UNITED STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
|
þ
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 13 OR 15(
d
)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2016
OR
|
¨
|
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:
000-54598
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in
its charter)
British Columbia, Canada
|
N/A
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
332 E. Scott Street
Port Hueneme, California
|
93041
|
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip Code)
|
Registrant’s telephone number, including
area code: (805) 488-2800
Securities registered pursuant to Section
12(b) of the Act:
|
Name of each exchange on which
|
Title
of each class
|
registered
|
Common Shares, without par value
|
The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g)
of the Act:
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is
a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes
¨
No
x
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is
not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes
¨
No
x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
(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 has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File
required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes
x
No
¨
Indicate by check mark
if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) 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 this Form 10-K.
¨
Indicate by check mark
whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company.
See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company”
in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
|
Large Accelerated Filer
¨
|
Accelerated Filer
¨
|
|
|
Non-Accelerated Filer
x
|
Smaller Reporting
Company
¨
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes
¨
No
x
As of March 31, 2016, the
last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s
outstanding common shares held by non-affiliates was approximately $39,507,208, which was calculated based on 8,448,758 common
shares outstanding as of that date, of which 8,145,816 common shares were held by non-affiliates, and a price per share of $4.85,
which was the closing price of the registrant’s common shares on The Nasdaq Capital Market on such date.
As of December 9, 2016,
the registrant had 10,136,258 common shares issued and outstanding.
Documents
incorporated by reference:
NONE
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Annual
Report ON FORM 10-K
Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2016
Table of Contents
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This
Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act
of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
“Exchange Act”) and, as such, may involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Forward-looking statements
are based upon our current expectations, speak only as of the date hereof, and are subject to change. Forward-looking statements
are those that predict or describe future events or trends and that do not relate solely to historical matters. You can generally
identify forward-looking statements as those statements containing the words
“anticipate,”
“believe,” “plan,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,”
“will,” “would,” “could,” “should,” “might,” “potential,”
“continue”
or other similar expressions. You should not rely on our forward-looking
statements as they are not a guarantee of future performance. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will prove
to be accurate because the matters they describe are subject to assumptions, known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other unpredictable
factors, many of which are beyond our control. Our actual results could differ materially and adversely from those expressed in
any forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, some of which are listed under the “Risk Factors” section
of this Annual Report. Risks and uncertainties include, among others, the availability of funds and resources to pursue our research
and development projects, the successful and timely completion of preclinical or clinical studies by third parties in which our
products are utilized, our ability to meet the goals of our joint ventures and strategic partnerships, the degree of market acceptance
for our products or for other companies’ products in which our products are components, our ability to take advantage of
business opportunities in the pharmaceutical industry, changes in our strategy or development plans, our ability to protect our
intellectual property, uncertainties related to governmental regulations and regulatory processes, the volatility of our common
share price, the effect of competition, the effect of technological changes, reliance on key personnel, and general changes in
economic or business conditions. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update forward-looking statements.
As used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K,
“Stellar,” “the Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc. and our consolidated subsidiaries, except where the context otherwise requires.
Our logo,
Stellar KLH™ and other trademarks or service marks of Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc. appearing in this Annual Report on Form
10-K are the property of Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc. This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains additional trade names, trademarks
and service marks of other companies. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names, trademarks or
service marks to imply relationships with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, these other companies.
PART I
Item 1. BUSINESS.
Business Overview
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
is a biotechnology company engaged in the aquaculture, research and development, manufacture and commercialization of Keyhole Limpet
Hemocyanin (KLH). KLH is an immune-stimulating protein with an extensive history of safe and effective use in immunological applications.
KLH can be used as an active
pharmaceutical ingredient (API) and combined with a disease-targeting agent to create immunotherapies for the treatment of a variety
of diseases. The protein is currently being utilized in active immunotherapies in clinical development for Alzheimer’s disease,
metastatic breast cancer, Crohn’s disease, systemic lupus erythematous, ovarian cancer and various other cancers and diseases.
The KLH protein can also be used as a finished, injectable product in the immunodiagnostic market for measuring immune response
in patients and research settings. Immunotherapies (also known as therapeutic vaccines) involve using the body’s own immune
system to target and treat disease. Immunodiagnostics involve assessing the body’s immune status in relation to the effects
of a new drug, a disease, or the environment. Our KLH products can be used to stimulate the immune system in both applications.
We extract and manufacture
KLH from the hemolymph (a fluid equivalent to blood) of a relatively scarce ocean mollusk, the Giant Keyhole Limpet. Based upon
our specialized knowledge of aquaculture science and KLH, we have built unique land-based aquaculture, laboratory and production
facilities in Port Hueneme, California, and developed sustainable and scalable manufacturing processes to produce KLH using Current
Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP or GMP).
We market and sell GMP grade and research grade
KLH products to third parties under the brand Stellar KLH™. Our customers and partners include multinational biotechnology
and pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, clinical research organizations, and research centers. We believe we are positioning
our business to meet the anticipated long-term demand within the pharmaceutical industry for GMP grade KLH by providing a sustainable
source for its scalable, controlled, and traceable production. The versatility of the KLH molecule and the growing need for commercial-scale
GMP grade KLH provide multiple commercial opportunities for us.
Competitive Strengths
We
believe that we possess a number of competitive strengths that position us to become
the world leader in the sustainable
manufacture of GMP grade KLH and KLH-conjugated vaccines
, including:
|
·
|
Mature, land-based aquaculture facility produces a barrier to market entry.
Using our proprietary methods and achievements
in aquaculture science, we can support the source animal for KLH from embryo to protein-producing adult, and we now support multiple
generations of limpets grown entirely within our land-based aquaculture facility. Other KLH suppliers do not have this capability
and thus are reliant on scarce, wild populations. Due to the time needed to raise the source animal to maturity, and the time needed
to build and validate facilities and manufacturing processes, we believe that we have a five to seven year lead over any new market
entrants attempting to produce KLH in a similar manner. Due to its exceptional size and complexity, KLH has not been reproduced
synthetically.
|
|
·
|
Fully traceable, GMP grade product offerings benefit commercialization programs.
Using our proprietary production and
manufacturing methods, we are able to produce a high quality, GMP grade KLH product that is fully traceable and controlled from
native source to finished product, which we believe are important considerations for our pharmaceutical partners as they pursue
later-stage trials and commercial introductions subject to more rigorous regulatory standards than early-stage research. Due to
the known origin of material and continuity of data, we believe we are able to create a more consistent, high quality, immunogenic
product than other KLH proteins in the market. In contrast, commercial supplies of KLH from other sources have historically differed
widely in their source, traceability, purity, form and preparation, as well as their immunogenicity (their ability to stimulate
an immune response). We believe that we are the only company that offers GMP grade KLH supported by fully traceable manufacturing
methods.
|
|
·
|
Multiple supply and collaboration agreements reduce single-customer dependence.
We believe
that our supply and collaboration agreements with drug developers, which include binding orders, allow us to better manage our
working capital as well as build long-term relationships. Our manufacturing and quality experts work closely with our collaboration
partners and customers to deliver KLH products according to their specifications. We believe that our record for reliably providing
high quality KLH has created customer trust and loyalty.
|
|
·
|
Business model leverages growth potential.
We believe we have an attractive business model
due to the unique nature of our product offerings, embedded growth opportunities within our existing customer base and operating
leverage. As we increase production volumes and sales, we expect our operating expenses to decrease as a percentage of revenue,
providing for greater operating leverage. In addition, we have established a model via our joint venture, Neostell, S.A.S., to
participate in the manufacturing of KLH-conjugated vaccines, which provides additional revenue and growth opportunities.
|
|
·
|
Intellectual property portfolio includes protection for specialized systems and technologies.
We
have intellectual property related to KLH development and manufacturing and to the environmental protection of the
Giant Keyhole Limpet, including patents, trade secrets and know-how related to specialized aquaculture systems and technologies;
spawning, selection and maintenance of the species; non-lethal KLH protein extraction methods; and the processing, purification
and production of KLH formulations.
|
|
·
|
Sustainability practices protect marine source and promote scalability.
Our KLH protein is
produced using environmentally sound, sustainable practices intended to protect and renew the live marine source. We believe this
is a critical component of ensuring long-term, scalable supplies, since rapid growth in demand has had severe consequences to other
related species. In California, for example, failure to manage wild populations of abalone resulted in dramatic declines and eventually
led to closure of commercial abalone harvests.
|
|
·
|
Leadership team provides extensive aquaculture production and related industry expertise.
Our
leadership team includes industry experts who have extensive experience in the field of aquaculture and Giant Keyhole Limpet production,
and possess a deep understanding of a variety of biotechnology businesses. Our President and CEO has more than 40 years of experience
leading commercial aquaculture businesses and projects focused on mollusk domestication and production.
|
Our Strategy
We plan to use our proprietary methods and intellectual
property to serve the growing demand for KLH in immunotherapy and immunodiagnostics applications. Key elements of our business
strategy include:
|
·
|
Expand infrastructure and capacity while maintaining a strong balance sheet.
We plan to incrementally increase our infrastructure, manufacturing capabilities and KLH production capacity based on our customers’ forecasts and the anticipated future requirements of commercial-scale vaccine manufacturing, which we estimate could require multiple kilograms of GMP grade KLH per year. In order to produce such volumes and to provide our customers with greater certainty of future supply, we intend to have the capacity to support commercial drug launches in a variety of indications, with planned redundancy at multiple locations. We believe we can scale up capacity to meet anticipated customer demand for the next one to two years with current resources.
|
|
·
|
Pursue additional supply and collaboration agreements.
We plan to continue pursuing opportunities for commercial growth
that build on our strengths and core competencies in KLH development and manufacturing, including additional supply and collaboration
agreements. We regularly engage in discussions with various entities involved in immunotherapies, in connection with opportunities
for licensing, supply and collaborative research.
|
|
·
|
Support continuing development of our Neostell Growth Initiative.
In July 2016, we formed Neostell S.A.S., a joint venture with Neovacs S.A, to produce Neovacs’ Kinoid immunotherapy product candidates which utilize Stellar KLH™ as a carrier molecule. In addition to expanding our market opportunities related to manufacturing of Neovacs’ KLH-conjugated vaccines, this joint venture provides the opportunity to manufacture and sell KLH-based immunotherapies for third party customers.
|
|
·
|
Continue innovation and new product development.
We plan to expand our KLH technology portfolio through ongoing research and development. Our research and development (R&D) activities are focused primarily on the aquaculture of the Giant Keyhole Limpet; improvements in KLH protein analysis and manufacturing; the development of functional assays; and new uses for KLH in immunotherapy and immunodiagnostic applications. We believe that these activities provide long-term strategic, revenue and clinical opportunities by extending the commercial use of Stellar KLH™ and furthering our understanding of the KLH molecule.
|
Keyhole Limpet Hemocyanin (KLH)
KLH is a safe, potent, immune-stimulating protein.
Specifically, it is a very large, high molecular weight, oxygen-carrying glycoprotein made of millions of atoms. In addition to
the native molecule, KLH can be chemically dissociated into a subunit formulation commonly used in the production of immunotherapies.
Both the native, high molecular weight molecule and subunit forms of KLH are excellent immune stimulants. The KLH molecular structure
offers numerous sites for conjugation, and can generate multiple product configurations. Because of its large size, immune-stimulating
properties, numerous sites for conjugation, and safety profile, KLH is used by researchers and product developers as a vaccine
carrier protein. However, due to its exceptional size and complexity, KLH has not been reproduced synthetically.
KLH can be used as an active pharmaceutical
ingredient, or API, or it can be used as a finished, injectable product in the immunodiagnostic market.
As an active pharmaceutical ingredient, KLH
is an effective and safe carrier molecule for conjugation to vaccine antigens that are used to promote the generation of antibody
and cell-mediated immune responses against targeted diseases. By themselves, the small haptens (partial antigens) and vaccine antigens
used to target these diseases are not usually immunogenic enough to awaken the immune system and therefore, require a carrier molecule
or adjuvant, like KLH, in order to be effective. The combination of an antigen against specific pathogenic targets, such as tumors,
and over-expressed proteins, conjugated to the immunogenic KLH molecule, is the basis for a promising new class of drugs in development
known as active immunotherapies or therapeutic vaccines. Unlike preventative vaccines, active immunotherapies are designed to stimulate
the body’s own immune system to generate an immune response to target and attack an existing disease or condition. We believe
immunotherapies are, and will continue to be, one of the fastest-growing sectors of pharmaceutical research and development. KLH
is an important component for drugs used in clinical development, including major indications such as Alzheimer’s disease,
metastatic breast cancer, Crohn’s disease, systemic lupus erythematous, ovarian cancer and various other cancers and diseases.
New indications entering clinical trials, such as dermatomyositis, point to expanding clinical potential for KLH.
As a finished injectable product, KLH has been
used extensively by pharmaceutical companies and researchers as a safe, immune-stimulating antigen in drug-screening, drug immunotoxicology,
and assessment of immune status. KLH is a standard immunogen in T-Cell Dependent Antibody Response (TDAR), a functional assay which
is widely recognized as a standard test for monitoring the effects of drugs on the immune system.
KLH protein is derived only from the hemolymph
of the Giant Keyhole Limpet (
Megathura crenulata
), a mollusk native only to a limited stretch of the Pacific Ocean coastline
along Southern California and Baja California, Mexico. Historically, suppliers other than us have obtained KLH protein directly
from wild and sensitive populations of Giant Keyhole Limpet, or have utilized lethal production processes. Based on publicly available
information and reports, commercial supplies of KLH differ widely in their source, traceability, purity, form, and preparation,
as well as in immunogenicity (their ability to stimulate an immune response). We believe that highly-specialized aquaculture manufacturing
methods, like the methods we practice, protect the KLH molecule’s source species and provide sustainable, scalable supplies
of quality KLH protein. The concept of sustainability involves sound, responsible management of environmental resources and, especially
where biological systems are concerned, includes protecting native species so that the species thrive and remain diverse and productive
over time. Further, we believe that environmentally sound methods associated with professional and specialized aquaculture can
minimize variability in KLH products and assure full traceability to their biological source.
Our Technology
We have committed over 15 years to the advancement
of aquaculture science and sustainable KLH production methods, specifically focused on protection of the Giant Keyhole Limpet and
the non-lethal extraction of KLH protein. We believe our proprietary methods will provide a sustainable supply of GMP grade KLH
and meet pharmaceutical industry standards for immune response, consistency, purity, and traceability while protecting the natural
source species.
Our Aquaculture Technology & Manufacturing
Our proprietary aquaculture technology involves
methods we developed and optimized to control the reproduction and growth of the Giant Keyhole Limpet including, but not limited
to, culture systems, nutritional requirements, and the recirculation of seawater. We achieved a significant milestone in aquaculture
science by developing the capability to sustain the complete life cycle of the Giant Keyhole Limpet. Using our proprietary methods,
we can support the marine mollusk from embryo to protein-producing adult, and we now support multiple generations of limpets grown
entirely within our land-based aquaculture facility. Other KLH suppliers do not have this capability and thus are reliant on scarce,
wild populations of limpets.
The aquaculture cycle to raise Giant Keyhole
Limpets from fertilized eggs to maturity for KLH production is approximately five years, with multiple complex larval and juvenile
stages. KLH can be extracted from mature limpets a limited number of times per year and, if properly maintained, the average extracted
quantity of KLH per year per limpet is predictable and useful in estimating targets for production planning and optimizing the
use of the hemolymph. The hemolymph is extracted in a non-lethal manner utilizing our patented methods. Once extracted, the hemolymph
is processed through our proprietary methods, which are protected as trade secrets.
We currently maintain a production inventory
of limpets sufficient for an annual capacity of 1,500 grams/year of KLH pharmaceutical intermediate, which can be further processed
and purified to produce various final product grades and formulations. Given current resources, we believe we can scale up capacity
to meet anticipated customer demand for the next one to two years. Given sufficient funding to continue scale-up, our projected
production capacity is up to 20,000 grams (20 kg) of KLH pharmaceutical intermediate in five to seven years. We plan to incrementally
increase hatchery production of limpets and expand aquaculture infrastructure, which will thereby increase our KLH production capacity,
in order to meet the anticipated future multi-kilogram KLH requirements of immunotherapy commercialization.
We contract with contract manufacturing organizations
and contract testing organizations for certain steps of cGMP processing and quality control testing. The services currently performed
by these contract vendors include sterile fill/finish and release testing.
As a result of these operational capabilities,
we believe we will be able to supply GMP grade KLH in commercial quantities to meet the anticipated long-term demand within the
pharmaceutical industry, while protecting the natural source species. We base these beliefs on our intellectual property, achievements
in aquaculture science, KLH production capacity, KLH sustainable manufacturing know-how, and survey data used to estimate population
of Giant Keyhole Limpets in the wild.
Our Facilities
We maintain research and manufacturing facilities
directly along the Pacific Ocean with dedicated, land-based aquaculture operations in Port Hueneme, California. We have approximately
37,000 square feet of leased aquaculture, manufacturing, and laboratory space. We believe our waterfront location is a proprietary
asset that allows our marine scientists to work in close proximity to naturally resident Giant Keyhole Limpet
colonies,
and to be at the forefront in developing protective measures and environmentally sound practices for KLH production.
Our aquaculture operations were specially developed
in the late 1990s for production and research on gastropod mollusks, have been in near continuous operation since that time, and
have since been expanded significantly by us for the specialized purpose of conducting the intensive steps required to support
the complete life cycle of the Giant Keyhole Limpet and for the commercial production of KLH protein. Our aquaculture facility
includes, among other specialized infrastructure, systems for spawning, larval development, and maturation of limpets, a fully
permitted seawater supply system, recirculating seawater supply systems, environmental controls and regulated seawater return to
the ocean. Our facility currently includes multiple production tanks and numerous individual limpet production modules in two independent
aquaculture production systems. Each closed recirculating system is equipped with temperature controlled seawater distribution,
filtration and treatment equipment. The facility also contains a fabrication shop for production of equipment and culture apparatus.
In July 2015, we entered into an exclusive collaboration
agreement with Ostiones Guerrero, SA de CV to secure a unique strategic site in Baja California, Mexico, for the potential development
of an additional aquaculture locale and future expansion of our KLH production. The collaboration with Ostiones is intended to
include design, expansion and development of marine aquaculture resources for hatchery and maturation of Giant Keyhole Limpets.
In connection with the collaboration agreement, we also entered into a lease agreement with Ostiones for undeveloped land on which
suitability studies are to be conducted by Stellar over the next two years. We believe this expansion will support our goal to
meet the anticipated long-term industry demand for KLH protein.
Research and Development
We are committed to applying our proprietary
Stellar KLH™ technology to improve immunotherapy and immunodiagnostics, and to protecting the natural resource for KLH. To
that end, we are actively engaged in research and development focused primarily on the aquaculture of the Giant Keyhole Limpet;
improvements in KLH protein analysis and manufacturing; the development of functional assays; and new uses for KLH in immunotherapy
and immunodiagnostic applications. These activities involve both internal programs and external collaborations with other biopharmaceutical
companies or research organizations.
Our internal research has included, among other
activities, improvement of methods for the culture and growth of Giant Keyhole Limpet, innovations in aquaculture systems and infrastructure,
biophysical and biochemical characterization of the KLH molecule, analytical processes to enhance performance of our products,
KLH manufacturing process improvements, new KLH formulations and KLH-related technologies, and early development of potential new
KLH-based immunotherapy.
Our external collaborations involve both development
and evaluation projects, with multiple biopharmaceutical companies and research institutions, for the use of Stellar KLH™
in their programs. We believe that these collaborations provide for strategic, revenue and clinical opportunities for our future
business by extending the commercial use of Stellar KLH™ and furthering our understanding of the KLH molecule.
For the years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 and August 31, 2014, research and development expense were
$1,715,992, $1,029,489 and $2,458,934, respectively. These amounts related mainly to research and development in aquaculture, improvements
in analytical, manufacturing, and purification processes, stability studies, formulation development, and primarily in fiscal 2014,
preclinical research for a potential KLH-based immunotherapy approach against C. diff infection. None of these expenses were borne
by our customers.
Our Stellar KLH™ Products
We market Stellar KLH™ protein in various grades, formulations
and configurations for both preclinical and clinical applications, and certain KLH-based in vitro diagnostic kits for preclinical
use. Our Stellar KLH™ product offerings include:
|
·
|
Stellar KLH™ protein for conjugation and
as carrier molecule in immunotherapy development. We offer a variety of Stellar KLH™ products (HMW and subunit
formulations, GMP and research grades, and bulk and vial configurations) for use in these clinical and research
applications.
|
|
·
|
Stellar KLH™ protein and ELISA test kits for immune function testing: KLH can be used in research and clinical studies
as an antigen for assessing immune function and in immunotoxicology studies for monitoring the immunosuppressive effects of drug
candidates. We also offer a line of Stellar KLH™ ELISA assay test kits for the detection of anti-KLH antibodies in preclinical
research settings.
|
|
·
|
Custom KLH formulations, adjuvants, conjugations and fill finishes for preclinical research and drug development applications.
|
We currently have limited
revenue from sales of our Stellar KLH™ products. The list price for Stellar KLH™ protein ranges from approximately
$15,000 to $50,000 per gram, depending on the purity, grade, preparation, packaging configuration and volume ordered. Product
sales are highly dependent upon the rate of development and clinical trials of the active immunotherapies and other technologies
being developed by third party customers, which utilize our products. The advancement and commercial success of third-party products
utilizing Stellar KLH is dependent upon many factors, including available capital, trial recruitment and progress, and regulatory
review. Revenue from these customers is highly variable, but historically is not subject to seasonal fluctuations.
Revenues from
the sale of Stellar KLH™ products and contract services revenues related to Stellar KLH™ products in fiscal years
2016, 2015 and 2014 are as follows:
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
1,239,689
|
|
|
$
|
563,689
|
|
|
$
|
143,553
|
|
Contract services revenue
|
|
|
32,000
|
|
|
|
195,000
|
|
|
|
192,000
|
|
The geographic breakdown of revenues in fiscal
years 2016, 2015 and 2014 are as follows:
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
43
|
%
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
Asia
|
|
|
45
|
%
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
|
|
40
|
%
|
U.S.
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
Other countries
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
Customers
We primarily market and distribute our products
directly to biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, clinical research organizations and research centers.
Products are shipped to our customers from our facilities in Port Hueneme, California using a common carrier chosen by the customer.
The geographic markets of our customers are principally Europe, the United States and Asia.
The customers that represent a significant portion
of our total consolidated revenue in fiscal years 2016, 2015 and 2014 are as follows:
Customer
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OBI Pharma, Inc.
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
|
|
-
|
|
Eurogentec
|
|
|
25
|
%
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Neovacs SA
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
15
|
%
|
|
|
30
|
%
|
AXON Neuroscience SE
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16
|
%
|
|
|
-
|
|
Amaran Biotechnology, Inc.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
19
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
Araclon Biotech, SL
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
19
|
%
|
|
|
-
|
|
Contracts, Supply Agreements and Collaboration Agreements
We have previously entered
into, and intend to continue to enter into, agreements with third parties that will allow us to supply Stellar KLH™ in exchange
for fees, revenues, or royalties. Supply agreements generally involve a customer’s commitment to purchase our Stellar KLH™
for use as an active pharmaceutical ingredient in the customer’s own immunotherapy products or as a finished product in their
development programs. To date, our Stellar KLH™ protein has been used in research and development, preclinical, and clinical
phases but has not yet been used in any commercialized and marketed products. Quantities required for clinical trials depend on,
among other variables, the nature of the trial, the clinical indication, the number of patients enrolled, dosing regimens and vaccine
manufacturing processes.
Agreements with Neovacs S.A.
Joint Venture Agreement and Formation of Neostell
S.A.S.
In May 2016, we entered into a joint venture
agreement with Neovacs S.A., a publicly-held biotechnology company in Paris, France for the formation of a joint venture company
to manufacture and sell conjugated therapeutic vaccines. In July 2016, Neostell S.A.S., a French simplified stock corporation (Neostell),
was formed to carry out the business of the joint venture. Neostell is expected to produce Neovacs’ Kinoid immunotherapy
product candidates which utilize Stellar KLH™ as a carrier molecule ingredient. Neostell may also manufacture and sell other
KLH-based immunotherapy products for third-party customers worldwide.
We hold a 30% equity interest in the joint venture
in exchange for an initial capital contribution of €120,000. One-half of the initial contribution, approximately $67,000,
was paid prior to June 30, 2016 with the balance due upon the occurrence of certain defined future events. We will also provide
additional financing to Neostell, as may be required, on a pro rata basis in line with our equity interest. If Neostell does not
achieve certain milestones by December 2017, it will be dissolved, unless the parties mutually agree to pursue the joint venture
arrangement, or either party decides to purchase the equity interests of the other party. Each of the parties is entitled, upon
the occurrence of certain defined events, to acquire the interest of the other party.
In connection with the formation of Neostell
and the execution of its strategy, the parties intend over time to enter into an exclusive supply agreement within a limited field
of use for Stellar to supply KLH to Neostell, a supply agreement designating Neostell as the exclusive manufacturer and supplier
of the Neovacs’ vaccines, and services agreements for the provision of various knowledge and expertise by each of the parties.
Neovacs will also license certain of its intellectual property to Neostell.
The joint venture has an initial ten-year term,
renewable for successive five-year terms. If either party provides notice at least six months prior to the expiration date of an
applicable term that it does not wish to continue its participation in the joint venture, the other party will have a right to
acquire all of such terminating party’s equity interests in Neostell.
The joint venture agreement contains customary
restrictions on transfer of the equity interests, tag-along and drag-along rights, non-competition, non-solicitation, confidentiality
and termination provisions.
Supply Agreements
In April 2015, we entered into a supply agreement
with Neovacs to extend and expand two prior supply agreements entered into in 2008 for the use of Stellar KLH™ in the development
and manufacture of Neovacs’ active immunotherapies. Stellar KLH™ is used by Neovacs as a carrier molecule to stimulate
an immune response in its Kinoid immunotherapy technology, which has two products currently in Phase II clinical trials for the
treatment of lupus and Crohn’s disease.
The agreement provides for Neovacs to purchase
Stellar KLH™ for use in its proprietary KLH-based Kinoid immunotherapies in the European Union, Latin America, Asia, the
U.S. and Canada. Neovacs will use Stellar KLH™ for its planned Phase II and Phase III clinical trials and for expected commercial
manufacturing of its products for up to one year following market approval. Neovacs will manage and fund all product development
and regulatory submissions for its immunotherapy products and act as the sponsor company for the future clinical trials.
Under the terms of the agreement, we will supply
GMP grade KLH to Neovacs according to agreed specifications, quantities and pricing, as well as maintain a master file with the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) for the KLH product. We will also provide professional, technical and
regulatory support to Neovacs. The agreement has an initial five-year term, which may be renewed by Neovacs in one-year increments.
Collaboration Agreement and Lease Agreement with Ostiones Guerrero
S.A. de C.V.(Ostiones)
In July 2015, we entered into a collaboration
agreement with Ostiones, a privately held commercial fishing corporation in Baja California, Mexico. The purpose of the agreement
is to secure a strategic site in Baja California, Mexico for the potential development of an additional aquaculture locale and
future expansion of our KLH production, subject to a site suitability study to be conducted over the next three years.
The agreement provides for Stellar and Ostiones
to collaborate on the design, expansion and development of marine aquaculture resources and KLH production facilities in Baja California,
Mexico to provide, exclusively for Stellar, an additional site for hatchery and maturation of Giant Keyhole Limpets and production
of KLH. Ostiones will provide local manpower, labor and operational support, the costs of which are subject to our prior approval
and monthly reimbursement. As part of the collaboration, Ostiones will gain access to our proprietary aquaculture techniques and
expertise, support services and training to facilitate the expansion of Ostiones’ seafood production business. During the
three-year term of the agreement and for five years thereafter, the parties are subject to customary non-competition and non-contravention
provisions.
In June 2015, we entered into a lease agreement
with Ostiones whereby Ostiones leased to Stellar undeveloped land in Baja California, Mexico to assess its suitability for the
long-term development and potential expansion of our production capability. The first two years rent was prepaid in June 2015.
The lease agreement and the collaboration agreement each expire in June 2018, unless terminated earlier. If we decide to proceed
with development of the site, we have options to extend the lease for 30 years.
Under the terms of the collaboration and lease
agreements, we will be responsible for certain improvements to the leased, undeveloped land, including construction of certain
structures and a power-generating facility, which will be owned by us. We expect to enter into separate usage and supply agreements
covering the use of site resources and utilities such as seawater and power, and for the production of Giant Keyhole Limpets by
Ostiones exclusively for us. However, any such agreements are contingent upon completion of our site suitability assessment and
we are currently under no obligation to execute such agreements at this time.
Supply Agreement with Araclon Biotech, S.L.
In November 2014, we entered into an exclusive
supply agreement with Araclon Biotech SL, a privately-held biotechnology company headquartered in Spain and majority-owned by global
healthcare company Grifols (Araclon). Araclon is developing beta amyloid-targeting active immunotherapies for neurodegenerative
diseases with a primary focus on Alzheimer's disease. Araclon's patented technology involves immunization against amyloid-beta
together with KLH as a carrier protein.
The purpose of the agreement is to ensure a stable
supply of KLH to Araclon to support Phase II/III clinical trials of Araclon’s Alzheimer's drugs, including the development
of manufacturing processes and production capacity. Under the agreement, Araclon will manage and fund all product development and
regulatory submissions for its products. We will supply GMP grade Stellar KLH™ protein and provide technical and regulatory
support to Araclon.
Under the terms of the
agreement, Araclon will purchase KLH exclusively from us, and we will supply KLH exclusively to Araclon, for use in Araclon’s
beta amyloid-targeting active immunotherapies against Alzheimer’s at agreed specifications, quantities and pricing. In addition,
the agreement provides us with first negotiation rights for the exclusive supply of KLH in connection with the potential future
commercialization by Araclon of its beta amyloid-targeting immunotherapy products. The agreement has an initial five-year term,
which may be renewed by Araclon for additional one-year periods.
Intellectual Property and License Agreements
We hold important proprietary intellectual property
related to KLH development and manufacture and to the environmental protection of the Giant Keyhole Limpet including, but not limited
to, patents and trade secrets related to specialized aquaculture systems and technologies; spawning, selection and maintenance
of the Giant Keyhole Limpet; non-lethal KLH protein extraction methods; and the processing, purification and production of KLH
formulations. Our proprietary methods also include methods for the control of larval development, metamorphosis and maturation
of the Giant Keyhole Limpets, which we protect as trade secrets.
Our success depends in part on our ability to
obtain and maintain proprietary protection for our product technology and know-how, to operate without infringing proprietary rights
of others, and to prevent others from infringing our proprietary rights. We seek to protect our proprietary position by, among
other methods, filing, when possible, U.S. and foreign patent applications relating to our technology, inventions and improvements
that are important to our business. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation, and in-licensing
opportunities to develop and maintain our proprietary position.
We hold patent protection for our non-lethal
extraction methods of hemocyanin in the United States and other countries, including one issued patent in the United States, U.S.
Patent No. 6,852,338, which currently expires in 2023, and covers a two-step method for obtaining hemolymph from a live gastropod
mollusk. This U.S. patent was originally granted to our Chief Executive Officer, Frank Oakes, who assigned the patent to the Company
in August 2002. Foreign patent counterparts were granted in Canada, France and Germany.
We have a worldwide exclusive license with the
University of Guelph to one issued patent in the United States, U.S. Patent No. 8,597,663, which currently expires in 2030, for
certain novel cell surface polysaccharides and their chemical structures and vaccine compositions for the treatment, prevention
and diagnosis of C. difficile infection. We also have foreign patent counterparts and foreign patent applications and patents claiming
priority therefrom in certain jurisdictions outside the United States, including Europe, Australia, Canada, China, Japan and New
Zealand.
The scope of any patent protection may not exclude
competitors or provide competitive advantages to us, and any of our patents may not be held valid if subsequently challenged, and
others may claim rights in or ownership of our patents and proprietary rights. Furthermore, others may develop products similar
to our products and may duplicate any of our products or design around our patents.
Our trademarks include, but are not limited
to, “Powering and Improving Immunotherapy™”, “Stellar KLH™” and “KLH Site™”.
In addition to patents and trademarks, we rely on trade secrets and other intellectual property laws, nondisclosure agreements
and other measures to protect our intellectual property rights. We believe that in order to have a competitive advantage, we must
develop and maintain the proprietary aspects of our technologies. We require our employees, consultants and advisors to execute
confidentiality agreements in connection with their employment, consulting or advisory relationship with us. We also require our
employees, and to the extent practicable, our consultants and advisors with whom we expect to work on our products to agree to
disclose and assign to us all inventions made in the course of our working relationship with them, while using our intellectual
property or which relate to our business. Despite any measures taken to protect our intellectual property, unauthorized parties
may attempt to copy aspects of our products or to wrongfully obtain or use information that we regard as proprietary.
License Agreement with University of Guelph
In July 2013, we acquired the exclusive,
worldwide license to certain patented technology for the development of human immunotherapies against
Clostridium difficile
infection (C. diff), a highly contagious bacteria spread by human contact, from the University of Guelph, Ontario,
Canada (the “Guelph License”). Under the terms of the Guelph License, we have the exclusive rights to develop, manufacture,
and sell active immunotherapies to treat C. diff infection that derive from the technology covered by certain of the University’s
international patents and patent applications.
The Guelph License agreement required an initial,
non-refundable license fee of $25,000, which was paid in fiscal 2013, payment of an aggregate of $200,000 in delayed license fees,
which were paid in fiscal 2014, and a license fee of $20,000 to be paid annually thereafter, creditable against royalties due,
if any. Royalties are payable for a percentage of related net sales, if any. License fees are also payable for a percentage of
related non-royalty sublicensing revenue, if any. No royalties have been incurred to date.
As additional consideration, we also issued
to the University of Guelph 37,120 common shares and warrants to purchase up to 27,840 of our common shares with an exercise price
of C$12.50 per share. The warrants expired on January 23, 2015 without being exercised. We reimbursed patent filing costs
of approximately $11,000, $52,000, and $34,000 in fiscal 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and will reimburse certain future patent
filing, prosecution, and maintenance costs.
We are required to pay up to an aggregate of
$6,020,000 in milestone payments to the University of Guelph upon achievement of various financing and development targets up to
the first regulatory approval. Remaining milestone payments totaling $57,025,000 are related to achievement of sales targets. We
are required to provide regular reports to the University of Guelph regarding product development efforts, and progress toward
meeting certain milestones. A financing milestone was met during fiscal 2014 and, accordingly, we made a milestone payment of $100,000
to the University of Guelph. No other milestones have been met to date, and there can be no assurance that any remaining milestones
will be met in the future.
The Guelph License agreement expires when the
last valid patent claim licensed under the agreement expires, which is currently 2030. Prior to that time, the agreement can be
terminated by the University of Guelph upon certain conditions including: (i) our failure to make any payments or submit any reports
when due; (ii) our failure to diligently pursue development or commercialization of the product based upon our reports; (iii) our
material breach of any provision of the Guelph License; or (iv) providing a false report. We will have 30 days after written notice
from the University of Guelph to cure the problem prior to termination of the agreement. We can terminate the Guelph License with
three months’ prior written notice to the University of Guelph.
Collaboration Agreement and Exclusive Licensing Rights with Bayer
Innovation GmbH
In August 2011 we acquired an exclusive, worldwide
sub-licensable and royalty-free license to the technology we developed under collaboration with Bayer Innovation GmbH (Bayer)
for the improved production method and process yields for Stellar KLH™. The license included a carve-out by Bayer to use
the technology in certain non-Hodgkin Lymphoma active immunotherapies, but we may exclusively commercialize the technology in other
fields. We paid Bayer $200,000 in 2011 for the licensing rights, which are jointly owned by Bayer and us. We assessed the licensing
rights for impairment and wrote off the unamortized balance in July 2014.
Grants
We have historically financed a portion of our
operations through the receipt of monetary grants made available through programs funded and administered by various U.S. government
entities.
In the fiscal 2014,
we recognized, through our California subsidiary, the remaining $36,579 in grant funding from the National Science Foundation
(NSF) Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) through the Technology Enhancement for Commercial Partnerships program under Phase
II and Phase IIB grants, which totaled approximately $1.2 million over a 4-year period. Our project was entitled “
Megathura
Crenulata
Post Larval Culture - Bottleneck for a Valuable Medical Resource,” and the purpose of the project was to allow
for the full implementation of the commercial scale aquaculture systems for KLH production and development of a validated KLH-based
immunogenicity assay. Grant revenues were recorded as we fulfilled the grant requirements. In addition to NSF grants, we also
receive grants from time to time for the development of new technology from the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer
Institute (NIH), the California Technology Investments Program (CalTIP), and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) qualifying therapeutic
discovery project grants.
Competition
The immunotherapy industry is rapidly evolving and new competitors
with competing technologies and products are regularly entering clinical development and the market. We compete on the basis of:
the advantages and disadvantages of Stellar KLH
TM
as compared to other KLH proteins manufactured by our competitors;
our ability to educate the industry about the high quality, and sustainable and traceable features, of Stellar KLH
TM
;
our ability to supply scalable quantities of GMP grade KLH; product efficacy; customer service; and the price and demonstrated
cost-effectiveness of Stellar KLH
TM
as compared to our competitors. We believe that our products and services currently
compete favorably with respect to such factors. However, we may not be able to maintain our competitive position against current
and potential competitors. We compete directly with Biosyn Corporation, a pharmaceutical and biotechnology company which manufactures
KLH starting material and offers clinical and research grade KLH products. We also compete directly with SAFC, a division of Sigma-Aldrich,
which offers clinical and research grade KLH products manufactured from its own starting material from ocean harvested limpets
and from aquaculture starting material purchased from us. In addition to competition from current suppliers of KLH, we also face
indirect competition from developers of other carrier proteins, adjuvants or therapeutic vaccine platforms. We are unable to predict
what effect evolution of the KLH and immunotherapy industries and potential new entrants may have on price, selling strategies,
intellectual property or our competitive position.
Government Regulation
Our operations, including our aquaculture and
harvesting activities, as well as production operations, site development, and drug research, development and sales, are subject
to complex regulation at the local, state and federal levels in the United States by a number of regulatory agencies including,
but not limited to, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, the U.S. Secretary of the Navy, the Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region, the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife, the California Coastal Commission, the California Air Pollution Control Board, the County of Ventura, and
the City of Port Hueneme.
We are subject to laws and regulations covering
clean water and waste discharge, and are required to hold licenses for the aquaculture production and wild harvesting of the Giant
Keyhole Limpet. Our aquaculture facility is subject to regulation by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Regional
Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region. These agencies impose regulations that restrict any activity that could pose a
potential risk to the California marine environment including, but not limited to, seawater waste discharge limitations specified
in our National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit. We have operated in compliance with all environmental regulations
imposed by these agencies since the formation of our California subsidiary in 1999, apart from a
de minimus
settlement in
April 2014.
In addition to regulations in the United States,
we may be subject to a variety of foreign regulations related to research, manufacturing, and the commercial sale and distribution
of our products, to the extent we choose to manufacture, sell or distribute any products outside of the United States. The requirements
governing our activities in jurisdictions outside the United States vary greatly from country to country.
Product Development and Customer Regulatory Support
Currently, none of our
products are subject to approval as a drug by any regulatory authority. However, a number of our customers and strategic partners
are utilizing Stellar KLH™ in the development of pharmaceuticals and immunotherapies that are subject to the regulatory approval
process in various jurisdictions.
We have submitted Type
II Master Files for our KLH drug substance and drug product formulations to the FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research
(CBER) and the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). A Master File is a confidential, detailed dossier kept on file
at the FDA that contains the proprietary information on the manufacture and safety of a drug component. These files can be used
to support the regulatory approval process for customers’ immunotherapy products that use our Stellar KLH™, while allowing
us to control access to our manufacturing data.
The regulatory approval process for new drugs
under development by our customers is typically long and expensive. Clinical trials that they conduct may not be successful and
such products may not receive regulatory approval.
Delays by our customers
in obtaining, or the inability to obtain, regulatory approvals for their products which use Stellar KLH
TM
will have
a direct effect on the demand for our products.
Good Manufacturing Practices
The FDA and other regulatory agencies regulate
and inspect equipment, facilities and processes used in the manufacture of pharmaceutical and biologic products prior to approving
a product. If, after receiving approval from regulatory agencies, a company makes a material change in manufacturing equipment,
location or process, additional regulatory review and approval may be required. All facilities and manufacturing techniques used
for the manufacture of our products must comply with applicable regulations governing the production of pharmaceutical products
known as Current Good Manufacturing Practices.
The FDA and other regulatory agencies also conduct
regular, periodic visits to re-inspect equipment, facilities and processes following initial approval of a product. If, as a result
of these inspections, it is determined that our equipment, facilities or processes do not comply with applicable regulations and
conditions of product approval, regulatory agencies may issue warning or similar letters or may seek civil, criminal, or administrative
sanctions against us. To date, we have not been subject to inspection by the FDA or other drug regulatory agency because none of
our customers or partners has filed an application in any country for marketing approval of a product encompassing our Stellar
KLH™ protein.
Backlog and Renegotiation of Profits
Orders for our products are generally filled
on a current basis, and order backlog is not material to our business. In addition, our business is not subject to renegotiation
of profits or termination of contracts at the election of a government.
Employees
As of December 9, 2016, we had 23 employees.
We consider our employee relations to be good. None of our employees are represented by a labor union or collective bargaining
agreement.
Corporate Information
We operate through our wholly-owned
subsidiary, Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc., a California corporation which was organized September 9, 1999. We acquired the subsidiary
on April 12, 2010 through a reverse merger and began trading on the TSX Venture Exchange (TSX-V) under the symbol “KLH”
on April 19, 2010. We were originally incorporated in Canada on June 12, 2007 under the name China Growth Capital, Inc. and subsequently
changed our name to CAG Capital, Inc. on April 15, 2008. We began trading on the TSX Venture Exchange as a Canadian capital pool
company on August 29, 2008, and became a British Columbia corporation on November 25, 2009. Our reverse merger in April 2010 constituted
our “qualifying transaction” under Canadian law, at which time we changed our name to Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
In January 2013, we began trading on the U.S. OTCQB Marketplace Exchange under the symbol “SBOTF” and, on November
5, 2015, our common shares began trading on The Nasdaq Capital Market (Nasdaq) under the symbol “SBOT.” On March 29,
2016, at our request, our common shares were voluntarily delisted from the TSX-V in Canada and ceased trading on the TSX-V as of
the close of business on April 8, 2016.
Our executive offices are
located at 332 East Scott Street, Port Hueneme, California 93041. Our phone number is (805) 488-2800. Our website address is www.stellarbiotechnologies.com.
The contents of our website are not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for any purpose or otherwise incorporated by reference.
Our website address is included for information only.
Available Information
We file or furnish
periodic reports, including our annual reports on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K,
proxy statements and other information with the SEC
, and amendments to such reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file or
furnish such materials to the SEC.
Such reports
and filings may
be
obtained by visiting the Public Reference Room of the SEC at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20549, by calling the SEC at (800)
SEC-0330 or by sending an email to the SEC at publicinfo@sec.gov. In addition, the SEC maintains a website (www.sec.gov) that contains
reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. Our reports,
proxy statements and other information are also made available, free of charge, on our investor relations website at http://ir.stellarbiotechnologies.com
as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such information with the SEC. References to our corporate website
address (www.stellarbiotechnologies.com) in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are intended to be inactive textual references only,
and none of the information contained on our website is part of this report or incorporated in this report by reference
.
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS.
Certain factors may
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions and results of operations. You should carefully consider
the risks and uncertainties described below together with all of the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form
10-K, including our financial statements and the related notes, before deciding to invest in our common shares. The risks and
uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that
we currently believe to be immaterial may also adversely affect our business. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our
business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects could be materially and adversely affected.
Risks Related to Our Business
We have a history of net losses and limited cash flow to sustain
our operations.
We currently have limited revenue from product
sales of Stellar KLH
TM
, and anticipate our planned total operating expenses will be greater than our revenues for the
foreseeable future. We incurred net losses of $5.03 million in fiscal 2016, $
2.84
million in
fiscal 2015 and $8.44 million in fiscal 2014. As of September 30, 2016, we have an accumulated deficit of $40
.2
million
since inception. To date, we have not paid dividends on our common shares and do not anticipate doing so in the
foreseeable future. We have historically relied upon the sale of common shares to help fund our operations and meet our obligations.
Any future additional equity financing would cause dilution to current shareholders. If we do not have sufficient capital for our
operations, management would be forced to reduce or discontinue our activities, which would have a negative effect on our operations
and financial condition.
We depend heavily on the success and market acceptance of
Stellar KLH
TM
and we may never recoup our investment into its research and development.
We have invested a significant portion of our
time and financial resources into the development of Stellar KLH
TM
. We anticipate that in the near term our ability
to generate revenues will depend solely on the commercial success of Stellar KLH
TM
, which depends upon its market acceptance
by purchasers in the pharmaceutical market and the future market demand and medical need for products and research utilizing KLH.
The degree of market acceptance of Stellar KLH
TM
depends on a number of factors including: the advantages and disadvantages
of Stellar KLH
TM
as compared to other KLH proteins; our ability to educate the industry about the high quality, sustainable
and traceable qualities of Stellar KLH
TM
; product efficacy; customer service; and the price and demonstrated cost-effectiveness
of Stellar KLH
TM
as compared to our competitors.
Our customers face uncertainties related to regulatory approval,
which could reduce the market for our products.
A primary market for our Stellar KLH
TM
products is
its use as a component
of active immunotherapies
under
development
. The pharmaceutical industry is subject to significant government regulation, which varies from country to country.
Many of the products
being
developed by our customers that utilize
our Stellar KLH
TM
are not yet approved for commercial sale. Before regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any
drug is granted, it must be demonstrated through preclinical research and clinical trials to be safe and effective for its intended
use in humans. The process to determine safety and efficacy, including clinical trials, is expensive, prolonged and uncertain.
The time necessary to complete these processes and clinical trials, and to submit applications for regulatory approvals, is difficult
to predict and is subject to numerous factors outside of our control. Such clinical trials may not be successful. Larger or later
stage clinical trials may not produce the same results as earlier trials. Successful results in clinical trials may not result
in regulatory approval, due to certain factors including unacceptable side effects or safety issues. If regulatory approval is
granted for any drug or product that utilizes Stellar KLH
TM
, it will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements,
which include registration, manufacturing, labeling, advertising and promotion, packaging, distribution, record keeping and reporting,
and storage. Manufacturing facilities, both those operated by us and by our contractors, would be subject to continual review and
inspection, and failure to meet these regulatory requirements can interrupt, delay, or shut down these facilities. Previously unknown
problems may result in regulatory restrictions on such products, including withdrawal from the marketplace. Delays in obtaining
regulatory approvals for products developed by our customers that use Stellar KLH
TM
, or failure to obtain or maintain
regulatory approvals altogether, would have a negative effect on market demand for our Stellar KLH
TM
products, and have
a negative effect on our operations and financial condition.
Our business is geographically concentrated and if a catastrophic
event, such as a hurricane, an earthquake or coastal flooding, were to impact our facilities, our business may be disrupted which
could result in serious harm to our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Our aquaculture operations, research and manufacturing
facilities, laboratory space, and executive offices are all located in Port Hueneme, California, a coastal city located along the
Pacific Ocean. To date, we have conducted all of our aquaculture operations, research and manufacturing at these facilities and
we currently have no active backup facilities or second sites. In July 2015, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Ostiones
Guerrero S.A. de C.V. to secure a strategic site in Baja California, Mexico for the development of an additional aquaculture locale
and expansion of our KLH production. However, we do not anticipate the site to be available for manufacture and production until
2018 at the earliest. There can be no assurance that these expansion plans will result in successful development of additional
sites of research and manufacturing and KLH production outside of our Port Hueneme location. If a hurricane, an earthquake or other
natural disaster, including coastal flooding, or a virus affecting our limpet colony, were to impact our facilities, we may be
unable to manufacture our KLH products, which would have a serious disruptive impact on our business and a material adverse effect
on our results of operations and financial condition. While we carry personal property insurance, such insurance may not be adequate
to compensate us for losses from any damage or interruption of our business operations resulting from a hurricane, an earthquake,
coastal flooding or other catastrophic event.
Uncertainty in the global geopolitical landscape from recent
events may impede the implementation of our strategy outside the United States.
There may be uncertainty
as to the position the United States will take with respect to world affairs and events following the 2016 U.S. presidential election
and related change in political agenda, coupled with the transition of administrations. This uncertainty may include such issues
as U.S. support for existing treaty and trade relationships with other countries. This uncertainty, together with other key global
events during 2016 (such as the continuing uncertainty arising from the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom as well as ongoing
terrorist activity), may adversely impact (i) the ability or willingness of non-U.S. companies to transact business in the United
States, including with Stellar (ii) regulation and trade agreements affecting U.S. companies, (iii) global stock markets ( including
The Nasdaq Capital Market on which our common shares are traded), and (iv) general global economic conditions. All of these factors
are outside of our control, but may nonetheless cause us to adjust our strategy in order to compete effectively in global markets.
Our joint venture with Neovacs involves numerous risks that
could adversely impact our financial results.
In May 2016, we entered into a strategic relationship
with Neovacs S.A. to manufacture and sell conjugated therapeutic vaccines through a newly-formed joint venture entity in France
called Neostell S.A.S. This relationship is subject to various risks that could adversely affect the value of our investments and
our results of operations. These risks include the following:
|
·
|
our interests could diverge from those of Neovacs or we may not be able to agree on ongoing manufacturing and operational activities,
or on the amount, timing, or nature of further investments in Neostell;
|
|
·
|
we may experience difficulties in transferring technology to Neostell;
|
|
·
|
we may experience difficulties and delays in manufacturing and production at Neostell;
|
|
·
|
as a minority partner, our control over the operations of Neostell is limited;
|
|
·
|
Neovacs may be unable to meet its commitments to us or to Neostell, which may pose credit risks for our transactions with them;
|
|
·
|
due to differing business models or long-term business goals, we and Neovacs may not participate to the same extent on funding
capital investments in Neostell;
|
|
·
|
our working capital or cash flows may be inadequate to fund increased capital requirements in Neostell;
|
|
·
|
we may experience difficulties or delays in collecting amounts due to us from Neostell and/or Neovacs due to multinational
financial regulations or geopolitical forces beyond our control; and
|
|
·
|
shifts in the geopolitical landscape resulting from the 2016 U.S. presidential election may result in tax, legal, or regulatory
changes in the United States, France and/or the European Union, thereby necessitating amendments to the agreements with Neovacs
and/or the structure of the joint venture.
|
If our joint venture with Neovacs is unsuccessful,
our business, results of operations, or financial condition may be materially adversely affected.
Our expansion plans include the design and development of
aquaculture infrastructure and KLH production in Mexico which presents substantial risks to our business and personnel. We may
never recoup our investment into this location.
We plan to develop an additional aquaculture
locale and expand KLH production on leased, undeveloped land in Baja California, Mexico. We are currently engaged in a three-year
study to assess the suitability of the site, and to initiate the design, expansion, and development of aquaculture resources and
KLH production facilities there. There are certain administrative, legal, governmental and societal risks to operating in Mexico
that could adversely impact our ability to expand our operations there. Any one or more of the risks that could adversely affect
our ability to successfully implement our expansion and therefore ultimately have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations include, without limitation:
|
·
|
geopolitical factors resulting from the 2016 U.S. presidential election and related change in administration, that could adversely
impact the ongoing relationship between the United States and Mexico and/or the continuity of the North American Free Trade Agreement,
or NAFTA, in its present form;
|
|
·
|
regional political and economic instability;
|
|
·
|
rate of crime in Mexico;
|
|
·
|
ability to hire and maintain a significant work force;
|
|
·
|
burdensome and evolving government regulations;
|
|
·
|
cooperation of various departments of the Mexican government in issuing permits, and inspecting our operations on a timely
basis;
|
|
·
|
providing adequate security for our employees; and
|
|
·
|
change in the value of the Mexican peso.
|
Our sales in international markets subject us to foreign currency
exchange and other
risks and costs, which could harm our business.
Substantial portions of our revenues are derived
from outside the United States; primarily from Europe and Asia. We anticipate that revenues from international customers will continue
to represent a substantial portion of our revenues for the foreseeable future. All our revenues are generated in U.S. dollars.
However, if the effective price of our products were to increase as a result of fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates,
demand for our products could decline and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
We compete with other companies in KLH production and manufacturing that may have greater resources than we do.
The immunotherapy industry is rapidly evolving
and new competitors with competing technologies and products are regularly entering the market. Our Stellar KLH
TM
products
are similar to KLH-based products produced by other companies. While we believe we are the only company that offers GMP grade KLH
supported by fully traceable manufacturing methods, we may not be able to maintain our competitive position against current and
potential competitors. We compete directly with Biosyn Corporation, a pharmaceutical and biotechnology company which manufactures
KLH starting material and offers clinical and research grade KLH products. We also compete directly with SAFC, a division of Sigma-Aldrich,
which offers clinical and research grade KLH products manufactured from its own starting material from ocean harvested limpets
and from aquaculture starting material purchased from us. Some of our competitors, both public and private, have greater financial
and personnel resources than us, and have greater sales and marketing experience in the industry than us. If they are able to produce
and sell comparable KLH products for less than us, it will have a negative effect on our operations and financial position. In
addition to competition from current suppliers of KLH, we also face indirect competition from developers of other carrier proteins,
adjuvants or therapeutic vaccine platforms. We are unable to predict what effect evolution of the KLH and immunotherapy industries
and potential new entrants may have on price, selling strategies, intellectual property or our competitive position.
We may not be able to meet demand for KLH from either internally
raised or ocean harvest sources.
We are dependent upon a supply of Giant Keyhole
Limpets (
Megathura crenulata
) for KLH production. The range of the Giant Keyhole Limpet in the wild is limited, and due
to the lack of a regulated harvest, the wild stocks of Giant Keyhole Limpets are believed to be declining. If the wild stocks are
depleted, and our hatchery and aquaculture operations are unable to produce sufficient supplies of captive Giant Keyhole Limpets
to meet demand, it would have a negative effect on our operations and financial condition.
We may not be able to manufacture our products in commercial
quantities and currently depend on third parties for certain steps in our manufacturing operations, which could prevent us from
marketing our products.
We contract with third party vendors, including
contract manufacturing organizations and contract testing organizations, for certain steps in the manufacture and testing of our
products, and may be unable to establish and maintain relationships with qualified manufacturers in order to produce sufficient
supplies of our finished products.
We are currently dependent upon a small number
of contractors and locations for certain steps in our manufacturing operations, namely fill/finish of vialed products and release
testing. We do not currently have backup manufacturing capacity for some of our key products. If we are unable to retain our current
contractors, or are unable to obtain new contractors to provide manufacturing services in a timely manner and on similar terms,
it will have a negative effect on our operations. Further, these contract manufacturers and testing organizations provide services
to many biotechnology and research companies, and such third party contractors may not provide acceptable quality, quantity or
costs required by us. In addition, they may not be able to provide the services required on a schedule acceptable to us. These
issues may result in us being unable to manufacture our products in the required quantities or at an acceptable cost, which would
have a negative effect on our operations and financial condition.
We have been, and expect to continue to be in the future,
significantly dependent on collaboration and supply agreements for the development and sales of Stellar KLH
TM
.
In conducting our research and development and
commercialization activities, we currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on collaboration and supply agreements with third
parties, such as contract research organizations, commercial partners, universities, gover
nmental
agencies and not-for-profit organizations, for strategic, technological, and financial resources. The inability to secure agreements
on acceptable terms, the termination of these relationships, changes in our strategy or development plans or those of third parties,
or failure to perform by us or third parties who are subject to regulatory, competitive and other risks, under their respective
agreements or arrangements with us, would substantially disrupt or delay our research and development and commercialization activities,
including anticipated commercial sales. Any such loss would likely increase our expenses and materially harm our business, financial
condition and results of operation.
We have limited marketing, sales and distribution experience
and capabilities. We will need to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market
and sell our products.
We currently have limited experience in the
marketing, sales and distribution of KLH-based therapeutic or diagnostic products. Depending on market acceptance of our Stellar
KLH
TM
products, we may need to expand our capabilities. We may not be able to establish such additional capabilities
in-house, and then will need to enter into agreements with third parties to successfully perform these tasks. If we contract or
make arrangements with third parties for the sales and marketing of our products, our revenues will be dependent on the efforts
of these third parties, whose efforts may not be successful. If we market any of our products directly, we must either internally
develop or acquire a marketing and sales force, which would require substantial resources and management attention.
We rely on the significant experience and specialized expertise
of our Chief Executive Officer and other members of our senior management team, and we will need to hire and retain other highly
skilled personnel to maintain and grow our business.
Our ability to be successful in the highly competitive
biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries depends in large part upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial,
scientific, medical, sales and other personnel. Our performance is substantially dependent on the research and development and
business development expertise of Frank Oakes, our President and Chief Executive Officer, and other executive officers. We do not
have employment agreements currently in effect with Mr. Oakes and other executive officers, and they are free to leave their employment
with us at any time.
There is little possibility that this dependence
will decrease in the near term. The loss of the services of Mr. Oakes, or the increased demands placed on our key executives and
personnel by our continued growth, could adversely affect our financial performance and our ability to execute our strategies.
Our continued success also depends on our ability to attract and retain qualified team members to meet our future growth needs.
We may not be able to attract and retain necessary team members to operate our business.
In addition, our future success depends on our
ability to identify, attract, hire, train, retain and motivate highly skilled technical, managerial and research personnel in all
areas within our organization. We plan to continue to grow our business and will need to hire additional personnel to support this
growth. We believe that there are only a limited number of individuals with the requisite skills to serve in many of our key positions,
and we compete for key personnel with other biotechnology companies, as well as universities and research institutions. It is often
difficult to hire and retain these persons, and we may be unable to timely replace key persons if they leave or be unable to fill
new positions, as they become available, requiring key persons with appropriate experience. If we fail to attract, integrate and
retain the necessary personnel, our ability to maintain and grow our business could suffer significantly.
We are subject to the risk of product liability claims, for
which we may not have, or be able to obtain, adequate insurance coverage.
The pharmaceutical industry is subject to product
liability claims in the event of adverse effects, even in respect to products that have received regulatory approval for commercial
sale. Such claims might be made directly by consumers, healthcare providers or by pharmaceutical companies, or others selling or
utilizing our Stellar KLH
TM
products. Although we currently maintain liability insurance for our products, we may not
be able to obtain or maintain sufficient and affordable insurance coverage for all claims that may occur. The cost of any product
liability litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. In addition, our inability to obtain
or maintain sufficient insurance coverage at an acceptable cost or to otherwise protect against potential product liability claims
could prevent or inhibit the development and commercial production and sale of our products, which could adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Our activities are subject
to regulation in the United States and in the foreign jurisdictions in which we operate. Failure to comply with applicable laws
and regulations could adversely impact our operations
Our operations, including our aquaculture and
harvesting activities, and our production activities, are subject to regulation at the local, state and federal levels in the United
States by a number of regulatory agencies including, but not limited to, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Secretary of the Navy, The Regional Water Quality Control Board,
the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and similar foreign agencies. In addition to regulations in the United States,
we may be subject to a variety of foreign regulations related to research, manufacturing, and the commercial sales and distribution
of our products, to the extent we choose to manufacture, sell or distribute any products outside of the United States. If we are
unable to comply with laws and regulations in the United States and elsewhere, our operations could be restricted, or sanctions
could be imposed on us, if we are found to not be in compliance with any such regulation.
We may face environmental
risks related to handling regulated substances and hazardous materials.
Our research
and clinical development activities, as well as the manufacture of materials and products, are subject to federal, state and local
laws, rules, regulations and policies governing the use, generation, manufacture, storage, air emission, effluent discharge, handling
and disposal of certain materials, biological specimens and wastes. We may be required to incur significant costs to comply with
environmental and health and safety regulations in the future. Our research and clinical development, both now and in the future,
may involve the controlled use of hazardous materials, including but not limited to certain hazardous chemicals. We cannot completely
eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of such an occurrence, we could be
held liable for any damages that result and any such liability could exceed our resources.
We deal with hazardous
materials and must comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, which can be expensive and restrict how we
do business and/or give rise to significant liabilities.
As we
operate a manufacturing facility, we are subject to various environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those
governing air emissions, water and wastewater discharges, noise emissions, the use, management and disposal of hazardous materials
and wastes, and the cleanup of contaminated sites. The cost of compliance with these laws and regulations could be significant.
In the event of a violation of these requirements, including from accidental contamination or injury, we could be held liable for
damages exceeding our available financial resources. We could be subject to monetary fines, penalties or third party damage claims
as a result of violations of such laws and regulations or noncompliance with environmental permits required at our facility. As
an operator of real property and a generator of hazardous materials and wastes, we also could be subject to environmental cleanup
liability, in some cases without regard to fault or whether we were aware of the conditions giving rise to such liability. In addition,
we may be subject to liability and may be required to comply with new or existing environmental laws regulating pharmaceuticals
in the environment. Environmental laws or regulations (or their interpretation) may become more stringent in the future. If any
such future revisions require significant changes in our operations, or if we engage in the development and manufacturing of new
products or otherwise expand our operations requiring new or different environmental controls, we will have to dedicate additional
management resources and incur additional expenses to comply with such laws and regulations.
In
the event of an accident, applicable authorities may curtail our use of hazardous materials and interrupt our business operations.
In addition, with respect to our manufacturing facility, we may incur substantial costs to comply with environmental regulations
and may become subject to the risk of accidental contamination or injury from the use of hazardous materials in our manufacturing
process.
Risks Related to Intellectual Property
The inability to protect our intellectual property rights
could result in competitive harm to our Company.
Our success and ability to maintain our competitive
position depends on our ability to protect our intellectual property, including by obtaining patent protection in the United States
and other countries, or through protection of our trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary
information. When appropriate, we seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and
other countries. If we are unable to protect our intellectual property, whether by obtaining patents or through trade secret protection,
our competitors could develop and commercialize products similar or identical to ours.
We may not have adequate remedies for any infringement
or funds to take action against those infringing any of our intellectual property rights, or if our trade secrets otherwise become
known or independently developed by competitors. There can be no assurance that any current or future patents held, licensed by
or applied for by us will be upheld, if challenged, or that the protections afforded will not be circumvented by others.
The
patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, which often involve licensing agreements, are frequently uncertain
and involve complex legal and factual questions. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly
reduced before the patent is issued. Consequently, our patents, patent applications and licensed rights may not provide protection
against competitive technologies or may be held invalid if challenged or could be circumvented.
If we enter litigation in
regards to our business or to protect or enforce our patents, it may involve substantial expenditures and require significant management
attention, even if we ultimately prevail.
The patent position of biotechnology companies
is generally highly uncertain. The degree of patent protection we require may be unavailable or severely limited in some cases
and may not adequately protect our rights, provide sufficient exclusivity, or preserve our competitive advantage. For example:
|
·
|
we might not have been the first to invent or the first to file patent applications on the inventions covered by each of our
pending patent applications;
|
|
·
|
others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies;
|
|
·
|
the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business;
|
|
·
|
any patents we obtain or license from others in the future may not encompass commercially viable products, may not provide
us with any competitive advantages or may be challenged by third parties;
|
|
·
|
any patents we have obtained, will obtain or license from others in the future may not be valid or enforceable; and
|
|
·
|
we may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable.
|
Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United
States, the natural expiration of a utility patent typically is generally 20 years after it is filed. Various extensions may be
available; however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited.
In addition, some of our technologies are not
covered by any patent application and we rely instead on confidentiality agreements and trade secret law to protect such intellectual
property rights. We require all of our employees and consultants to sign confidentiality agreements. The agreements also oblige
our employees, and to the extent practicable, our consultants, and advisors, to assign to us ideas, developments, discoveries and
inventions made by such persons in connection with their work with us. We cannot be sure that these agreements will maintain confidentiality,
will prevent disclosure, or will protect our proprietary information or intellectual property, or that others will not independently
develop substantially equivalent proprietary information or intellectual property.
The failure of our patents, patent applications,
applicable intellectual property law or our confidentiality agreements to protect our intellectual property and other proprietary
information, including our trade secrets, could have a material adverse effect on our competitive advantages and on our operations
and financial position.
Changes in patent law could diminish the value of patents
in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products and our technologies.
There are numerous recent changes to the U.S.
patent laws and proposed changes to the rules of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) that may have
a significant impact on our ability to obtain and enforce intellectual property rights. In particular, the Leahy-Smith America
Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”) was adopted in September 2011. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant
changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect
patent litigation. Under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first-inventor-to-file”
system for patent applications filed on or after March 16, 2013. With respect to patent applications filed on or after March 16,
2013, if we are the first to invent but not the first to file a patent application, we may not be able to fully protect our intellectual
property rights and may be found to have violated the intellectual property rights of others if we continue to operate in the absence
of a patent issued to us. Many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act have recently become
effective. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However,
the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent
applications and the enforcement or defense of any patents that issue, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our
business and financial condition.
In addition, patent reform legislation may pass
in the future that could lead to additional uncertainties and increased costs surrounding the prosecution, enforcement, and defense
of patent applications and any patents we may obtain. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit have made, and will likely continue to make, changes in how the patent laws of the United States are interpreted.
Similarly, foreign courts have made, and will likely continue to make, changes in how the patent laws in their respective jurisdictions
are interpreted. We cannot predict future changes in the interpretation of patent laws or changes to patent laws that might be
enacted into law by United States and foreign legislative bodies. Those changes may materially affect our patents and patent applications
or any patents we may obtain and our ability to obtain and enforce or defend additional patent protection in the future.
We may not be able to adequately protect our intellectual
property rights throughout the world.
Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on
our products and technologies in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. The requirements for patentability
may differ in certain countries, particularly developing countries, and the breadth of patent claims allowed can be inconsistent.
In addition, the laws of some foreign countries may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as laws in
the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside
the United States. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop
their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement
on infringing activities is inadequate.
We seek to protect our proprietary position
by, among other methods, filing, when possible, U.S. and foreign patent applications relating to our technology, inventions and
improvements that are important to our business. We have obtained patent protection for our non-lethal extraction methods of hemocyanin
in the United States and other countries. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation, and in-licensing
opportunities to develop and maintain our proprietary position.
We plan to file other international patent applications
directed to patentable features of our products and technologies from time to time. If patent rights are obtained in foreign jurisdictions,
proceedings to enforce such rights could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of
our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our pending patent applications
at risk of not issuing, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we
initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Thus, we may not be able to stop
a competitor from marketing and selling in foreign countries products that are the same as or similar to our product.
We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our
patents and patent applications, any patents that may be issued to us or other intellectual property, which could be expensive,
time consuming and unsuccessful.
Competitors may infringe our patents or patent
applications, or other of our intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement
or misappropriation claims, which can be expensive and time consuming. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could
provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents or claiming that our patents are
invalid or unenforceable. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements,
including lack of novelty, obviousness, non-enablement or lack of statutory subject matter. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion
could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant material information from the USPTO,
or made a materially misleading statement, during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar validity claims before the
USPTO in post-grant proceedings such as
ex parte
reexaminations,
inter partes
review, or post-grant review, or oppositions
or similar proceedings outside the United States, in parallel with litigation or even outside the context of litigation. The outcome
following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. We cannot be certain that there is no invalidating
prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. For any patents and patent applications we may
license, we may have limited or no right to participate in the defense of any such patents against challenge by a third party.
If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps
all, of any future patent protection on our products. Such a loss of patent protection could harm our business. In addition, in
a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that our patent applications or patents, if issued, are invalid or unenforceable,
in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly, or refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at
issue on the grounds that our patent applications do not cover the technology. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could
put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly.
Our trade secrets are difficult to protect and misappropriation
could reduce the market for our products.
We may not be able to obtain adequate remedies
for the unauthorized use or disclosure of our proprietary information, including our trade secrets. Enforcing a claim that a party
illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable.
If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor, we would have no right to
prevent them, or those to whom they communicate it, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our
trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position could be harmed.
Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that
we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse
effect on the success of our business.
Our success depends, in part, on our ability
to operate without infringing the patents and other proprietary intellectual property rights of third parties. This is generally
referred to as having the “freedom to operate.” The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by
extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. The defense and prosecution of intellectual property
claims, interference proceedings and related legal and administrative proceedings, both in the United States and internationally,
involve complex legal and factual questions. As a result, such proceedings are lengthy, costly and time-consuming, and their outcome
is highly uncertain. We may become involved in protracted and expensive litigation in order to determine the enforceability, scope
and validity of the proprietary rights of others, or to determine whether we have the freedom to operate with respect to the intellectual
property rights of others.
Patent applications in the United States are,
in most cases, maintained in secrecy until approximately 18 months after the patent application is filed. The publication of discoveries
in the scientific or patent literature frequently occurs substantially later than the date on which the underlying discoveries
were made. Therefore, patent applications relating to a product or method similar to ours may have already been filed by others
without our knowledge. In the event that a third party has also filed a patent application covering our products, methods or other
claims, we may have to participate in an adversarial proceeding, such as an interference or derivation proceeding in the USPTO
or similar proceedings in other countries, to determine the priority of invention. In the event an infringement claim is brought
against us, we may be required to pay substantial legal fees and other expenses to defend such a claim and, if we are unsuccessful
in defending the claim, we may be subject to injunctions or damage awards.
In the future, the USPTO or a foreign patent
office may grant patent rights to our claims to third parties. Subject to the issuance of these future patents, the claims of which
will be unknown until issued, we may need to obtain a license or sublicense to these rights in order to have the appropriate freedom
to further use, develop or commercialize such products or methods. Any required licenses may not be available to us on acceptable
terms, if at all. If it is determined that we have infringed an issued patent and do not have the freedom to operate, we could
be subject to injunctions, and compelled to pay significant damages, including punitive damages. In any cases where we in-license
intellectual property, our failure to comply with the terms and conditions of such licensing agreements could harm our business.
If we become involved in any patent litigation
or other legal proceedings, we could incur substantial expense, and the efforts of our technical and management personnel could
be significantly diverted. A negative outcome of such litigation or proceedings may expose us to the loss of our proprietary position
or to significant liabilities, or require us to seek licenses that may not be available from third parties on commercially acceptable
terms, if at all. We may be restricted or prevented from using or developing methods, or manufacturing and selling our products
in the event of an adverse determination in a judicial or an administrative proceeding, or if we fail to obtain necessary licenses.
Further, even if we are successful in defending against claims of infringement, such litigation could be burdensome and costly,
and divert management’s attention away from executing our business plan.
We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants
or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.
Certain of our employees were previously employed
at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. We may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent
contractors have inadvertently or otherwise improperly used or disclosed confidential information of these third parties or our
employees’ former employers. We may also be subject to claims that former employees, consultants, independent contractors
or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. Litigation may be necessary to
defend against these and other claims challenging our right to and use of confidential and proprietary information. If we fail
in defending any such claims, we may lose our rights to such information, in addition to paying monetary damages. Such an outcome
could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could
result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and employees.
Risks Related to Ownership of Our Securities
The price of our common shares may be subject to substantial
volatility.
Although our common shares are listed on The
Nasdaq Capital Market in the United States, there can be no assurance that an active public market will be sustained for our common
shares. If there is a thin trading market or “float” for our common shares, the market price for our common shares
may fluctuate significantly more than the stock market as a whole. Without a large float, our common shares would be less liquid
than the stock of companies with broader public ownership and, as a result, the trading price of our common shares may be more
volatile.
Furthermore, the stock market is subject to
significant price and volume fluctuations, and the price of our common shares has been in the past, and may continue in the future
to be subject to wide fluctuations in response to several factors, including:
|
·
|
our quarterly or annual operating results;
|
|
·
|
our cash and cash equivalents position;
|
|
·
|
changes in our earnings estimates;
|
|
·
|
investment recommendations by securities analysts following our business or our industry;
|
|
·
|
additions or departures of key personnel;
|
|
·
|
changes in the business, earnings estimates or market perceptions of our competitors;
|
|
·
|
our failure to achieve operating results consistent with securities analysts’ projections;
|
|
·
|
announcements or the expectation of raising additional financing;
|
|
·
|
sales of our common shares by us, our insiders or other shareholders;
|
|
·
|
the status of our listing on the Nasdaq;
|
|
·
|
changes in industry, general market or economic conditions; and
|
|
·
|
announcements of legislative or regulatory changes in the United States and in other countries where we transact business.
|
The stock markets in general, and the small-cap
biotech market, in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations in recent years that have significantly affected
the quoted prices of the securities of many companies, including companies in our industry. The changes often appear to occur without
regard to specific operating performance. The price of our common shares could fluctuate based upon factors that have little or
nothing to do with our company and these fluctuations could materially reduce our share price.
If we cannot meet Nasdaq’s continuing
listing requirements and Nasdaq rules, Nasdaq may delist our securities, which could negatively affect our company and the price
of our securities.
On November 3, 2015, our common shares were
approved for listing on The Nasdaq Capital Market and began trading on November 5, 2015. In order to meet certain initial listing
requirements of Nasdaq, on September 2, 2015, we effected a consolidation of our issued and outstanding common shares on the basis
of one (1) post-consolidation common share for every ten (10) pre-consolidation shares. We also amended our Articles to comply
with certain corporate governance requirements set forth in the Nasdaq Listing Guide, which amendment was approved at a special
meeting of our shareholders. These actions were time consuming and required substantial expense on the part of our Company. Although
our shares are currently listed on Nasdaq, in the future, we may not be able to meet the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq,
which require, among other things, a minimum bid price of $1.00 per share for common shares listed on the exchange. If we are unable
to satisfy the Nasdaq criteria for maintaining our listing, our securities could be subject to delisting. Trading of our securities
may still be eligible for an over-the-counter market or electronic bulletin board. As a consequence of any such delisting, our
shareholders would likely find it more difficult to dispose of, or to obtain accurate quotations as to the prices of our securities.
We may require additional financing or financings, which would
result in substantial dilution to existing shareholders.
Management currently estimates
that our operations, including research and development, capital expenditures and general and administrative expenses, will require
approximately $6.5 million for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017. We believe our cash and cash equivalents and short-term
investments at September 30, 2016 are sufficient to meet estimated working capital requirements and fund planned operations for
at least the next 12 months. Notwithstanding the above, we may decide to expand operations, undertake strategic acquisitions or
determine some other business need. In such case, we would then seek financing for such events through the sale of additional common
shares, debt securities or bank loans. Our ongoing research and development activities may be dependent upon our ability to obtain
funds, which may include the sale of common shares, as well as possible debt financings, joint ventures, or other means. Such sources
of financing may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all. Failure to obtain such financing may result in delay or indefinite
postponement of research and development of our Stellar KLH
TM
. Any transaction involving the issuance of previously
authorized but unissued common shares, or securities convertible into common shares, could result in dilution, possibly substantial,
to present and prospective holders of common shares and may be on terms less favorable to us.
We could be deemed a “passive foreign investment company”
in the future, which could have negative consequences for U.S. investors.
We would be designated as a “passive foreign
investment company”, or a PFIC, under the meaning of Section 1297 of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, or the Code, if (a) 75% or more of our gross income is “passive income” (generally, dividends, interest, rents,
royalties and gains from the disposition of assets producing passive income) in any taxable year, or (b) at least 50% of the average
value of our assets produce, or are held for the production of, passive income. If we are designated a PFIC for any taxable year
during which a U.S. shareholder holds our common shares, it would likely result in materially adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences
for such U.S. shareholder, including, but not limited to, any gain from the sale of our common shares would be taxed as ordinary
income, as opposed to capital gain, and such gain and certain distributions on our common shares would be subject to an interest
charge, except in certain circumstances. In addition, U.S. shareholders should be aware that there can be no assurances that we
would be able to satisfy the record keeping requirements that apply to a PFIC, or that we would supply U.S. shareholders with the
information that such U.S. shareholders require to make certain elections available under the Code that are intended to mitigate
the adverse tax consequences of the PFIC rules. The PFIC rules are extremely complex. A U.S. shareholder of our common shares is
encouraged to consult a tax advisor regarding the PFIC rules and the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the acquisition, ownership
and disposition of our common shares.
We are governed by the corporate laws in British Columbia,
Canada which in some cases have a different effect on shareholders than the corporate laws in Delaware.
The material
differences between the British Columbia
Business Corporations Act (the “BCBCA”) as compared to the
Delaware General Corporation Law (the “DGCL”) which may be of most interest to shareholders include the
following: (i) for material corporate transactions (such as amalgamations, other extraordinary corporate transactions,
amendments to the notice of articles and amendments to the Articles), the BCBCA generally requires a two-thirds majority vote
by shareholders (and, in addition, especially where the holders of a class of shares are being affected differently from
others, approval will be required by holders of two-thirds of the shares of such class voting in a meeting called for that
purpose), whereas the DGCL generally only requires a majority vote of shareholders for similar material corporate
transactions; (ii) quorum for shareholders meetings is not prescribed under the BCBCA and is 33-1/3% under our Articles (to
assure compliance with Nasdaq corporate governance requirements); whereas, under the DGCL, quorum requires the holders of a
majority of the shares entitled to vote to be present; and (iii) our Articles require a two-thirds majority vote of
shareholders to pass a resolution for one or more directors to be removed, whereas the DGCL requires only the affirmative
vote of a majority of the shareholders.
Risks Related to an Emerging Growth Company
We are an “emerging growth company” under the
JOBS Act of 2012 and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make
our common shares less attractive to investors.
We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of
2012 (JOBS Act), and as a result, we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable
to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies.” We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions
until we are no longer an “emerging growth company.” We will remain an “emerging growth company” until
the earlier of: (i) the last day of the fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the date of our initial registration
statement on Form 20-F, which was February 3, 2012, (b) in which we have more than $1.0 billion in annual revenues, or (c) in which
we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which means the market value of our common shares that is held by non-affiliates
exceeded $700 million as of the prior March 31
st
, and (ii) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in
non-convertible debt securities during the prior three-year period. We may choose to take advantage of some but not all of these
reduced reporting burdens.
For so long as we remain an emerging growth
company, we will not be required to:
|
·
|
have an auditor report on our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404(b) of Sarbanes-Oxley;
|
|
·
|
comply with any requirement that may be adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”), regarding
mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor’s report providing additional information about the audit and
the financial statements (auditor discussion and analysis);
|
|
·
|
submit certain executive compensation matters to shareholders advisory votes pursuant to the “say on frequency”
and “say on pay” provisions (requiring a non-binding shareholder vote to approve compensation of certain executive
officers) and the “say on golden parachute” provisions (requiring a non-binding shareholder vote to approve golden
parachute arrangements for certain executive officers in connection with mergers and certain other business combinations) of the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010; and
|
|
·
|
include detailed compensation discussion and analysis in our filings under the Exchange Act, and, instead, may provide a reduced
level of disclosure concerning executive compensation.
|
In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act also
provides that an “emerging growth company” can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section
7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act for complying with new or revised accounting standards. In other words, an “emerging growth
company” can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies.
We have elected not to take advantage of the extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards.
If we take advantage of any of these reduced
reporting burdens in future filings, the information that we provide our security holders may be different than information such
security holders might receive from other public companies in which they hold equity interests. We cannot predict if investors
will find our common shares less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common shares less
attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common shares and our share price may be more volatile.
Item 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.
None.
Item 2. PROPERTIES.
We currently lease 4,300 square feet of executive
office and laboratory space in Port Hueneme, California under a lease which was renewed in July 2016 for a two-year term, with
options to renew for three successive two-year terms.
Our aquaculture operations are land-based, and
encompass three buildings and a 37,000 square foot oceanfront leasehold facility in the Port Hueneme Aquaculture Business Park,
located along the Pacific Coast. These facilities include our aquaculture, manufacturing, and laboratory operations, and are leased
from the Oxnard Harbor District under three sublease agreements that expire in September and October 2020 with options to extend
the leases for two additional five-year terms.
We also currently lease undeveloped land in Baja
California, Mexico under a lease agreement which we entered into in June 2015, with a three-year term, which lease agreement is
terminable at will at any time with 30 days prior notice by either party. We expect to utilize the undeveloped land to conduct
suitability studies over the next three years for the potential development of an additional aquaculture locale and future expansion
of production.
Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
From time to time, we may be involved in legal
proceedings, claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, including contract disputes, employment matters
and intellectual property disputes. We are not currently a party to any material legal proceedings or claims outside the ordinary
course of business. Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs,
diversion of management resources and other factors.
Item 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES.
Not applicable.
PART II
|
Item 5.
|
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED
STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.
|
Market Information
Our common shares trade on The Nasdaq Capital
Market in the United States under the symbol “SBOT” since November 5, 2015.
From January 15, 2013 through November 4, 2015,
our common shares were traded in the United States on the U.S. OTCQB Marketplace Exchange under the symbol “SBOTF.”
From April 19, 2010 to April 8, 2016 our common shares traded on the TSX Venture Exchange in Canada under the symbol “KLH.”
The table below lists the
high and low closing prices for our common shares for each fiscal quarter during 2016 and 2015 as reported by Nasdaq, Inc. or OTC
Markets Group, Inc, as applicable. The OTC quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission,
and may not necessarily represent actual transactions. The prices have been adjusted to reflect the one share for ten shares reverse
share split completed on September 2, 2015.
Common Shares Trading Activity
Nasdaq Capital Market and OTCQB Marketplace
|
|
U.S. Dollars
|
|
Period
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter Ended 9/30/16
|
|
$
|
3.82
|
|
|
$
|
2.13
|
|
Third Quarter Ended 6/30/16
|
|
|
4.70
|
|
|
|
2.44
|
|
Second Quarter Ended 3/31/16
|
|
|
6.85
|
|
|
|
4.81
|
|
First Quarter Ended 12/31/15 (after 11/4/15)
|
|
|
9.41
|
|
|
|
6.49
|
|
First Quarter Ended 12/31/15 (through 11/4/15)*
|
|
|
8.56
|
|
|
|
6.75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter Ended 9/30/15*
|
|
$
|
9.04
|
|
|
$
|
5.30
|
|
Third Quarter Ended 6/30/15*
|
|
|
9.15
|
|
|
|
6.11
|
|
Second Quarter Ended 3/31/15*
|
|
|
11.72
|
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
First Quarter Ended 12/31/14*
|
|
|
15.40
|
|
|
|
10.20
|
|
* OTC quotations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The table below lists the
high and low sales prices for our common shares on the TSX Venture Exchange for the first two fiscal quarters during 2016 and the
partial third quarter through April 8, 2016, and for each fiscal quarter during 2015. The quotations on the TSX Venture Exchange
were obtained from QuoteMedia.com. These quotations reflect adjusted close prices, and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
The prices have been adjusted to reflect the one share for ten shares reverse share split completed on September 2, 2015.
Common Shares Trading Activity
TSX Venture Exchange
|
|
Canadian Dollars
|
|
Period
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Third Quarter Ended 6/30/16 (through 4/8/16)
|
|
$
|
6.07
|
|
|
$
|
4.90
|
|
Second Quarter Ended 3/31/16
|
|
|
9.44
|
|
|
|
6.30
|
|
First Quarter Ended 12/31/15
|
|
|
12.55
|
|
|
|
8.92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter Ended 9/30/15
|
|
$
|
11.99
|
|
|
$
|
6.70
|
|
Third Quarter Ended 6/30/15
|
|
|
11.40
|
|
|
|
7.40
|
|
Second Quarter Ended 3/31/15
|
|
|
13.90
|
|
|
|
10.70
|
|
First Quarter Ended 12/31/14
|
|
|
17.30
|
|
|
|
11.60
|
|
Holders
As of December 9, 2016, we had 10,136,258 common
shares outstanding, with 18 shareholders of record. The number of record shareholders was determined from the records of our stock
transfer agent and does not reflect persons or entities that hold their shares in nominee or “street” name through
various brokerage firms.
Securities Authorized for Issuance Under
Equity Compensation Plans
See Item 12 “
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
” of this report.
Dividends
We have not declared any
dividends on our common shares since our incorporation and do not anticipate that we will do so in the foreseeable future. Our
present policy is to retain future earnings, if any, for use in our operations and the expansion of our business.
Performance Graph
The following performance graph and related information shall
not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC, nor shall such information be
incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate
it by reference into such filing.
The graph set forth below compares the cumulative
total return of our common shares to the Nasdaq Composite Index and the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index based on the period from August
31, 2011 through the Company’s fiscal year end on September 30, 2016. The graph assumes $100 was invested on August 31, 2011
in our common shares and in each of the comparative indices and assumes reinvestment of dividends, if any.
The comparisons shown in the graph below are
based on historical data. We caution that the stock price performance showing in the graph below is not necessarily indicative
of, nor is it intended to forecast, the potential future performance of our common shares. Information used in the graph was obtained
from S&P Capital IQ, a source believed to be reliable, but we are not responsible for any errors or omissions in such information.
Please also note that, due to the fact that the graph begins in August and includes a transition period resulting from a change
in fiscal year-end, the horizontal segments of the graph do not represent equal time intervals.
|
|
8/31/11
|
|
|
8/31/12
|
|
|
8/31/13
|
|
|
8/31/14
|
|
|
9/30/15
|
|
|
9/30/16
|
|
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
$
|
60.71
|
|
|
$
|
253.73
|
|
|
$
|
288.17
|
|
|
$
|
115.99
|
|
|
$
|
43.50
|
|
Nasdaq Composite Index
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
$
|
120.26
|
|
|
$
|
142.81
|
|
|
$
|
184.44
|
|
|
$
|
188.33
|
|
|
$
|
219.26
|
|
Nasdaq Biotechnology Index
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
$
|
141.71
|
|
|
$
|
202.24
|
|
|
$
|
289.21
|
|
|
$
|
316.85
|
|
|
$
|
302.65
|
|
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities; Use of Proceeds from
Registered Securities
None.
Purchase of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
None.
Item 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.
Our selected financial
data in the table below is derived from our audited financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States (US GAAP). Our auditors for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015
and August 31, 2014, Moss Adams LLP, conducted the audits in accordance with United States generally accepted auditing standards,
and the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Our auditors for the fiscal years ended August 31, 2013 and
2012, D&H Group LLP, conducted the audits in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards, and the standards
of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. You should read these selected financial data together with “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Item 7 and our audited financial statements
and notes thereto that are included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Selected Financial Data
Expressed in U.S. dollars
|
|
Year Ended
September 30,
2016
|
|
|
Year Ended
September 30,
2015
|
|
|
Year Ended
August 31,
2014
|
|
|
Year Ended
August 31,
2013
|
|
|
Year Ended
August 31,
2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
1,271,689
|
|
|
$
|
758,689
|
|
|
$
|
372,132
|
|
|
$
|
545,469
|
|
|
$
|
286,054
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(5,026,080
|
)
|
|
|
(2,843,029
|
)
|
|
|
(8,439,523
|
)
|
|
|
(14,495,779
|
)
|
|
|
(5,529,278
|
)
|
Net loss per share
|
|
|
(0.57
|
)
|
|
|
(0.36
|
)
|
|
|
(1.11
|
)
|
|
|
(2.81
|
)
|
|
|
(1.26
|
)
|
Total assets
|
|
|
12,937,804
|
|
|
|
10,385,927
|
|
|
|
14,473,962
|
|
|
|
8,513,358
|
|
|
|
1,543,878
|
|
Long-term obligations
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,352,663
|
|
|
|
6,835,199
|
|
|
|
124,141
|
|
Supplementary Financial Information
Selected Quarterly Financial Data
U.S. dollars are shown in thousands, except
per share data
|
|
For the Year Ended September 30,
|
|
|
For the Year Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
277
|
|
|
$
|
181
|
|
|
$
|
326
|
|
|
$
|
488
|
|
|
$
|
200
|
|
|
$
|
158
|
|
|
$
|
188
|
|
|
$
|
213
|
|
Net income (loss) for period
|
|
|
(1,349
|
)
|
|
|
(1,194
|
)
|
|
|
(861
|
)
|
|
|
(1,622
|
)
|
|
|
(1,538
|
)
|
|
|
464
|
|
|
|
(426
|
)
|
|
|
(1,343
|
)
|
Income (loss) per share - Basic
|
|
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
|
(0.14
|
)
|
|
|
(0.10
|
)
|
|
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
(0.05
|
)
|
|
|
(0.17
|
)
|
Income (loss) per share - Diluted
|
|
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
|
(0.14
|
)
|
|
|
(0.10
|
)
|
|
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
|
(0.19
|
)
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
|
|
(0.05
|
)
|
|
|
(0.17
|
)
|
Fluctuations in net income
(loss) between quarters can be mainly attributed to changes in fair value of warrant liability shown in thousands as follows:
|
|
For the Year Ended September 30,
|
|
|
For the Year Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value of warrant liability - gain (loss)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(212
|
)
|
|
$
|
(325
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,254
|
|
|
$
|
1,062
|
|
|
$
|
140
|
|
|
Item 7.
|
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
.
|
This discussion
contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or events to differ materially
from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements as a result of many important factors, including those set forth
in Part I of this Annual Report on Form 10-K under the caption “Risk Factors.” Please see “Special Note Regarding
Forward-Looking Statements” in Part I above. We do not undertake any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect
events or circumstances occurring after the date of this Annual Report.
Operating and Financial Review and Prospects
Overview
Our financial statements
have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”)
and include the accounts of the Company and our wholly-owned subsidiary, Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
Since inception, we have
primarily financed our activities through the issuance of common shares, exercise of warrants, grant revenues, contract services
revenue, and product sales. In July 2016, the Company closed a $6.75 million registered direct offering. Management believes our
financial resources are adequate to support our current initiatives at the current level for at least the next 12 months. Management
is also continuing the ongoing effort toward expanding the customer base for existing marketed products, and we may seek additional
financing alternatives, including additional equity financing, debt financing, bank loans, or nondilutive financing alternatives
including applying for grants and entering into collaboration and/or licensing arrangements.
Results of Operations
The greatest impact on
the comparison of our consolidated statements of operations is from fluctuations in the change in fair value of our warrant liability.
As a result of having exercise prices denominated in a currency other than our functional currency, our warrants with Canadian
dollar exercise prices met the definition of derivatives and were therefore classified as derivative liabilities measured at fair
value with noncash adjustments to fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations. Fair values were based
on the Black-Scholes option valuation model. The losses and gains in each year were a reflection of our share price fluctuations
whereby increases in share prices caused greater warrant liability and a resulting loss on fair value of warrant liability, while
decreases in share prices caused a resulting gain on fair value of warrant liability. Changes in fair value of warrant liability
had no impact on cash flow. If the warrants were exercised, the warrant liability was reclassified to common shares. If the warrants
expired, the decrease in warrant liability offset the changes in fair value. All warrants with exercise prices denominated in Canadian
dollars were exercised or expired by December 31, 2015. Therefore, there was no change in fair value after that time.
Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2016
Our total revenues
increased by $513,000 to $1,271,689 for fiscal 2016 compared to $758,689 for fiscal 2015. Product sales increased by $676,000 to
$1,239,689 for fiscal 2016 compared to $563,689 for fiscal 2015 primarily due to an increase in the number of customers and greater
product sales volume, including sales under supply agreements and custom manufactured products. Contract services revenue decreased
by $163,000 to $32,000 for fiscal 2016 compared to $195,000 for fiscal 2015 as a result of the successful conclusion of a collaboration
agreement in December 2015.
Our total expenses
increased by $1,082,764 to $6,180,045 for fiscal 2016 compared to $5,097,281 for fiscal 2015.
Our costs of sales
and contract services increased by $237,742 to $818,556 for fiscal 2016 compared to $580,824 for fiscal 2015, due to increased
product sales.
Our research and development
expenses increased by $699,956 to $1,729,445 fiscal 2016 compared to $1,029,489 for fiscal 2015. The increase was a result of additional
research and development in aquaculture, both in the U.S. and for our aquaculture feasibility assessment in Baja California, Mexico;
improvements in analytical, manufacturing, and purification processes; stability studies; and formulation development.
Our general and administrative
expenses increased by $95,227 to $3,322,772 for fiscal 2016 compared to $3,227,545 for fiscal 2015. The increase resulted from
increased corporate expenses, including our Nasdaq listing fees; compensation increases; and expanded business development and
investor relations activities; offset by decreases in legal fees due to the Form S-3 shelf registration statement and our transition
to reporting as a U.S. domestic issuer during fiscal 2015.
Other income decreased
by $1,642,887 to an overall loss of $110,524 for fiscal 2016 compared to an overall gain of $1,532,363 for fiscal 2015 primarily
due to a noncash change in fair value of warrant liability, which fluctuated to a loss of $211,956 for fiscal 2016 compared to
a gain of $2,131,062 in fiscal 2015. All warrants with Canadian dollar exercise prices were exercised or expired by December 2015
and, consequently, there was no warrant liability and no gain/loss in fair value of warrant liability after that time. These fair
value gains and losses occur in inverse relation to changes in our share price that affect the Black Scholes valuation model. The
loss in fiscal 2016 is a result of the increase in our share price from September 30, 2015 to the exercise dates of the warrants
compared to the gain in fiscal 2015 as a reflection of both the decrease in our share price from September 30, 2014 to the exercise
dates of warrants during the year and the decrease in our share price from $11.90 at September 30, 2014 to $6.40 for warrants outstanding
at September 30, 2015. Our foreign exchange gain in fiscal 2016 was $76,800 compared to a foreign exchange loss of $653,333 in
fiscal 2015. The change over the prior year was due to improved exchange rates for our Canadian cash and cash equivalents. The
portion of foreign exchange realized in cash was gain of $2,137 in fiscal 2016 and loss of $14,995 in fiscal 2015.
Our net loss for fiscal
2016 was $5,026,080, or $0.57 per basic share, compared to a net loss of $2,843,029, or $0.36 per basic share, for fiscal 2015.
The increase in net loss of approximately $2.2 million for fiscal 2016 was primarily due to significant fluctuations in non-cash
gain/loss in fair value of warrant liability and non-cash foreign exchange gain/loss, as well as increased research and development
expenses, which were offset by increased product sales.
Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2015
Our total revenues
increased by $386,557 to $758,689 for fiscal 2015 compared to $372,132 for fiscal 2014. Product sales increased by $420,136 to
$563,689 for fiscal 2015 compared to $143,553 for fiscal 2014 due to an increase in the number of customers and greater product
sales volume including sales under supply agreements and custom manufactured products. Contract services revenue increased by
$3,000 to 195,000 for fiscal 2015 compared to $192,000 for fiscal 2014 due to the net impact of services performed under a collaboration
agreement entered into December 2013 and completion of services in December 2014 related to a supply agreement. There were no
grant revenues for fiscal 2015 compared to $36,579 in fiscal 2014 due to the completion of work associated with our Phase II/IIB
grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF) Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) through the Technology Enhancement
for Commercial Partnerships program.
Our total expenses
decreased by $993,367 to $5,097,281 for fiscal 2015 compared to $6,090,648 for fiscal 2014.
Our costs of sales
and contract services increased by $111,675 to $580,824 for fiscal 2015 compared to $469,149 for fiscal 2014, due to increased
sales and contract services revenue. Also, due to the early stage of our development in fiscal 2014, all manufacturing costs of
production were expensed during that period. There were no grant expenses for fiscal 2015 compared to $36,579 in fiscal 2014 due
to the closeout of NSF Phase II/IIB grants in November 2013.
Our research and development
expenses decreased by $1,429,445 to $1,029,489 for fiscal 2015, as compared to $2,458,934 for fiscal 2014 due to the decreased
use of contract research organizations as we realigned our focus from internal research and process development to manufacturing
our Stellar KLH™ products in response to increased customer demand.
Our general and administrative
expenses increased by $356,090 to $3,227,545 for fiscal 2015, compared to $2,871,455 for fiscal 2014. The increase was due to the
net impact of increased corporate expenses, including legal and audit fees related to our transition to reporting as a U.S. domestic
issuer rather than a foreign private issuer, our Nasdaq application and listing, and increased business development and investor
relations activity, partially offset by decreases in share-based compensation. Share-based compensation is allocated to all expense
types but the greatest portion is recorded as general and administrative expenses. Share-based compensation was $267,222 for fiscal
2015, which was a decrease from $956,634 recorded in fiscal 2014. The decrease for fiscal 2015 was related to fewer share options
granted, fluctuations in our share price that affect the valuation model and vesting of options granted in prior years.
Other income increased
by $4,226,170 to an overall gain of $1,532,363 for fiscal 2015 compared to an overall loss of $2,693,807 for fiscal 2014 primarily
due to a noncash change in fair value of warrant liability, which fluctuated to a gain of $2,131,062 for fiscal 2015 from a loss
of $2,533,305 in fiscal 2014. These fair value gains and losses occur in inverse relation to changes in our share price that affect
the valuation model. The gain in fiscal 2015 is a reflection of the decrease in our share price from $11.90 to $6.40 compared to
the loss in fiscal 2014 as a result of the increase in our share price from $14.00 to $15.90. Also, there were fewer Canadian denominated
warrants outstanding than each prior year. The increase in overall gain in fiscal 2015 was offset by an increase in foreign exchange
loss to $653,333 over the same period. Our foreign exchange loss in fiscal 2014 was $222,437. The change over the prior year was
due to unfavorable exchange rates for our Canadian cash and cash equivalents. The portion of foreign exchange loss realized in
cash was $14,995 in fiscal 2015, and $26,778 in the fiscal 2014.
Our net loss for fiscal
2015 was $2,843,029, or $0.36 per basic share, compared to a net loss of $8,439,523, or $1.11 per basic share, for fiscal 2014.
The decrease in net loss of approximately $5.6 million for fiscal 2015 was primarily due to a significant noncash gain in the fair
value of warrant liability, increased sales and decreased research and development expenses.
Capital Expenditures
Our capital expenditures,
which primarily consist of scientific, manufacturing, and aquaculture equipment, and facility leasehold improvements for the previous
three fiscal years are as follows:
Fiscal Year
|
|
Capital Expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
$
|
402,271
|
|
2015
|
|
|
274,589
|
|
2014
|
|
|
279,065
|
|
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our working capital
position at September 30, 2016 was $11,476,011, including cash and cash equivalents of $7,416,904 and short-term investments of
$3,988,794. Management currently estimates that our operations, including research and development, capital expenditures and general
and administrative expenses, will require approximately $6.0 million for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017. Management
has flexibility to adjust these expenditures based on a number of factors including the size and timing of capital expenditures,
staffing levels, inventory levels, and the status of customer clinical trials. Management believes the current working capital
is sufficient to meet our present requirements, including all contractual obligations and anticipated research and development
expenditures for at least the next 12 months. In July 2016, we closed a registered direct offering of an aggregate of 1,687,500
of our common shares, and a concurrent private placement of warrants to purchase up to an aggregate of 1,265,626 common shares
with an exercise price of $4.50 per share, resulting in net proceeds of approximately $6 million. We may pursue opportunities to
obtain additional financing in the future through equity financings. We have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
and the Securities and Exchange Commission declared effective, a universal shelf registration statement of up to $100 million worth
of registered equity securities, of which we utilized approximately $6.75 million in our July 2016 offering. Under this effective
registration statement, we may issue registered securities, from time to time, in one or more separate offerings or other transactions
with the size, price and terms to be determined at the time of issuance. Pursuant to General Instruction I.B.6 of Form S-3, in
no event will we sell securities in a public primary offering with a value of more than one-third of the aggregate market value
of our common shares held by non-affiliates in any twelve-month period, so long as the aggregate market value of our common shares
held by non-affiliates remains below $75 million. Registered securities issued using our existing shelf may be used to raise additional
capital to fund our working capital, R&D and other corporate needs.
We expect to finance our
future expenditures and obligations through revenues from product sales, contract services income, and sales of common shares.
We expect to continue incurring losses for the foreseeable future and may need to raise additional capital to pursue our business
plan and continue as a going concern. We cannot provide any assurances that we will be able to raise additional capital. Our management
believes that we have access to capital resources through possible public or private equity offerings, debt financings, corporate
collaborations or other means, if needed; however, we have not secured any commitment for new financing at this time, nor can we
provide any assurance that new financing will be available on commercially acceptable terms, if needed.
Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2016
As of September 30,
2016, our working capital position was $11,476,011 compared to working capital of $7,485,971 as of September 30, 2015. Working
capital was reduced by the noncash current portion of our warrant liability in the amount of $1,550,630 at September 30, 2015,
however, there is no warrant liability at September 30, 2016.
Our cash and cash equivalents
totaled $7,416,904 at September 30, 2016, as compared to cash and cash equivalents of $3,955,503 at September 30, 2015, which represented
an increase of $3,461,401. Our short-term investments totaled $3,988,794 at September 30, 2016, as compared to short-term investments
of $5,015,171 at September 30, 2015, which represented a decrease of $1,026,377.
During fiscal 2016,
operating activities used cash of $4,505,629. Items not affecting cash included: depreciation and amortization of $149,565; share-based
compensation related to the issuance of share options of $259,379; unrealized foreign exchange gain of $76,800; and loss in fair
value of warrant liability of $211,956 due to adjustment to fair value of warrants previously issued as a result of the increase
in the price of our shares. Changes in working capital items include an decrease in accounts receivable of $71,827 due to timing
of sales and cash receipts; decrease in inventory of $307,850 due to increased sales; increase in prepaid expenses of $197,150
primarily due to prepaid R&D supplies; decrease in accounts payable and accrued liabilities of $33,403; and decrease in deferred
revenue of $173,333 recognized as sales when products were billed.
Investing activities provided
cash of $557,411. The acquisition of property, plant and equipment used cash of $402,271. Purchase of short-term investments used
cash of $11,995,450. Proceeds on maturities of short-term investments provided cash of $13,021,827. Contribution to joint venture
used cash of $66,695. The effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents was an increase of $96,623.
Financing activities provided
cash of $7,312,996. The proceeds from issuance of common shares and warrants provided cash of $6,277,500 and share issuance costs
used cash of $332,764. The proceeds from exercise of warrants and options provided cash of $1,368,260.
During fiscal 2016, a
total of 2,151,500 common shares were issued:
|
·
|
1,687,500
common shares were issued in a registered direct offering for gross proceeds of $6,750,000.
|
|
·
|
464,000 common shares were issued pursuant to the exercise of warrants for gross proceeds of $1,368,260.
|
Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2015
As of September 30, 2015,
our working capital position was $7,485,971 compared to working capital of $12,650,004 as of August 31, 2014. Working capital is
reduced by the noncash current portion of our warrant liability in the amount of $1,550,630 and $879,040 at September 30, 2015
and August 31, 2014, respectively.
Our cash and cash equivalents
totaled $3,955,503 at September 30, 2015, as compared to cash and cash equivalents of $8,423,089 at August 31, 2014, which represented
a decrease of $4,467,586. Our short-term investments totaled $5,015,171 at September 30, 2015, as compared to short-term investments
of $5,462,413 at August 31, 2014, which represented a decrease of $447,242.
During fiscal 2015, operating activities used cash of $4,412,395. Items not affecting cash included: depreciation
and amortization of $159,521; share-based compensation related to the issuance of share options of $267,222; unrealized foreign
exchange loss of $653,333; and gain in fair value of warrant liability of $2,131,062 due to adjustment to fair value of warrants
previously issued as a result in the decrease in the price of our shares. Changes in working capital items include an increase
in accounts receivable of $113,917 related mostly to increased revenues; increase in inventory of $522,389 caused by recording
inventory beginning in fiscal 2015; increase in prepaid expenses of $45,758; increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities
of $77,018; and increase in deferred revenue of $86,666 related to deposits on custom manufactured products billed in advance.
Investing activities provided
cash of $122,470. The acquisition of property, plant and equipment used cash of $274,589. Purchase of short-term investments used
cash of $13,677. Proceeds on maturities of short-term investments provided cash of $410,736. The effect of exchange rate changes
on cash and cash equivalents was a reduction of $629,808.
Financing activities provided
cash of $106,777 from the proceeds from exercise of warrants and options.
During fiscal 2015,
a total of 42,773 common shares were issued upon the exercise of warrants and options, of which:
|
·
|
4,020 common shares were issued pursuant to the exercise of warrants for gross proceeds of $12,609.
|
|
·
|
38,753 common shares were issued pursuant to the exercise of options for proceeds of $94,168.
|
Research and Development
Our
core business is developing and commercializing Keyhole Limpet Hemocyanin for use in immunotherapy and immunodiagnostic applications.
Our internal research has included, among other activities, continual improvement of methods for the culture and growth of Giant
Keyhole Limpet, innovations in aquaculture systems and infrastructure, biophysical and biochemical characterization of the KLH
molecule, analytical processes to enhance performance of our products, KLH manufacturing process improvements, new KLH formulations,
and early development of potential new KLH-based immunotherapies.
Research and development
costs, including materials and salaries of employees directly involved in research and development efforts, are expensed as incurred.
The following table includes our research and
development costs for each of the most recent three fiscal years:
Fiscal Year
|
|
Research and
Development Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
$
|
1,729,445
|
|
2015
|
|
|
1,029,489
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2,458,934
|
|
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 material effect on our financial condition, changes in financial
condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures, or capital resources.
Disclosure of Contractual Obligations
We lease three buildings
and facilities used in operations under sublease agreements with the Oxnard Harbor District. In June 2015, we exercised our option
to extend these sublease agreements, each for an additional five-year term beginning in October and November 2015. We also negotiated
an option to extend the leases for two additional five-year terms.
We lease facilities used
for executive offices and laboratories, and we must pay a portion of the common area maintenance. In July 2016, we exercised our
option to extend this lease for a two-year term, with options to renew for three successive two-year terms.
In June 2015, we leased
undeveloped land in Baja California, Mexico to assess its suitability for the long-term development and potential expansion of
our production capability. The first two years rent was prepaid in June 2015. The initial term is three years and we may terminate
early with 30 days’ notice. If we decide to proceed with development of the site, we have options to extend the lease for
30 years.
We have purchase commitments
for contract research organizations, consultants and construction contractors.
The approximate amounts
of our contractual obligations are as follows:
Contractual Obligations
As of September 30, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 1
|
|
|
1-3
|
|
|
3-5
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
year
|
|
|
years
|
|
|
years
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating lease obligations
|
|
$
|
591,000
|
|
|
$
|
185,000
|
|
|
$
|
294,000
|
|
|
$
|
112,000
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Purchase obligations
|
|
|
314,000
|
|
|
|
314,000
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
905,000
|
|
|
$
|
499,000
|
|
|
$
|
294,000
|
|
|
$
|
112,000
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Significant Accounting
Policies and Estimates
Our
consolidated financial statements, which are
indexed under Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K
,
have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, which require that the management
make certain assumptions and estimates and, in connection therewith, adopt certain accounting policies. Our significant accounting
policies are set forth in Note 3 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Of those policies, we believe that the policies
discussed below may involve a higher degree of judgment or may otherwise be more relevant to our financial condition and results
of operations.
Investments
Investments at September
30, 2016 consisted of U.S. Treasury bills with original maturities between 13 and 52 weeks. They are classified as held-to-maturity
and are reported at amortized cost, which approximates fair value. We regularly review these investments to determine whether any
decline in fair value below the amortized cost basis has occurred that is other than temporary. If a decline in fair value has
occurred that is determined to be other than temporary, the cost basis of the investment is written down to fair value. Investments
at September 30, 2015 consisted of a mutual fund of short-term fixed, floating and variable rate debt securities with normal weighted
average effective maturity of approximately 1 year or less. This mutual fund investment is reported at fair value using level 1
inputs.
Inventory
We record inventory at
the lower of cost or market, with market not in excess of net realizable value. Raw materials are measured using FIFO (first-in
first-out) cost. Work in process and finished goods are measured using average cost. Raw materials include inventory of manufacturing
supplies. Work in process includes manufacturing supplies, direct and indirect labor, contracted manufacturing and testing, and
allocated manufacturing overhead for inventory in process at the end of the year. Finished goods include products that are complete
and available for sale. The Company recorded work in process and finished goods inventory only for those products with recent sales
levels to evaluate net realizable value.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
We use the fair value measurement
framework for valuing financial assets and liabilities measured on a recurring basis in situations where other accounting pronouncements
either permit or require fair value measurements.
Fair value of a financial
instrument is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants at the measurement date. The carrying value of certain financial instruments such as accounts receivable, accounts
payable, accrued liabilities, and deferred revenue approximates fair value due to the short-term nature of such instruments. Short-term
investments in U.S. Treasury Bills are reported at amortized cost, which approximates fair value.
We follow the fair value
hierarchy which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring
fair value. There are three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value:
Level 1:
|
Quoted prices in active markets for identical or similar assets and liabilities.
|
|
|
Level 2:
|
Quoted prices for identical or similar assets and liabilities in markets that are not active or observable inputs other than quoted prices in active markets for identical or similar assets and liabilities.
|
|
|
Level 3:
|
Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.
|
We recorded our short-term
investments in mutual fund debt securities at fair value using Level 1 inputs in the fair value hierarchy. We recorded our warrant
liability at fair value using Level 2 input using the Black-Scholes option valuation model.
Warrant Liability
Our equity offerings in
prior years included the issuance of warrants with exercise prices denominated in Canadian dollars. As a result of having exercise
prices denominated in a currency other than our functional currency, our warrants with Canadian dollar exercise prices met the
definition of derivatives and were therefore classified as derivative liabilities measured at fair value with noncash adjustments
to fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations. Upon exercise of these warrants, the fair value of
warrants included in derivative liabilities was reclassified to common shares. If these warrants expired, the related decrease
in warrant liability was recognized as gain in fair value of warrant liability. There was no cash flow impact as a result of this
accounting treatment.
The fair value of the warrants
was determined using the Black-Scholes option valuation model at the end of each reporting period. The losses and gains in each
year were a reflection of our share price fluctuations whereby increases in share prices caused greater warrant liability and a
resulting loss in fair value of warrant liability, while decreases in share prices caused a resulting gain in fair value of warrant
liability. Changes in fair value of warrant liability had no impact on cash flow.
All warrants with exercise
prices denominated in Canadian dollars were exercised or expired. Therefore, there is no outstanding warrant liability at September
30, 2016.
Revenue Recognition
Product Sales
We recognize product sales when KLH
product is shipped (for which the risk is typically transferred upon delivery to the shipping carrier) and there is persuasive
evidence of an arrangement, the fee is fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured. We document arrangements
with customers with purchase orders and sales agreements.
Product sales include sales made
under supply agreements with customers for a fixed price per gram of KLH products based on quantities ordered, including those
produced from a customer’s designated limpet colonies. The supply agreements are typically on a non-exclusive basis except
within that customer’s field of use.
Contract Services Revenue
We recognize contract services
revenue when contract services have been performed and reasonable assurance exists regarding measurement and collectability. An
appropriate amount will be recognized as revenue in the period that we are assured of fulfilling the contract requirements. Amounts
received in advance of performance of contract services are recorded as deferred revenue.
Contract services include services
performed under collaboration agreements effective December 2013 through 2015 and monthly maintenance of limpet colonies designated
to meet the needs of the customer through December 2014. We also had the right to use raw material produced from designated limpet
colonies at no cost to us with prior written consent from the customer.
Share-Based Compensation
We grant options to
buy common shares of the Company to our directors, officers, employees and consultants, and grant other equity-based instruments
to non-employees.
The fair value of share-based
compensation is measured on the date of grant, using the Black-Scholes option valuation model and is recognized over the vesting
period net of estimated forfeitures for employees or the service period for non-employees. The Black-Scholes option valuation model
requires the input of subjective assumptions, including price volatility of the underlying stock, risk-free interest rate, dividend
yield, and expected life of the option.
Foreign Exchange
Items included in the
financial statements of our subsidiary are measured using the currency of the primary economic environment in which the entity
operates (the “functional currency”). Our functional currency and the functional currency of our subsidiary is the
U.S. dollar.
Transactions in currencies
other than the U.S. dollar are recorded at exchange rates prevailing on the dates of the transactions.
Recent Accounting
Pronouncements
Recent accounting pronouncements
are contained in Note 3p to the financial statements, which are indexed under Item 15 of this this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
CERTAIN INCOME TAX CONSIDERATIONS
United States Federal Income Taxation
As used below, a “U.S.
holder” is a beneficial owner of a common share that is, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, (i) a citizen or resident
alien individual of the United States, (ii) a corporation (or an entity treated as a corporation) created or organized under the
law of the United States, any State thereof or the District of Columbia, (iii) an estate the income of which is subject to U.S.
federal income tax without regard to its source or (iv) a trust if (1) a court within the United States is able to exercise primary
supervision over the administration of the trust, and one or more United States persons have the authority to control all substantial
decisions of the trust, or (2) the trust has a valid election in effect under applicable U.S. Treasury Regulations to be treated
as a United States person. For purposes of this discussion, a “non-U.S. holder” is a beneficial owner of a common share
that is (i) a nonresident alien individual, (ii) a corporation (or an entity treated as a corporation) created or organized in
or under the law of a country other than the United States or a political subdivision thereof or (iii) an estate or trust that
is not a U.S. Holder. If a partnership (including for this purpose any entity treated as a partnership for U.S. federal tax purposes)
is a beneficial owner of a common share, the U.S. federal tax treatment of a partner in the partnership generally will depend on
the status of the partner and the activities of the partnership. A holder of a common share that is a partnership and partners
in that partnership should consult their own tax advisers regarding the U.S. federal income tax consequences of holding and disposing
of common shares. We have not sought a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) or an opinion of counsel as
to any U.S. federal income tax consequence described herein. The IRS may disagree with the description herein, and its determination
may be upheld by a court. This discussion does not address U.S. federal tax laws other than those pertaining to U.S. federal income
taxation (such as estate or gift tax laws), nor does it address any aspects of U.S. state or local or non-U.S. taxation.
GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY OF THE TAX LAWS AND
BECAUSE THE TAX CONSEQUENCES TO ANY PARTICULAR SHAREHOLDER MAY BE AFFECTED BY MATTERS NOT DISCUSSED HEREIN, SHAREHOLDERS ARE URGED
TO CONSULT THEIR OWN TAX ADVISORS WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIFIC TAX CONSEQUENCES OF THE ACQUISITION, OWNERSHIP AND DISPOSITION OF
COMMON SHARES, INCLUDING THE APPLICABILITY AND EFFECT OF STATE, LOCAL AND NON-U.S. TAX LAWS, AS WELL AS U.S. FEDERAL TAX LAWS.
Taxation of Dividends
U.S. Holders
.
In general, subject to the passive foreign investment company rules discussed below, a distribution on a common share will
constitute a dividend for U.S. federal income tax purposes to the extent that it is made from a corporation’s current or
accumulated earnings and profits as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. If a distribution exceeds the current
and accumulated earnings and profits of the distributing corporation, it will generally be treated as a non-taxable reduction of
basis to the extent of the U.S. holder’s tax basis in the common share on which it is paid, and to the extent it exceeds
that basis it will be treated as capital gain. The Company has not and does not plan to maintain calculations of earnings and profits
under U.S. federal income tax principles. Accordingly, it is unlikely that U.S. holders will be able to establish that a distribution
by the Company is in excess of its current and accumulated earnings and profits (as computed under U.S. federal income tax principles).
Therefore, a U.S. holder should expect that a distribution by the Company will generally be taxable in its entirety as a dividend
to U.S. holders for U.S. federal income tax purposes even though the distribution may be treated in whole or in part as a non-taxable
distribution for Canadian tax purposes.
The gross amount of
any dividend on a common share (which will include the amount of any Canadian taxes withheld with respect to such dividend) generally
will be subject to U.S. federal income tax as foreign source dividend income, and will not be eligible for the corporate dividends
received deduction. The amount of a dividend paid in Canadian dollars will be its value in U.S. dollars based on the prevailing
spot market exchange rate in effect on the day the U.S. holder receives the dividend. A U.S. holder will have a tax basis in any
distributed Canadian dollars equal to their U.S. dollar value on the date of receipt, and any gain or loss realized on a subsequent
conversion or other disposition of such Canadian dollars generally will be treated as U.S. source ordinary income or loss. If dividends
paid in Canadian dollars are converted into U.S. dollars on the date they are received by a U.S. holder, the U.S. holder generally
should not be required to recognize foreign currency gain or loss in respect of the dividend income.
Subject to
certain exceptions for short-term and hedged positions, as well as the passive foreign investment rules, a dividend that a
non-corporate holder receives on a common share will generally be subject to a maximum federal income tax rate of 20% if the
dividend is a “qualified dividend.” A dividend on a common share will be a qualified dividend if (i) either (a)
the common shares are readily tradable on an established market in the United States or (b) we are eligible for the benefits
of a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States that the Secretary of the Treasury determines is satisfactory for
purposes of these rules and that includes an exchange of information program, and (ii) we were not, in the year prior to the
year the dividend was paid, and are not, in the year the dividend is paid, a passive foreign investment company
(“PFIC”). The common shares are listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market which should be treated as an established
securities market in the United States. In any event, the U.S. Canada Income Convention (the “Treaty”) satisfies
the requirements of clause (i)(b), the Company is incorporated in and tax resident of Canada and should be entitled to the
benefits of the Treaty. Based on our audited financial statements, income tax returns and relevant market and shareholder
data, we believe that we likely will not be classified as a PFIC in the September 30, 2016 taxable year. There can be no
assurance, however, that the Company will not be considered to be a PFIC for any particular year in the future because PFIC
status is factual in nature, depends upon factors not wholly within the Company’s control, generally cannot be
determined until the close of the taxable year in question, and is determined annually. Accordingly, no assurance can be made
that a dividend paid, if any, would be a “qualified dividend.” In addition, as described in the section below
entitled “Passive Foreign Investment Company Rules,” if we were a PFIC in a year while a U.S. holder held a
common share, and if the U.S. holder has not made a qualified electing fund election effective for the first year the U.S.
holder held the common share, the common share remains an interest in a PFIC for all future years or until such an election
is made. The IRS takes the position that such rule will apply for purposes of determining whether a common share is an
interest in a PFIC in the year a dividend is paid or in the prior year, even if we do not satisfy the tests to be a PFIC in
either of those years. Even if dividends on the common shares would otherwise be eligible for qualified dividend treatment,
in order to qualify for the reduced qualified dividend tax rates, a non-corporate holder must hold the common share on which
a dividend is paid for more than 60 days during the 120-day period beginning 60 days before the ex-dividend date,
disregarding for this purpose any period during which the non-corporate holder has an option to sell, is under a contractual
obligation to sell or has made (and not closed) a short sale of substantially identical stock or securities, is the grantor
of an option to buy substantially identical stock or securities or, pursuant to U.S. Treasury regulations, has diminished
such holder’s risk of loss by holding one or more other positions with respect to substantially similar or related
property. In addition, to qualify for the reduced qualified dividend tax rates, the non-corporate holder must not be
obligated to make related payments with respect to positions in substantially similar or related property. Payments in lieu
of dividends from short sales or other similar transactions will not qualify for the reduced qualified dividend tax
rates.
A non-corporate holder
that receives an extraordinary dividend (generally, any dividend that is in excess of 10% of the holder's adjusted basis in the
common share on which the dividend is paid) that is eligible for the reduced qualified dividend rates must treat any loss on the
sale of the common share as a long-term capital loss to the extent of the dividend. For purposes of determining the amount of a
non-corporate holder’s deductible investment interest expense, a dividend is treated as investment income only if the non-corporate
holder elects to treat the dividend as not eligible for the reduced qualified dividend tax rates. Special limitations on foreign
tax credits with respect to dividends subject to the reduced qualified dividend tax rates apply to reflect the reduced rates of
tax.
The U.S. Treasury has
announced its intention to promulgate rules pursuant to which non-corporate holders of stock of non-U.S. corporations, and intermediaries
through which the stock is held, will be permitted to rely on certifications from issuers to establish that dividends are treated
as qualified dividends. Because those procedures have not yet been issued, it is not clear whether we will be able to comply with
them.
Non-corporate holders
of common shares are urged to consult their own tax advisers regarding the availability of the reduced qualified dividend tax rates
with respect to dividends, if any, received on the common shares in the light of their own particular circumstances.
Any Canadian withholding
tax imposed on dividends received with respect to the common shares will be treated as a foreign income tax eligible for credit
against a U.S. holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability, subject to generally applicable limitations under U.S. federal
income tax law. For purposes of computing those limitations separately under current law for specific categories of income, a dividend
generally will constitute foreign source “passive category income” or, in the case of certain holders, “general
category income.” A U.S. holder will be denied a foreign tax credit with respect to Canadian income tax withheld from dividends
received with respect to the common shares to the extent the U.S. holder has not held the common shares for at least 16 days of
the 30-day period beginning on the date which is 15 days before the ex-dividend date or to the extent the U.S. holder is under
an obligation to make related payments with respect to substantially similar or related property. Any days during which a U.S.
holder has substantially diminished its risk of loss on the common shares are not counted toward meeting the 16-day holding period
required by the statute. The rules relating to the determination of the foreign tax credit are complex, and U.S. holders are urged
to consult with their own tax advisers to determine whether and to what extent they will be entitled to foreign tax credits as
well as with respect to the determination of the foreign tax credit limitation. Alternatively, any Canadian withholding tax may
be taken as a deduction against taxable income, provided the U.S. holder takes a deduction and not a credit for all foreign income
taxes paid or accrued in the same taxable year. In general, special rules will apply to the calculation of foreign tax credits
in respect of dividend income that is subject to preferential rates of U.S. federal income tax.
Non-U.S. Holders
.
A dividend paid to a non-U.S. holder of a common share will generally not be subject to U.S. federal income tax unless the
dividend is effectively connected with the conduct of trade or business by the non-U.S. holder within the United States (and is
attributable to a permanent establishment or fixed base the non-U.S. holder maintains in the United States if an applicable income
tax treaty so requires as a condition for the non-U.S. holder to be subject to U.S. taxation on a net income basis on income from
the common share). A non-U.S. holder generally will be subject to tax on an effectively connected dividend in the same manner as
a U.S. holder. A corporate non-U.S. holder under certain circumstances may also be subject to an additional “branch profits
tax,” the rate of which may be reduced pursuant to an applicable income tax treaty.
Taxation of Capital Gains
U.S. Holders
.
Subject to the passive foreign investment company rules discussed below, on a sale or other taxable disposition of a common
share, a U.S. holder will recognize capital gain or loss in an amount equal to the difference between the U.S. holder’s adjusted
basis in the common share and the amount realized on the sale or other disposition, each determined in U.S. dollars. Such capital
gain or loss will be long-term capital gain or loss if at the time of the sale or other taxable disposition the common share has
been held for more than one year. In general, any adjusted net capital gain of an individual is subject to a maximum federal income
tax rate of 20%. Capital gains recognized by corporate U.S. holders generally are subject to U.S. federal income tax at the same
rate as ordinary income. The deductibility of capital losses is subject to limitations.
Any gain a U.S. holder
recognizes generally will be U.S. source income for U.S. foreign tax credit purposes, and, subject to certain exceptions, any loss
will generally be a U.S. source loss. If a Canadian tax is paid on a sale or other disposition of a common share, the amount realized
will include the gross amount of the proceeds of that sale or disposition before deduction of the Canadian tax. The generally applicable
limitations under U.S. federal income tax law on crediting foreign income taxes may preclude a U.S. holder from obtaining a foreign
tax credit for any Canadian tax paid on a sale or other disposition of a common share. The rules relating to the determination
of the foreign tax credit are complex, and U.S. holders are urged to consult with their own tax advisers regarding the application
of such rules. Alternatively, any Canadian tax paid on the sale or other disposition of a common share may be taken as a deduction
against taxable income, provided the U.S. holder takes a deduction and not a credit for all foreign income taxes paid or accrued
in the same taxable year.
Non-U.S. Holders
.
A non-U.S. holder will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on gain recognized on a sale or other disposition of a common
share unless (i) the gain is effectively connected with the conduct of trade or business by the non-U.S. holder within the United
States (and is attributable to a permanent establishment or fixed base the non-U.S. holder maintains in the United States if an
applicable income tax treaty so requires as a condition for the non-U.S. holder to be subject to U.S. taxation on a net income
basis on income from the common share), or (ii) in the case of a non-U.S. holder who is an individual, the holder is present in
the United States for 183 or more days in the taxable year of the sale or other disposition and certain other conditions apply.
Any effectively connected gain of a corporate non-U.S. holder may also be subject under certain circumstances to an additional
“branch profits tax,” the rate of which may be reduced pursuant to an applicable income tax treaty.
Passive Foreign Investment Company Rules
A special set of U.S.
federal income tax rules applies to a foreign corporation that is a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes. As noted above,
based on our audited financial statements, income tax returns, and relevant market and shareholder data, we believe that we likely
will not be classified as a PFIC in the September 30, 2016 taxable year. There can be no assurance, however, that the Company will
not be considered to be a PFIC for any particular year in the future because PFIC status is factual in nature, depends upon factors
not wholly within the Company’s control, generally cannot be determined until the close of the taxable year in question,
and is determined annually.
In general, a non-US
corporation is a PFIC if in any taxable year either (i) at least 75% of its gross income is “passive income” or (ii)
at least 50% of the quarterly average value of its assets is attributable to assets that produce or are held to produce “passive
income.” In applying these tests, the Company generally is treated as holding its proportionate share of the assets and receiving
its proportionate share of the income of any other corporation in which the Company owns at least 25% by value of the shares. Passive
income for this purpose generally includes dividends, interest, royalties, rent and capital gains, but generally does not include
certain royalties derived in an active business. Passive assets are those assets that are held for production of passive income
or do not produce income at all. Thus cash will be a passive asset. Interest, including interest on working capital, is treated
as passive income for purposes of the income test. Without taking into account the value of its goodwill, more than 50% of the
Company’s assets by value would be passive so that the Company would be a PFIC under the asset test. Based upon its current
operations, its goodwill (the value of which should be based upon the Company’s market capitalization) will likely be attributable
to its activities that will generate active income and to such extent, should be treated as an active asset. The determination
of whether a foreign corporation is a PFIC is a factual determination made annually and is therefore subject to change. Subject
to exceptions pursuant to certain elections that generally require the payment of tax, once stock in a foreign corporation is stock
in a PFIC in the hands of a particular shareholder that is a United States person, it remains stock in a PFIC in the hands of that
shareholder.
If we are treated as
a PFIC, contrary to the tax consequences described in “Taxation of Dividends” and “Taxation of Capital Gains”
above, a U.S. holder that does not make an election described in the succeeding two paragraphs would be subject to special rules
with respect to (i) any gain realized on a sale or other disposition of a common share (for purposes of these rules, a disposition
of a common share includes many transactions on which gain or loss is not realized under general U.S. federal income tax rules)
and (ii) any “excess distribution” by the Company to the U.S. holder (generally, any distribution during a taxable
year in which distributions to the U.S. holder on the common share exceed 125% of the average annual taxable distributions (whether
actual or constructive and whether or not out of earnings and profits) the U.S. holder received on the common share during the
preceding three taxable years or, if shorter, the U.S. holder’s holding period for the common share). Under those rules,
(i) the gain or excess distribution would be allocated ratably over the U.S. holder’s holding period for the common share,
(ii) the amount allocated to the taxable year in which the gain or excess distribution is realized would be taxable as ordinary
income in its entirety and not as capital gain, would be ineligible for the reduced qualified dividend rates, and could not be
offset by any deductions or losses, and (iii) the amount allocated to each prior year, with certain exceptions, would be subject
to tax at the highest tax rate in effect for that year, and the interest charge generally applicable to underpayments of tax would
be imposed in respect of the tax attributable to each of those years.
The special PFIC rules
described above will not apply to a U.S. holder if the U.S. holder makes a timely election, which remains in effect, to treat the
Company as a “qualified electing fund” (“QEF”) in the first taxable year in which the U.S. holder owns
a common share and the Company is a PFIC and if the Company complies with certain requirements. Instead, a shareholder of a QEF
generally is currently taxable on a pro rata share of the Company’s ordinary earnings and net capital gain as ordinary income
and long-term capital gain, respectively. Neither that ordinary income nor any actual dividend from the Company would qualify for
the 20% maximum federal income tax rate on dividends described above if the Company is a PFIC in the taxable year the ordinary
income is realized or the dividend is paid or in the preceding taxable year. A QEF election cannot be made unless the Company provides
U.S. Holders the information and computations needed to report income and gains pursuant to a QEF election. The Company expects
that will not provide this information. It is, therefore, likely that U.S. holders would not be able to make a QEF election in
any year we are a PFIC.
In lieu of a QEF election,
a U.S. holder of stock in a PFIC that is considered marketable stock could elect to mark the stock to market annually, recognizing
as ordinary income or loss each year an amount equal to the difference as of the close of the taxable year between the fair market
value of the stock and the U.S. holder’s adjusted basis in the stock. Losses would be allowed only to the extent of net mark-to-market
gain previously included in income by the U.S. holder under the election for prior taxable years. A U.S. holder’s adjusted
basis in the common shares will be adjusted to reflect the amounts included or deducted with respect to the mark-to-market election.
If the mark-to-market election were made, the rules set forth in the second preceding paragraph would not apply for periods covered
by the election. A mark-to-market election will not apply during any later taxable year in which the Company does not satisfy the
tests to be a PFIC. In general, the common shares will be marketable stock if the common shares are traded, other than in
de
minimis
quantities, on at least 15 days during each calendar quarter on a national securities exchange that is registered with
the SEC or on a designated national market system or on any exchange or market that the Treasury Department determines to have
rules sufficient to ensure that the market price accurately represents the fair market value of the stock
.
Under current
law, the mark-to-market election may be available to U.S. holders of common shares because the common shares are listed on The
Nasdaq Capital Market and the TSX Venture Exchange (at least one of which should constitute a qualified exchange for this purpose),
although there can be no assurance that the common shares will be “regularly traded” for purposes of the mark-to-market
election.
If we are treated as
a PFIC, each U.S. holder generally will be required to file a separate annual information return with the United States Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) with respect to the Company (and any lower-tier PFICs). A failure to file this return will suspend the statute
of limitations with respect to any tax return, event, or period to which such report relates (potentially including with respect
to items that do not relate to a U.S. holder’s investment in the common shares). Given the complexities of the PFIC rules
and their potentially adverse tax consequences, U.S. holders of common shares are urged to consult their tax advisers about the
PFIC rules.
Medicare Surtax on Net Investment Income
Non-corporate U.S.
Holders whose income exceeds certain thresholds generally will be subject to 3.8% surtax on their “net investment income”
(which generally includes, among other things, dividends on, and capital gain from the sale or other taxable disposition of, the
common shares). Absent an election to the contrary, if a QEF election is available and made, QEF inclusions will not be included
in net investment income at the time a U.S. Holder includes such amounts in income, but rather will be included at the time distributions
are received or gains are recognized. Non-corporate U.S. Holders should consult their own tax advisors regarding the possible effect
of such tax on their ownership and disposition of the common shares, in particular the applicability of this surtax with respect
to a non-corporate U.S. Holder that makes a QEF or mark-to-market election in respect of their common shares.
Information Reporting and Backup Withholding
Dividends paid on,
and proceeds from the sale or other disposition of, a common share to a U.S. holder generally may be subject to information reporting
requirements and may be subject to backup withholding unless the U.S. holder provides an accurate taxpayer identification number
or otherwise establishes an exemption. The amount of any backup withholding collected from a payment to a U.S. holder will be allowed
as a credit against the U.S. holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability and may entitle the U.S. holder to a refund, provided
certain required information is furnished to the Internal Revenue Service. A non-U.S. holder generally will be exempt from these
information reporting requirements and backup withholding tax but may be required to comply with certain certification and identification
procedures in order to establish its eligibility for exemption.
Under U.S. federal
income tax law and U.S. Treasury Regulations, certain categories of U.S. holders must file information returns with respect to
their investment in, or involvement in, a foreign corporation. U.S. holders are urged to consult with their own tax advisors concerning
such reporting requirements.
Reporting Obligations of Individual
Owners of Foreign Financial Assets
Section 6038D of the
Code generally requires U.S. individuals (and possibly certain entities that have U.S. individual owners) to file IRS Form 8938
if they hold certain “specified foreign financial assets,” the aggregate value of which exceeds $50,000. The definition
of specified foreign financial assets includes not only financial accounts maintained in foreign financial institutions, but also,
unless held in accounts maintained by a financial institution, any stock or security issued by a non-US. person, any financial
instrument or contract held for investment that has an issuer or counterparty other than a U.S. person and any interest in a foreign
entity. Persons who are required to report foreign financial assets and fail to do so may be subject to substantial penalties.
Canadian Federal Income Tax Consequences
The following summary
of the material Canadian federal income tax consequences is stated in general terms and is not intended to be legal or tax advice
to any particular shareholder. Each shareholder or prospective shareholder is urged to consult his or her own tax advisor regarding
the tax consequences of his or her purchase, ownership and disposition of common shares. The tax consequences to any particular
holder of common shares will vary according to the status of that holder as an individual, trust, corporation or member of a partnership,
the jurisdiction in which that holder is subject to taxation, the place where that holder is resident and, generally, according
to that holder’s particular circumstances.
This summary is applicable
only to holders who are resident in the United States for income tax purposes, have never been resident in Canada for income tax
purposes, deal at arm’s length with the Company, hold their common shares as capital property and who will not use or hold
the common shares in carrying on business in Canada. Special rules, which are not discussed in this summary, may apply to a United
States holder that is an issuer that carries on business in Canada and elsewhere.
This summary is based
upon the provisions of the Income Tax Act (Canada) and the regulations thereunder (collectively, the “Tax Act” or “ITA”)
and the Canada-United States Tax Convention (the “Tax Convention”) at the date of this Annual Report and the current
administrative practices of the Canada Revenue Agency. This summary does not take into account provincial income tax consequences.
The comments in this summary that are based on the Tax Convention are applicable to U.S. holders only if they qualify for benefits
under the Tax Convention. Management urges each holder to consult his own tax advisor with respect to the income tax consequences
applicable to him in his own particular circumstances.
Non-Resident Holders
The summary below is
restricted to the case of a holder (a “Holder”) of one or more common shares who for the purposes of the Tax Act is
a non-resident of Canada, holds his common shares as capital property and deals at arm’s length with the Company.
Dividends
A Holder will be subject
to Canadian withholding tax (“Part XIII Tax”) equal to 25%, or such lower rates as may be available under an applicable
tax treaty, of the gross amount of any dividend paid or deemed to be paid on his common shares. The Company will be required to
withhold the applicable amount of Part XIII Tax from each dividend so paid and remit the withheld amount directly to the Receiver
General for Canada for the account of the Holder.
Disposition of Common Shares
A Holder who disposes
of common shares, including by deemed disposition on death, will not be subject to Canadian tax on any capital gain thereby realized
unless the common share constituted “taxable Canadian property” as defined by the Tax Act. Generally, a common share
of a public corporation will not constitute taxable Canadian property of a Holder unless he held the common share as capital property
used by him carrying on a business in Canada, or he, persons with whom he did not deal at arm’s length or (under currently
proposed rules) partnerships in which he or persons with whom he did not deal at arm’s length held an interest, alone or
together held or held options to acquire, at any time within the 60 months preceding the disposition, 25% or more of the issued
shares of any class of the capital stock of the Company and at any time during the 60 months preceding the disposition more than
50% of the value of the common shares is derived from, or from an interest in, Canadian real estate, including Canadian resource
or timber resource properties.
Holders Resident in the United States
A Holder who is a resident
of the United States and realizes a capital gain on disposition of common shares that was taxable Canadian property will, if qualified
for benefits under the Tax Convention, generally be exempt from Canadian tax thereon unless (a) more than 50% of the value of the
common shares is derived from, or from an interest in, Canadian real estate, including Canadian mineral resources properties, (b)
the common shares formed part of the business property of a permanent establishment that the Holder has or had in Canada within
the 12 months preceding disposition, or (c) the Holder (i) was a resident of Canada at any time within the ten years immediately
preceding the disposition, and for a total of 120 months during any period of 20 consecutive years, preceding the disposition,
(ii) owned the common shares when he ceased to be resident in Canada, and (iii) the common shares were not subject to a deemed
disposition on the Holder’s departure from Canada.
Inclusion in Taxable Income
A Holder who is subject
to Canadian tax in respect of a capital gain realized on disposition of common shares must include one half of the capital gain
(“taxable capital gain”) in computing his taxable income earned in Canada. The Holder may, subject to certain limitations,
deduct one half of any capital loss (“allowable capital loss”) arising on disposition of taxable Canadian property
from taxable capital gains realized in the year of disposition in respect to taxable Canadian property and, to the extent not so
deductible, from such taxable capital gains of any of the three preceding years or any subsequent year.
Subject to certain exceptions,
a non-resident person who disposes of taxable Canadian property must notify the Canada Revenue Agency either before or after the
disposition (within ten days of the disposition).
|
Item
7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT
MARKET RISK
.
|
We are exposed to financial
market risks associated with foreign exchange rates, concentration of credit, and liquidity. In accordance with our policies, we
manage our exposure to various market-based risks and where material, these risks are reviewed and monitored by our Board of Directors.
Foreign Exchange Risk
Our exposure to
foreign exchange risk is primarily related to fluctuations between the Canadian dollar and the U.S. dollar. We incur
operating expenses and capital expenditures mostly in U.S. dollars, with some operating expenses incurred in Canadian dollars
which are subject to foreign currency fluctuations. The fluctuation of the U.S. dollar in relation to the Canadian dollar
will have an impact upon our profitability and may also affect the value of our assets and the amount of shareholders’
equity. We have not entered into any agreements or purchased any instruments to hedge possible currency risks. At September
30, 2016, we held approximately CDN$4,270,000 in cash and cash equivalents in Canadian dollars and the U.S. dollar was equal
to 1.314 Canadian dollars. Based on the exposure at September 30, 2016, a 10% annual change in the Canadian/U.S. exchange
rate over the prior year would impact our net loss by approximately $325,000.
Concentration of Credit Risk
We are potentially
subject to financial instrument concentration of credit risk through our cash equivalents, US Treasury bills, mutual fund debt
securities and accounts receivables. We place our cash and cash equivalents in 4 week US Treasury bills or financial institutions
believed to be credit worthy and perform periodic evaluations of their relative credit standing. We place short-term investments
in 13 to 52 week US Treasury bills or a mutual fund that invests in high-quality, U.S. dollar-denominated short-term fixed-, floating-
and variable-rate debt securities that have received either a minimum short-term rating of at least A-1 (or its equivalent) or
a minimum long-term rating of A minus (or its equivalent), by one or more Nationally Recognized Statistical Ratings Organizations,
or, if unrated, that are deemed by the fund to be of comparable quality at the time of purchase. Accounts receivables can be potentially
exposed to a concentration of credit risk with our major customers.
The Company had concentrations
of revenues in fiscal 2016, 2015 and 2014 as follows:
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales and
|
|
|
76% from
|
|
|
|
82% from
|
|
|
|
73% from
|
|
contract services revenue
|
|
|
3 customers
|
|
|
|
3 customers
|
|
|
|
2 customers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
100% from
|
|
Grant revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 grantor
|
|
The Company had concentrations
of accounts receivable at fiscal year-end 2016 and 2015 as follows:
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
100 % from
|
|
|
|
91% from
|
|
|
|
|
1 customer
|
|
|
|
2 customers
|
|
We assess the collectability
of our accounts receivable through a review of our current aging, as well as an analysis of our historical collection rate, general
economic conditions and credit status of our customers. As of September 30, 2016 and 2015, all outstanding accounts receivable
were deemed to be fully collectible, and therefore, no allowance for doubtful accounts was recorded. We determine terms and conditions
for our customers primarily based on the volume purchased by the customer, customer creditworthiness and past transaction history.
Management works to
mitigate our concentration of credit risk with respect to accounts receivable through our credit evaluation policies, reasonably
short payment terms and geographical dispersion of sales. Revenue includes export sales to foreign companies located principally
in Europe and Asia.
Liquidity Risk
Liquidity risk is
the risk that we will not be able to meet our financial obligations as they fall due. We attempt to manage liquidity risk by
maintaining sufficient cash and cash equivalent and short-term investment balances. Liquidity requirements are managed based
on expected cash flows to ensure that there is sufficient capital in order to meet our short-term obligations. At September
30, 2016 and 2015, we had cash and cash equivalents and short-term investment balances totaling $11,405,698 and $8,970,674,
respectively, to settle current liabilities of $623,644 and $2,380,648, respectively. Current liabilities included the
current portion of our warrant liability in the amount of $1,550,630 at September 30, 2015, which will not be settled in
cash.
|
Item
8.
|
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
.
|
The financial statements
and related financial information required to be filed hereunder are indexed under Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K
and are incorporated herein by reference.
|
Item
9.
|
CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS
ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
.
|
There were no reportable
events under this item during the past two fiscal years.
|
Item
9A.
|
CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
.
|
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management is responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that material information related
to our Company, including our consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to senior management, including our Chief Executive Officer
and the Chief Financial Officer, by others within those entities on a timely basis so that appropriate decisions can be made regarding
public disclosure.
We carried out an evaluation,
under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Principal Executive Officer and our Principal
Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) as of September 30, 2016. Our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures as of September 30, 2016, were effective.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible
for designing, establishing and maintaining a system of internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rule 13a-15(f)) to provide reasonable assurance that the financial information prepared by us for external purposes is reliable
and has been recorded, processed and reported in an accurate and timely manner in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States. The Board of Directors is responsible for ensuring that management fulfills its responsibilities.
The Audit Committee fulfills its role of ensuring the integrity of the reported information through its review of the interim and
annual financial statements. Management reviewed the results of their assessment with our Audit Committee.
Because of its inherent
limitations, our internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect all possible misstatements or frauds. Also,
projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because
of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Management has used
the criteria issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) in “Internal
Control — Integrated Framework (2013)” to evaluate the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.
Management has assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and concluded that such internal control
over financial reporting was effective as of September 30, 2016.
Attestation Report of Our Registered
Public Accounting Firm
This Annual Report
does not include an attestation report from our independent registered public accounting firm. We are an “emerging growth
company,” as defined under the JOBS Act, and are subject to reduced public company reporting requirements. The JOBS Act
provides that an emerging growth company is not required to have the effectiveness of such company’s internal control over
financial reporting audited by its external auditors for as long as such company is deemed to be an emerging growth company.
Limitations on the Effectiveness of Controls
Our management, including
the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, does not expect that our disclosure controls or our internal controls
will prevent all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable,
not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect
the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because
of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues
and instances of fraud, if any, within our Company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments
in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can
be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the control.
The design of any system of controls is also based, in part, upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and
there can be no assurance that any design will succeed achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions; over time,
control may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur
and not be detected.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There were no changes
in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the fourth quarter ended September 30, 2016 that have materially
affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
|
Item
9B.
|
OTHER INFORMATION.
|
None.
PART III
|
Item
10.
|
DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE.
|
Directors
Our directors and their
ages as of December 9, 2016 are set forth below.
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position(s) Held
|
|
Director Since
|
Tessie M. Che, Ph.D.
|
|
66
|
|
Director
|
|
September 25, 2013
|
Paul Chun (1)
|
|
35
|
|
Director
|
|
December 8, 2016
|
David L. Hill, Ph.D. (1)(2)(3)
|
|
65
|
|
Director
|
|
May 17, 2011
|
Daniel E. Morse, Ph.D.
|
|
75
|
|
Director
|
|
April 9, 2010
|
Frank R. Oakes
|
|
66
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of our Board of Directors
|
|
April 9, 2010
|
Charles V. Olson, D.Sc.
|
|
59
|
|
Director
|
|
December 8, 2016
|
Mayank D. Sampat (1)(2)(3)
|
|
61
|
|
Director
|
|
August 15, 2012
|
(1) Member of Audit Committee.
(2) Member of Compensation Committee.
(3) Member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
There are no family
relationships between any of our directors or executive officers.
Biographies
and Qualifications.
The biographies of our directors and certain information regarding each director’s experience,
attributes, skills and/or qualifications that led to the conclusion that the director should be serving as a director of our Company
are as follows:
Tessie M. Che, Ph.D.
has been a director of Stellar since September 2013. Dr. Che is currently General Manager
and Chair of the Board of Directors of Amaran Biotechnology Inc., a privately-held biopharmaceuticals manufacturer based in Taiwan,
a position she has held since 2012. She is also a director of OBI Pharma USA, a wholly-owned subsidiary of OBI Pharma, Inc., a
publicly traded biotechnology corporation in Taiwan. From 1998 to 2011 she served as COO and Sr. V.P., Corporate Affairs of Optimer
Pharmaceuticals Inc., a company she co-founded. At Optimer, Dr. Che guided the company’s CMC team to the successful registration
and commercialization of Dificid
TM
in the U.S., Canada and Europe. Prior to Optimer, Dr. Che’s experience includes
20 years in research, operations and management at global companies, including Exxon Mobil Corp., Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc.,
and EniChem SpA. Dr. Che holds bachelor degrees in chemistry from Illinois State University and Fu-Jen Catholic University (Taiwan)
and a PhD in physical-inorganic chemistry from Brandeis University. She has authored numerous scientific publications and holds
over 20 U.S. patents. Dr. Che has extensive scientific, operational, manufacturing, quality assurance, product development and
senior management experience in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, as well as experience serving on a board of directors
within our industry.
Paul Chun
has
been a director of Stellar since December 2016. He is a Managing Partner of Eldred Advisors LLC, a life sciences advisory
firm he founded in May 2016. From November 2015 to April 2016, he served as Director of Strategy and Corporate Development
at Kiromic, LLC. From May 2011 to October 2015, Mr. Chun served as a life sciences principal with Westwicke Partners, LLC, a capital
markets advisory firm. During his tenure at Westwicke, he supported the capital markets and investor engagement objectives
of private and public biopharma companies, including the support of multiple initial public offerings and other strategic transactions.
Prior to Westwicke, he held various roles in investment research and corporate finance, including at Amgen, Inc., Tavistock
Life Sciences and Goldman, Sachs & Co. He received his bachelors in biological sciences from Columbia University. Mr. Chun
has broad experience in therapeutics development and commercialization, valuation, corporate development and finance.
David L. Hill, Ph.D.
has been a director of Stellar since May 2011, and serves as the chair of the Compensation Committee. He currently serves as
Scientific Director for the ART Reproductive Center, Beverly Hills, California, a position he has held since December 1999. He
is also an Assistant Clinical Professor in the Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the David Geffen School of Medicine, University
of California, Los Angeles, and a Research Assistant IV at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. Dr. Hill received
his Ph.D. in Biological Sciences from the Department of Pathology, School of Life Sciences, University of Connecticut and completed
a Postdoctoral Fellowship at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute through an appointment by the Department of Physiology and Biophysics,
Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. Hill has extensive scientific and clinical research experience in our industry.
Daniel E. Morse,
Ph.D.
has been a director of Stellar since April 2010. Dr. Morse is the Wilcox Professor Emeritus of Molecular Genetics and
Biochemistry Biotechnology, Biomolecular Science and Engineering, a position he has held since 2008, and Director of the Marine
Biotechnology Center, at the University of California, Santa Barbara, a position he has held since 1986. Previously, he served
as Director of the UCSB-MIT-Caltech Institute of Collaborative Biotechnologies from 2003 to 2010, and also served as Stellar’s
Executive Vice-President, Science & Technology from 2010 until December 2011. Dr. Morse is an expert in the structure and function
of the KLH molecule and internationally recognized expert in protein chemistry, molecular biology, molluscan reproductive biology,
and aquaculture, and has an intimate understanding of our technology.
Frank R. Oakes
was appointed our President and Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of our Board of Directors in April 2010. Prior to that time,
he served as founder and Chief Executive Officer of Stellar’s California subsidiary since 1999. He has more than 40 years
of management experience in aquaculture including a decade as Chief Executive Officer of The Abalone Farm, Inc., during which he
led the company through the R&D, capitalization, and commercialization phases of development to become the largest abalone
producer in the United States. Mr. Oakes is the inventor of our patented method for non-lethal extraction of hemolymph from a live
gastropod mollusk. He was the principal investigator on our Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grant from the National Science
Foundation and was principal investigator on our Phase I and II SBIR grants from the NIH’s Center for Research Resources,
and a California Technology Investment Partnership (CalTIP) grant from the Department of Commerce. Mr. Oakes has consulted and
lectured for the aquaculture industry around the world. He received his Bachelor of Science degree from California State Polytechnic
University, San Luis Obispo and is a graduate of the Los Angeles Regional Technology Alliance University’s management-training
program. Mr. Oakes is a valuable member of our Board due to his depth of operating, strategic, and senior management experience
in our industry, specifically as related to aquaculture. Additionally, Mr. Oakes holds an intimate knowledge of Stellar due to
his longevity in the industry and with us.
Charles V. Olson,
D.Sc.
has been a director of Stellar since December 2016 and a member of our scientific advisory board since June 2014.
Since April 2010, he has served at Anthera Pharmaceuticals Inc, where he is currently the Chief Technology Officer. He has also
been a Principal Biotechnology Consultant for Compass Biotechnology LLC since 2006. Dr. Olson previously held senior and executive
management positions at NGM Bioharmaceuticals Inc, Coherus BioSciences Inc, Nexbio Inc., Cell Genesys, Inc., Biomarin Pharmaceuticals,
Inc, and Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. After graduate school, Dr. Olson was a Research Scientist at Kaiser Hospitals, followed by
Scientist and Senior Scientist positions at Genentech and Bayer, respectively. He holds a B.A. in biology and chemistry from Westmont
College, an M.A. in chemistry from the University of California at Santa Barbara and a D.Sc. in biochemistry. Dr. Olson has extensive
scientific, manufacturing operations, process development, and senior management experience in the biopharmaceutical industry.
Mayank (Mike) D.
Sampat
has been a director of Stellar since August 2012, and serves as the chair of the Audit Committee. Mr. Sampat is an
independent consultant providing business services to companies seeking expertise in financial planning and analysis, accounting
and financial reporting, M&A transactions support and financial system implementation. He previously held the positions of
controller at Precision Toxicology, LLC, a healthcare focused clinical laboratory specializing in providing quantitative drug
testing, from February 2015 to May 2016, Zpower, LLC, an emerging manufacturer in the microbattery industry, from June 2012 to
September 2014, and Imaging Advantage LLC from September 2010 to June 2012, and the position of Chief Financial Officer for Gamma
Medica-Ideas, a supplier of imaging equipment to the medical industry, from September 2007 to June 2010. Mr. Sampat received a
BBA in accounting from Bombay University and his MBA in Finance at Mercer University. Mr. Sampat is a seasoned finance and accounting
executive, having worked with multiple companies ranging from startups to large Fortune 100 companies.
Executive Officers
Set forth below is
certain information with respect to the names, ages, and positions of our executive officers as of December 9, 2016. Biographical
information pertaining to Mr. Oakes, who is a director and an executive officer, may be found in the above section entitled
“Directors.” The executive officers serve at the pleasure of our Board of Directors.
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position(s) Held
|
|
Date of Appointment
|
Frank R. Oakes
|
|
66
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of our Board of Directors
|
|
April 9, 2010
|
Kathi Niffenegger, CPA
|
|
59
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary
|
|
November 1, 2013
|
Gregory T. Baxter, Ph.D.
|
|
57
|
|
Executive Vice President of Corporate Development
|
|
December 1, 2016
|
Kathi Niffenegger,
CPA
was appointed Chief Financial Officer in November 2013 and Corporate Secretary in June 2013. She initially joined Stellar
in May 2012 as Controller, after previously serving as the company’s outside Certified Public Accountant for more than 12
years. Ms. Niffenegger has more than 30 years of experience in accounting and finance in a range of industries. She held positions
of increasing responsibility in the audit division of Glenn Burdette CPAs from 1988 to 2012 and served most recently as technical
partner. She obtained CFO experience at Martin Aviation, and began her career at Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. (now KPMG LLP). Ms.
Niffenegger has held leadership roles for audits of manufacturing, aquaculture, pharmaceutical and governmental grant clients,
and developed specific expertise in cost accounting systems and internal controls. Ms. Niffenegger holds a B.S. degree in Business
Administration, Accounting from California State University, Long Beach and is a member of the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants (AICPA).
Gregory T. Baxter,
Ph.D.
joined Stellar’s executive management team in December 2016 following his service on the company’s Board
of Directors, which he joined in August 2012. Dr. Baxter has served as an executive and scientist for several biotechnology corporations
and foundations. Since 2001, Dr. Baxter has been a Senior Scientist in the Department of Clinical Drug Development for CCS Associates
Inc., a scientific research consulting firm specializing in technical and support services for clinical research, design strategies
for preclinical studies, chemical information sciences and research and development support for translational science. His prior
experience includes serving as Program Director for the National Science Foundation (NSF) Division of Industrial Innovation and
Partnerships, Founder and CSO of Hurel Corporation, Founder and CEO of Aegen Biosciences and Research Scientist for Molecular Device
Corporation. He also serves as Adjunct Associate Professor at Cornell University in the College of Chemical Engineering and on
the Founders Board of Stanford University's StartX Med Program. Dr. Baxter received his B.A. and Ph.D. in Biochemistry/Molecular
Biology from University of California, Santa Barbara.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, requires that our directors, executive officers, and greater-than-10% shareholders
file reports with the SEC on their initial beneficial ownership of our common shares and any subsequent changes. To our knowledge,
based solely on a review of copies of such reports furnished to us by our officers and directors, we believe that, during the fiscal
year ended September 30, 2016, no person required to file reports under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act failed to file such reports
on a timely basis during such fiscal year.
Code of Ethics
We have adopted a Code
of Ethics and Business Conduct that applies to all of our directors, officers, and employees. A copy of our Code of Ethics and
Business Conduct is available on the Investor Relations section of our website at http://ir.stellarbiotechnologies.com. We intend
to satisfy the SEC’s disclosure requirements regarding amendments to, or waivers of, our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct
by posting such information on our website. Copies of our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct may be obtained, free of charge,
by writing to our Corporate Secretary, Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc., 332 East Scott Street, Port Hueneme, California 93041.
Nominations for Board of Directors
The Board of Directors
has approved an advance notice policy, which was subsequently approved by our shareholders, that requires advance notice be given
to us in certain circumstances where nominations of persons for election to the Board are made by our shareholders.
In the case of an annual
meeting of shareholders, notice to the Company must be made not less than 30 days nor more than 65 days prior to the date of the
annual meeting. However, in the event that the annual meeting is to be held on a date that is less than 40 days after the date
on which the first public announcement of the date of the annual meeting was made, notice may be made not later than the close
of business on the tenth (10th) day following such public announcement.
In the case of a special
meeting of shareholders (which is not also an annual meeting), notice to the Company must be made not later than the close of
business on the fifteenth (15th) day following the day on which the first public announcement of the date
of
the special meeting was made.
Information
about our Board Committees
Our
Board of Directors has appointed an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, and a Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
The Board of Directors has determined that each director who serves on these committees is “independent,” as that term
is defined by the listing rules of Nasdaq and rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Board of Directors has adopted
written charters for its Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. Copies of
these charters are available on our website at
http://ir.stellarbiotechnologies.com
. In addition, our board of directors
appointed a temporary Listing Committee to approve actions related to our listing application for The Nasdaq Capital Market and
a Pricing Committee to approve actions related to our capital raising transactions. There was no requirement for directors who
served on these committees to be “independent”.
Audit Committee
Our
Audit Committee is composed of Paul Chun, David Hill, and Mayank Sampat (chair). The purpose of the Audit Committee is to oversee
our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audits of our financial statements. In that regard, the Audit Committee
assists the Board in monitoring: (a) the integrity of our financial statements; (b) our independent auditor’s qualifications,
independence, and performance; (c) the performance of our internal audit function, including our system of internal controls, financial
reporting, and disclosure controls; and (d) our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. To fulfill this obligation and
perform its duties, the Audit Committee maintains effective working relationships with the Board, management, our internal auditor,
and our independent auditor.
Mayank
Sampat is the Chair of our Audit Committee and has extensive financial experience. He received an MBA in Finance from Mercer University,
and has served in several financial positions with other companies, including several years as Chief Financial Officer for a medical
equipment manufacturer. Mr. Sampat is considered to be “independent” as defined pursuant to the listing rules of the
Nasdaq. The Board has determined that Mr. Sampat is an “audit committee financial expert” as defined in Item 407(d)(5)(ii)
of Regulation S-K.
Compensation
Committee
Our
Compensation Committee is composed of David Hill (chair) and Mayank Sampat. The purpose of the Compensation Committee is to oversee
the Board’s responsibilities relating to compensation of our Company’s Chief Executive Officer and our other executi
ve
officers. It has overall responsibility for approving and evaluating all of our compensation plans, policies and programs as such
plans, policies and programs affect executive officers.
Nominating and Corporate Governance
Committee
Our Nominating and
Corporate Governanc
e Committee is composed of David Hill and
Mayank Sampat. The purpose of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is to identify individuals qualified to become
Board members; recommend to the Board individuals to serve as directors; advise the Board with respect to Board composition, procedures
and committees; develop, recommend to the Board and annually review a set of corporate governance principles applicable to the
Company; and oversee any related matters required by the federal sec
urities laws.
|
Item
11.
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
|
Executive Compensation
Our named executive officers for 2016 were Frank
R. Oakes, Chief Executive Officer, President and Executive Chairman of our Board of Directors; Kathi Niffenegger, CPA, Chief Financial
Officer and Corporate Secretary; Catherine Brisson, Ph.D., our former Chief Operating Officer until October 2016; and Mark McPartland,
our former Vice President of Corporate Development and Communications until September 2016.
Summary Compensation Table
The following table sets forth information
regarding the compensation awarded to, earned by or paid to the named executive officers.
Name and Principal
Position
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Salary ($)
|
|
|
Bonus ($)
|
|
|
Option
Awards
($) (1)
|
|
|
All Other
Compensation ($)
|
|
|
Total ($)
|
|
Frank R. Oakes,
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
$
|
250,100
|
|
|
$
|
120,000
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
59,737
|
(2)
|
|
|
429,837
|
|
President, Chief Executive
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
240,000
|
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
25,643
|
|
|
|
355,643
|
|
Officer and Chairman of our
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Board of Directors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kathi Niffenegger, CPA,
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
196,560
|
|
|
|
47,250
|
|
|
|
61,147
|
|
|
|
19,003
|
(3)
|
|
|
323,960
|
|
Chief Financial Officer and
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
189,000
|
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
|
106,287
|
|
|
|
17,320
|
|
|
|
339,607
|
|
Corporate Secretary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark McPartland
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
214,978
|
|
|
|
46,350
|
|
|
|
122,294
|
|
|
|
13,014
|
(5)
|
|
|
396,636
|
|
Vice President of Corporate
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
185,400
|
|
|
|
5,400
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
7,150
|
|
|
|
197,950
|
|
Development and
Communications (4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catherine Brisson, Ph.D.,
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
173,628
|
|
|
|
47,700
|
|
|
|
61,147
|
|
|
|
12,863
|
(7)
|
|
|
295,338
|
|
Chief Operating Officer (6)
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
190,800
|
|
|
|
18,000
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
13,989
|
|
|
|
222,789
|
|
|
(1)
|
Represents the aggregate grant date fair value of the stock option award granted in the covered
fiscal year as computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, Compensation — Stock Compensation. The fair value of each
stock option award is estimated for the covered fiscal year on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option valuation model.
A discussion of the assumptions used in calculating the amounts in this column may be found in Note 9 to our audited consolidated
financial statements for the year ended September 30, 2016 included in this Annual Report.
|
|
(2)
|
Represents (i) $35,516 in patent royalties paid by the Company, (ii) $16,271 in health insurance and (iii) $7,950 in 401(k)
Company contributions.
|
|
(3)
|
Represents (i) $11,789 in health insurance and (ii) $7,214 in 401(k) Company contributions.
|
|
(4)
|
Mr. McPartland’s employment with the Company ended in September 2016.
|
|
(5)
|
Represents
(i) $5,725 in health insurance and (ii) $7,289 in 401(k) Company contributions.
|
|
(6)
|
Dr. Brisson’s employment with the Company ended in October 2016.
|
|
(7)
|
Represents (i) $6,991 in health insurance and (ii) $5,862 in 401(k) Company contributions.
|
Employment Agreements
We do not have employment
agreements currently in effect with any of our named executive officers. Like our other employees, our executives are eligible
for annual salary increases and discretionary equity grants.
Performance Share Plan
Under the merger agreement
between our Company and our California subsidiary, we allotted 1,000,000 common shares (the “Performance Shares”) under
a performance share plan (the “Plan”). The purpose of the Plan was to encourage the development of our products and
business by distributing shares to key management, employees, and consultants upon the meeting of certain milestones. These milestones
were set as follows:
|
1.
|
Completion of method development for commercial-scale manufacture of IMG KLH with applicable good
GMP as a pharmaceutical intermediate, evidenced by completion of three GMP lots meeting all quality and product release specifications
required for stability studies and process validation;
|
|
2.
|
Compilation and regulatory submittal of all required CMC data compiled in CTD format and evidenced
by filing as a DMF with the USFDA; and
|
|
3.
|
Completion of preclinical toxicity and immunogenicity testing of IMG KLH and Subunit KLH in rodent
and non-rodent species as evidenced by acceptance by study protocols and completion reports available to support customer United
States FDA and EMEA filings.
|
As each milestone
was met as determined by our Board of Directors, one-third of the Performance Shares were available to be released to the Plan
members. In January 2011, it was determined that Milestone No. 3 was successfully completed and the Board authorized the issuance
of an aggregate of 333,334 Performance Shares to all participants in the Plan. In August 2012, the Board of Directors determined
that Milestones No. 1 and 2 had been met and authorized the issuance of an aggregate of 131,313 Performance Shares to the non-director
participants in the Plan. The Board did not take any action at that time on the issuance of shares to the participants of the Plan
who were also directors of the Company. No action was taken regarding the Plan in fiscal 2013. In December 2013, we issued 151,515
common shares to a former director of the Company named as an eligible participant in the Plan.
Mr. Oakes, our President,
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, and Dr. Morse, a director of our company, are eligible participants in the
Plan. 235,690 and 134,680 shares, respectively, are reserved for future issuance to Mr. Oakes and Dr. Morse under the Plan. No
other named executive officer or director is eligible to participate in the Plan.
Outstanding Equity Awards at 2016 Fiscal
Year-End
The following table summarizes
the equity awards made to our named executive officers that were outstanding at September 30, 2016.
|
|
Option Awards
|
Name
|
|
Number of
securities
underlying
unexercised
options (#)
exercisable
|
|
|
Number of
securities
underlying
unexercised
options (#)
unexercisable
(1)
|
|
|
Option
exercise prices
($)
|
|
Option
expiration
date
|
Frank R. Oakes
|
|
|
103,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN$
|
2.80
|
|
4/9/17
|
|
|
|
42,560
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
6.50
|
|
8/8/18
|
|
|
|
37,560
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
4.20
|
|
4/13/19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kathi Niffenegger, CPA
|
|
|
9,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN$
|
2.90
|
|
6/18/19
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
2.50
|
|
12/19/19
|
|
|
|
9,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
5.80
|
|
5/14/20
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US
|
18.30
|
|
11/1/20
|
|
|
|
9,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
15.20
|
|
11/12/21
|
|
|
|
3,333
|
|
|
|
6,667
|
|
|
US
|
7.24
|
|
12/22/22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catherine Brisson, Ph.D. (2)
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN$
|
6.40
|
|
10/25/17
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
4.00
|
|
12/22/18
|
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
3.70
|
|
8/9/19
|
|
|
|
5,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
2.50
|
|
12/19/19
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDN
|
5.80
|
|
5/14/20
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US
|
18.30
|
|
11/1/20
|
|
|
|
3,333
|
|
|
|
6,667
|
|
|
US
|
7.24
|
|
12/22/22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark McPartland (3)
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US
|
18.40
|
|
11/15/20
|
|
|
|
6,667
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US
|
7.24
|
|
12/22/22
|
|
(1)
|
Options granted to the named executive officers are subject to the following vesting schedule:
(a) one-third of the option shall vest on the date of grant; (b) one-third of the option shall vest 12 months from the date of
grant; and (c) the remaining one-third of the option shall vest 18 months from the date of grant.
|
|
(2)
|
Dr. Brisson’s employment with the Company ended in October 2016.
|
|
(3)
|
Mr. McPartland’s employment with the Company ended in September 2016.
|
Outstanding Equity Awards Narrative Disclosure
Fixed Share Option Plan
Our
2013 Fixed Share Option Plan is comprised of 1,000,000 options to purchase our common shares. The purpose of the 2013 Fixed Share
Option Plan is to advance the interests of the Company by encouraging equity participation in the Company through the acquisition
of common shares of the Company. Our Board is
responsible for the general administration
of the Fixed Share Option Plan and the proper execution of its provisions, its interpretation and the determination of all questions
arising thereunder. Specifically, the Board has the power to, among other things:
|
·
|
allot common shares for issuance in connection with the exercise of options;
|
|
·
|
amend, suspend, terminate or discontinue the plan; and
|
|
·
|
delegate all or a portion of its administrative
powers as it may determine to one or more committees.
|
Options may be awarded to our directors, officers,
employees and consultants.
Options to purchase 539,103 common shares at
prices ranging from CDN$2.50 to CDN$18.70 and $2.22 to $18.40 are outstanding at September 30, 2016.
Options issued during fiscal 2016 to employees
and consultants under the Fixed Share Option Plan totaled 56,300 options to purchase common shares, at exercise prices ranging
from $2.22 to $7.24.
Grants of Plan-Based Awards
The following table provides information regarding grants of plan-based
awards to our named executive officers during fiscal year 2016.
Name
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
All Other
Option
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Options (#)
(1)
|
|
|
Exercise or
Base Price of
Option
Awards
($/Sh)
|
|
|
Grant Date
Fair Value of
Option
Awards ($)(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kathi Niffenegger, CPA
|
|
12/22/15
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.24
|
|
|
$
|
61,147
|
|
Catherine Brisson, Ph.D. (3)
|
|
12/22/15
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
7.24
|
|
|
|
61,147
|
|
Mark McPartland (4)
|
|
12/22/15
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
7.24
|
|
|
|
122,294
|
|
|
(1)
|
The option awards were issued under our 2013 Fixed Share Option Plan, and vest in thirds beginning December 2015.
|
|
(2)
|
Represents
the aggregate grant date fair value of the stock option award granted in the covered fiscal year as computed in accordance with
FASB ASC Topic 718, Compensation — Stock Compensation. The fair value of each stock option award is estimated for the covered
fiscal year on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option valuation model. A discussion of the assumptions used in calculating
the amounts in this column may be found in Note 9 to our audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended September
30, 2016 included in this Annual Report.
|
|
(3)
|
Dr. Brisson’s employment with the Company ended in October 2016.
|
|
(4)
|
Mr. McPartland’s employment with the Company ended in September 2016.
|
Retirement Benefits
We have established a 401(k)
plan to provide retirement benefits to eligible executive officers and employees. Employees may enter the plan after they have
been employed by us for at least three consecutive months. Under the plan, we contribute a flat non-elective contribution of 3%
of eligible compensation for each plan participant at the end of the fiscal year. Any Company contributions we made to the plan
for our named executive officers are reflected in the “All Other Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table
above.
Other than the funds contributed
under our 401(k) plan, no other funds were set aside or accrued by us during fiscal 2016 to provide pension, retirement or similar
benefits for our named executive officers.
Director Compensation
The following table sets forth information regarding
the compensation of our non-employee directors for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2016.
Name
|
|
Fees Earned
or Paid in
Cash ($)
|
|
|
Total ($)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory T. Baxter, Ph.D. (1)
|
|
$
|
6,850
|
|
|
$
|
6,850
|
|
Tessie M. Che, Ph.D.
|
|
|
4,400
|
|
|
|
4,400
|
|
David L. Hill, Ph.D.
|
|
|
6,500
|
|
|
|
6,500
|
|
Daniel E. Morse, Ph.D.
|
|
|
1,700
|
|
|
|
1,700
|
|
Mayank D. Sampat
|
|
|
6,850
|
|
|
|
6,850
|
|
|
(1)
|
Dr. Baxter resigned from the Board of Directors effective December 1, 2016 when he began employment as an executive officer.
|
Narrative to Director Compensation Table
Non-Employee Director Compensation Policy
Pursuant to our non-employee director compensation policy, non-employee directors receive $1,000 for each
Board meeting attended in person and $350 for each Board meeting attended by telephone. Members of Board committees also receive
$350 for each committee meeting attended. Non-executive directors may also receive stock option awards at the discretion of the
Board of Directors. No options were awarded to the Company’s non-executive directors in fiscal year 2016.
Non-Employee Directors on our Scientific
Advisory Board
Dr. Morse and Dr. Olson
are members of our Scientific Advisory Board. As compensation for their services, the members of our Scientific Advisory Board
receive certain advisory fees and expense reimbursements. Dr. Baxter was a member of our Scientific Advisory Board until December
1, 2016, when he resigned from the Scientific Advisory Board simultaneously with the effective date of his employment as an executive
officer of the Company. During fiscal 2016, we paid an aggregate of $4,950 to Dr. Baxter, $6,200 to Dr. Morse and $12,250 to Dr.
Olson for their services as members of our Scientific Advisory Board and such amounts are not reflected in the Director Compensation
table above.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation
The members of our Compensation
Committee during the fiscal year ended September 30, 2016 were Gregory Baxter, David Hill (chairman), and Mayank Sampat.
None of the individuals
who served as a member of the Compensation Committee during fiscal 2016 was at any time during fiscal 2016 an officer or employee
of our Company.
|
Item 12.
|
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS
AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
.
|
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides certain information
as of September 30, 2016 about our common shares that may be issued under our equity compensation plans:
Plan category
|
|
Number of securities to
be issued upon exercise
of outstanding options,
warrants and rights
|
|
|
Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options,
warrants and rights
|
|
|
Number of securities
remaining available for
future issuance under equity
compensation plans
(excluding securities
reflected in column (a))
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders
|
|
|
1,804,729
|
|
|
$
|
4.74
|
|
|
|
357,897
|
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1,804,729
|
|
|
$
|
4.74
|
|
|
|
357,897
|
|
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
The
following tables sets forth certain information as of December 9, 2016, with respect to the beneficial ownership of our common
shares by: (1) all of our directors; (2) our named executive officers listed in the Summary Compensation Table; (3) all of directors
and executive officers as a group; and (4) each person known by us to beneficially own more than 5% of our outstanding common
shares.
We have determined beneficial
ownership in accordance with the rules of the SEC. Except as indicated by the footnotes below, we believe, based on the information
furnished to us, that the persons and entities named in the table below have sole voting and investment power with respect to all
common
shares that they beneficially own, subject to applicable
community property laws.
Common shares subject to
options or warrants currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016 are deemed outstanding for computing
the share ownership and percentage of the person holding such options and warrants, but are not deemed outstanding for computing
the percentage of any other person. The percentage ownership of our common shares of each person or entity named in the following
table is based on 10,136,258
common
shares outstanding as of December
9, 2016.
Directors and Officers
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner (1)
|
|
Amount and
Nature of
Beneficial
Ownership
|
|
|
Percent of
Shares
Beneficially
Owned
|
|
Frank R. Oakes
|
|
|
372,585
|
(2)
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
Kathi Niffenegger, CPA
|
|
|
48,667
|
(3)
|
|
|
*
|
|
Catherine Brisson, Ph.D. (4)
|
|
|
63,051
|
(5)
|
|
|
*
|
|
Mark A. McPartland (6)
|
|
|
16,667
|
(7)
|
|
|
*
|
|
Gregory T. Baxter, Ph.D.
|
|
|
8,250
|
(8)
|
|
|
*
|
|
Tessie M. Che, Ph.D.
|
|
|
7,000
|
(9)
|
|
|
*
|
|
David L. Hill, Ph.D.
|
|
|
12,000
|
(10)
|
|
|
*
|
|
Daniel E. Morse, Ph.D.
|
|
|
151,109
|
(11)
|
|
|
1.5
|
%
|
Charles V. Olson, D.Sc.
|
|
|
1,250
|
(12)
|
|
|
*
|
|
Mayank D. Sampat
|
|
|
7,000
|
(13)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All directors and executive officers as a group (11 persons)
|
|
|
686,329
|
(14)
|
|
|
6.5
|
%
|
* Percentage of shares beneficially owned does
not exceed one percent.
|
(1)
|
Unless otherwise indicated, the address of each beneficial owner is c/o Stellar Biotechnologies,
Inc., 332 E. Scott Street, Port Hueneme, California 93041.
|
|
(2)
|
This amount includes (i) 183,620 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016; and excludes (ii) 20,867 common shares and 5,400 common shares issuable upon the exercise of outstanding options currently exercisa
ble or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016 which are held by Mr. Oakes’ spouse who has sole voting and dispositive power over the securities, and as to which Mr. Oakes disclaims beneficial ownership. Mr. Oakes does not have the power to vote or dispose of, or to direct the voting or disposition of, the shares held by his spouse, or with respect to any shares acquired under her outstanding options.
|
|
(3)
|
Represents 48,667 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(4)
|
Dr. Brisson’s employment with the Company ended in October 2016.
|
|
(5)
|
This amount includes 47,583 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(6)
|
Mr. McPartland’s employment with the Company ended in September 2016.
|
|
(7)
|
Represents 16,667 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(8)
|
Represents 8,250 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(9)
|
Represents 7,000 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(10)
|
This amount includes 10,000 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(11)
|
This amount includes 54,600 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(12)
|
Represents 1,250 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(13)
|
Represents 7,000 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
|
(14)
|
This amount includes 384,637 shares issuable upon the exercise of options currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of December 9, 2016.
|
Shareholders Known by Us to Own 5% or More
of Our Common Shares
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner
|
|
Amount and
Nature of Beneficial
Ownership
|
|
|
Percent of Shares
Beneficially
Owned
|
|
Ernesto Echavarria
Blvd. Anaya
1225 Culiacan Sinaloa, Mexico 80040
|
|
|
1,411,310
|
|
|
|
13.9
|
%
|
Anson Investments Master Fund LP (1)
5950 Berkshire Lane, Suite 210
Dallas, Texas 75225
|
|
|
1,416,513
|
(2)
|
|
|
13.2
|
%
|
Empery Asset Management, LP (3)
1 Rockefeller Plaza, Suite 1205
New York, New York 10020
|
|
|
1,321,242
|
(4)
|
|
|
12.7
|
%
|
|
(1)
|
Voting and investment power over the shares held by Anson Investments Master Fund LP is exercised by the co-investment advisors to Anson Investments Master Fund LP. The co-investment advisors of Anson Investments Master Fund LP consist of Frigate Ventures LP (d/b/a Anson Group), a Texas limited partnership, and M5V Advisors Inc. (d/b/a Anson Group Canada), an Ontario, Canada Corporation. As the general partner of Frigate Ventures LP, Admiralty Advisors LLC, a Texas limited liability company, may direct the vote and disposition of the common shares held by Anson Investments Master Fund LP. As the principal of Frigate Ventures LP and Admiralty Advisors, LLC, Bruce R. Wilson may direct the vote and disposition of the common shares held by Anson Investments Master Fund LP. As directors of M5V Advisors Inc., Adam Spears and Moez Kassam may each direct the vote and disposition of the common shares held by Anson Investments Master Fund LP..
|
|
(2)
|
This amount includes 632,813 common shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants, which are exercisable beginning January 6, 2017 and expire in January 2022. Under the terms of these warrants, the holders may not exercise such warrants to the extent such exercise would cause such holder, together with its affiliates and attribution parties, to beneficially own a number of common shares which would exceed 4.99% of our then outstanding common shares following such exercise, excluding for purposes of such determination common shares issuable upon exercise of such warrants which have not been exercised.
|
|
(3)
|
These shares are held by Empery Asset Master, LTD, Empery Tax Efficient, LP and Empery Tax Efficient II, LP (together, the “Empery Entities”). Empery Asset Management, LP is the investment manager for the Empery Entities and has discretionary authority to vote and dispose of the shares held by the Empery Entities and may be deemed to be the beneficial owner of these shares. Martin Hoe and Ryan Lane, in their capacity as investment managers of Empery Asset Management LP, may also be deemed to have investment discretion and voting power over the shares held by the Empery Entities. The Empery Entities, Mr. Hoe and Mr. Lane each disclaim any beneficial ownership of these shares.
|
|
(4)
|
This amount includes 632,813 common shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants, which are exercisable beginning January 6, 2017 and expire in January 2022. Under the terms of these warrants, the holder may not exercise such warrants to the extent such exercise would cause such holder, together with its affiliates and attribution parties, to beneficially own a number of common shares which would exceed 4.99% of our then outstanding common shares following such exercise, excluding for purposes of such determination common shares issuable upon exercise of such warrants which have not been exercised.
|
|
Item 13.
|
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND
DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.
|
Related Party Transactions
Patent Royalty Agreement
On August 14, 2002, through
our California subsidiary, we entered into an agreement with Frank Oakes, our Chief Executive Officer, where he would receive royalty
payments in exchange for the assignment of his rights to U.S. Patent No. 6,852,338 to us. The royalty is 5% of gross receipts from
products using this invention in excess of $500,000 annually. Our current operations utilize this invention. Patent royalties of
$35,516 and $1,495 were paid to Mr. Oakes for the years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Collaboration Agreement
In December 2013, we entered
into a collaboration agreement (the “Amaran Agreement”) with Amaran Biotechnology, Inc. to develop and evaluate methods
for Amaran’s potential manufacture of the OBI-822 active immunotherapy using our GMP grade Stellar KLH™.
Revenues received from
Amaran under the Amaran Agreement totaled $32,000 and $180,000 during the fiscal years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015. The
Amaran Agreement also provides for Amaran to pay us fees for certain expenses and costs associated with the collaboration. Subject
to certain conditions and timing, the terms of the collaboration with Amaran also provide for the possible negotiation of a commercial
supply agreement for Stellar KLH™ in the future. The Amaran Agreement expired by its terms on December 7, 2015.
Tessie Che, a member of
our Board of Directors, currently serves as general manager and chair of the board of directors of Amaran.
Policies and Procedures for Review of Related Party Transactions
The Audit Committee reviews,
approves and oversees any transaction between us and any “related person” (as defined in Item 404 of Regulation S-K)
and any other potential conflict of interest situations, on an ongoing basis. Under these policies and procedures, the Audit Committee
is to be informed of transactions subject to review before their implementation. The procedures establish our practices for obtaining
and reporting information to the Audit Committee regarding such transactions on a periodic and an as-needed basis. The policy provides
that such transactions are to be submitted for approval before they are initiated but also provides for ratification of such transactions.
No director who is interested in a transaction may participate in the Audit Committee’s determinations as to the appropriateness
of such transaction.
Director Independence
In evaluating the independence
of our Board members and the composition of the committees of our Board of Directors, the Board of Directors utilizes the definition
of “independence” as that term is defined by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Nasdaq Listing Rules. Using
this standard, the Board of Directors has determined that Paul Chun, David Hill, Daniel Morse, Charles Olson and Mayank Sampat
are “independent directors.” This means that our Board of Directors is composed of a majority of independent directors
as required by the rules of Nasdaq.
Item 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
.
The following table shows
the aggregate fees paid or accrued for audit and other services provided for the years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 rendered
by Moss Adams LLP.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Type of Service
|
|
Fiscal Year 2016
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Audit Fees
|
|
$
|
238,000
|
|
|
$
|
194,000
|
|
Audit-Related Fees
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Tax Fees
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
All Other Fees
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
238,000
|
|
|
$
|
194,000
|
|
Audit Fees
consisted
of fees incurred for professional services rendered for audits of the years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 and include procedures
related to registrations and offerings.
Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures
The Audit Committee is
directly responsible for the appointment, compensation and oversight of our auditors. It has established procedures for the receipt,
retention, and treatment of complaints received by us regarding accounting, internal accounting controls, or auditing matters,
and the confidential, anonymous submission by our employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters.
The Audit Committee also has the authority and the funding to engage independent counsel and other outside advisors.
In accordance with the
requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and rules issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission, our Audit Committee
Charter includes a procedure for the review and pre-approval of all audit and permitted non-audit and tax services, subject to
the de minimis exception for non-audit services described in Section 10A(i)(1)(B) of the Exchange Act and the Commission rules
promulgated thereunder that may be provided by our independent auditor or other registered public accounting firms. The procedure
requires that all proposed engagements of the auditor for audit and permitted non-audit services are submitted to the Audit Committee
for approval prior to the beginning of any such services. The Audit Committee pre-approved 100% of the audit services performed
by our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2016.
PART IV
|
Item 15.
|
EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES.
|
|
(a)
|
The following documents are filed as a part of this Annual
Report:
|
(1) Financial Statements
The list of consolidated financial statements
and notes required by this Item 15 (a) (1) is set forth in the “Index to Financial Statements” on page F-1 of this
Annual Report.
(2) Financial Statement Schedules
All schedules have been omitted because the
required information is included in the financial statements or notes thereto.
The exhibits listed on the Exhibit Index below
are filed as part of this Annual Report.
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit No.
|
Description
|
|
|
3.1
|
Certificate of Incorporation of the Company, dated June 12, 2007 (included as Exhibit 1(a) to the
Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
3.2
|
Certificate of Amendment, dated April 15, 2008 (included as Exhibit 1(b) to the Company’s
Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
3.3
|
Certificate of Continuation of the Company, dated November 25, 2009 (included as Exhibit 1(c) to
the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
3.4
|
Certificate of Name Change of the Company, dated April 7, 2010 (included as Exhibit 1(f) to the
Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
3.5
|
Notice of Articles of the Company, dated April 7, 2010 (included as Exhibit 1(g) to the Company’s
Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
3.6
|
Articles of the Company, effective November 20, 2009 (included as Exhibit 1(h) to the Company’s
Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
3.7
|
Amended and Restated Articles of Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc., dated October 29, 2015 (included
as Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 30, 2015, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
4.1
|
Form of Warrant dated June
30, 2016 (included as Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 30, 2016, and incorporated herein
by reference).
|
|
10.1
|
Patent Assignment Agreement between the Company and Frank Oakes, dated August 14, 2002 (included
as Exhibit 4(a) to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by
reference).
|
|
10.2
|
Sublease Agreement (Units 3, 4 and 5) between the Company and the Port Hueneme Surplus Property
Authority, dated October 2, 2000 (included as Exhibit 4(j) to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on
February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.3
|
Sublease Agreement (Unit 7) between the Company and the Port Hueneme Surplus Property Authority,
dated March 21, 2005 (included as Exhibit 4(k) to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3,
2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.4
|
Lease Agreement between the Company and Beachport Center, dated March 29, 2011 (included as Exhibit
4(l) to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.5
|
Research Collaboration Agreement between the Company and Bayer Innovation GmbH, dated August 27, 2009 (included as Exhibit 4(16) to the Company’s Amendment No. 2 to its Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on July 5, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.6 #
|
Joint Venture Agreement, dated May 11, 2016, by and among the Company and Neovacs, S.A. (included as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 17, 2016, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.7
|
License Agreement between the Company and University of Guelph, dated July 24, 2013 (included as Exhibit
99.1 to the Company’s Report on Form 6-K filed on August 30, 2013, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.8 @
|
Share Option Plan, as Amended, dated December 13, 2011 (included as Exhibit 10(b) to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.9 @
|
Fixed Share Option Plan dated December 18, 2013 (included as Exhibit 10.11 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on November 14, 2014, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.10
|
Shareholder’s Rights Plan, as amended, dated January 9, 2014 (included as Exhibit 10.12 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on November 14, 2014, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.11 @
|
Performance Share Plan dated April 9, 2010 (included as Exhibit 10(d) to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 20-F filed on February 3, 2012, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.12
|
Advance Notice Policy, adopted October 31, 2013 (included as Exhibit 10.14 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on November 14, 2014, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.13
|
Amendment One to Lease Agreement between the Company and Beachport Center, dated June 24, 2014 (included as Exhibit 10.15 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on November 14, 2014, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.14
|
Sublease Amendment No. 2 (Units 4 and 5) to Sublease Agreement between the Company and the Port Hueneme Surplus Property Authority, dated October 2, 2010 (included as Exhibit 10.16 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on November 14, 2014, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.15
|
Sublease Amendment No. 1 (Unit 7) to Sublease Agreement between the Company and the Port Hueneme Surplus Property Authority, dated March 21, 2010 (included as Exhibit 10.17 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on November 14, 2014, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.16
|
Collaboration Agreement by and between Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc. and Amaran Biotechnology dated December 7, 2013 (included as Exhibit 10.18 to Amendment No. 2 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on September 9, 2015, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.17
|
Collaboration Agreement, dated July 27, 2015, by and between Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc. and Ostiones Guerrero SA de CV (included as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 30, 2015, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.18
|
Sublease Amendment No. 1 (Units 4 and 5) to Sublease Agreement between the Company and the Port Hueneme Surplus Property Authority, and establishment of new commencement date for Sublease Agreement (Unit 7) between the Company and the Port Hueneme Surplus Property Authority, dated October 31, 2005 (included as Exhibit 10.20 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on December 14, 2015, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.19
|
Sublease Amendment No.
3 (Unit 4 and 5) to Sublease Agreement between the Company and the Port Hueneme Surplus Property Authority, dated June 4, 2015
(included as Exhibit 10.21 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on December 14, 2015, and incorporated herein
by reference).
|
|
10.20
|
Sublease Amendment No.
2 (Unit 7) to Sublease Agreement between the Company and the Port Hueneme Surplus Property Authority, dated June 4, 2015 (included
as Exhibit 10.22 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on December 14, 2015, and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
10.21
|
Form of Securities Purchase
Agreement, dated June 30, 2016 (included as Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on June 30, 2016,
and incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
14.1
|
Code of Ethics and Business
Conduct (included as Exhibit 99.4 to the Company’s Report on Form 6-K filed on August 14, 2014, and incorporated herein
by reference).
|
|
21
|
Subsidiaries of Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc. (included as Exhibit 21 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on November 14, 2014, and
incorporated herein by reference).
|
|
23.1
|
Consent of Moss Adams LLP (filed herewith).
|
|
31.1
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (filed herewith).
|
|
31.2
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (filed herewith).
|
|
32.1 ^
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (filed herewith).
|
|
32.2 ^
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (filed herewith).
|
|
101.INS
|
XBRL
Instance
Document
|
|
101.SCH
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
|
|
101.CAL
|
XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document
|
|
101.DEF
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
|
|
101.LAB
|
XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document
|
|
101.PRE
|
XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document
|
|
@
|
Management
contract or compensatory plan
or arrangement.
|
|
#
|
Confidential treatment has been granted for certain portions of this exhibit. Original copies have
been filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 24B-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended.
|
|
^
|
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided and will
be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
Date: December 14, 2016
|
STELLAR BIOTECHNOLOGIES, INC.
|
|
|
|
/s/ Frank R. Oakes
|
|
Frank R. Oakes
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
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.
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
Frank R. Oakes
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer, and
|
|
December 14, 2016
|
Frank R. Oakes
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors (Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
Kathi Niffenegger
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
December 14, 2016
|
Kathi Niffenegger
|
|
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
Tessie M. Che
|
|
Director
|
|
December 14, 2016
|
Tessie M. Che
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
PAUL CHUN
|
|
Director
|
|
December 14, 2016
|
Paul Chun
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
DAVID L. HILL
|
|
Director
|
|
December 14, 2016
|
David L. Hill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
DANIEL E. MORSE
|
|
Director
|
|
December 14, 2016
|
Daniel E. Morse
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
CHARLES V. OLSON
|
|
Director
|
|
December 14, 2016
|
Charles V. Olson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/
Mayank D. Sampat
|
|
Director
|
|
December 14, 2016
|
Mayank D. Sampat
|
|
|
|
|
STELLAR BIOTECHNOLOGIES, INC.
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
Page
|
|
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, dated December 14, 2016
|
F-3
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets at September 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015
|
F-4
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended September 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, one month ended September 30, 2014, and year ended August 31, 2014
|
F-5
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended September 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, one month ended September 30, 2014, and year ended August 31, 2014
|
F-6
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity for the years ended September 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015, one month ended September 30, 2014, and year ended August 31, 2014
|
F-7
|
|
|
Notes to Financial Statements
|
F-8
|
Consolidated
Financial Statements
For the Years
Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(In U.S.
Dollars)
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets
of Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc. (the “Company”) as of September 30, 2016 and 2015, and the related consolidated statements
of operations, changes in equity and cash flows for the fiscal years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, the one month period ended
September 30, 2014, and the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of
the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on
our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of
the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated 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 audit 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 also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall consolidated financial statement presentation. We believe that
our audits provide reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred
to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc. as of September
30, 2016 and 2015, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for fiscal years ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, the one month period ended September 30, 2014, and the fiscal year ended August 31, 2014, in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
/s/ Moss Adams LLP
Los Angeles, California
December 14, 2016
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars )
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
7,416,904
|
|
|
$
|
3,955,503
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
85,813
|
|
|
|
157,597
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
3,988,794
|
|
|
|
5,015,171
|
|
Inventory
|
|
|
249,430
|
|
|
|
557,280
|
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
358,714
|
|
|
|
181,068
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
12,099,655
|
|
|
|
9,866,619
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity investment in joint venture
|
|
|
66,695
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
756,114
|
|
|
|
503,408
|
|
Deposits
|
|
|
15,340
|
|
|
|
15,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noncurrent assets
|
|
|
838,149
|
|
|
|
519,308
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
12,937,804
|
|
|
$
|
10,385,927
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Shareholders' Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
623,644
|
|
|
$
|
656,685
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
173,333
|
|
Warrant liability, current portion
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,550,630
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Liabilities
|
|
|
623,644
|
|
|
|
2,380,648
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
(Note 8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders' equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares, unlimited common shares authorized, no
par value, 10,136,258 and 7,984,758 issued and outstanding at September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively
|
|
|
47,280,792
|
|
|
|
38,114,215
|
|
Accumulated share-based compensation
|
|
|
5,394,763
|
|
|
|
5,226,379
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(40,361,395
|
)
|
|
|
(35,335,315
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Shareholders' Equity
|
|
|
12,314,160
|
|
|
|
8,005,279
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Shareholders' Equity
|
|
$
|
12,937,804
|
|
|
$
|
10,385,927
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these consolidated financial statements.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars )
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
One Month Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
1,239,689
|
|
|
$
|
563,689
|
|
|
$
|
32,786
|
|
|
$
|
143,553
|
|
Contract services revenue
|
|
|
32,000
|
|
|
|
195,000
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
192,000
|
|
Grant revenue
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
36,579
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,271,689
|
|
|
|
758,689
|
|
|
|
52,786
|
|
|
|
372,132
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs of sales and contract services
|
|
|
818,566
|
|
|
|
580,824
|
|
|
|
11,636
|
|
|
|
469,149
|
|
Costs of aquaculture
|
|
|
309,262
|
|
|
|
259,423
|
|
|
|
22,063
|
|
|
|
254,531
|
|
Grant costs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
36,579
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
1,729,445
|
|
|
|
1,029,489
|
|
|
|
178,280
|
|
|
|
2,458,934
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
3,322,772
|
|
|
|
3,227,545
|
|
|
|
293,130
|
|
|
|
2,871,455
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,180,045
|
|
|
|
5,097,281
|
|
|
|
505,109
|
|
|
|
6,090,648
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss) from Operations
|
|
|
(4,908,356
|
)
|
|
|
(4,338,592
|
)
|
|
|
(452,323
|
)
|
|
|
(5,718,516
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Income (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange gain (loss)
|
|
|
76,800
|
|
|
|
(653,333
|
)
|
|
|
(97,866
|
)
|
|
|
(222,437
|
)
|
Gain (loss) in fair value of warrant liability
|
|
|
(211,956
|
)
|
|
|
2,131,062
|
|
|
|
1,680,040
|
|
|
|
(2,533,305
|
)
|
Investment income
|
|
|
24,632
|
|
|
|
54,634
|
|
|
|
1,853
|
|
|
|
61,935
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(110,524
|
)
|
|
|
1,532,363
|
|
|
|
1,584,027
|
|
|
|
(2,693,807
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss) Before Income Tax
|
|
|
(5,018,880
|
)
|
|
|
(2,806,229
|
)
|
|
|
1,131,704
|
|
|
|
(8,412,323
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
7,200
|
|
|
|
36,800
|
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
|
|
27,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss)
|
|
$
|
(5,026,080
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,843,029
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,127,904
|
|
|
$
|
(8,439,523
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.57
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.36
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.14
|
|
|
$
|
(1.11
|
)
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.57
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.36
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
|
$
|
(1.11
|
)
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
8,826,312
|
|
|
|
7,956,962
|
|
|
|
7,867,575
|
|
|
|
7,582,664
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
8,826,312
|
|
|
|
7,956,962
|
|
|
|
8,714,045
|
|
|
|
7,582,664
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these consolidated financial statements.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars )
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
One Month Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows Used In Operating Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(5,026,080
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,843,029
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,127,904
|
|
|
$
|
(8,439,523
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash used in operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
149,565
|
|
|
|
159,521
|
|
|
|
12,529
|
|
|
|
158,313
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
259,379
|
|
|
|
267,222
|
|
|
|
36,509
|
|
|
|
956,634
|
|
Foreign exchange (gain) loss
|
|
|
(76,800
|
)
|
|
|
653,333
|
|
|
|
97,866
|
|
|
|
222,437
|
|
(Gain) loss in fair value of warrant liability
|
|
|
211,956
|
|
|
|
(2,131,062
|
)
|
|
|
(1,680,040
|
)
|
|
|
2,533,305
|
|
Loss on disposal of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,670
|
|
Impairment loss
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
90,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in working capital items:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
71,827
|
|
|
|
(113,917
|
)
|
|
|
12,352
|
|
|
|
121,075
|
|
Deferred share issuance costs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
60,656
|
|
Inventory
|
|
|
307,850
|
|
|
|
(522,389
|
)
|
|
|
(34,891
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
(197,150
|
)
|
|
|
(45,758
|
)
|
|
|
490
|
|
|
|
(94,974
|
)
|
Deposits
|
|
|
560
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(33,403
|
)
|
|
|
77,018
|
|
|
|
58,922
|
|
|
|
106,224
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
(173,333
|
)
|
|
|
86,666
|
|
|
|
71,667
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(4,505,629
|
)
|
|
|
(4,412,395
|
)
|
|
|
(296,692
|
)
|
|
|
(4,266,707
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Investing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(402,271
|
)
|
|
|
(274,589
|
)
|
|
|
(13,477
|
)
|
|
|
(279,065
|
)
|
Proceeds on sale of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,150
|
|
Purchase of short-term investments
|
|
|
(11,995,450
|
)
|
|
|
(13,677
|
)
|
|
|
(2,491
|
)
|
|
|
(5,468,815
|
)
|
Proceeds on sales and maturities of short-term investments
|
|
|
13,021,827
|
|
|
|
410,736
|
|
|
|
2,821
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Contribution to joint venture
|
|
|
(66,695
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
557,411
|
|
|
|
122,470
|
|
|
|
(13,147
|
)
|
|
|
(5,745,730
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Financing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common shares, net
|
|
|
6,277,500
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,613,675
|
|
Payments for share issuance costs
|
|
|
(332,764
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(134,578
|
)
|
Proceeds from exercise of warrants and options
|
|
|
1,368,260
|
|
|
|
106,777
|
|
|
|
739,292
|
|
|
|
4,308,878
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
7,312,996
|
|
|
|
106,777
|
|
|
|
739,292
|
|
|
|
10,787,975
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
96,623
|
|
|
|
(629,808
|
)
|
|
|
(84,083
|
)
|
|
|
(212,338
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
3,461,401
|
|
|
|
(4,812,956
|
)
|
|
|
345,370
|
|
|
|
563,200
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning of year
|
|
|
3,955,503
|
|
|
|
8,768,459
|
|
|
|
8,423,089
|
|
|
|
7,859,889
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents - end of year
|
|
$
|
7,416,904
|
|
|
$
|
3,955,503
|
|
|
$
|
8,768,459
|
|
|
$
|
8,423,089
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash (demand deposits)
|
|
$
|
972,412
|
|
|
$
|
3,955,503
|
|
|
$
|
5,895,229
|
|
|
$
|
5,474,155
|
|
Cash equivalents
|
|
|
6,444,492
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,873,230
|
|
|
|
2,948,934
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
7,416,904
|
|
|
$
|
3,955,503
|
|
|
$
|
8,768,459
|
|
|
$
|
8,423,089
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash transactions
(Note 11)
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these consolidated financial statements.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity
|
(Expressed in US Dollars )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Share-Based
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Shareholders'
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Subscribed
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
Balance - August 31, 2013
|
|
|
5,794,616
|
|
|
$
|
13,180,677
|
|
|
$
|
5,155,674
|
|
|
$
|
4,648,317
|
|
|
$
|
(25,180,667
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,195,999
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common shares
|
|
|
1,142,857
|
|
|
|
12,000,000
|
|
|
|
(5,000,000
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
7,000,000
|
|
Share issuance costs including fair value of broker units
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(907,801
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
386,898
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(520,903
|
)
|
Issuance of performance shares
|
|
|
151,515
|
|
|
|
422,728
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(422,728
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of warrants
|
|
|
593,730
|
|
|
|
3,920,134
|
|
|
|
(155,674
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,764,460
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of warrants
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,591,546
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,591,546
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of options
|
|
|
144,167
|
|
|
|
544,418
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
544,418
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
489,136
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(489,136
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
956,634
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
956,634
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(8,439,523
|
)
|
|
|
(8,439,523
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Balance - August 31, 2014
|
|
|
7,826,885
|
|
|
$
|
36,240,838
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
5,079,985
|
|
|
$
|
(33,620,190
|
)
|
|
$
|
7,700,633
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of warrants
|
|
|
110,100
|
|
|
|
727,804
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
727,804
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of warrants
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
890,214
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(29,817
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
860,397
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of options
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
11,488
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
11,488
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
13,533
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(13,533
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
36,509
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
36,509
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,127,904
|
|
|
|
1,127,904
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2014
|
|
|
7,941,985
|
|
|
$
|
37,883,877
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
5,073,144
|
|
|
$
|
(32,492,286
|
)
|
|
$
|
10,464,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of warrants
|
|
|
4,020
|
|
|
|
12,609
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12,609
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of warrants
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(426
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9,574
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of options
|
|
|
38,753
|
|
|
|
94,168
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
94,168
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
113,561
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(113,561
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
267,222
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
267,222
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(2,843,029
|
)
|
|
|
(2,843,029
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2015
|
|
|
7,984,758
|
|
|
$
|
38,114,215
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
5,226,379
|
|
|
$
|
(35,335,315
|
)
|
|
$
|
8,005,279
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common shares
|
|
|
1,687,500
|
|
|
|
6,750,000
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,750,000
|
|
Share issuance costs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(805,264
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(805,264
|
)
|
Proceeds from exercise of warrants
|
|
|
464,000
|
|
|
|
1,368,260
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,368,260
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of warrants
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,853,581
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(90,995
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,762,586
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
259,379
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
259,379
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(5,026,080
|
)
|
|
|
(5,026,080
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2016
|
|
|
10,136,258
|
|
|
$
|
47,280,792
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
5,394,763
|
|
|
$
|
(40,361,395
|
)
|
|
$
|
12,314,160
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these consolidated financial statements.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars)
|
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
(the “Company”) is organized under the laws of British Columbia, Canada. The Company’s common shares are listed
on The Nasdaq Capital Market under the trading symbol “SBOT.” The Company’s common shares trade on The Nasdaq
Capital Market in the United States under the symbol “SBOT” since November 5, 2015. From January 15, 2013 through November
4, 2015, the Company’s common shares were traded in the United States on the U.S. OTCQB Marketplace Exchange under the symbol
“SBOTF.” From April 19, 2010 to April 8, 2016 the Company’s common shares were listed in Canada on the TSX Venture
Exchange as a Tier 2 issue under the trading symbol “KLH.”
In April 2010, the Company changed
its name from CAG Capital, Inc. to Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc. and completed a reverse merger transaction with Stellar Biotechnologies,
Inc., a California corporation, which was founded in September 1999, and remains the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary and
principal operating entity. The Company’s executive offices are located at 332 E. Scott Street, Port Hueneme, California,
93041, USA, and its registered and records office is Royal Centre, 1055 West Georgia Street, Suite 1500, Vancouver, BC, V6E 4N7,
Canada.
Nature of Operations
The Company’s business
is the aquaculture, research and development, manufacture and commercialization of Keyhole Limpet Hemocyanin (“KLH”).
The Company markets and distributes its KLH products to biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, academic institutions, and
clinical research organizations in Europe, the United States, and Asia.
Management Plans
For the fiscal years 2016, 2015,
and 2014, the Company reported net losses of approximately $5.0 million, $2.8 million, and $8.4 million, respectively. The most
significant factor in the fluctuations in net income and losses relates to noncash changes in the fair value of warrant liability,
which was a loss of $212,000, gain of $2.1 million, and loss of 2.5 million for the fiscal years 2016, 2015, and 2014, respectively.
As of September 30, 2016, the Company had an accumulated deficit of approximately $40.4 million and working capital of approximately
$11.5 million.
In the past, operations of the
Company have primarily been funded by the issuance of common shares, exercise of warrants, grant revenues, contract services revenue
and product sales. In July 2016, the Company closed a $6.75 million registered direct offering. Management believes the Company’s
working capital is sufficient to support the Company’s current initiatives at the current level for at least 12 months. Management
is also continuing the ongoing effort toward expanding the customer base for existing marketed products, and the Company may seek
additional financing alternatives, including nondilutive financing through grants, collaboration and licensing arrangements, as
well as additional equity financing and debt financing.
The accompanying consolidated
financial statements have been prepared on the going concern basis, which assumes that the Company will continue in operation for
the foreseeable future and be able to realize its assets and discharge its liabilities and commitments in the normal course of
business.
Functional Currency
The consolidated financial statements
of the Company are presented in U.S. dollars, which is the Company’s functional currency, unless otherwise stated.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars)
|
Reverse Share Split
On September 2, 2015, the Company
effected a share consolidation (reverse split) of the Company's common shares at a ratio of 1-for-10. As a result of the reverse
split, every ten shares of the issued and outstanding common shares, without par value, consolidated into one newly-issued outstanding
common share, without par value. Each fractional share remaining after the reverse split that was less than one-half of a share
was cancelled and each fractional share that was at least one-half of a share was changed to one whole share. The reverse split
reduced the number of common shares outstanding from 79,847,550 to 7,984,758 after fractional share rounding. The number of warrants,
broker units, and options were proportionately adjusted by the split ratio and the exercise prices correspondingly increased by
the same split ratio. All historical shares and exercise prices are presented on a post-split basis in these condensed interim
consolidated financial statements.
The accompanying consolidated
financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S.
GAAP”) and include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc. All significant
intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
Change in Fiscal Year End
On June 3, 2014, the Board
of Directors of the Company approved a change in the Company’s fiscal year end from August 31 to September 30 of each year.
This change to the calendar quarter reporting cycle began September 1, 2014. As a result of the change, the Company had a one-month
transition period from September 1, 2014 to September 30, 2014. Included in this report are the Company’s consolidated balance
sheets as of September 30, 2016 and 2015; and the consolidated statements of operations, cash flows and changes in equity for
the 12 months ended September 30, 2016 (“fiscal 2016”), September 30, 2015 (“fiscal 2015”), August 31,
2014 (“fiscal 2014”), and the one month ended September 30, 2014.
|
3.
|
Significant Accounting Policies
|
The preparation of financial
statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make certain estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the
reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the consolidated
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reported periods. These estimates include warrant
liability, share-based compensation, intangible assets, valuation of accounts receivable, valuation of inventory, and income taxes.
Actual outcomes could differ from these estimates. These consolidated financial statements include estimates, which by their nature
are uncertain. The impacts of such estimates are pervasive throughout the consolidated financial statements, and may require accounting
adjustments based on future periods if the revision affects both current and future periods. These estimates are based on historical
experience, current and future economic conditions and other factors, including expectations of future events that are believed
to be reasonable under the circumstances.
|
b)
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
Cash and cash equivalents consist
of demand deposits with financial institutions and highly liquid investments which are readily convertible into cash with maturities
of three months or less when purchased.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars)
|
Investments at September 30,
2016 consisted of U.S. Treasury bills with original maturities between 13 and 52 weeks. They are classified as held-to-maturity
and are reported at amortized cost, which approximates fair value. The Company regularly reviews these investments to determine
whether any decline in fair value below the amortized cost basis has occurred that is other than temporary. If a decline in fair
value has occurred that is determined to be other than temporary, the cost basis of the investment is written down to fair value.
Investments at September 30, 2015 consisted of a mutual fund of short-term fixed, floating and variable rate debt securities with
normal weighted average effective maturity of approximately 1 year or less. This mutual fund investment is reported at fair value
using level 1 inputs.
|
d)
|
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts Receivable
|
The Company assesses the collectability
of its accounts receivable through a review of its current aging, as well as an analysis of its historical collection rate, general
economic conditions and credit status of its customers. As of September 30, 2016 and 2015, all outstanding accounts receivable
were deemed to be fully collectible, and therefore, no allowance for doubtful accounts was recorded.
The Company records inventory at the lower of cost
or market, with market not in excess of net realizable value. Raw materials are measured using FIFO (first-in first-out) cost.
Work in process and finished goods are measured using average cost.
|
f)
|
Property, Plant and Equipment
|
Property, plant and equipment
are recorded at cost less accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses, if any. Depreciation is recorded on the straight-line
method over useful lives ranging from 1.5 to 15 years. Leasehold improvements are depreciated over the shorter of the useful life
of the improvement or remaining term of lease. Maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred.
|
g)
|
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
|
If indicators of impairment exist, the Company assesses
the recoverability of the affected long-lived assets by determining whether the carrying value of such assets can be recovered
through undiscounted future operating cash flows. If impairment is indicated, the amount of such impairment is measured by comparing
the carrying value of the asset to the fair value of the asset and the Company records the impairment as a reduction in the carrying
value of the related asset and a charge to operating results. Estimating the undiscounted future cash flows associated with long-lived
assets requires judgment, and assumptions could differ materially from actual results. See Note 7 for impairment of licensing rights.
|
h)
|
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
|
The Company uses the fair value
measurement framework for valuing financial assets and liabilities measured on a recurring basis in situations where other accounting
pronouncements either permit or require fair value measurements. See Note 12 for fair value measurements.
Product Sales
The Company recognizes product
sales when KLH product is shipped (for which the risk is typically transferred upon delivery to the shipping carrier) and there
is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the fee is fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured. The Company
documents arrangements with customers with purchase orders and sales agreements.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars)
|
Product sales include sales made under supply agreements
with customers for a fixed price per gram of KLH products based on quantities ordered, including those produced from a customer’s
designated limpet colonies. Supply agreements are typically on a non-exclusive basis except within that customer’s field
of use.
Contract services revenue
The Company recognizes contract
services revenue when contract services have been performed and reasonable assurance exists regarding measurement and collectability.
An appropriate amount will be recognized as revenue in the period that the Company is assured of fulfilling the contract requirements.
Amounts received in advance of performance of contract services are recorded as deferred revenue.
Contract services include services performed under
collaboration agreements effective December 2013 through 2015 and monthly maintenance of limpet colonies designated to meet the
needs of the customer through December 2014. The Company also had the right to use raw material produced from designated limpet
colonies at no cost to the Company with prior written consent from the customer.
Grants
The Company has taken the income
approach to recognizing grant revenue. The Company recognizes grant revenue when there is reasonable assurance that the Company
will comply with the conditions attached, the benefits have been earned and it is reasonably assured of collection. An appropriate
amount of earned revenue will be recognized as revenue in the period that the Company is assured of fulfilling the grant requirements.
|
j)
|
Research and Development
|
Research
and development expenses principally consist of personnel costs related to the Company’s research and development staff as
well as depreciation of research and development assets. Research and development expenses also include costs incurred for laboratory
supplies, reimbursable costs associated with government grants and collaborative agreements, third-party contract payments, consultants,
facility and related overhead costs.
Research and development costs are expensed as incurred.
|
k)
|
Share-Based Compensation
|
The Company grants options to
buy common shares of the Company to its directors, officers, employees and consultants, and grants other equity-based instruments
to non-employees.
The fair value of share-based compensation
is measured on the date of grant, using the Black-Scholes option valuation model and is recognized over the vesting period net
of estimated forfeitures for employees or the service period for non-employees. The Black-Scholes option valuation model requires
the input of subjective assumptions, including price volatility of the underlying stock, risk-free interest rate, dividend yield,
and expected life of the option.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars)
|
Items included in the financial
statements of the Company’s subsidiary are measured using the currency of the primary economic environment in which the entity
operates (the “functional currency”). The functional currency of the parent and its subsidiary is the U.S. dollar.
Transactions in currencies other than the U.S. dollar
are recorded at exchange rates prevailing on the dates of the transactions.
Income tax expense comprises
current and deferred tax. Income tax is recognized in income or loss except to the extent that it relates to items recognized directly
in equity. Current tax expense is the expected tax payable on taxable income for the year, using tax rates enacted or substantively
enacted at year-end, adjusted for amendments to tax payable with regards to previous years.
Deferred tax is recorded using
the liability method, providing for temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial
reporting purposes and the amounts used for taxation purposes. Temporary differences are not provided for relating to goodwill
not deductible for tax purposes. The amount of deferred tax provided is based on the expected manner of realization or settlement
of the carrying amount of assets and liabilities, using tax rates enacted or substantively enacted at the balance sheet date.
A deferred tax asset is recognized
only to the extent that it is more likely than not that future taxable profits will be available against which the asset can be
utilized. To the extent that the Company does not consider it more likely than not that a deferred tax asset will be recovered,
it provides a valuation allowance against that excess.
The Company periodically evaluates
its tax positions to determine whether it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the
appropriate taxing authorities. The Company has not incurred any interest or penalties as of September 30, 2016 with respect to
uncertain income tax matters. The Company does not expect that there will be unrecognized tax benefits of a significant nature
that will increase or decrease within 12 months of the reporting date.
The Company files income tax
returns in the U.S. federal and state jurisdictions and in Canada. Management believes that there are no material uncertain tax
positions that would impact the accompanying consolidated financial statements. The Company's policy is to recognize interest and
penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense. The Company may be subject to examination by the Internal
Revenue Service for tax years 2012 through 2015 and by the Canada Revenue Agency for tax years 2012 through 2016. The Company may
also be subject to examination on certain state and local jurisdictions for the tax years 2011 through 2015.
|
n)
|
Earnings (Loss) Per Share
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share
is calculated by dividing income available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during
the period.
The computation of diluted earnings (loss)
per share assumes the conversion, exercise or contingent issuance of securities only when such conversion, exercise or issuance
would have a dilutive effect on earnings (loss) per share. The dilutive effect of convertible securities is reflected in diluted
earnings per share by application of the “if converted” method. The dilutive effect of outstanding options and warrants
and their equivalents is reflected in diluted earnings per share by application of the treasury stock method. Conversion of outstanding
warrants, broker units and options would have an antidilutive effect on loss per share for the years ended September 30, 2016 and
2015 and August 31, 2014 and are therefore excluded from the computation of diluted loss per share.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars)
|
The Company operates in one
reportable segment and, accordingly, no segment disclosures have been presented. All equipment, leasehold improvements and other
fixed assets owned by the Company are physically located within the United States (except for insignificant leasehold improvements
under evaluation in Baja California, Mexico), and all supply, collaboration and licensing agreements are denominated in U.S. dollars.
|
p)
|
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
|
In
May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update
(“ASU”) 2014-09,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)
, as
amended by ASU 2015-14 to
defer the effective date (“ASU 2014-09”). ASU 2014-09 creates a new topic in the Accounting Standards
Codification (“ASC”) Topic 606 and establishes a new control-based revenue recognition model, changes the basis
for deciding when revenue is recognized over time or at a point in time, provides new and more detailed guidance on specific
topics, and expands and improves disclosures about revenue. In addition, ASU 2014-09 adds a new Subtopic to the Codification,
ASC 340-40,
Other Assets and Deferred Costs: Contracts with Customers
, to provide guidance on costs related to
obtaining a contract with a customer and costs incurred in fulfilling a contract with a customer that are not in the scope of
another ASC Topic. The guidance in ASU 2014-09 is effective for public entities for annual reporting periods beginning after
December 15, 2017, including interim periods
within those years
. Early
application is only permitted as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting
periods within that reporting period. Subsequently, the FASB has issued the following standards related to ASU 2014-09: ASU
No. 2016-08,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations
(“ASU
2016-08”); ASU No. 2016-10,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations
and Licensing
(“ASU 2016-10”); and ASU No. 2016-12,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606):
Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients
(“ASU 2016-12”). The Company must adopt ASU 2016-08, ASU
2016-10 and ASU 2016-12 with ASU 2014-09 (collectively, the “new revenue standards”). Management is in the
process of assessing the impact of ASU 2014-09 and the new revenue standards on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In
August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15,
Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): Disclosure
of Uncertainties about an Entity's Ability to Continue as a Going Concern
. ASU 2014-15
defines management's responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an organization's ability to continue
as a going concern and to provide related footnote disclosures. The guidance in ASU 2014-15 is effective for annual reporting periods
beginning after
December 15, 2016
, with early application permitted. Management is
in the process of assessing the impact of ASU 2014-15 on the Company’s
consolidated
financial
statements.
In July 2015, FASB issued ASU 2015-11,
Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory (Topic 330)
. ASU 2015-11 indicates that an entity should measure inventory at the
lower of cost and net realizable value. Net realizable value is the estimated selling prices in the ordinary course of business,
less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal, and transportation. The ASU does not apply to inventory measured using
LIFO or the retail inventory method. It does apply to all other inventory, including inventory measured using FIFO or average cost.
The guidance in ASU 2015-11 is effective for public entities for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including
interim periods therein. The provisions should be applied prospectively with early application permitted. Management is in the
process of assessing the impact of ASU 2015-11 on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars)
|
In
January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01,
Financial Instruments-Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities
(“ASU 2016-01”), which
primarily
affects the accounting for equity investments, financial liabilities under the fair value option, and the presentation and disclosure
requirements for financial instruments. In addition,
ASU 2016-01
clarified
guidance related to the valuation allowance assessment when recognizing deferred tax assets resulting from unrealized losses on
available-for-sale debt securities
.
The guidance is effective for public entities
for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those years, with early adoption permitted.
The Company has not yet determined the impact of
ASU 2016-01 on its
consolidated
financial statements.
In
February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02,
Leases (Topic 842)
(“ASU 2016-02”), which establishes a new lease
accounting model for lessees. The updated guidance requires an entity to recognize assets and liabilities on the balance sheet
arising from a lease for both financing and operating leases, along with additional qualitative and quantitative disclosures. The
amended guidance is effective for public entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods
within those years, with early adoption permitted.
The Company has not yet determined the impact of
ASU
2016-02 on its
consolidated
financial statements.
In
March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09,
Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based
Payment Accounting
(“ASU 2016-09”), which is part of the FASB's Simplification Initiative. The updated guidance
simplifies the accounting for share-based payment transactions,
including the income tax consequences, classification of
awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows
.
The amended guidance is effective for public entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods
within those years, with early adoption permitted.
The Company has not yet determined the impact of
ASU
2016-09 on its
consolidated
financial statements.
In
May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-11,
Revenue Recognition (Topic 605) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Rescission of
SEC Guidance Because of Accounting Standards Updates 2014-09 and 2014-16 (“ASU 2016-11”)
, which rescinds certain
SEC paragraphs from the FASB Accounting Standards Codification in response to SEC staff announcements at the March 3, 2016 Emerging
Issues Task Force meeting, and which supersedes certain SEC observer comments on the topics of revenue and expense recognition
for freight service in process, accounting for shipping and handling fees and costs, accounting for consideration given by a vendor
to a customer and accounting for gas-balancing arrangements upon the adoption of ASU 2014-09. The effective date for ASU 2016-11
is the same as the effective date of ASU 2014-09
as
amended by ASU 2015-14
,
for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods
within
those years.
The Company has not yet determined the impact of
ASU 2016-11 on its
consolidated
financial statements.
In
June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13,
Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial
Instruments
(“ASU 2016-13”), which includes provisions that require financial assets measured at amortized cost
basis to be presented at the net amount expected to be collected and credit losses relating to available-for-sale debt securities
to be recorded through an allowance for credit losses, which requires recognition of an estimate of all current expected credit
losses. The guidance is effective for public entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods
within those years, with early adoption permitted for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018.
The Company has not
yet determined the impact of
ASU 2016-13 on its
consolidated
financial
statements.
Stellar Biotechnologies, Inc.
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
|
(Expressed in U.S. Dollars)
|
Short-term investments consisted of the following:
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury Bills
|
|
$
|
3,988,794
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Mutual fund debt securities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,015,171
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,988,794
|
|
|
$
|
5,015,171
|
|
U.S. Treasury Bills are carried at amortized cost
which approximates fair value and classified as held-to-maturity investments. Mutual fund debt securities are carried at fair value
using level 1 inputs.
Raw materials include inventory
of manufacturing supplies. Work in process includes manufacturing supplies, direct and indirect labor, contracted manufacturing
and testing, and allocated manufacturing overhead for inventory in process at the end of the year. Finished goods include products
that are complete and available for sale. At September 30, 2016 and 2015, the Company recorded work in process and finished goods
inventory only for those products with recent sales levels to evaluate net realizable value.
Inventory
consisted of the following:
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw materials
|
|
$
|
38,764
|
|
|
$
|
42,549
|
|
Work in process
|
|
|
43,498
|
|
|
|
137,021
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
167,168
|
|
|
|
377,710
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
249,430
|
|
|
$
|
557,280
|
|
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
|
6.
|
Property, Plant and Equipment, net
|
Property, plant and equipment, net consisted of the
following:
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aquaculture system
|
|
$
|
126,257
|
|
|
$
|
124,529
|
|
Laboratory facilities
|
|
|
62,033
|
|
|
|
62,033
|
|
Computer and office equipment
|
|
|
102,030
|
|
|
|
78,936
|
|
Tools and equipment
|
|
|
894,319
|
|
|
|
714,764
|
|
Vehicles
|
|
|
49,347
|
|
|
|
10,997
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
282,305
|
|
|
|
123,562
|
|
|
|
|
1,516,291
|
|
|
|
1,114,821
|
|
Less: accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(793,057
|
)
|
|
|
(643,492
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciable assets, net
|
|
|
723,234
|
|
|
|
471,329
|
|
Construction in progress
|
|
|
32,880
|
|
|
|
32,079
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
756,114
|
|
|
$
|
503,408
|
|
Depreciation expense amounted to $149,565, $159,521,
$12,529 and $132,122 for the years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, one month ended September 30, 2014, and year ended August
31, 2014, respectively.
|
7.
|
Intangible Assets - Licensing Rights
|
In August 2011, the Company
acquired an exclusive, worldwide sub-licensable and royalty-free license for certain technology developed under collaboration with
a customer. The Company paid a $200,000 license fee for the licensing rights, which are jointly owned by the Company and the customer.
The licensing rights do not have a fixed term or termination provisions. The licensing rights were amortized over the estimated
useful life of seven years and shown net of accumulated amortization and impairment losses. During the year ended August 31, 2014,
the Company discontinued its use of these licensing rights and recorded impairment loss for the remaining value of licensing rights.
Amortization expense amounted
to $26,191 for the year ended August 31, 2014. Impairment loss for the year ended August 31, 2014 totaled $90,476 and is included
in general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Operating leases
The Company leases buildings
and facilities used in its operations under three sublease agreements with the Oxnard Harbor District. In June 2015, the Company
exercised its option to extend these sublease agreements for an additional five-year term beginning in October and November 2015.
The Company negotiated an option to extend the leases for two additional five-year terms.
The Company leases facilities
used for executive offices and laboratories. The Company must pay a portion of the common area maintenance. In July 2016, the Company
extended this lease for a two-year term, with options to renew for three successive two-year terms.
The Company leases undeveloped
land in Baja California, Mexico to assess the potential development of an additional aquaculture locale and expansion of production.
The lease term is three years from June 2015 with options to extend the lease for 30 years. The Company may terminate early with
30 days’ notice. The first two years of rent under the lease totaling $74,606 were prepaid in June 2015, and are not included
in the future minimum lease payments below. The Company has a related agreement with the lessor to collaborate on the design, expansion
and development of marine aquaculture resources and KLH production facilities on the leased property. Under that agreement, the
Company is responsible for certain leasehold improvements including construction of structures and a power-generating facility,
which will be owned by the Company. The Company will reimburse the lessor for local operational support. The collaboration agreement
expires in June 2018, unless terminated earlier.
Aggregate future minimum lease
payments at September 30, 2016 are as follows:
For The Year Ending September 30,
|
|
|
|
2017
|
|
$
|
185,000
|
|
2018
|
|
|
188,000
|
|
2019
|
|
|
106,000
|
|
2020
|
|
|
106,000
|
|
2021
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
591,000
|
|
Rent expense on these lease
agreements amounted to approximately $235,000, $192,000, $15,000 and $181,000 for the years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015,
one month ended September 30, 2014, and year ended August 31, 2014, respectively.
Purchase obligations
The Company has commitments
totaling approximately $314,000 at September 30, 2016, for signed agreements with contract research organizations, consultants
and construction contractors. All purchase obligations are expected to be fulfilled within the next 12 months.
Supply agreements
The Company has two commitments
under certain supply agreements with customers for fixed prices per gram on a non-exclusive basis except within that customer’s
field of use. One amended and restated supply agreement replaced two prior agreements that automatically renewed each year. The
new agreement is effective March 2015 through March 2020 and is renewable for one-year terms upon written request of the customer.
The other customer supply agreement is effective October 2014 through October 2019 and is renewable for one-year terms upon written
request of the customer.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Joint venture agreement
In May 2016, the Company entered
into a joint venture agreement with another party for the formation of a joint venture company to manufacture and sell conjugated
therapeutic vaccines. The joint venture is organized as a French simplified corporation.
The Company holds a 30% equity
interest in the joint venture in exchange for an initial capital contribution of €120,000. One-half of the initial contribution,
approximately $67,000, was paid during the year ended September 30, 2016 with the balance due upon the occurrence of certain defined
future events. The Company will also provide the joint venture additional financing as may be required, on a pro rata basis in
line with our equity interest. If the joint venture does not achieve certain milestones by December 2017, the joint venture will
be dissolved, unless (i) the parties mutually agree to pursue the joint venture arrangement, or (ii) either party decides to purchase
the equity interests of the other party. Each of the parties is entitled, upon the occurrence of certain defined events, to acquire
the interest of the other party.
In connection with the formation
of the joint venture and the execution of its strategy, the parties intend over time to enter into an exclusive supply agreement
within a limited field of use for Stellar to supply KLH to the joint venture, a supply agreement designating the joint venture
as the exclusive manufacturer and supplier of the other party’s vaccines, and services agreements for the provision of various
knowledge and expertise by each of the parties. The other party will also license certain of its intellectual property to the joint
venture.
The joint venture has an initial
ten-year term, renewable for successive five-year terms. If either party provides notice at least six months prior to the expiration
date of an applicable term that it does not wish to continue its participation in the joint venture, the other party will have
a right to acquire all of such terminating party’s equity interests in the joint venture.
The joint venture agreement
contains customary restrictions on transfer of the equity interests, tag-along and drag-along rights, non-competition, non-solicitation,
confidentiality and termination provisions.
Licensing fees
In July 2013, the Company acquired
the exclusive, worldwide license to certain patented technology for the development of human immunotherapies against
Clostridium
difficile
infection (“C. diff”). The license agreement required an initial, non-refundable license fee of $25,000,
which was paid in fiscal August 2013, and payment of an aggregate of $200,000 in delayed license fees, which were paid in fiscal
August 2014. Beginning September 2014, the terms also require a license fee of $20,000 to be paid annually, creditable against
royalties due, if any. Royalties are payable for a percentage of related net sales, if any. License fees are also payable for a
percentage of related non-royalty sublicensing revenue, if any. No royalties have been incurred to date. The Company also reimbursed
patent filing costs of approximately $11,000, $52,000 and $34,000 for the years ended September 30, 2016, September 30, 2015 and
August 31, 2014, respectively, and will reimburse certain future patent filing, prosecution, and maintenance costs. There were
no patent cost reimbursements during the one month ended September 30, 2014. License fees and patent cost reimbursements have been
accounted for as research and development expense in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
The license agreement expires
when the last valid patent claim licensed under the license agreement expires, which is currently 2030. Prior to that time, the
license agreement can be terminated by the licensor upon certain conditions. The Company will have 30 days after written notice
from the licensor to cure the problem prior to termination of the license agreement. The Company can terminate the agreement with
three months’ prior written notice.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Upon execution of the license
agreement, the Company issued 37,120 common shares and warrants to purchase up to 27,840 of the Company’s common shares to
the licensor, as further described in Note 9. The warrants expired on January 23, 2015 and were not exercised.
The license agreement provides
for the Company to pay up to an aggregate of $6,020,000 in milestone payments to the licensor upon achievement of various financing
and development targets up to the first regulatory approval. Remaining contingent milestone payments to the licensor totaling $57,025,000
are related to achievement of sales targets. A financing milestone was met during the year ended August 31, 2014, and accordingly,
the Company made a milestone payment of $100,000. No milestones were met during any other annual period, and there can be no assurance
that any of the remaining milestones will be met in the future.
Retirement savings plan 401(k)
contributions
The Company sponsors a 401(k)
retirement savings plan that requires an annual non-elective safe harbor employer contribution of 3% of eligible employee wages.
All employees over 21 years of age are eligible beginning the first payroll after 3 consecutive months of employment. Employees
are 100% vested in employer contributions and in any voluntary employee contributions. Contributions to the 401(k) plan were approximately
$64,000, $58,000, $5,000 and $52,000, for the years ended September 30, 2016, and 2015 one month ended September 30, 2014, and
year ended August 31, 2014 respectively.
Related party commitments:
Patent
r
oyalty agreement
On August 14, 2002, through
its California subsidiary, the Company entered into an agreement with a director and officer of the Company, where he would receive
royalty payments in exchange for assignment of his patent rights to the Company. The royalty is 5% of gross receipts from products
using this invention in excess of $500,000 annually. The Company’s current operations utilize this invention. Royalty expense
incurred during the year ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 was approximately $35,500 and $1,500. There was no royalty expense incurred
during the one month ended September 30, 2014 and year ended August 31, 2014.
Collaboration agreement
In December 2013, the Company
entered into a collaboration agreement with a privately-held Taiwanese biopharmaceuticals manufacturer effective through December
2015. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company was responsible for the production and delivery of GMP grade KLH for evaluation
as a carrier molecule in the collaboration partner’s potential manufacture of OBI-822 active immunotherapy. The Company was
also responsible for method development, product formulation, and process qualification for certain KLH reference standards. The
collaboration partner was responsible for development objectives and product specifications. The agreement provided for the collaboration
partner to pay fees for certain expenses and costs associated with the collaboration. Subject to certain conditions and timing,
the collaboration also provided for the parties to negotiate a commercial supply agreement for Stellar KLH™ in the future.
However, there can be no assurance that any such negotiations will lead to successful execution of a supply or other agreements
related to this collaboration.
The privately-held Taiwanese
biopharmaceuticals manufacturer is a beneficial owner of over 5% of the Company’s common shares. In addition, a member of
the Company’s Board of Directors currently serves as the manufacturer’s general manager and chair of its board of
directors. There are no arrangements or agreements between the Company and the manufacturer relating to representation on the
Board.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
The Company
had the following transactions in share capital:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of common shares issued
|
|
|
2,151,500
|
|
|
|
42,773
|
|
|
|
115,100
|
|
|
|
2,032,269
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common shares
|
|
$
|
6,750,000
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
12,000,000
|
|
Share issuance costs
|
|
|
(805,264
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(907,801
|
)
|
Proceeds from exercise of warrants
|
|
|
1,368,260
|
|
|
|
12,609
|
|
|
|
727,804
|
|
|
|
3,764,460
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of warrants
|
|
|
1,853,581
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
890,214
|
|
|
|
6,591,546
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
94,168
|
|
|
|
11,488
|
|
|
|
544,418
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
113,561
|
|
|
|
13,533
|
|
|
|
489,136
|
|
Share-based compensation
|
|
|
259,379
|
|
|
|
267,222
|
|
|
|
36,509
|
|
|
|
956,634
|
|
Performance
Shares
There were 1,000,000 common
shares allotted as performance shares to be issued to certain officers, directors and employees of the Company based on meeting
milestones related to completion of method development for commercial-scale manufacture of KLH, compilation and regulatory submittal
of all required chemistry, manufacturing and control data and completion of preclinical toxicity and immunogenicity testing of
products under a performance share plan. Share-based compensation was recorded over the estimated vesting period ending in August
2012.
At September 30, 2016, there
are 383,838 performance shares reserved for issuance.
License Agreement
During the year ended August
31, 2013, the Company entered into a license agreement and issued 37,120 common shares and warrants to purchase up to 27,840 of
the Company’s common shares to the licensor. Each warrant entitled the holder to purchase one common share of the Company
at a price of CDN$12.50 per share on or before January 23, 2015. The common shares were subject to a hold period that ended on
November 25, 2013. The warrants expired on January 23, 2015 and were not exercised. The value of the shares and warrants were recorded
as research and development expense.
Black-Scholes option valuation
model
The Company uses the Black-Scholes
option valuation model to determine the fair value of warrants, broker units and share options. Option valuation models require
the input of highly subjective assumptions including the expected price volatility. The Company has used historical volatility
to estimate the volatility of the share price. Changes in the subjective input assumptions can materially affect the fair value
estimates, and therefore the existing models do not necessarily provide a reliable single measure of the fair value of the Company’s
warrants, broker units and share options.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Warrants
A summary of the Company’s warrants activity
is as follows:
|
|
Number of
Warrants
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2014
|
|
|
1,054,531
|
|
|
$
|
9.05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(3,900
|
)
|
|
|
4.05
|
|
|
CDN $
|
Expired
|
|
|
(27,870
|
)
|
|
|
12.50
|
|
|
CDN $
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2015
|
|
|
1,022,761
|
|
|
$
|
9.04
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,265,626
|
|
|
|
4.50
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
4.00
|
|
|
CDN $
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(424,000
|
)
|
|
|
4.00
|
|
|
CDN $
|
Expired
|
|
|
(598,761
|
)
|
|
|
13.33
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(40,000
|
)
|
|
|
4.00
|
|
|
CDN $
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2016
|
|
|
1,265,626
|
|
|
$
|
4.50
|
|
|
|
There are no outstanding warrants
with exercise prices denominated in Canadian dollar at September 30, 2016.
The weighted average contractual
life remaining on the outstanding warrants at September 30, 2016 is 63 months.
The following table summarizes information about
the warrants outstanding at September 30, 2016:
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Number of
Warrants
|
|
|
Expiry Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$4.50
|
|
|
|
1,265,626
|
|
|
January 6, 2022*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,265,626
|
|
|
|
* Exercisable beginning January
6, 2017.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Warrant Liability
All warrants with exercise prices
denominated in Canadian dollars were exercised or expired. Therefore, there is no outstanding warrant liability at September 30,
2016.
Equity offerings conducted by
the Company in prior years included the issuance of warrants with exercise prices denominated in Canadian dollars. The Company’s
functional currency is in U.S. dollars. As a result of having exercise prices denominated in other than the Company’s functional
currency, those warrants met the definition of derivatives and were therefore classified as derivative liabilities measured at
fair value with adjustments to fair value recognized through the consolidated statements of operations. As these warrants were
exercised, the fair value of the recorded warrant liability on date of exercise was included in common shares along with the proceeds
from the exercise. If those warrants expired, the related decrease in warrant liability was recognized in profit or loss, as part
of the change in fair value of warrant liability. There was no cash flow impact as a result of this accounting treatment.
The fair value of these warrants
was determined using the Black-Scholes option valuation model at the end of each reporting period. Upon exercise of the warrants,
the fair value of warrants included in derivative liabilities was reclassified to equity.
The fair value of warrants exercised
was determined using the Black-Scholes option valuation model, using the following weighted average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
Risk free interest rate
|
|
|
0.48
|
%
|
|
|
0.44
|
%
|
|
|
1.12
|
%
|
|
|
1.07
|
%
|
Expected life (years)
|
|
|
0.04
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
0.27
|
|
Expected share price volatility
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
|
|
97
|
%
|
|
|
106
|
%
|
There were no warrants granted
during the year ended September 30, 2015 or the one month ended September 30, 2014. The fair value of warrants granted was determined
using the Black-Scholes option valuation model, using the following weighted average assumptions at the date of the grant:
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2014
|
|
Risk free interest rate
|
|
|
0.52
|
%
|
|
|
1.48
|
%
|
Expected life (years)
|
|
|
0.01
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
Expected share price volatility
|
|
|
91
|
%
|
|
|
112
|
%
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Broker units
The Company granted broker units
as finders’ fees in conjunction with equity offerings in prior years. Broker units were fully vested when granted and allowed
the holders to purchase equity units. A unit consisted of one common share and either one whole warrant or one half warrant.
A summary of broker units activity is as follows:
|
|
Number of
Units
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2014
|
|
|
46,720
|
|
|
$
|
2.25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
CDN $
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2015
|
|
|
46,600
|
|
|
|
1.87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(40,000
|
)
|
|
|
2.50
|
|
CDN $
|
Expired
|
|
|
(6,600
|
)
|
|
|
2.50
|
|
CDN $
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2016
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
There were no broker units granted during the years
ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, the one month ended September 30, 2014, or the year ended August 31, 2014.
Options
The Company has a fixed share
option plan adopted in 2013 (“the Plan”) to be administered by the Board of Directors, which has the discretion to
grant up to an aggregate of 1,000,000 options. The exercise price of an option is set at the closing price of the Company’s
common shares on the date of grant. Share options granted to directors, officers, employees and consultants are subject to the
following vesting schedule:
|
(a)
|
One-third shall vest immediately;
|
|
(b)
|
One-third shall vest 12 months from the date of grant; and
|
|
(c)
|
One-third shall vest
18 months from the date of grant.
|
Share options granted to investor
relations consultants vest over a period of not less than 12 months as to 25% on the date that is three months from the date of
grant, and a further 25% on each successive date that is three months from the date of the prior vesting.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Options have been issued under
the Plan allowing the holders to purchase common shares of the Company as follows:
|
|
Number of
Options
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2014
|
|
|
588,553
|
|
|
$
|
5.56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
16,500
|
|
|
|
13.30
|
|
|
CDN $
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(38,750
|
)
|
|
|
3.06
|
|
|
CDN $
|
Expired
|
|
|
(3,333
|
)
|
|
|
18.30
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(5,332
|
)
|
|
|
7.76
|
|
|
CDN $
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2015
|
|
|
557,638
|
|
|
$
|
5.17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
56,300
|
|
|
|
6.47
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(21,334
|
)
|
|
|
10.70
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(53,501
|
)
|
|
|
5.22
|
|
|
CDN $
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance - September 30, 2016
|
|
|
539,103
|
|
|
$
|
5.29
|
|
|
|
The weighted average contractual
life remaining on the outstanding options is 2.57 years.
The following table summarizes
information about the options under the Plan outstanding and exercisable at September 30, 2016:
Number of Options
|
|
|
Exercisable at
September 30, 2016
|
|
|
Range of exercise prices
|
|
Expiry Dates
|
|
283,610
|
|
|
|
283,610
|
|
|
CDN$0.01 - 5.00
|
|
Apr 2017-Dec 2019
|
|
8,600
|
|
|
|
2,867
|
|
|
$0.01 - 5.00
|
|
Sep 2023
|
|
142,860
|
|
|
|
141,193
|
|
|
CDN$5.01 - 10.00
|
|
Oct 2017-Jun 2022
|
|
33,033
|
|
|
|
15,900
|
|
|
$5.01 - 10.00
|
|
Dec 2022
|
|
21,500
|
|
|
|
21,500
|
|
|
CDN$15.01 - 20.00
|
|
Nov 2018-Nov 2021
|
|
49,500
|
|
|
|
49,500
|
|
|
$15.01 - 20.00
|
|
Nov 2020
|
|
539,103
|
|
|
|
514,570
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
There were no share options
granted in the one month ended September 30, 2014. The estimated fair value of the share options granted was determined using a
Black-Scholes option valuation model with the following weighted average assumptions:
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
Risk free interest rate
|
|
|
1.01
|
%
|
|
|
1.65
|
%
|
|
|
2.01
|
%
|
Expected life (years)
|
|
|
7.00
|
|
|
|
7.00
|
|
|
|
6.75
|
|
Expected share price volatility
|
|
|
117
|
%
|
|
|
115
|
%
|
|
|
120
|
%
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
The weighted average fair value
of share options granted during the years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, and August 31, 2014 was $5.56, $9.48, and $15.14,
respectively.
As of September 30, 2016, the
Company had approximately $86,000 of unrecognized share-based compensation expense, which is expected to be recognized over a period
of 1.5 years.
The intrinsic value of the options
exercised during the year ended September 30, 2015, one month ended September 30, 2014, and year ended August 31, 2014, was $8.28,
$15.99, and $12.78, respectively. There were no options exercised during the year ended September 30, 2016. The intrinsic value
of the vested options at September 30, 2016 was $0.10.
The breakdown of loss before
income tax by jurisdiction is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
$
|
(4,001,206
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3,258,355
|
)
|
|
$
|
(334,841
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4,183,392
|
)
|
Canadian
|
|
|
(1,026,520
|
)
|
|
|
405,203
|
|
|
|
1,462,652
|
|
|
|
(4,096,931
|
)
|
Other foreign
|
|
|
8,846
|
|
|
|
46,923
|
|
|
|
3,893
|
|
|
|
(132,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Loss Before Income Tax
|
|
$
|
(5,018,880
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,806,229
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,131,704
|
|
|
$
|
(8,412,323
|
)
|
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Deferred income tax assets and
liabilities of the Company are as follows:
|
|
September 30,
2016
|
|
|
September 30,
2015
|
|
|
September 30,
2014
|
|
|
August 31,
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-capital loss carry-forwards
|
|
$
|
10,000,000
|
|
|
$
|
8,028,900
|
|
|
$
|
6,561,000
|
|
|
$
|
6,418,300
|
|
Research and development tax credits
|
|
|
808,000
|
|
|
|
716,400
|
|
|
|
626,900
|
|
|
|
616,600
|
|
Deferred expenses
|
|
|
70,000
|
|
|
|
82,900
|
|
|
|
84,000
|
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
1,700
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Share issuance costs
|
|
|
207,200
|
|
|
|
67,800
|
|
|
|
124,700
|
|
|
|
131,800
|
|
Deferred income tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. federal benefit net of state taxes
|
|
|
(764,500
|
)
|
|
|
(628,800
|
)
|
|
|
(517,100
|
)
|
|
|
(509,000
|
)
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(13,600
|
)
|
|
|
(14,500
|
)
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(10,321,100
|
)
|
|
|
(8,268,900
|
)
|
|
|
(6,865,900
|
)
|
|
|
(6,733,200
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred income tax asset (liability)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Realization of the deferred tax assets is dependent
upon the generation of future taxable income, the amount and timing of which are uncertain. Accordingly, the net deferred tax assets
have been fully offset by a valuation allowance.
As of September 30, 2016, the
Company had federal net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards of approximately $20,708,000 expiring 2030 through 2036,
California NOL carryforwards of approximately $20,472,000 expiring 2018 through 2036, and Canadian federal and provincial NOL carryforwards
of approximately CDN$5,855,000 expiring 2029 through 2036. Portions of these NOL carryforwards may be used to offset future taxable
income, if any.
As of September 30, 2016, the
Company also has federal and California research and development tax credit carryforwards of approximately $384,000 and $424,000,
respectively, available to offset future taxes. The federal credits begin expiring in 2030 and continue expiring through 2036.
The state tax credits do not expire.
Under the provisions of Section
382 of the Internal Revenue Code, substantial changes in the Company's ownership limit the amount of net operating loss carryforwards
and tax credit carryforwards that can be utilized annually in the future to offset taxable income. A valuation allowance has been
established to reserve the potential benefits of these carryforwards in the Company's consolidated financial statements to reflect
the uncertainty of future taxable income required to utilize available tax loss carryforwards and other deferred tax assets.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
The recovery of income taxes
shown in the consolidated statements of operations differs from the amounts obtained by applying statutory rates to the loss before
provision for income taxes due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined Canadian federal and provincial tax rates
|
|
|
26.0
|
%
|
|
|
26.0
|
%
|
|
|
26.0
|
%
|
|
|
26.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected income tax (recovery)/expense
|
|
$
|
(1,304,900
|
)
|
|
$
|
(729,600
|
)
|
|
$
|
294,300
|
|
|
$
|
(2,187,200
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nondeductible share-based payments
|
|
|
(67,400
|
)
|
|
|
69,500
|
|
|
|
9,500
|
|
|
|
248,700
|
|
Nondeductible change in fair value of warrant liability
|
|
|
(55,100
|
)
|
|
|
(554,100
|
)
|
|
|
(436,800
|
)
|
|
|
659,300
|
|
Effect of higher income tax rate in U.S.
|
|
|
(550,600
|
)
|
|
|
(445,800
|
)
|
|
|
(46,000
|
)
|
|
|
(602,100
|
)
|
Foreign currency differences
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
169,900
|
|
|
|
25,400
|
|
|
|
(50,900
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(2,800
|
)
|
|
|
(43,300
|
)
|
|
|
(3,800
|
)
|
|
|
(219,800
|
)
|
Change in valuation allowance on deferred tax assets
|
|
|
1,968,000
|
|
|
|
1,570,200
|
|
|
|
161,200
|
|
|
|
2,179,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
$
|
7,200
|
|
|
$
|
36,800
|
|
|
$
|
3,800
|
|
|
$
|
27,200
|
|
The components of income tax
provision (benefits) are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current tax provision
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. federal
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Canadian
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Other foreign
|
|
|
6,400
|
|
|
|
36,000
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
26,400
|
|
State
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax provision
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. federal
|
|
|
(1,265,700
|
)
|
|
|
(1,032,200
|
)
|
|
|
(107,100
|
)
|
|
|
(1,431,400
|
)
|
Canadian
|
|
|
(303,300
|
)
|
|
|
(209,300
|
)
|
|
|
(21,600
|
)
|
|
|
(289,800
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
(399,000
|
)
|
|
|
(328,700
|
)
|
|
|
(32,500
|
)
|
|
|
(458,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in valuation allowance on deferred tax assets
|
|
|
1,968,000
|
|
|
|
1,570,200
|
|
|
|
161,200
|
|
|
|
2,179,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
7,200
|
|
|
$
|
36,800
|
|
|
$
|
3,800
|
|
|
$
|
27,200
|
|
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
|
11.
|
Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow and Non-Cash Transactions
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash
flow information follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
Cash paid during the period for taxes
|
|
$
|
7,200
|
|
|
$
|
36,800
|
|
|
$
|
800
|
|
|
$
|
30,200
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of non-cash
financing and investing activities follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share issuance costs - broker units and warrants
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
386,898
|
|
Share issuance costs withheld from escrow proceeds
|
|
|
472,500
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
386,325
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of warrants
|
|
|
1,853,581
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
890,214
|
|
|
|
6,591,546
|
|
Transfer to common shares on exercise of options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
113,561
|
|
|
|
13,533
|
|
|
|
489,136
|
|
Transfer to common shares on issuance of performance shares
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
422,728
|
|
Shares subscribed transferred to common shares
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,155,674
|
|
|
12.
|
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
|
The Company uses the fair value
measurement framework for valuing financial assets and liabilities measured on a recurring basis in situations where other accounting
pronouncements either permit or require fair value measurements.
Fair value of a financial instrument
is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants
at the measurement date. The carrying value of certain financial instruments such as accounts receivable, accounts payable, accrued
liabilities, and deferred revenue approximates fair value due to the short-term nature of such instruments. Short-term investments
in U.S. Treasury Bills are reported at amortized cost, which approximates fair value.
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
The Company follows the fair
value hierarchy which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when
measuring fair value. There are three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value:
|
Level 1:
|
Quoted prices in active markets for identical or similar assets and liabilities.
|
|
|
|
|
Level 2:
|
Quoted prices for identical
or similar assets and liabilities in markets that are not active or observable inputs other than quoted prices in active markets
for identical or similar assets and liabilities.
|
|
Level 3:
|
Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no
market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.
|
The Company recorded its short-term
investments in mutual fund debt securities at fair value using Level 1 inputs in the fair value hierarchy. The Company recorded
its warrant liability at fair value using Level 2 inputs using the Black-Scholes option valuation model and assumptions disclosed
in Note 9.
The following table summarizes
fair values for those assets and liabilities with fair value measured on a recurring basis. There are no short-term investments
in mutual fund debt securities or warrant liability at September 30, 2016.
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices
in Active
Markets
for
Identical
Instruments
(Level 1)
|
|
|
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs
(Level 2)
|
|
|
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
|
|
|
Total Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments in U.S. Treasury Bills
|
|
$
|
3,988,794
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
3,988,794
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments in mutual fund debt securities
|
|
$
|
5,015,171
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
5,015,171
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrant liability, current portion
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,550,630
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,550,630
|
|
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
|
13.
|
Concentrations of Credit Risk
|
Credit risk is the risk of an
unexpected loss if a customer or third party to a financial instrument fails to meet its contractual obligations. Financial instruments
that potentially subject the Company to a concentration of credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, US Treasury
bills, mutual fund debt securities and accounts receivable. The Company estimates its maximum credit risk at the amount recorded
on the balance sheet.
Management’s assessment
of the Company’s credit risk for cash and cash equivalents is low as they are held in major financial institutions believed
to be credit worthy or US Treasury bills. The Company limits its exposure to credit loss for short-term investments by using US
Treasury bills or a mutual fund that invests in high-quality, U.S. dollar-denominated short-term fixed-, floating- and variable-rate
debt securities that have received either a minimum short-term rating of at least A-1 (or its equivalent) or a minimum long-term
rating of A minus (or its equivalent), by one or more Nationally Recognized Statistical Ratings Organizations, or, if unrated,
that are deemed by the fund to be of comparable quality at the time of purchase. Based on credit monitoring and history, the Company
considers the risk of credit losses due to customer non-performance on accounts receivable to be low.
The Company had the following
concentrations of revenues by customers and grantors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales and contract services revenue
|
|
|
76% from
3 customers
|
|
|
|
82% from
3 customers
|
|
|
|
86% from
3 customers
|
|
|
73% from
2 customers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant revenue
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
100% from
1 grantor
|
The Company had the following
concentrations of revenues by geographic areas:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Month
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
August 31,
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
43
|
%
|
|
|
53
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
Asia
|
|
|
45
|
%
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
|
|
28
|
%
|
|
|
40
|
%
|
U.S.
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
62
|
%
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
Other countries
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
The Company had the following
concentrations of accounts receivable:
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
100 % from
1 customer
|
|
|
|
91% from
2 customers
|
|
Stellar
Biotechnologies, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
For the Years Ended September 30, 2016
and 2015, One Month Ended September 30, 2014, and Year Ended August 31, 2014
(Expressed
in U.S. Dollars)
Certain reclassifications have been made to the
prior period to conform with the current period’s presentation. These include the Company’s reclassification of a
mutual fund investing in short-term debt securities from cash equivalents to short-term investments and reclassification of costs
related to aquaculture to present such costs separately from costs of sales and contract services. There was no impact on total
assets, total shareholders’ equity, accumulated deficit, total expenses or net income (loss) resulting from these reclassifications.
The statement of cash flows reflects the mutual fund activity as cash flows from investing activities rather than changes in cash.
Stellar Biotechnologies Inc. (NASDAQ:SBOT)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2024 to Apr 2024
Stellar Biotechnologies Inc. (NASDAQ:SBOT)
Historical Stock Chart
From Apr 2023 to Apr 2024