9,494,263 | ) | |
| (6,961,318 | ) |
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash used by operating activities: | |
| | | |
| | |
Compensatory common, preferred stock and warrant issuances | |
| 3,496,150 | | |
| 3,441,699 | |
Interest imputed | |
| 3,409 | | |
| 13,261 | |
Interest expense recognized on issuance and through accretion of discount on
debt | |
| 72,890 | | |
| 7,810 | |
Change in fair value of derivatives | |
| 4,012,010 | | |
| 3,950,096 | |
Change in fair value of rescission liability | |
| (339,976 | ) | |
| (1,877,808 | ) |
(Gain) Loss on extinguishment of debt | |
| 441,959 | | |
| (104,669 | ) |
(Gain) Loss on legal settlement | |
| | | |
| – | |
Depreciation expense | |
| 9,032 | | |
| 6,359 | |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: | |
| | | |
| | |
Changes in accounts receivable | |
| 6,615 | | |
| (6,354 | ) |
Changes in related party receivable | |
| – | | |
| | |
Changes in inventory | |
| (198,268 | ) | |
| 48,822 | |
Changes in pre-paid assets | |
| (9,500 | ) | |
| 58,089 | |
Changes in related party accounts payable | |
| – | | |
| (244,945 | ) |
Changes in accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
|
603,200 |
|
|
|
479,488 |
|
Net cash used by operating activities | |
| (1,396,742 | ) | |
| (1,189,470 | ) |
Cash flows from investing activities: | |
| | | |
| | |
Acquisition of equipment | |
| (7,993 | ) | |
| (13,807 | ) |
Net cash used in investing activities | |
| (7,993 | ) | |
| (13,807 | ) |
Cash flows from financing activities: | |
| | | |
| | |
Proceeds from note payable | |
| 263,999 | | |
| – | |
Principal payments on debt | |
| (140,003 | ) | |
| (101,400 | ) |
Stock purchases | |
| (17,000 | ) | |
| (14,000 | ) |
Proceeds from sale of common stock | |
| 1,269,500 | | |
| 1,368,450 | |
Net cash provided by financing activities | |
| 1,376,496 | | |
| 1,253,050 | |
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | |
| (28,239 | ) | |
| 49,773 | |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year | |
| 60,612 | | |
| 10,839 | |
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year | |
| 32,373 | | |
| 60,612 | |
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of the financial statements
SAVI CORP
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
For the Years Ended December 31, 2014 and 2013
1. |
Organization and Significant Accounting Policies |
SaviCorp (the "Company")
is a Nevada Corporation that has acquired rights to "blow-by gas and crankcase engine emission reduction technology"
which it intends to develop and market on a commercial basis. The technology is a relatively simple gasoline and diesel engine
emission reduction device that the Company intends to sell to its customers for effective and efficient emission reduction and
engine efficiency for implementation in both new and presently operating automobiles. The Company is considered a development stage
enterprise because it currently has no significant operations, has not yet generated revenue from new business activities and is
devoting substantially all of its efforts to business planning and the search for sources of capital to fund its efforts.
The Company was originally incorporated
as Energy Resource Management, Inc. on August 13, 2002 and subsequently adopted name changes to Redwood Energy Group, Inc. and
Savi Media Group, Inc., upon completion of a recapitalization on August 26, 2002. The re-capitalization occurred when the Company
acquired the non-operating public shell of Gene-Cell, Inc. Gene-Cell Inc. had no significant assets or operations at the date of
acquisition and the Company assumed all liabilities that remained from its prior discontinued operation as a biopharmaceutical
research company. The historical financial statements presented herein are those of Savi Media Group, Inc. and its predecessors,
Redwood Energy Group, Inc. and Energy Resource Management, Inc.
The non-operating public shell
used to recapitalize the Company was originally incorporated as Becniel in 1986 and subsequently adopted name changes to Tzaar
Corporation, Gene-Cell, Inc., Redwood Energy Group, Inc., Redwood Entertainment Group, Inc., Savi Media Group, Inc., and finally
its current name SaviCorp.
Significant Estimates
The preparation of financial
statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America 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 dates of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the periods. Actual results could
differ from estimates making it reasonably possible that a change in the estimates could occur in the near term.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Company considers all highly
liquid short-term investments with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased, to be cash equivalents. The Company
had cash equivalents of $60,612 as of December 31, 2013 and $32,373 as of December 31, 2014.
Concentration of Credit
Risk
Cash and cash equivalents are
the primary financial instruments that subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk. The Company maintains its cash deposits
with major financial institutions selected based upon management’s assessment of the financial stability. Balances periodically
exceed the $100,000 federal depository insurance limit; however, the Company has not experienced any losses on deposits.
Inventory
Inventories are stated at the
lower of cost, computed using the first-in, first-out method, or market. If the cost of the inventories exceeds their market value,
provisions are made currently for the difference between the cost and the market value.
Furniture and Equipment
Furniture and equipment is recorded
at cost. The cost and related accumulated depreciation of assets sold, retired or otherwise disposed of are removed from the respective
accounts, and any resulting gains or losses are included in the results of operations. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line
method over the estimated useful lives of the related assets. Repairs and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred.
Income Taxes
The Company uses the liability
method of accounting for income taxes. Under this method, deferred income taxes are recorded to reflect the tax consequences on
future years of temporary differences between the tax basis of assets and liabilities and their financial amounts at year-end.
The Company provides a valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets to their net realizable value.
Stock-Based Compensation
The
Company adopted FASB guidance on stock based compensation on January 1, 2006. Under FASB ASC 718-10-30-2, all share-based payments
to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values.
Pro forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. Stock and stock options issued for services and compensation totaled $3,441,699
and $3,496,150 for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014, respectively.
Valuation of Derivatives
The Company evaluates its convertible
instruments, options, warrants or other contracts to determine if those contracts or embedded components of those contracts qualify
as derivatives to be separately accounted for under ASC Topic 815, “Derivatives and Hedging.” The result of this accounting
treatment is that the fair value of the derivative is marked-to-market each balance sheet date and recorded as a liability. In
the event that the fair value is recorded as a liability, the change in fair value is recorded in the statement of operations as
other income (expense). Upon conversion or exercise of a derivative instrument, the instrument is marked to fair value at the conversion
date and then that fair value is reclassified to equity. Equity instruments that are initially classified as equity that become
subject to reclassification under ASC Topic 815 are reclassified to liabilities at the fair value of the instrument on the reclassification
date. We analyzed the derivative financial instruments (the Convertible Notes), in accordance with ASC 815. The objective is to
provide guidance for determining whether an equity-linked financial instrument is indexed to an entity’s own stock. This
determination is needed for a scope exception which would enable a derivative instrument to be accounted for under the accrual
method. The classification of a non-derivative instrument that falls within the scope of ASC 815-40-05 “Accounting for Derivative
Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own Stock” also hinges on whether the instrument
is indexed to an entity’s own stock. A non-derivative instrument that is not indexed to an entity’s own stock cannot
be classified as equity and must be accounted for as a liability. There is a two-step approach in determining whether an instrument
or embedded feature is indexed to an entity’s own stock. First, the instrument's contingent exercise provisions, if any,
must be evaluated, followed by an evaluation of the instrument's settlement provisions. The Company utilized multinomial lattice
models that value the derivative liability within the notes based on a probability weighted discounted cash flow model. The Company
utilized the fair value standard set forth by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, defined as the amount at which the assets
(or liability) could be bought (or incurred) or sold (or settled) in a current transaction between willing parties, that is, other
than in a forced or liquidation sale.
The derivative liabilities result
in a reduction of the initial carrying amount (as unamortized discount) of the Convertible Notes. This derivative liability is
marked-to-market each quarter with the change in fair value recorded in the income statement. Unamortized discount is amortized
to interest expense using the effective interest method over the life of the Convertible Note. If the Note is converted or the
warrants are exercised, the derivative liability is released and recorded as additional paid in capital.
Profit/Loss Per Share
Basic and diluted net profit
or loss per share is computed on the basis of the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during each period.
See Note 11 for a discussion of potentially dilutive instruments.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The Company includes fair value
information in the notes to financial statements when the fair value of its financial instruments is different from the book value.
When the book value approximates fair value, no additional disclosure is made.
New Accounting Pronouncements
Reporting of Amounts
Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
In February 2013, the Financial
Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an accounting standards update which adds new disclosure requirements for
items reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income. The update requires entities to disclose additional information
about reclassification adjustments, including changes in accumulated other comprehensive income balances by component and significant
items reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income. The update was effective for the Company in the first quarter
of 2013. The update primarily impacted our disclosures and did not have a material impact on our financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
Presentation of an Unrecognized
Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists
In July 2013, the FASB issued
an accounting standards update which requires an entity to present an unrecognized tax benefit, or portion thereof, in the statement
of financial position as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward or a tax credit carryforward,
with certain exceptions related to availability. The update was effective in the first quarter of 2014. The update did not have
a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Accounting for Share-Based
Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period
In June 2014, the FASB issued
an accounting standard which provides new guidance that requires share-based compensation to meet a specific performance target
to be achieved in order for employees to become eligible to vest in the awards and that could be achieved after an employee completes
the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. As such, the performance target should not be reflected in
estimating the grant-date fair value of the award. Compensation costs should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable
that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which
the requisite service has already been rendered. If the performance target becomes probable of being achieved before the end of
the requisite service period, the remaining unrecognized compensation cost should be recognized prospectively over the remaining
requisite service period. The total amount of compensation cost recognized during and after the requisite service period should
reflect the number of awards that are expected to vest and should be adjusted to reflect those awards that ultimately vest. The
requisite service period ends when the employee can cease rendering service and still be eligible to vest in the award if the performance
target is achieved. This new guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods within those years beginning after December
15, 2015. Early adoption is permitted. Entities may apply the amendments in this Update either (a) prospectively to all awards
granted or modified after the effective date or (b) retrospectively to all awards with performance targets that are outstanding
as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements and to all new or modified awards thereafter.
The adoption of ASU 2014-12 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
Pushdown Accounting
In November 2014, the FASB issued
guidance to provide an acquired entity with an option to apply pushdown accounting in its separate financial statements upon occurrence
of an event in which an acquirer obtains control of the acquired entity. After the effective date, an acquired entity can
make an election to apply the guidance to future change-in-control events or to its most recent change-in-control event. However,
if the financial statements for the period in which the most recent change-in-control event occurred already have been issued or
made available to be issued, the application of this guidance would be a change in accounting principle. The amendments in this
Update are effective on November 18, 2014. The adoption of ASU 2014-17 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial
position or results of operations.
We have adopted recently issued
accounting pronouncements and have determined that they have no material effect on our financial position, results of operations,
or cash flow. We do not expect any recently issued but not yet adopted accounting pronouncements to have a material
effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flow.
2. |
Going Concern Considerations |
The accompanying financial statements
have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. In 2014, the Company had limited resources. At December
31, 2014, the Company is in a negative working capital position of $14,242,023 and has a stockholders' deficit of $14,220,829.
Additionally, as of December 31, 2014 the Company faced substantial challenges to future success as follows:
|
· |
The Company is delinquent on critical liabilities such as payments to key consultants. |
| · | The Company does not generate sufficient revenue to cover its expenses. |
| · | The Company does not have committed funding to cover its cash flow deficits. |
Such matters raise substantial
doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern. These financial statements do not include any adjustment that
might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
The goals of the Company will
require a significant amount of capital and there can be no assurances that the Company will be able to raise adequate short-term
capital to sustain its current operations, or that the Company can raise adequate long-term capital from private placement of its
common or preferred stock or private debt to emerge from its current status. There can also be no assurances that the Company will
ever attain profitability. The Company's long-term viability as a going concern is dependent upon certain key factors, including:
|
· |
The Company's ability to obtain adequate sources of funding to sustain it during its growth stage. |
|
· |
The ability of the Company to successfully produce and market its gasoline and diesel engine emission reduction device in a manner that will allow it to ultimately achieve adequate profitability and positive cash flows to sustain its operations. |
In order to address its ability
to continue as a going concern, implement its business plan and fulfill commitments made in connection with its agreement for acquisition
of patent rights, the Company hopes to raise additional capital from sale of its common and preferred stock. Sources of funding
may not be available on terms that are acceptable to the Company and its stockholders, or may include terms that will result in
substantial dilution to existing stockholders.
3. |
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities |
Accounts Payable and Accrued
Liabilities at December 31, 2014 and 2013, consisted of the following:
|
|
2014 |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade accounts payable |
|
$ |
1,110,576 |
|
|
$ |
838,701 |
|
Accrued wages payable |
|
|
1,541,309 |
|
|
|
1,289,565 |
|
Accrued interest expense |
|
|
324,913 |
|
|
|
259,793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,976,798 |
|
|
$ |
2,388,059 |
|
4. |
Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities – Related Party |
The $15,000 amount due at December
31, 2013 and December 31, 2014 consist of $10,000 to Serge Monros and $5,000 to Greg Sweeney for payments made on behalf of the
Company related to the Herrera Settlement.
5. |
Accounts Payable Assumed in Recapitalization |
Accounts payable assumed in
recapitalization, represents the liabilities of the public shell, at the time, Gene-Cell, Inc. that the Company assumed as part
of the recapitalization. This balance is comprised of liabilities for legal fees and trade payables incurred by Gene-Cell, Inc.
(See Note 1).
The Company received a letter
dated June 7, 2013 with a Civil Complaint titled Arnold Lamarr Weese, et al v. SaviCorp filed in the Northern District of West
Virginia. In addition to SaviCorp, Serge Monros and Craig Waldrop are being sued individually. Settlement discussions failed and
Plaintiff's counsel began service of Process. The Company and Mr. Monros have hired Shustak and Partners to defend the claim. The
defendants sued for breach of contract, fraud, vicarious liability, and unlawful sale by an unregistered broker. The lawsuit attempted
to hold the Company and Mr. Monros responsible for alleged improprieties of Waldrop. The Company finalized a negotiated settlement
and received court approval on April 7, 2015. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company has recorded a $1,101,179 liability
based on the settlement agreement. This consists of $100,000 cash payment for legal fees paid over a period of five months and
net common shares to be issued of 296,050,421 valued at $1,001,179. The lawsuit has been settled and dismissed.
The Company received a letter
from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Los Angeles Regional Office, dated May 9, 2011. The letter informed us that the SEC
had entered into a “formal order of investigation” into “Savi Media Group, Inc.” The letter included a
“Subpoena DucesTecum,” meaning the Company was given a prescribed period of time to produce all requested documents
and information contained in the subpoena. An index of the source of all such produced information and an authentication declaration
were also to be supplied. The stated purpose of the investigation is a fact-finding inquiry to assist the SEC staff in determining
if the Company has violated federal securities laws. The SEC states there is no implication of negativity or guilt at this stage
of the investigation.
The Company initially hired
the Los Angeles law firm of Troy Gould to represent us in the matter of this investigation. As of the date of this filing, the
Company believes it has provided all requested material to the SEC. Updates on the investigation will be supplied by supplemental
filings hereto.
Status of prior private investments;
$0 in 2007 (although HDV sold $13,000 of its shares), $0 in 2008 (although HDV sold $445,750 of its shares), $0 in 2009 (although
HDV sold $448,000 of its shares), $910,742 in 2010, $1,827,543 in 2011, and $629,500 in the first three quarters of 2012. There
is concern that these private placement securities sales were not made in compliance with applicable law (lack of material disclosure
and/or failure to file securities sales notices as required by federal law) and the Company may need to offer rescission rights
to the investors.
In 2006, the Company issued
shares for services valued at $611,768. There were issued shares for services valued at $1,416,060 in 2007; shares for services
valued at $14,625 in 2008, shares for services valued at $380,500 in 2009, shares for services valued at $236,920 in 2010, shares
for services valued at $3,370,273 in 2011, and shares for services valued at $3,165,039 during the first 3 quarters of 2012. We
have no plans to offer rescission for these share issuances.
We offered rescission to many
of the 2011 investors in late 2011 (“2011 rescission offer”). The legal sustainability of these rescission offers is
also being looked at by Counsel. The results of our rescission offers, in terms of rescission offers accepted by shareholders,
were very encouraging. We had five rescissions offers accepted and refunded $14,000 plus interest.
Generally, we believe we have
good relationships with our shareholders. Our plan is to offer rescission to most shareholders obtaining privately offered shares
from us since January 1, 2007 through 2011. The Company has pledged to use our best efforts, in good faith, to honor any accepted
rescission offer. However, there is no assurance that rescission offer acceptances will not have a material effect on our finances
or that we will be able to re-pay those electing to rescind in a complete and timely manner. As of the date hereof, the Company
has postponed their plans to offer rescission to earlier purchasing shareholders, deeming it advisable to wait until the common
stock price increases and they have more operating cash available to pay for the cost of undertaking this endeavor. The Company
has booked a liability to account for this rescission liability and marks the liability to market on a quarterly basis. The rescission
liability as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 is $444,833, and $784,809 respectively.
In connection with the sale
of debt or equity instruments, the Company may sell options or warrants to purchase our common stock. In certain circumstances,
these options or warrants may be classified as derivative liabilities, rather than as equity. Additionally, the debt or equity
instruments may contain embedded derivative instruments, such as embedded derivative features which in certain circumstances may
be required to be bifurcated from the associated host instrument and accounted for separately as a derivative instrument liability.
The Company's derivative instrument
liabilities are re-valued at the end of each reporting period, with changes in the fair value of the derivative liability recorded
as charges or credits to income in the period in which the changes occur. For options, warrants and bifurcated embedded derivative
features that are accounted for as derivative instrument liabilities, the Company estimates fair value using either quoted market
prices of financial instruments with similar characteristics or other valuation techniques. The valuation techniques require assumptions
related to the remaining term of the instruments and risk-free rates of return, our current common stock price and expected dividend
yield, and the expected volatility of our common stock price over the life of the option.
The following table summarizes
the convertible debt and warrant liabilities derivative activity for the period December 31, 2012 to December 31, 2014:
Description | |
Convertible Notes | | |
Warrant Liabilities | | |
Total | |
Fair value at December 31, 2012 | |
$ | 1,198,628 | | |
$ | 321,680 | | |
$ | 1,520,308 | |
Change due to Exercise/Conversion | |
| (238,869 | ) | |
| – | | |
| (238,869 | ) |
Change in Fair Value | |
| 2,889,164 | | |
| 1,060,932 | | |
| 3,950,096 | |
Fair value at December 31, 2013 | |
$ | 3,848,923 | | |
$ | 1,382,612 | | |
$ | 5,231,535 | |
Change due to Issuance | |
| 79,623 | | |
| 265,489 | | |
| 345,112 | |
Change due to Exercise/Conversion | |
| (385,035 | ) | |
| (164,561 | ) | |
| (549,596 | ) |
Change in Fair Value | |
| 5,244,743 | | |
| (1,232,733 | ) | |
| 4,012,010 | |
Fair value at December 31, 2014 | |
$ | 8,788,254 | | |
$ | 250,807 | | |
$ | 9,039,061 | |
For the year ended December
31, 2014, net derivative loss was $4,012,010. For the year ended December 31, 2013, net derivative loss was $3,950,096.
The lattice methodology was
used to value the convertible notes and warrants issued, with the following assumptions.
Assumptions | |
2014 | |
2013 |
Dividend yield | |
0.00% | |
0.00% |
Risk-free rate for term | |
0.25%-0.67% | |
.10%-0.38% |
Volatility | |
151% | |
193% |
Maturity dates | |
0.99-2.41 years | |
0.57-2.41 years |
Stock Price | |
0.0038 | |
0.0026 |
The Cornell warrants issued
on July 24, 2011 (initial 25,000,000 warrants with an exercise price of $0.0119 and an expiration date of July 20, 2014 reset to
991,666,667 warrants at $0.0003) had a term remaining of 0.56 years at December 31, 2013 and expired partially exercised by December
31, 2014. The HDV and DSE convertible notes matured on April 1, 2010 and are in default as of December 31, 2013 and December 31,
2014. The Pierce convertible note converted into series B Preferred shares as of December 20, 2014.
DS Enterprises:
On December 15, 2009, the Company
converted accounts payable due to DS Enterprises, Inc. into a convertible promissory note. The note bears interest at 8%, matured
on April 15, 2010, and converts into common shares at the conversion rate of $0.003 (reset to $0.000228) subject to anti-dilution
protection. This note was in default as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2014 due to lack of payment upon maturity.
Gross accounts payable converted | |
$ | 526,094 | |
Plus accrued interest | |
| 71,346 | |
Net due | |
$ | 597,440 | |
Following is an analysis of
convertible debt due DS Enterprises at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:
| |
2014 | | |
2013 | |
| |
| | |
| |
Contractual balance, in default | |
$ | 511,440 | | |
$ | 511,440 | |
Less unamortized discount | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Convertible debt | |
$ | 511,440 | | |
$ | 511,440 | |
This note is considered a derivative
instrument due to the anti-dilution protection related to the conversion feature. The Company recorded a derivative liability upon
issuance which resulted in the note discount ($597,440 at issuance) and a loss on modification recorded as interest expense in
the amount of $344,157. The Company also recorded $79,945 in interest expense upon the conversion of accounts payable to notes
payable.
During 2013, $15,000 of principal
was converted to 50,000,000 shares of common stock.
His Divine Vehicle - Related
Party:
On December 15, 2009, the Company
converted $204,302 of accounts payable due to His Divine Vehicle, Inc. into a convertible promissory note. The note bears interest
at 8%, matured on April 15, 2010, and converts into common shares at the conversion rate of $0.003 (reset to $0.000228) subject
to anti-dilution protection. This note was in default as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2014 due to lack of payment upon
maturity.
Following is an analysis of
convertible debt - related party at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:
| |
2014 | | |
2013 | |
| |
| | |
| |
Contractual balance, in default | |
$ | 204,302 | | |
$ | 204,302 | |
Less unamortized discount | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Convertible debt | |
$ | 204,302 | | |
$ | 204,302 | |
This note is considered a derivative
instrument due to the anti-dilution protection related to the conversion feature. The Company recorded a derivative liability upon
issuance which resulted in the note discount ($204,302 at issuance) and a loss on modification recorded as interest expense in
the amount of $131,967 in 2009.
Steve Botkin:
On July 17, 2012, the Company
entered into a convertible promissory note with Steve Botkin. The note bears interest at 12%, matures on July 17, 2015 and converts
into common shares at the conversion rate of 80% of market. On August 9, 2012, the Company entered into a convertible promissory
note with Steve Botkin. The note bears interest at 12%, matures on August 9, 2015 and converts into common shares at the conversion
rate of 80% of market.
Following is an analysis of
convertible debt due Steve Botkin at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:
| |
2014 | | |
2013 | |
| |
| | |
| |
Contractual balance | |
$ | – | | |
$ | 32,600 | |
Less unamortized discount | |
| – | | |
| – | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Convertible debt | |
$ | – | | |
$ | 32,600 | |
This note is considered a derivative
instrument due to the variable conversion feature. The Company recorded a derivative liability upon issuance which resulted in
the note discount ($71,024 at issuance). A settlement agreement was reached with Botkin on April 8, 2013. The Company made a cash
payment of $36,400, received 27,000,000 shares of common stock from Botkin, issued a note payable to Botkin for $67,600. In addition,
Botkin waived $9,251 in accrued interest. The Company booked a $137,325 gain on settlement of this debt based on the common stock
price and the fair value of the derivative liability on the date of settlement.
Lamar Pierce:
On July 10, 2014, the Company
entered into a $15,000 convertible promissory note with Lamar Pierce. The note bears interest of $2,500 for the first month and
12% per thirty days thereafter, matures on August 10, 2014 and converts into common shares at the rate of $0.0003.
This note is considered a tainted
derivative instrument due to the fact that the company does not have sufficient authorized unissued shares to share settle the
debt. The Company recorded a derivative liability upon issuance which resulted in the note discount ($15,000 at issuance). The
Holder converted the note into 9,306 shares of series B preferred shares on December 20, 2014.
In connection with the Herrera
Settlement Agreement, the Company issued promissory notes to former officers who made payments on behalf of the company. The Notes
were issued on November 15, 2008, bear interest of 12% and are due in one year from the date of issuance. The total due as of December
31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 includes $10,778 due to former officers who made payments or waived fees as part of the Herrera
Settlement Agreement and the $15,000 due to Mr. Monros and Mr. Sweeney recorded as related party debt to Mr. Monros and Mr. Sweeney.
On March 25, 2014, the Company
issued Chul Chung a promissory note in exchange for $20,000. The note matured on September 25, 2014 and bears interest at 12% per
year. The Company issued 15,000 series A preferred shares as consideration for the loan. The shares were valued at $4,350 and are
a debt discount amortized over the life of the note. The note is currently in default.
On April 3, 2014, the Company
issued John Fromberg a promissory note in exchange for $25,000. The note accrues interest at 22.9% per year. The note was paid
in full during the third quarter of 2014.
On June 12, 2014, the Company
issued Carole Klove a promissory note in exchange for $20,000. The note matures on June 12, 2015 and bears interest of 12% per
year.
On September 4, 2014, the Company
issued David Blanchard a promissory note in exchange for $50,000. The note matures on March 4, 2015 and bears interest at 15% per
year. The Company issued 200,000 series A preferred shares as consideration for the loan. The shares issued were valued at $56,000
and were considered a debt discount. The Company booked $6,000 in interest expense upon origination and a $50,000 debt discount
which was amortized over the life of the note. The note was converted to series B preferred stock on November 18, 2014. The Company
booked a loss on conversion of $441,959.
On July 17, 2014, the Company
issued Cash Call, Inc. a promissory note in the amount of $35,000. The note matures on August 1, 2024 and bears interest at 94%
per year. The note included a $3,500 origination fee. The note was paid in full on October 20, 2014.
On November 14, 2014, the Company
issued Cash Call, Inc. a promissory note in the amount of $50,000. The note matures on December 1, 2024 and bears interest at
94% per year. The note included a $2,500 origination fee.
The Company files a U.S. Federal
income tax return. The components of the net loss before income tax benefit for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 are
as follows:
|
|
2014 |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income/(loss) before income taxes |
|
$ |
(9,494,263 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,961,318 |
) |
The components of the Company's deferred tax assets
at December 31, 2014 and 2013 are as follows:
|
|
2014 |
|
|
2013 |
|
Deferred tax assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss carry-forwards |
|
$ |
4,854,603 |
|
|
$ |
4,239,943 |
|
Valuation allowance |
|
|
(4,854,603 |
) |
|
|
(4,239,943 |
) |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
– |
|
At December 31, 2014, the Company
had generated US net operating loss carry-forwards of approximately $4,854,603 which will expire in various years between 2015
and 2034. The benefit from utilization of net operating loss carry forwards incurred prior to December 30, 2004 is significantly
limited in connection with a change in control of the Company. Such benefit could be subject to further limitations if significant
future ownership changes occur in the Company. The Company believes that a significant portion of its unused net operating loss
carry forwards will never be utilized due to expiration or limitations on use due to ownership changes.
At December 31, 2014 and December
31, 2013, the Company has no uncertain tax positions.
12. |
Commitments and Contingencies |
Legal Proceedings
From time to time, we may become
party to litigation or other legal proceedings that we consider to be a part of the ordinary course of our business.
The Company received a letter
from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Los Angeles Regional Office, dated May 9, 2011. The letter informed us that the SEC
had entered into a “formal order of investigation” into “Savi Media Group, Inc.” The letter included a
“Subpoena DucesTecum,” meaning the Company was given a prescribed period of time to produce all requested documents
and information contained in the subpoena. An index of the source of all such produced information and an authentication declaration
were also to be supplied. The stated purpose of the investigation is a fact-finding inquiry to assist the SEC staff in determining
if the Company has violated federal securities laws. The SEC states there is no implication of negativity or guilt at this stage
of the investigation.
The Company initially hired
the Los Angeles law firm of Troy Gould to represent us in the matter of this investigation. As of the date of this filing, the
Company believes it has provided all requested material to the SEC. Updates on the investigation will be supplied by supplemental
filings hereto.
Status of prior private investments;
$0 in 2007 (although HDV sold $13,000 of its shares), $0 in 2008 (although HDV sold $445,750 of its shares), $0 in 2009 (although
HDV sold $448,000 of its shares), $910,742 in 2010, $1,827,543 in 2011, and $629,500 in the first three quarters of 2012. There
is concern that these private placement securities sales were not made in compliance with applicable law (lack of material disclosure
and/or failure to file securities sales notices as required by federal law) and the Company may need to offer rescission rights
to the investors.
In 2006, the Company issued
shares for services valued at $611,768. There were issued shares for services valued at $1,416,060 in 2007; shares for services
valued at $14,625 in 2008, shares for services valued at $380,500 in 2009, shares for services valued at $236,920 in 2010, shares
for services valued at $3,370,273 in 2011, and shares for services valued at $3,165,039 during the first 3 quarters of 2012. We
have no plans to offer rescission for these share issuances.
We offered rescission to many
of the 2011 investors in late 2011 (“2011 rescission offer”). The legal sustainability of these rescission offers is
also being looked at by Counsel. The results of our rescission offers, in terms of rescission offers accepted by shareholders,
were very encouraging. We had five rescissions offers accepted and refunded $14,000 plus interest.
Generally, we believe we have
good relationships with our shareholders. Our plan is to offer rescission to most shareholders obtaining privately offered shares
from us since January 1, 2007 through 2011. The Company has pledged to use our best efforts, in good faith, to honor any accepted
rescission offer. However, there is no assurance that rescission offer acceptances will not have a material effect on our finances
or that we will be able to re-pay those electing to rescind in a complete and timely manner. As of the date hereof, the Company
has postponed their plans to offer rescission to earlier purchasing shareholders, deeming it advisable to wait until the common
stock price increases and they have more operating cash available to pay for the cost of undertaking this endeavor. The Company
has booked a liability to account for this rescission liability and marks the liability to market on a quarterly basis. The rescission
liability as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 is $444,833 and $784,809 respectively.
The Company received a letter
dated June 7, 2013 with a Civil Complaint titled Arnold Lamarr Weese, et al v. SaviCorp filed in the Northern District of West
Virginia. In addition to SaviCorp, Serge Monros and Craig Waldrop are being sued individually. Settlement discussions failed and
Plaintiff's counsel began service of Process. The Company and Mr. Monros have hired Shustak and Partners to defend the claim. The
defendants sued for breach of contract, fraud, vicarious liability, and unlawful sale by an unregistered broker. The lawsuit attempted
to hold the Company and Mr. Monros responsible for alleged improprieties of Waldrop. The Company finalized a negotiated settlement
and received court approval on April 7, 2015. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company has recorded a $1,101,179 and $1,101,179
liability respectively based on the settlement agreement. This consists of $100,000 cash payment for legal fees paid over a period
of five months and net common shares to be issued of 296,050,421 valued at $1,001,179. The lawsuit has been settled and dismissed.
Lease Commitments
The Company is currently leasing
office space and adjacent research and development space on an annual basis from CEE, LLC, for $110,000 per year.
Common Stock
Following is a description of
transactions affecting common stock for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014.
Year Ended December 31, 2013
In January 2013, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 50,625,000 common shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of
$20,500.
In February 2013, the Board
of Directors authorized the issuance of 92,500,000 common shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $43,000.
In March 2013, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 48,127,694 common shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of
$40,100.
In April 2013, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 340,000,000 common shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of
$322,500.
In April 2013, 27,000,000 common
shares were returned in the Botkin Settlement. These shares were valued based on the common stock price on the date of settlement
totaling $116,100.
In May 2013, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 36,400,000 common shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $18,500.
In May 2013, 14,843,750 common
shares were issued in the Bingham settlement. These shares were valued based on the common stock price on the date of settlement.
The Company recorded a loss on settlement of $32,656.
In June 2013, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 50,000,000 common shares to accredited investors in exchange for $15,000 of convertible debt and the
related $166,708 derivative liability. The Company recorded no gain or loss on the transaction.
Throughout the year, the Board
of Directors also authorized the issuance of 749,900,000 common shares for services rendered by independent contractors. The issuances
were valued based on the market value of the stock totaling 1,231,300.
Throughout the year, 300,000
Preferred A shares were converted to 30,000,000 common shares. There was no gain or loss on this transaction.
Throughout the year, 3,500,000
common shares were bought back for $14,000.
Throughout the year, 246,000,000
common shares were loaned to the company and 78,414,606 common shares were issued to repay stock payable.
Year Ended December 31, 2014
In March 2014, 71,433,289 shares
were issued upon the cashless exercise of 80,362,450 warrants.
Throughout the year, the Board
of Directors also authorized the issuance of 500,000 common shares for services rendered by independent contractors. These issuances
were valued based on the market value of the stock totaling $1,050.
Throughout the year, 70,000,000
common shares were converted to 700,000 Preferred A shares.
Throughout the year, 300,000
Preferred C shares were converted to 30,000,000 common shares. There was no gain or loss on this transaction.
Throughout the year, 20,000,000
common shares were bought back for $17,000.
Stock Options
There are no stock options outstanding
as of December 31, 2013 or December 31, 2014.
Incentive Stock Plan
During the year ended December
31, 2005 the 2005 Incentive Stock Plan was adopted by the Company’s Board of Directors and approved by the stockholders in
August 2005. The 2005 Plan provides for the issuance of up to 25,000,000 shares and/or options. The primary purpose of the 2005
Incentive Stock Plan is to attract and retain the best available personnel for us in order to promote the success of our business
and to facilitate the ownership of our stock by employees. The 2005 Incentive Stock Plan is administered by our Board of Directors.
Under the 2005 Incentive Stock Plan, key employees, officers, directors and consultants are entitled to receive awards. The 2005
Incentive Stock Plan permits the granting of incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options and shares of common stock with
the purchase price, vesting and expiration terms set by the Board of Directors. No options have been issued under the Plan as of
December 31, 2014.
Stock Warrants
In connection with the a repayment
agreement, we agreed to issue to YA Global warrants to purchase an aggregate of 25,000,000 shares of common stock, exercisable
for a period of three years at an exercise price of $0.0119. The warrants issued to YA Global provide for certain anti-dilution
protection in the event that (i) we issue shares of our common stock for a purchase price below the exercise price of the various
warrants or in the event we issue options or other convertible securities with a conversion price below the exercise price, (ii)
we effectuate a stock split, stock dividend or other form of recapitalization, or (iii) we declare a dividend payment to the holders
of our common stock. The exercise price was reset on August 8, 2011 to $0.0005 and the number of warrants increased to 595,000,000.
The exercise price was reset on January 30, 2013 to $0.0003 and the number of warrants increased to 991,666,667. The holder exercised
80,362,450 warrants on a cashless basis and were issued 71,433,289 shares of common stock. The remaining warrants expired on July
24, 2014.
The Company issued 5,000,000
warrants in May 2010 to a law firm for services rendered valued at $137,000 using a Black-Scholes-Merton model using the following
inputs (0.0% dividend yield, stock price of $0.0274, risk-free rate of 2.43%, volatility of 417%, 5 year remaining term). The warrants
expire in five years with an exercise price of $0.01.
The Company issued 666,667 warrants
with an exercise price of $0.015 in April 2012 to a law firm for services rendered valued at $770 using a lattice model using the
following inputs (0.0% dividend yield, stock price of $0.009, risk-free rate of 0.53%, volatility of 139%, 2.5 year remaining term).
The warrants expired unexercised on October 4, 2014.
In May 2013 as part of the DynoGreen
Tech licensing agreement for the Middle East, the Company issued 400,000,000 warrants at an exercise price of $0.001 if exercised
within 30 days and an exercise price of $0.002 if exercised within 60 days. All these warrants were exercised within 30 days.
In December, 2014 as part of
a private placement, the Company issued 125,000,000 warrants to an investor at an exercise price of $0.0004. The warrants expire
on December 29, 2015. The warrants are a tainted derivative liability and were valued using a lattice model with the following
inputs (0.0% dividend yield, stock price of $0.0036, risk-free rate of 0.25%, volatility of 151%, 1 year term).
As of December 31, 2014 the
following warrants remain outstanding:
| | |
| | |
Remaining |
Number of | | |
Exercise | | |
Life |
Warrants | | |
Price | | |
Years |
| 5,000,000 | | |
| 0.0100 | | |
0.33 |
| 125,000,000 | | |
| 0.0004 | | |
0.99 |
| | | |
| | | |
|
| 130,000,000 | | |
$ | 0.0008 | | |
|
Preferred Stock
During the year ended December
31, 2005, the Company set preferences for its Series A, B and C preferred stock. The Company is authorized to issue 40,000,000
shares of preferred stock, $0.001 par value per share. At December 31, 2012 the Company had 5,953,233 shares of series A preferred
stock issued and outstanding and 4,409,609 shares of series C preferred stock issued and outstanding. The Company’s preferred
stock may be issued in series, and shall have such voting powers, full or limited, or no voting powers, and such designations,
preferences and relative participating, optional or other special rights, and qualifications, limitations or restrictions thereof,
as shall be stated and expressed in the resolution or resolutions providing for the issuance of such stock adopted from time to
time by the board of directors.
The Series A and Series C preferred
stock provides for conversion on the basis of 100 shares of common stock for each share of preferred stock converted, with conversion
at the option of the holder or mandatory conversion upon restructure of the common stock and holders of the series A preferred
stock vote their shares on an as-converted basis. Holders of the series A preferred stock participates on distribution and liquidation
on an equal basis with the holders of common stock.
The series B preferred stock
provides for conversion on the basis of 10,000 shares of common stock for each share of preferred stock converted, with conversion
at the option of the holder or mandatory conversion upon restructure of the common stock and holders of the series A preferred
stock vote their shares on an as-converted basis. Holders of the series B preferred stock participates on distribution and liquidation
on an equal basis with the holders of common stock.
Following is a description of
transactions affecting preferred stock for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2014.
Year Ended December 31, 2013
In January 2013, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 1,000,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $40,000.
In February 2013, the Board
of Directors authorized the issuance of 700,000 Preferred C shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $35,000.
In March 2013, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 200,000 Preferred C shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of
$20,000.
In May 2013, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 3,388,500 Preferred C shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $338,850.
In July 2013, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 200,000 Preferred C shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $10,000.
In August 2013, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 900,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of
$47,500.
In September 2013, the Board
of Directors authorized the issuance of 2,250,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $137,500.
In October 2013, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 2,100,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $110,000.
In November 2013, the Board
of Directors authorized the issuance of 3,200,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $185,000.
Throughout the year, 300,000
Preferred A shares were converted to 30,000,000 common shares. There was no gain or loss on this transaction.
Throughout the year, the Board
of Directors also authorized the issuance of 1,351,667 Preferred A shares and 60,000 Preferred C shares for services rendered by
independent contractors. These issuances were valued based on the market value of the stock totaling $709,717.
Throughout the year, 3,491,423
Preferred A shares and 202,412 Preferred C shares were loaned to the company.
Year Ended December 31, 2014
In January 2014, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 1,703,333 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $95,000.
In February 2014, the Board
of Directors authorized the issuance of 2,850,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $150,000.
In March 2014, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 200,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of
$10,000.
In April 2014, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 4,916,666 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $187,500.
In May 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 300,000 Preferred A shares and 6,250 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for
total proceeds of $40,000.
In June 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 6,667 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $1,000.
In July 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of 250,000 Preferred A shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of $25,000.
In August 2014, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 25,000 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds of
$100,000.
In September 2014, the Board
of Directors authorized the issuance of 1,975,000 Preferred A shares and 45,056 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited
investors for total proceeds of $305,000.
In October 2014, the Board of
Directors authorized the issuance of 100,000 Preferred A shares and 36,500 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited
investors for total proceeds of $175,000.
In November 2014, the Board
of Directors authorized the issuance of 25,000 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $100,000.
In December 2014, the Board
of Directors authorized the issuance of 22,040 Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for total proceeds
of $81,000.
Throughout the year, 70,000,000
common shares were converted to 700,000 Preferred A shares. There was no gain or loss on these transactions.
Throughout the year, 300,000
Preferred C shares were converted to 30,000,000 common shares. There was no gain or loss on these transactions.
Throughout the year, 215,000
Preferred A shares were issued to lenders as consideration for issuing debt to the Company.
Throughout the year, 19,806
Preferred B shares were issued to lenders upon conversion of $77,919 in debt, $1,452 in accrued interest and the related derivative
liability of $385,035. A loss of $441,959 was recorded on these transactions.
Throughout the year, the Board
of Directors also authorized the issuance of 1,700,000 Preferred A shares and 94,950 Preferred B shares for services rendered by
independent contractors. These issuances were valued based on the market value of the stock totaling $3,495,100.
Potentially Dilutive Equity
Instruments
An analysis of potentially dilutive
equity instruments at December 31, 2014
Series A Preferred Stock convertible to common stock on a 100 for 1 basis | |
| 2,788,014,300 | |
Series B Preferred Stock convertible to common stock on a 10,000 for 1 basis | |
| 2,746,020,000 | |
Series C Preferred Stock convertible to common stock on a 100 for 1 basis | |
| 845,569,700 | |
| |
| | |
Total | |
| 6,379,604,000 | |
Other Equity Transactions
Year Ended December 31, 2013
Interest was imputed on non-interest
bearing related party debt in the amount of $13,261 and credited to additional paid in capital.
Year Ended December 31, 2014
Interest was imputed on non-interest
bearing related party debt in the amount of $3,409 and credited to additional paid in capital.
14. |
Related Party Transactions |
The Company engaged in various
related party transactions involving the issuance of shares of the Company's common stock during the years ended December 31, 2014
and 2013.
During 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010
and 2011 His Divine Vehicle, Inc. ("HDV") incurred costs on behalf of the Company. At December 31, 2012, the Company
owed HDV $244,956 and Serge Monros $570,367 in accrued wages. At December 31, 2014, the Company owed HDV of $25,864 and owed Serge
Monros $929,249 in accrued wages.
HDV, an affiliate of Mr. Monros,
manufactures the “DynoValve” and “DynoValve Pro” products and then sells them to the Company for resale
pursuant to the Product Licensing Agreement entered into on November 15, 2008. As consideration for HDV entering into the Product
Licensing Agreement, the Company agreed to issue to Mr. Monros and HDV, if and when available, an aggregate of 500 Million shares
of Common Stock, 5 Million shares of Series A Preferred Stock and 5 Million shares of Series C Preferred Stock. HDV loaned 1,000,000
Preferred A shares to the Company in 2008. As additional consideration for the Licensing Agreement, HDV waived $332,786 owed to
it by the company and Mr. Monros waived $306,000 in accrued wages. The excess value of the shares issued (common and preferred)
over the debt waived was expensed to research and development. In July, 2011, the stock consideration paid for the licensing agreement
was modified to increase the common shares by 100,000,000, increase the Series A Preferred Stock by 1,500,000 and reduce the Series
C Preferred Stock by 2,500,000.
The Board of Directors authorized
the issuance of an aggregate of 300,000,000 common shares and 2,500,000 Preferred C shares in exchange for services rendered by
His Divine Vehicle. His Divine Vehicle subsequently loaned back the 300,000,000 common shares and the 2,500,000 Preferred C shares.
On December 15, 2009, the Company
converted $204,302 of accounts payable due to His Divine Vehicle, Inc. into a convertible promissory note. The note bears interest
at 8%, matured on April 15, 2010, and converts into common shares at the conversion rate of $0.003 (reset to $0.0003) subject to
anti-dilution protection. The note matured and is currently in default due to lack of payment at maturity.
In January, 2013, His Divine
Vehicle loaned 196,000,000 common shares, 3,491,423 Preferred A shares and 202,412 Preferred C shares to the Company.
In March, 2013, the Company
entered into a five (5) year Master Distribution Agreement with His Divine Vehicle to sell the DynoValve and DynoValve Pro in various
international territories. The consideration for the agreement was guaranteeing a minimum annual volume, payment for the DynoValves
acquired and a three percent (3%) royalty payment. The Company is currently in default on this agreement.
In 2013, we have made major
inroads in the Middle Eastern country of the United Arab Emirates and others. We have a 5 year licensing agreement with DynoGreen
Tech, LLC (“DGT”) that we entered into in 2013. Regarding our progress, our original commitment for 2,000 DynoValves
(sold at $250 each) equate to $500,000. In order for DGT to fulfill and maintain this 5 year licensing agreement, they are required
to purchase 500 additional DynoValves per quarter (an additional 2,000 DynoValves / $500,000 per year) for a total of $2,500,000
over a 5 year span. With the initial investment of $500,000, this totals $3,000,000 for their 5 year licensing agreement. We have
already delivered 2,000 of those DynoValves. The areas that are included in this agreement are UAE, Malaysia, India, and Africa.
DGT has not made any additional purchases since 2013 and thus has not met their minimum volume requirements for 2014 or the first
quarter of 2015.
As part of the license agreement,
DGT agreed to acquire 100,000,000 shares of common stock in SaviCorp for $100,000 and was provided options to acquire an additional
400,000,000 shares at $0.001 if exercised within 30 days, or $0.002 if exercised within 60 days. DGT exercised its options and
acquired an additional 400,000,000 common shares for $400,000. Due to these investments, DGT is considered a related party. In
addition, the stock purchase and stock options provided for in the licensing agreement were considered a sales discount. DynoValve
sales to DGT totaling $715,000 in 2013 were discounted in full due to these sales discounts.
In March, 2015, the Company
entered into a seven (7) year Master Distribution Agreement with DynoValve Mfg, LLC, the holder of the patents for the DynoValve
products and related IP. The agreement is an exclusive agreement for North America, China, South Korea and the Middle East and
a non-exclusive license worldwide. The consideration for the agreement was payment for products acquired and a three percent (3%)
royalty payment. The Company acquires its inventory from His Divine Vehicle and DynoValve Mfg, LLC. During the years ended December
31, 2014 and 2013, the Company acquired $232,594 and $378,930 from His Divine Vehicle.
15. |
Non-Cash Investing and Financing Transactions and Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information |
During the years ended December
31, 2014 and 2013, the Company engaged in various non-cash investing and financing activities as follows:
| |
2014 | | |
2013 | |
Settlement of Debt and Derivative Liabilities with common stock | |
$ | 464,495 | | |
$ | 181,708 | |
| |
| | | |
| | |
Derivative Discount | |
$ | 79,623 | | |
$ | – | |
Conversion of Preferred Stock into Common Stock | |
$ | (40,000 | ) | |
$ | 30,000 | |
Debt Discount | |
$ | 75,350 | | |
$ | – | |
Stock issued upon cashless exercise of warrants | |
$ | 164,561 | | |
$ | – | |
Warrants issued with stock sales | |
$ | 265,489 | | |
$ | – | |
Preferred Stock Loaned/Common Stock Issued for Stock Payable | |
$ | – | | |
$ | 171,279 | |
During the years ended December
31, 2014 and 2013, the Company made $11,713 and $0 in interest payments.
During the years ended December
31, 2014 and 2013, the Company made no income tax payments.
16. Fair Value of Financial Instruments.
The Company’s financial
instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, accounts payable, accrued liabilities and convertible debt. The estimated fair
value of cash, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate their carrying amounts due to the short-term nature of these
instruments.
The Company utilizes various
types of financing to fund its business needs, including convertible debt with warrants attached. The Company reviews its warrants
and conversion features of securities issued as to whether they are freestanding or contain an embedded derivative and, if so,
whether they are classified as a liability at each reporting period until the amount is settled and reclassified into equity with
changes in fair value recognized in current earnings. At December 31, 2013, the Company had convertible debt and warrants to purchase
common stock, the fair values of which are classified as a liability. Some of these units have embedded conversion features that
are treated as a discount on the notes. Such financial instruments are initially recorded at fair value and amortized to interest
expense over the life of the debt using the effective interest method.
Inputs used in the valuation
to derive fair value are classified based on a fair value hierarchy which distinguishes between assumptions based on market data
(observable inputs) and an entity’s own assumptions (unobservable inputs). The hierarchy consists of three levels:
Level one — Quoted market
prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities;
Level two — Inputs other
than level one inputs that are either directly or indirectly observable; and
Level three — Unobservable
inputs developed using estimates and assumptions, which are developed by the reporting entity and reflect those assumptions that
a market participant would use.
Determining which category an
asset or liability falls within the hierarchy requires significant judgment. The Company evaluates its hierarchy disclosures each
quarter. The Company’s derivative liability is measured at fair value on a recurring basis. The Company classifies the fair
value of these convertible notes and warrants derivative liability under level three. The Company’s settlement payable is
measured at fair value on a recurring basis based on the most recent settlement offer. The Company classifies the fair value of
the settlement payable under level three. The Company’s rescission liability is measured at fair value on a recurring basis
based on the most recent stock price. The Company classifies the fair value of the rescission liability under level one.
Based on ASC Topic 815 and related
guidance, the Company concluded the convertible notes and common stock purchase warrants are required to be accounted for as derivatives
as of the issue date due to a reset feature on the conversion/exercise price. At the date of issuance the convertible subordinated
financing, warrant derivative liabilities were measured at fair value using either quoted market prices of financial instruments
with similar characteristics or other valuation techniques. The Company records the fair value of these derivatives on its balance
sheet at fair value with changes in the values of these derivatives reflected in the consolidated statements of operations as “Gain
(loss) on derivative liabilities.” These derivative instruments are not designated as hedging instruments under ASC 815-10
and are disclosed on the balance sheet under Derivative Liabilities.
The following table presents
liabilities that are measured and recognized at fair value as of December 31, 2013 on a recurring and non-recurring basis:
Description | |
Level 1 | | |
Level 2 | | |
Level 3 | | |
Gains (Losses) | |
Derivatives | |
$ | – | | |
$ | – | | |
$ | 5,231,535 | | |
$ | (3,950,096 | ) |
Settlements Payable | |
| – | | |
| 1,101,179 | | |
| – | | |
| 479,073 | |
Rescission Liability | |
| – | | |
| 784,809 | | |
| – | | |
| 1,398,735 | |
Fair Value at December 31, 2013 | |
$ | – | | |
$ | 1,885,988 | | |
$ | 5,231,535 | | |
$ | (2,072,288 | ) |
The following table presents
liabilities that are measured and recognized at fair value as of December 31, 2014 on a recurring and non-recurring basis:
Description | |
Level 1 | | |
Level 2 | | |
Level 3 | | |
Gains (Losses) | |
Derivatives | |
$ | – | | |
$ | – | | |
$ | 9,039,061 | | |
$ | (4,012,010 | ) |
Settlements Payable | |
| – | | |
| 1,101,179 | | |
| – | | |
| – | |
Rescission Liability | |
| – | | |
| 444,833 | | |
| – | | |
| 339,976 | |
Fair Value at December 31, 2014 | |
$ | – | | |
$ | 1,546,012 | | |
$ | 9,039,061 | | |
$ | (3,672,034 | ) |
17. Subsequent Events.
Stock Issuances:
Since 2014, the Board of Directors
authorized the issuance of an aggregate of 172,214 shares of its Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors
for total proceeds of $695,000. In addition, the Board of Directors has authorized the issuance of an aggregate of 47,500 shares
of its Preferred B shares to accredited and non-accredited investors for services rendered valued at an aggregate of $1,800,500.
No sales commissions were paid in connection with these issuances and all investors reviewed or had access to all of the Company’s
filing pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Legal Proceedings:
The Company received a letter
from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Los Angeles Regional Office, dated May 9, 2011. The letter informed us that the SEC
had entered into a “formal order of investigation” into “Savi Media Group, Inc.” The letter included a
“Subpoena DucesTecum,” meaning the Company was given a prescribed period of time to produce all requested documents
and information contained in the subpoena. An index of the source of all such produced information and an authentication declaration
were also to be supplied. The stated purpose of the investigation is a fact-finding inquiry to assist the SEC staff in determining
if the Company has violated federal securities laws. The SEC states there is no implication of negativity or guilt at this stage
of the investigation.
We hired the Los Angeles law
firm of Troy Gould to represent us in the matter of this investigation. As of the date of this filing, we believe we have provided
all requested material to the SEC.
Status of prior private investments;
$0 in 2007 (although HDV sold $13,000 of its shares), $0 in 2008 (although HDV sold $445,750 of its shares), $0 in 2009 (although
HDV sold $448,000 of its shares), $910,742 in 2010, $1,827,543 in 2011. There is concern that these private placement securities
sales were not made in compliance with applicable law (lack of material disclosure and/or failure to file securities sales notices
as required by federal law) and the Company may need to offer rescission rights to the investors.
In 2006, the Company issued
shares for services valued at $611,768. There were issued shares for services valued at $1,416,060 in 2007; shares for services
valued at $14,625 in 2008, shares for services valued at $380,500 in 2009, shares for services valued at $236,920 in 2010, and
shares for services valued at $3,370,273 in 2011. We have no plans to offer rescission for these share issuances.
We offered rescission to many
of the 2011 investors in late 2011 (“2011 rescission offer”). The legal sustainability of these rescission offers is
also being looked at by Counsel. The results of our rescission offers, in terms of rescission offers accepted by shareholders,
were very encouraging. We had seven rescissions offers accepted and refunded $30,000 plus interest.
Generally, we believe we have
good relationships with our shareholders. Our plan is to offer rescission to most shareholders obtaining privately offered shares
from us since January 1, 2007 through 2011. The Company has pledged to use our best efforts, in good faith, to honor any accepted
rescission offer. However, there is no assurance that rescission offer acceptances will not have a material effect on our finances
or that we will be able to re-pay those electing to rescind in a complete and timely manner. As of the date hereof, the Company
has postponed their plans to offer rescission to earlier purchasing shareholders, deeming it advisable to wait until the common
stock price increases and they have more operating cash available to pay for the cost of undertaking this endeavor. The Company
has booked a liability to account for this rescission liability and marks the liability to market on a quarterly basis. The rescission
liability as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 is $444,833 and $784,809 respectively.
The Company received a letter
dated June 7, 2013 with a Civil Complaint titled Arnold Lamarr Weese, et al v. SaviCorp filed in the Northern District of West
Virginia. In addition to SaviCorp, Serge Monros and Craig Waldrop are being sued individually. Settlement discussions failed and
Plaintiff's counsel began service of Process. The Company and Mr. Monros have hired Shustak and Partners to defend the claim. The
defendants sued for breach of contract, fraud, vicarious liability, and unlawful sale by an unregistered broker. The lawsuit attempted
to hold the Company and Mr. Monros responsible for alleged improprieties of Waldrop. The Company finalized a negotiated settlement
and received court approval on April 7, 2015. The Company has recorded a $1,101,179 liability based on the settlement agreement.
This consists of $100,000 cash payment for legal fees paid over a period of five months and net common shares to be issued of 296,050,421
valued at $1,001,179. The lawsuit has been settled and dismissed.
The Company received an Order
of Suspension of Trading on June 17, 2015 from the Security and Exchange Commission. The SEC indicated that there is a lack of
current and accurate information concerning the securities of the Company and therefore ordered that trading in the securities
of the Company be suspended from June 17, 2015 through June 30, 2015.
Licensing Events:
Mr. Monros has continued the
process of preparing patent applications for the other versions of the DynoValve products & related IP. In March, 2013, the
Company entered into a five (5) year Master Distribution Agreement with His Divine Vehicle to sell the DynoValve and DynoValve
Pro in various international territories. The consideration for the agreement was guaranteeing a minimum annual volume, payment
for the DynoValves acquired and a three percent (3%) royalty payment. The Company is currently in default on this agreement.
In March, 2015, the Company
entered into a seven (7) year Master Distribution Agreement with DynoValve Mfg, LLC, the holder of the patents for the DynoValve
products and related IP. The agreement is an exclusive agreement for North America, China, South Korea and the Middle East and
a non-exclusive license worldwide. The consideration for the agreement was payment for products acquired and a three percent (3%)
royalty payment.
Major Contracts:
In 2013, the Company has entered
into a 5 year licensing agreement with DynoGreen Tech, LLC ("DGT") to sell the DynoValve products in the licensed territories
(UAE, Malaysia, India, and Africa). DGT has ordered 3,000 DynoValves as of 9/30/13. The DynoValves were shipped in the third quarter
of 2013. In order for them to fulfill and maintain this 5 year licensing agreement, they are required to purchase 500 additional
DynoValves per quarter for a total of $3,000,000 over a 5 year span.
In 2014, the Company entered
into a 5 year licensing agreement with Beijing FlyingGlob Environmental Technology Limited Company, a company established in the
People’s Republic of China. According to the terms of the Agreement, FlyingGlob will promote, distribute and sell SaviCorp's
signature line of DynoValve® automotive products within its exclusive territory, which is defined as the People's Republic
of China and the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau.
FlyingGlob entered into the
distribution agreement, which establishes a minimum annual purchase volume of 500,000 DynoValve® units during the first year.
In support of this requirement, FlyingGlob is to purchase an initial order of 50,000 units at a price of $8.25 million. During
the final four years of the contract, FlyingGlob has agreed to a minimum purchase of 5.5 million units, for a total minimum order
of 6 million units during the five-year term of the agreement. The successful distribution and sale of the 6 million units is estimated
to produce revenues of approximately $679.5 million. In addition, the agreement provides for a $30 million licensing fee to be
paid by FlyingGlob that may be paid over the term of the agreement.
Shareholder Meeting, Increase
in Authorized Shares:
On May 28, 2015, our Shareholders,
by majority consent, re-elected Serge Monros, Rudy Rodriguez and Philip Pisanelli as members of our Board of Directors to serve
until the next election of our Board of Directors. The consent was approved by holders of our Series D Preferred shareholders and
one other shareholder. The Series D Preferred shares were established by the filing of a Certificate of Designation with the Nevada
Secretary of State on May 26, 2015 (“Designation”). The Designation, authorizes the temporary issuance of Series D
Preferred Shares to the members of the Company’s Board of Directors to vote on matters such as an increase in the authorized
common shares and re-election of Board members. The Series D Preferred Shares, when cast at a Shareholder meeting or included within
a Shareholder Consent constitute 50.1% of the outstanding voting shares of the Company. The vast number of Company voting shareholders
and perceived inability of obtaining a quorum for a shareholder meeting to obtain permission to increase the authorized common
shares (when, as a practical matter, there are no more common shares available to issue and circumstances require immediate additional
common shares issuances) and to re-elect the Board of Directors is the reasoning behind filing the Designation.
On June 2, 2015, we filed an Amendment
to our Articles of Incorporation with the Nevada Secretary of State (“Amendment”), increasing our authorized Common
shares from 6 billion to 8 billion. We did this so that we can continue to issue common shares in our private placement fund raising
efforts and also to allow us to issue common shares as part of the settlement of litigation dismissed on May 19, 2015 in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia; Arnold LaMarr Weese and David Kent Moss v. SaviCorp, Inc, Serge
V. Monros and Craig Waldrop, Civil Action No. 2:13-CV-41.
EXHIBIT 31.1
Certificate of Principal Executive
Officer
Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)
I, Serge Monros,
certify that:
1. |
|
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of SaviCorp; |
2. |
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |
3. |
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; |
4. |
|
The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have: |
(a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|
|
|
(b) |
|
[Omitted pursuant to SEC Release No. 33-8238]; |
|
|
|
(c) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and |
|
|
|
(d) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and |
5. |
|
The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): |
(a) |
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and |
|
|
|
(b) |
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting. |
Date: June 17, 2015
/s/ SERGE MONROS
Serge Monros
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 31.2
Certificate of Principal Financial
Officer
Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)
I, Serge Monros,
certify that:
1. |
|
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of SaviCorp; |
2. |
|
Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |
3. |
|
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; |
4. |
|
The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have: |
(a) |
|
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|
|
|
(b) |
|
[Omitted pursuant to SEC Release No. 33-8238]; |
|
|
|
(c) |
|
Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and |
|
|
|
(d) |
|
Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and |
5. |
|
The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): |
(a) |
|
All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and |
|
|
|
(b) |
|
Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting. |
Date: June 17, 2015
/s/ SERGE MONROS
Serge Monros
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Annual report of
SaviCorp (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Serge Monros, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
(1) |
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and |
(2) |
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. |
A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to SaviCorp and will be retained by SaviCorp and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Date: June 17, 2015 |
By: /s/ SERGE MONROS |
|
|
Serge Monros |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer |
|