Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
1. Organization, Nature of Operations, and Principles of
Consolidation
Real Goods Solar, Inc. (the “Company” or “RGS”)
is in the solar energy stem business as (i) a manufacturer of POWERHOUSE™ 3.0 in-roof solar shingles and (ii) a residential
and small business commercial solar energy engineering, procurement, and construction (“EPC”) firm.
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
RGS and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. RGS has prepared the accompanying consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP, which include the Company’s accounts and those of its subsidiaries.
Intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. The Company has included the results of operations of acquired companies
from the effective date of acquisition.
POWERHOUSE™ License Agreement
A material significant event occurred on September 29, 2017
(the “Effective Date”), when the Company executed an exclusive domestic and international world-wide Technology License
Agreement (the “License”) with Dow Global Technologies LLC (“Dow”) for its POWERHOUSE™ in-roof solar
shingle (“POWERHOUSE™”). The License allows RGS to market the POWERHOUSE™ 3.0 product using the Dow name,
and under the terms of the License agreed to a license fee of $3 million. The License requires the Company to commercialize and
sell a minimum of 50 megawatts of solar within 5-years of the Effective Date to retain exclusive world-wide rights.
The Company obtained Underwriters Laboratories (“UL”)
certification for POWERHOUSE™ 3.0 during November 2018, immediately after which the Company commenced commercialization entailing
the manufacturing, marketing and sale of POWERHOUSE™ to roofing companies and homebuilders. The first purchase order for
POWERHOUSE™ 3.0 was received from a customer on December 27, 2018 and shipped to the customer in January 2019.
Liquidity and Financial Resources Update
The Company’s historical operating results indicate substantial
doubt exists related to its ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans and actions, which are intended to
mitigate the substantial doubt raised by the Company’s historical operating results in order to satisfy its estimated liquidity
needs for a period of 12 months from the issuance of the consolidated financial statements, are discussed below. As the Company
cannot predict, with certainty, the outcome of its actions to generate liquidity, or whether such actions would generate the expected
liquidity as currently planned, management’s plans to mitigate the risk and extend cash resources through the evaluation
period, are not considered probable under current accounting standards for assessing an entity’s ability to continue as a
going concern.
On March 27, 2019, the Company’s Board of Directors determined
to exit its mainland residential solar business to focus on the POWERHOUSE™ in-roof shingle market and reduce overall cash
outflow, with the goal of maximizing future shareholder value. The Company believes this structure and realignment enables it to
effectively manage its operations and resources. This realignment is expected to result in the reduction of workforce payroll plus
burden of approximately $4.0 million annually.
As of March 31, 2019, the Company has cash of $2.1 million,
working capital of $2.2 million and shareholders’ equity of $7.1 million.
The Company has experienced recurring operating losses and negative
cash flow from operations which have necessitated:
|
·
|
Exiting the mainland residential division and execution of a reduction in workforce;
|
|
·
|
Focusing on growing POWERHOUSE™ revenue through a re-allocation of personnel to POWERHOUSE™ sales and initiating
sales to other solar installers and distribution companies; and
|
|
·
|
Raising additional capital. See Note 10. Subsequent Events for transaction to raise $3.3 million during the second quarter
of 2019.
|
No assurances can be given that the Company will be successful
with its plans to grow revenue for profitable operations.
The Company has historically incurred a cash outflow from its
operations as its revenue has not been at a level for profitable operations. As discussed above, a key component of the Company’s
revenue growth strategy is the sale of the POWERHOUSE™ 3.0 in-roof solar shingle. The Company obtained UL certification for
POWERHOUSE™ at the close of 2018 and therefore only recently has begun to market POWERHOUSE™ at the start of 2019.
The Company believes that it will require several quarters to generate sales to meet its goals for profitable operations.
The first quarter of the year has always been one of the Company’s
slowest sales periods and as such, this is a period of higher cash outflow. POWERHOUSE™ 3.0 sales during the first quarter
of 2019 have been materially less than the Company’s expectations and, accordingly, the Company raised additional capital
during the second quarter of 2019. See Note 10. Subsequent Events for further detail.
As discussed above, (i) the Company expects that future sales
of POWERHOUSE™ 3.0 in-roof solar shingles will be its primary source of revenue and (ii) the Company only recently began
marketing POWERHOUSE™ 3.0, and accordingly, expects to incur a quarterly cash outflow for a portion of 2019.
2. Significant Accounting Policies
The Company made no changes to its significant accounting policies
during the three months ended March 31, 2019, however it implemented Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 842
as discussed in Note 3.
Recently Adopted Accounting Standards
ASU 2017-11
On July 13, 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards
Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2017-11 (“ASU 2017-11”),
Earnings Per Share (Topic
260); Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity (Topic 480); Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): (Part I) Accounting for Certain
Financial Instruments with Down Round Features, (Part II) Replacement of the Indefinite Deferral for Mandatorily Redeemable Financial
Instruments of Certain Nonpublic Entities and Certain Mandatorily Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests with a Scope Exception.
The
amendments in Part I of ASU 2017-11 change the classification analysis of certain equity- linked financial instruments (or embedded
features) with down round features. When determining whether certain financial instruments should be classified as liabilities
or equity instruments, a down round feature no longer precludes equity classification when assessing whether the instrument is
indexed to an entity’s own stock. The amendments also clarify existing disclosure requirements for equity-classified instruments.
The amendments in Part II of ASU 2017-11 recharacterize the indefinite deferral of certain provisions of Topic 480 to a scope exception.
The Company adopted ASU 2017-11 during the three months ended March 31, 2019 however, the amendments within ASU 2017-11 do not
have any current accounting impact on the Company.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
ASU 2016-13
On June 16, 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update
No. 2016-13 (“ASU 2016-13”),
Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326)
. ASU 2016-13 requires financial
assets measured at amortized cost basis to be presented at the net amount expected to be collected. Additionally, any credit losses
relating to available-for-sale debt securities will need to be recorded through an allowance for credit losses upon adoption. ASU
2016-13 is effective for the Company for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 however, the Company does not expect adoption
to have any accounting impact. The Company does not carry any financial assets measured at amortized cost or available-for-sale
debt securities.
3. Leases
In February 2016, the FASB issued a new standard related to
leases to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by requiring the recognition of rights-of-use (“ROU”)
assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet. Most prominent among the changes in the standard is the recognition of ROU assets
and lease liabilities by lessees for those leases classified as operating leases. The Company has adopted the new standard on January
1, 2019 and used the effective date as its date of initial application. Consequently, financial information will not be updated,
and the disclosures required under the new standard will not be provided for dates and periods before January 1, 2019. The cumulative
effect of the change in accounting principal upon adoption of ASC 842 has resulted in an adjustment to retained earnings of $0.04
million as of January 1, 2019. Additionally, a right-of-use asset in the amount of $2.1 million was recognized in non-current assets
with offsetting lease liabilities of $0.8 million and $1.3 million recorded in current and non-current liabilities respectively.
The Company has operating leases for corporate offices, warehouses,
fleet vehicles and certain office equipment. Its leases have remaining lease terms of 1 year to 5 years, some of which include
options to extend the leases for up to 3 years. Options to extend have been recognized as part of the Company’s ROU assets
and lease liabilities for our warehouse and corporate office leases in Bloomfield, CT and Kailua, HI. As of the date of adoption
of ASC 842, the Company had exercised the extension option for these two locations creating a remaining lease term of 1 year. As
for the remaining leases, the Company was not reasonably certain that it would exercise its option to extend the leases and they
have not been recognized as part of the Company’s right-of-use assets and lease liabilities. Additionally, the Company is
the lessor of leased solar systems with 20-year terms which have been classified as sales-type leases. These solar system leases
have the option to extend for one or more additional one-year renewal terms.
The Company has elected the “package of practical expedients”
and has not reassessed whether the lease contracts contain a lease, their lease classifications or initial direct costs. Additionally,
the Company has made an accounting policy election to exclude immaterial leases from lease accounting and will continue to expense
them as incurred similar to its capitalization policy. The new standard also provides practical expedients for an entity’s
ongoing accounting. The Company has elected the short-term lease recognition exemption for all leases that qualify. This means,
for those leases that qualify, the Company will not recognize ROU assets or lease liabilities, and this includes not recognizing
ROU assets or lease liabilities for existing short-term leases of those assets in transition. The Company has also elected the
practical expedient to not separate lease and non-lease components for all of its leases where the Company is the lessee. Significant
judgements have been made in the determination of the discount rate for the leases. The rate implicit in the leases was not readily
determinable so the Company has used the incremental borrowing rate for measuring the leases liabilities and right-of-use asset.
The Company used yields of syndicated loans from comparable companies to estimate an incremental borrowing rate. These loans were
collateralized as required by ASC 842 and had similar credit ratings as the Company.
Operating lease costs for the three months ended March 31, 2019
were $0.3 million. Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities amounted to $0.5 million for the three
months ended March 31, 2019 and have been included within the operating section of the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash
Flows. Non-cash activities related to the adoption of ASC 842 include additions to right-of-use assets of $2.4 million arising
from operating lease liabilities. The weighted average remaining lease term and weighted average discount rate are as follows:
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
Weighted Average Remaining Lease Term
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Leases
|
|
|
2.57 years
|
|
Weighted Average Discount Rate
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Leases
|
|
|
15
|
%
|
Maturities of lease liabilities are as follows:
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
Maturities of lease liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
$
|
1,096,168
|
|
2020
|
|
|
826,313
|
|
2021
|
|
|
604,054
|
|
2022
|
|
|
44,709
|
|
2023
|
|
|
-
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
-
|
|
Total lease payments
|
|
|
2,571,244
|
|
Less imputed interest
|
|
|
(430,306
|
)
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2,140,938
|
|
In determining the amount the Company expects to derive from
the leased solar systems following the end of the lease term, it used significant assumptions. At lease inception, the Company
engaged the services of a third-party to perform a study of the future fair market value through the end of the assumed lease term
of 20 years using a cost approach and income approach. Inflation was projected based on historical trends to determine the residual
value in real dollars. The Company has managed the risk associated with the residual value of its leased panels by incorporating
system, home and property maintenance requirements within each lease. The Company expects to derive approximately $0.3 million
from the underlying solar panels following the end of the lease term.
Maturities of lease receivables are as follows:
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
Maturities of lease receivables
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
$
|
62,335
|
|
2020
|
|
|
84,441
|
|
2021
|
|
|
85,912
|
|
2022
|
|
|
87,426
|
|
2023
|
|
|
88,983
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
1,060,243
|
|
Total lease receivables
|
|
|
1,469,340
|
|
Less imputed interest
|
|
|
(625,500
|
)
|
Present value of lease receivables
|
|
|
843,840
|
|
Plus Unguaranteed residual
|
|
|
251,669
|
|
Plus Deferred operations and maintenance expenses
|
|
|
60,570
|
|
Less Initial direct costs
|
|
|
(80,574
|
)
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,075,505
|
|
The components of the Company’s aggregate net investment
in sales-type leases as of March 31, 2019 include lease receivables of $1.5 million, unguaranteed residual assets of $0.3 million,
initial direct cost of ($0.08) million, deferred operations and maintenance expense of $0.06 million and unearned revenue of $0.6
million.
4. Inventory
Inventory for our Solar Division consists primarily of solar
energy system components (such as solar panels and inverters) and its cost is determined by the first-in, first-out ("FIFO")
method. The inventory is stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value with an allowance for slow moving and obsolete inventory
items based on an estimate of the markdown to the retail price required to sell or dispose of such items. The Company has an allowance
for obsolete or slow-moving inventory of $0.7 million at March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively.
POWERHOUSE™ inventories are recorded at lower of cost
(incurred from third party supply channel manufacturers) or net realizable value. Cost is determined using the FIFO method. Management
will establish an estimated excess and obsolete inventory reserve based on slow-moving and obsolete inventory. As of March 31,
2019, and December 31, 2018, there was no excess and obsolete inventory reserve.
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Productive material, work
in process and supplies
|
|
$
|
1,375
|
|
|
$
|
92
|
|
Finished product, including
service parts, etc.
|
|
|
2,310
|
|
|
|
2,174
|
|
Total inventories
|
|
|
3,685
|
|
|
|
2,266
|
|
Reserve for
obsolescence
|
|
|
(678
|
)
|
|
|
(671
|
)
|
Total
inventories, net
|
|
$
|
3,007
|
|
|
$
|
1,595
|
|
5. Accrued Liabilities
Accrued liabilities consist of the following:
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
2019
|
|
|
2018
|
|
Accrued Expenses
|
|
$
|
931
|
|
|
$
|
924
|
|
Accrued Compensation
|
|
|
664
|
|
|
|
476
|
|
Other
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
69
|
|
Accrued Project Costs
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,691
|
|
|
$
|
1,571
|
|
6. Related Parties
On May 23, 2017, the Company entered into an agreement
with Mobomo, LLC (“Mobomo”) for the design and development of intellectual property at a cost of $0.5 million. The
intellectual property consisted of an integrated mobile phone application and the new RGS 365™ customer portal. As of March
31, 2019 and December 31, 2018, Mobomo provided data hosting services which totaled approximately $4,000 and $20,000, respectively.
Mobomo’s Chief Executive Officer Brian Lacey is the son
of the Company’s CEO Dennis Lacey. The Company approved the agreement in accordance with its related-party transaction policy.
7. Contingencies
The Company is subject to risks and uncertainties in the normal
course of business, including legal proceedings; governmental regulation, such as the interpretation of tax and labor laws; and
the seasonal nature of its business due to weather-related factors. The Company has accrued a liability for probable and estimable
costs incurred with respect to identified risks and uncertainties based upon the facts and circumstances currently available.
8. Fair Value Measurements
The Company complies with the provisions of FASB ASC No. 820,
Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures
(“ASC 820”), in measuring fair value and in disclosing fair value measurements
at the measurement date. ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about
fair value measurements required under other accounting pronouncements. FASB ASC No. 820-10-35, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures-
Subsequent Measurement (“ASC 820-10-35”), clarifies that fair value is an exit price, representing the amount 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. ASC 820-10-35-3 also requires that a fair value measurement reflect the assumptions market participants would
use in pricing an asset or liability based on the best information available. Assumptions include the risks inherent in a particular
valuation technique (such as a pricing model) and/or the risks inherent in the inputs to the model.
ASC 820-10-35 discusses valuation techniques, such as the market
approach (comparable market prices), the income approach (present value of future income or cash flow), and the cost approach (cost
to replace the service capacity of an asset or replacement cost). The statement utilizes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes
the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. The following is a brief description of
those three levels:
Level 1 Inputs – Level 1 inputs are unadjusted
quoted prices in active markets for assets or liabilities identical to those to be reported at fair value. An active market is
a market in which transactions occur for the item to be fair valued with sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information
on an ongoing basis.
Level 2 Inputs – Level 2 inputs are inputs other
than quoted prices included within Level 1. Level 2 inputs are observable either directly or indirectly. These inputs include:
(a) Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; (b) Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities
in markets that are not active, such as when there are few transactions for the asset or liability, the prices are not current,
price quotations vary substantially over time or in which little information is released publicly; (c) Inputs other than quoted
prices that are observable for the asset or liability; and
(d) Inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated
by observable market data by correlation or other means.
Level 3 Inputs – Level 3 inputs are unobservable
inputs for an asset or liability. These inputs should be used to determine fair value only when observable inputs are not available.
Unobservable inputs should be developed based on the best information available in the circumstances, which might include internally
generated data and assumptions being used to price the asset or liability.
When determining the fair value measurements for assets or liabilities
required or permitted to be recorded at and/or marked to fair value, the Company considers the principal or most advantageous market
in which it would transact and considers assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. When
possible, the Company looks to active and observable markets to price identical assets. When identical assets are not traded in
active markets, the Company looks to market observable data for similar assets.
The following tables present the fair values
of derivative instruments included in our consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018 (in
thousands) respectively:
Fair Value of Derivative Instruments
|
|
Liability Derivatives
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2019
|
|
|
December 31, 2018
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet
Location
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Balance Sheet
Location
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deriviative liability
|
|
N/a
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
Convertible debt, net
|
|
$
|
344
|
|
The Effect of Derivative Instrument on
the Statement of Operations
for the Three Months Ended March 31,
2019 and 2018
|
|
|
|
Amount of Loss Recognized in
Statement of Operations
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging
instruments
|
|
Location of Loss Recognized in Statement of
Operations
|
|
2019
|
|
|
2018
|
|
2018 Notes Conversion Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value of derivative liabilities and loss on debt extinguishment
|
|
$
|
57
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
|
Amortization of debt discount & deferred loan costs
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
The Company accounts for Series Q warrants in accordance with
ASC 480. The Series Q warrants are accounted for as liabilities due to provisions in the warrants allowing the warrant holders
to request redemption, upon a change of control, and failure to timely deliver shares of Class A common stock upon exercise or
default. The Company classifies these warrant liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as long-term liabilities, which are
revalued at each balance sheet date subsequent to their initial issuance. The Company used a Black Scholes pricing model to value
these warrant liabilities which is based, in part, upon unobservable inputs some of which have little or no market data, requiring
the Company to develop its own assumptions. The following tables summarize the basis used to measure certain financial assets and
liabilities at fair value on a recurring basis in the consolidated balance sheets:
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in Active
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Items
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2019 (in thousands)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
Common stock warrant liability
|
|
$
|
256
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
256
|
|
|
|
$
|
256
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
256
|
|
The following table shows the reconciliation from the beginning
to the ending balance for the Company’s common stock warrant liability and embedded derivative liability measured at fair
value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (i.e. Level 3) for the period ended March 31, 2019:
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
derivative
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
warrant liability
|
|
|
liability
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Fair value of financial liabilities at December 31, 2018
|
|
$
|
511
|
|
|
$
|
344
|
|
|
$
|
855
|
|
Change in the fair value of common stock warrant liabilities, net
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
Adjustment for exercise of common stock warrant liabilities
|
|
|
(241
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(241
|
)
|
Investor Notes
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
109
|
|
|
|
109
|
|
Change in the fair value of derivative liabilities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(211
|
)
|
|
|
(211
|
)
|
Conversions of 2018 Notes
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(242
|
)
|
|
|
(242
|
)
|
Fair value of financial liabilities at March 31, 2019
|
|
$
|
256
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
256
|
|
2018 Notes Derivative Liability
The Company’s Senior Convertible Notes issued on April
9, 2018 (“2018 Notes”) had a maturity date of April 9, 2019. As such, the Company made the assumption that as of the
period ended March 31, 2019, noteholders most likely would not convert the remaining notes. Additionally, information available
to the Company after period end supported this assumption and the conversion option derivative liability was determined to have
a value of $0 as of March 31, 2019.
Common Stock Warrants
The fair value of Series Q Warrants was derived using a Black
Scholes pricing model, which is based, in part, upon unobservable inputs for which there is little or no market data, requiring
the Company to develop its own assumptions. The Series Q Warrants had previously been valued using the Monte Carlo model however,
due to the immaterial difference in valuations between the two models, the Company utilized Black Scholes. The assumptions used
in the Black Scholes model were as follows:
|
|
Exercise
Price
|
|
|
Strike Floor
|
|
Closing
Market Price
(average)
|
|
|
Risk-free
Rate
|
|
|
Dividend
Yield
|
|
|
Market
Price
Volatility
|
|
|
Remaining
Term
(years)
|
|
Warrant Liability March 31, 2019
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
|
N/a
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
2.23
|
%
|
|
|
0.00
|
%
|
|
|
144
|
%
|
|
|
4.02
|
|
Other Financial Instruments
The Company's financial instruments consist primarily of cash
and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, deferred revenue and convertible debt. The carrying values of these
financial instruments approximate their fair values, due to their short-term nature.
9. Segment Information
Financial information for the Company’s segments and a
reconciliation of the total of the reportable segments’ income (loss) from operations (measures of profit or loss) to the
Company’s consolidated net loss are as follows:
(in thousands)
|
|
2019
|
|
|
2018
|
|
Contract revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solar Division
|
|
$
|
2,060
|
|
|
$
|
2,810
|
|
POWERHOUSE™
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Other
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Consolidated contract revenue
|
|
|
2,162
|
|
|
|
2,822
|
|
Operating loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solar Division
|
|
|
(1,618
|
)
|
|
|
(1,425
|
)
|
POWERHOUSE™
|
|
|
(461
|
)
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(2,423
|
)
|
|
|
(2,917
|
)
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(4,502
|
)
|
|
|
(4,395
|
)
|
Reconciliation of consolidated loss from operations to consolidated net loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
Change in fair value of derivative liabilities and loss on debt extinguishment
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
Amortization of debt discount and deferred loan costs
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(4,490
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4,338
|
)
|
The following is a reconciliation of reportable segments’
assets to the Company’s consolidated total assets. The Other segment includes certain unallocated corporate amounts.
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
2019
|
|
|
2018
|
|
Total assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solar Division
|
|
$
|
9,112
|
|
|
$
|
7,136
|
|
POWERHOUSE™
|
|
|
6,403
|
|
|
|
4,298
|
|
Other
|
|
|
436
|
|
|
|
4,826
|
|
|
|
$
|
15,951
|
|
|
$
|
16,260
|
|
10. Subsequent Events
On
April 4, 2019, the Company closed a registered offering in which it issued and sold (i) 15,938,280 shares of Class A common stock,
(ii) prepaid Series S Warrants to purchase 1,430,141 shares of Class A common stock and (iii) Series R Warrants to purchase 17,368,421
shares of Class A common stock pursuant to the terms of the Securities Purchase Agreement dated April 2, 2019 between the Company
and the investors. The investors paid $0.19 per share of Class A common stock and $0.18 per share of Class A common stock underlying
the Series S Warrant for aggregate gross proceeds of $3.3 million at the closing and before $0.34 million of expenses.