United
States
Securities
and Exchange Commission
Washington,
D.C. 20549
____________________________________
FORM
10-Q
[X]
Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act
of 1934
For
the
Quarterly Period Ended
June 30, 2006
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 0-10593
ICONIX
BRAND GROUP, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware
|
11-2481903
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation
or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
|
|
1450
Broadway, New York, NY
|
10018
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
Code)
|
(212)
730-0030
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
(Former
name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last
report)
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 periods that the registrant was
required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X
No
.
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated
filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act):
Large
accelerated filer ___ Accelerated
filer _X__ Non-accelerated
filer ___
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act) Yes ___
No.
_X__
Indicate
the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of Common
Stock, as of the latest practicable date.
Common
Stock, $.001 Par Value - 39,184,715 shares as of July 27, 2006.
INDEX
FORM
10-Q
Iconix
Brand Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Part
I.
|
Financial
Information
|
Page
No.
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements – (Unaudited)
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets – June 30, 2006 and December 31,
2005
|
3
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Income Statements – Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2006
and 2005
|
4
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders’ Equity – Six Months Ended June 30,
2006
|
5
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows – Six Months Ended June 30, 2006 and
2005
|
6
|
|
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
7
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
20
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
26
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part
II.
|
Other
Information
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
27
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
27
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
|
29
|
Part
I.
Financial
Information
Item
1.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Iconix
Brand Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(in
thousands, except par value)
|
June
30,
|
December
31,
|
|
2006
|
2005
|
Assets
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Current
Assets:
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents (including restricted cash of $9,003 in 2006
and
$4,094 in 2005)
|
$13,592
|
$11,687
|
Marketable
securities
|
911
|
553
|
Accounts
receivable, net of reserve of $885 in 2006 and $260 in
2005
|
8,246
|
3,532
|
Due
from affiliate
|
219
|
193
|
Deferred
income taxes
|
6,978
|
3,716
|
Prepaid
advertising and other
|
2,851
|
2,664
|
Total
Current Assets
|
32,797
|
22,345
|
Property
and equipment:
|
|
|
Furniture,
fixtures and equipment at cost
|
2,585
|
2,027
|
Less:
Accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
(1,276)
|
(1,175)
|
|
1,309
|
852
|
Other
Assets:
|
|
|
Restricted
cash
|
8,546
|
4,982
|
Goodwill
|
42,528
|
32,835
|
Other
intangibles, net
|
229,758
|
139,281
|
Deferred
financing costs, net
|
3,759
|
3,597
|
Deferred
income taxes
|
15,302
|
11,978
|
Other
|
1,142
|
1,374
|
|
301,035
|
194,047
|
Total
Assets
|
$
335,141
|
$
217,244
|
Liabilities
and Stockholders' Equity
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
$3,890
|
$3,360
|
Promissory note payable |
750 |
- |
Accounts
payable, subject to litigation
|
4,886
|
4,886
|
Deferred
revenue
|
2,645
|
4,782
|
Current
portion of long-term debt
|
32,469
|
13,705
|
Total
current liabilities
|
44,640
|
26,733
|
|
|
|
Deferred
income taxes
|
6,640
|
4,201
|
Long-term
debt, less current maturities
|
111,238
|
85,414
|
|
|
|
Contingencies
and commitments
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
Stockholders'
Equity:
|
|
|
Common
stock, $.001 par value -
shares authorized 75,000;
|
|
|
shares
issued 39,059 and 35,540 respectively
|
39
|
36
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
192,698
|
136,842
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
166
|
-
|
Retained
deficit
|
(19,613)
|
(35,315)
|
Treasury
stock - 198 shares at cost
|
(667)
|
(667)
|
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
172,623
|
100,896
|
Total
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
|
$
335,141
|
$
217,244
|
See
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Iconix
Brand Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed
Consolidated Income Statements -
(Unaudited)
(in
thousands, except earnings per share data)
|
Three
Months Ended June 30,
|
Six
Months Ended June 30,
|
|
2006
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Licensing
and commission revenue
|
$
18,409
|
$
4,287
|
|
$
31,678
|
|
$
8,587
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses (net
of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
recovery
in 2005 pursuant to an agreement. See Note H)
|
6,817
|
2,734
|
|
11,501
|
|
5,308
|
Special
charges
|
712
|
328
|
|
1,268
|
|
707
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
income
|
10,880
|
1,225
|
|
18,909
|
|
2,572
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense
|
3,073
|
525
|
|
5,178
|
|
1,089
|
Interest
income
|
(191)
|
(21)
|
|
(352)
|
|
(35)
|
Interest
expense - net
|
2,882
|
504
|
|
4,826
|
|
1,054
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
before income taxes
|
7,998
|
721
|
|
14,083
|
|
1,518
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
taxes (benefits)
|
(347)
|
(1,790)
|
|
(1,619)
|
|
(1,780)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
$
8,345
|
$
2,511
|
|
$
15,702
|
|
$
3,298
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
$
0.22
|
$
0.09
|
|
$
0.42
|
|
$
0.12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
$
0.19
|
$
0.08
|
|
$
0.37
|
|
$
0.11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average number of common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
38,680
|
28,602
|
|
37,208
|
|
28,516
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
44,712
|
30,247
|
|
42,872
|
|
30,115
|
See
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Iconix
Brand Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders’ Equity
(Unaudited)
Six
Months Ended June 30, 2006
(in
thousands)
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Common
Stock
|
Paid
- in
|
Retained
|
Treasury
|
Other
Compre-
|
|
|
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
Deficit
|
Stock
|
hensive
Income
|
Total
|
Balance
at January 1, 2006
|
35,540
|
$
36
|
$
136,842
|
$
(35,315)
|
$
(667)
|
$
-
|
$
100,896
|
Issuance
of common stock related to acquisition of Mudd ®
|
3,269
|
3
|
47,859
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
47,862
|
Warrants
granted to non-employees related to acquisition
|
-
|
-
|
4,596
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
4,596
|
Exercise
of stock options
|
250
|
-
|
931
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
931
|
Option
compensation expense recognized
|
-
|
-
|
90
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
90
|
Release
of valuation allowance from Net Operating Loss (“NOL”) related to options
exercised previously
|
-
|
-
|
2,380
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2,380
|
Unrealized
gain on marketable securities (net of tax)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
166
|
166
|
Net
income
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
15,702
|
-
|
-
|
15,702
|
Balance
at June 30, 2006
|
39,059
|
$
39
|
$
192,698
|
$
(19,613)
|
$
(667)
|
$166
|
$
172,623
|
See
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Iconix
Brand Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)
(000’s
omitted)
|
Six
Months Ended June 30,
|
|
2006
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
$7,806
|
$
2,119
|
Cash
flows used in investing activities:
|
|
|
Purchases
of fixed assets
|
(558)
|
(26)
|
Purchase
of marketable securities
|
(78)
|
-
|
Acquisition
of Mudd
|
(45,785)
|
-
|
Purchase
of trademarks
|
(829)
|
(218)
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(47,250)
|
(244)
|
Cash
flows (used in) provided by financing activities:
|
|
|
Proceeds
from long-term debt
|
49,000
|
-
|
Repayment
of loans from related parties
|
-
|
(2,000)
|
Proceeds
from exercise of stock options and warrants
|
931
|
749
|
Payment
of long-term debt
|
(4,528)
|
(1,430)
|
Deferred
financing costs
|
(490)
|
-
|
Restricted
cash - Current
|
(4,909)
|
444
|
Restricted
cash - Non Current
|
(3,564)
|
-
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
36,440
|
(2,237)
|
Net
(decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
(3,004)
|
(362)
|
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
7,593
|
798
|
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of period
|
$
4,589
|
$
436
|
Balance
of restricted cash - Current
|
9,003
|
79
|
Total
cash and cash equivalents including current restricted cash, end
of
period
|
$13,592
|
$515
|
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
Six
Months Ended June 30,
|
|
2006
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid during the year:
|
|
|
Interest
|
$4,157
|
$775
|
Supplemental
disclosures of non-cash investing and financing
activities:
|
Six
Months Ended June 30,
|
|
2006
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions:
|
|
|
Common
stock issued
|
$47,862
|
$
-
|
Warrants
issued - acquisition cost
|
$4,596
|
$
-
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of
promissory note: |
|
|
Issuance
of promissory note |
$750 |
$- |
See
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Iconix
Brand Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes
to
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
June
30,
2006
NOTE
A
BASIS OF
PRESENTATION
The
accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for
interim
financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article
10 of
Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all the information and
footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete
financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting
primarily of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair
presentation have been included. Operating results for the three months
(“Current Quarter”) and the six months (“Current Six Months”) ended June 30,
2006 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for
a
full fiscal year.
Beginning
in January 2005, the Company changed its business practices with respect
to
Bright Star Footwear, Inc (“Bright Star”), a subsidiary of the Company, which
resulted in Bright Star acting only as an agent of the Company. Accordingly,
after January 1, 2005 Bright Star net commissions are recognized as revenue
rather than gross product sales which were recognized prior to that date.
The
Candie’s and Bongo trademarks had previously been amortized on a straight-line
basis over their estimated useful lives of approximately 20 years. Effective
July 1, 2005, the Company changed for accounting purposes, the estimated
useful
lives of the Candie’s and Bongo trademarks to be an indefinite life.
Accordingly, the recorded value of these trademarks are no longer amortized,
but
instead will be tested for impairment on an annual basis. Amortization expenses
recorded for Candies and Bongo trademarks in the quarter (“Prior Year Quarter”)
and the six months (“Prior Year Six-Months”) ended June 30, 2005, prior to this
change in estimate, were $296,000 and $593,000, respectively.
Impairment
losses are recognized for long-lived assets, including certain intangibles,
used
in operations when indicators of impairment are present and the undiscounted
cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are not sufficient to
recover the assets' carrying amount. Impairment losses are measured by comparing
the fair value of the assets to their carrying amount.
Effective
July 1, 2005, the Company changed its corporate name to Iconix Brand Group,
Inc.
and its NASDAQ symbol to ICON.
For
further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and
footnotes thereto included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2005.
NOTE
B -
MARKETABLE SECURITIES
Marketable
securities consist of the common stock of Mossimo Inc. (“Mossimo”), acquired by
the Company. These equity shares will be cancelled upon the closing of the
proposed merger with Mossimo as previously announced by the Company. See
Note O.
These securities, which are classified as available-for-sale, are carried
at
fair value, with unrealized gains and losses, net of any tax effect, reported
in
stockholders' equity as accumulated other comprehensive income. The values
of
these securities may fluctuate as a result of changes in market price of
Mossimo’s stock.
NOTE
C
STOCK
OPTIONS/WARRANTS
Under
the
Company's various stock options plans, options to purchase common stock of
the
Company may be granted to any person, including, but not limited to, employees,
directors, independent agents, consultants, attorneys and advisors of the
Company by the Board of Directors or by the Company's Governance Committee.
The
term of options/warrants range from five to ten years with a vesting period
up
to five years. The exercise price for options/warrants is the trading price
of
the common shares of the Company on the NASDAQ Global Market on the day of
the
grant.
Effective
January 1, 2006, the Company adopted Statement No. 123(R), “Accounting for
Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS 123(R)”), which requires companies to measure and
recognize compensation expense for all stock-based payments at fair value.
Under
SFAS 123(R), using the modified prospective method, compensation expense
is
recognized for all share-based payments granted prior to, but not yet vested
as
of, January 1, 2006.
In
December 2005, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the accelerated vesting
of all employee service-based stock options previously granted under the
Company’s various non-qualified stock option plans, which would have been
unvested as of December 31, 2005. As a result, all options granted as of
December 31, 2005, except certain options based on performance became
exercisable immediately. The number of shares, exercise prices and other
terms
of the options subject to the acceleration remain unchanged. The acceleration
of
such option vesting resulted in an additional $446,000 of compensation expense
reflected in pro-forma net income for the prior year, an amount that would
have
otherwise been recorded as compensation expense in the years ending December
31,
2006 and 2007, but had no impact on compensation recognition in 2005 as the
options would have been otherwise vested.
As
of
June 30, 2006, 8.8 million stock options/warrants were outstanding. The
following table includes summary information for stock options/warrants for
employees and non-employee directors and consultants for the six months ended
June 30, 2006:
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic
|
|
Shares
|
|
Exercise
Price
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2005
|
9,573,292
|
|
$
5.09
|
|
Granted
|
698,333
|
*
|
10.45
|
|
Canceled
|
(1,217,750)
|
|
8.71
|
|
Exercised
|
(250,000)
|
|
3.75
|
|
Expired
|
-
|
|
-
|
|
Outstanding
at June 30, 2006
|
8,803,875
|
**
|
$
5.05
|
$99,416,861
|
Exercisable
at June 30, 2006
|
8,286,207
|
|
$
4.95
|
$97,135,772
|
*
Includes 40,000 options granted to its employees at the market price, and
the
658,333 warrants granted to non-employee consultants in connection with
acquisitions. See Notes K and O.
**
Includes 1,750,000 warrants outstanding at prices ranging from $5.98 to $15.93,
and a weighted average exercise price of $8.19 per share, subject to adjustment
in certain circumstances. Of these warrants, warrants to purchase 1,370,000
shares of common stock were immediately exercisable as of June 30, 2006.
The
warrants expire on dates ranging from August 26, 2012 to June 2,
2016.
The
intrinsic value of options exercised during the six months ended June 30,
2006
was based on the closing prices of the Company’s common stock on the dates of
exercise. The aggregate intrinsic value for options outstanding and exercisable
at June 30, 2006 was based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock at
June 30, 2006, which was $16.34.
Options/warrants
outstanding and exercisable at June 30, 2006 were as follows:
|
Options/Warrants
Outstanding
|
Options/Warrants
Exercisable
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
|
Weighted
|
|
Weighted
|
Range
of
|
Number
|
Average
|
Average
|
Number
|
Average
|
Exercise
Prices
|
Outstanding
|
Contractual
Life
|
Exercise
Price
|
Exercisable
|
Exercise
Price
|
$0.24-1.14
|
426,625
|
4.00
|
$1.07
|
426,625
|
$1.07
|
$1.15-1.50
|
370,500
|
4.38
|
$1.25
|
370,500
|
$1.25
|
$1.51-2.50
|
986,500
|
6.53
|
$1.99
|
986,500
|
$1.99
|
$2.51-3.50
|
2,419,750
|
4.19
|
$3.14
|
2,419,750
|
$3.14
|
$3.51-5.00
|
1,320,250
|
8.47
|
$4.62
|
1,218,582
|
$4.63
|
$5.01-10.19
|
3,280,250
|
9.04
|
$8.50
|
2,864,250
|
$7.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,803,875
|
6.90
|
$5.05
|
8,286,207
|
$4.62
|
In
the
Current Quarter and Current Six Months, the Company recorded a $50,000 and
$90,000 expense, with a estimated forfeiture rate of 3%, for options granted
with a vesting term from the dates of grants through May 2010. The fair value
for these options was estimated at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes
option-pricing model. The key assumptions used in determining the fair value
of
the stock options awarded were: expected life ranging from 3-5 years, risk-free
interest rate from 3.0-5.0%, expected volatility from 30-55%, and expected
dividend yield of 0%. The Company considers the following factors when
estimating the expected lives of options: vesting period of the award, expected
volatility of the underlying stock, employees’ historical exercise behavior and
external data. The risk-free interest rate reflects the interest rate on
zero-coupon U.S. government bonds available at the time each option was granted
having a remaining life approximately equal to the option’s expected life. When
making assumptions on the expected volatilities, the Company considered the
historical volatilities of the Company’s common stock, the volatilities of its
peers’ stocks, as well as the judgment of the Company’s management. Based on
these assumptions, the weighted-average fair value of each stock option granted
was $2.63 for 2005 and $7.20 for the Current Quarter
Prior
to
the adoption of SFAS 123(R), the Company accounted for its stock-based
compensation plans under the recognition and measurement principles of
Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued
to Employees”, and related interpretations. Accordingly, the compensation cost
for stock options had been measured as the excess, if any, of the quoted
market
price of the Company’s stock at the date of the grant over the amount the
employee must pay to acquire the stock. In accordance with the modified
prospective transition method, the consolidated financial statements have
not
been restated to reflect the impact of SFAS 123(R). The following table
illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share if the Company
had
applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS 123 to options granted
under the Company’s stock option plans for the three months and six months ended
June 30, 2005.
(in
thousands except per share data)
|
Three
months ended June 30, 2005
|
|
Six
months ended June 30, 2005
|
Net
income - as reported
|
$2,511
|
|
$3,298
|
Add:
Stock-based employee compensation included in reported net
income
|
-
|
|
-
|
Deduct:
Stock-based employee compensation determined under the fair value
based
method
|
(734)
|
|
(2,440)
|
Pro
forma net income
|
$1,777
|
|
$858
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
As
reported
|
$0.09
|
|
$0.12
|
Pro
forma
|
$0.06
|
|
$0.03
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
As
reported
|
$0.08
|
|
$0.11
|
Pro
forma
|
$0.06
|
|
$0.03
|
NOTE
D
FINANCING AGREEMENTS
Asset-Backed
Notes
In
August
2002, IP Holdings, LLC (“IPH”), a subsidiary of the Company, issued in a private
placement $20 million of asset-backed notes secured by intellectual property
assets (trade names, trademarks, license agreements and payments and proceeds
with respect thereto) of IPH (such notes and all other notes issued by IPH,
the
“Asset-Backed Notes”). The Asset-Backed Notes had a 7-year term with a fixed
interest rate of 7.93% with quarterly principal and interest payments of
approximately $859,000. After funding a liquidity reserve account in the
amount
of $2.9 million, the net proceeds of the Asset-Backed Notes ($16.2 million)
were
used by the Company to reduce amounts due by the Company under its then-existing
revolving credit facilities. In April 2004, IPH issued an additional $3.6
million in subordinated Asset-Backed Notes secured by its intellectual property
assets. The additional borrowing had a maturity date of August 2009, with
a
floating interest rate of LIBOR + 4.45% and quarterly principal and interest
payments and $500,000 of interest prepaid at closing. The net proceeds of
$2.9
million were used for general working capital purposes. As of July 22, 2005,
the
total principal on these notes was approximately $17.5 million, which were
refinanced in connection with the Joe Boxer acquisition described
below.
In
the
fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005, the Company, through IPH, acquired
the
Joe Boxer brand from Joe Boxer Company, LLC and its affiliates, and the Rampage
brand from Rampage Licensing, LLC. See Notes I and J. The financing for the
acquisitions was accomplished through two private placements by IPH of
Asset-Backed Notes, secured by the intellectual property assets owned by
IPH.
The combined proceeds of the Asset-Backed Notes, totaling $103 million, were
used as follows: approximately $17.5 million was used to refinance previously
issued Asset-Backed Notes, $40.0 million was paid to the sellers of the Joe
Boxer brand, approximately $25.8 million was paid to the sellers of the Rampage
brand, $1.7 million was placed in a liquidity reserve account as required
by the
holder of the Asset-Backed Notes, approximately $1.8 million was used to
pay
costs associated with the debt issuance, approximately $200,000 was paid
to
legal professionals associated with the acquisitions, approximately $4.0
million
was available to for working capital purposes, and $12 million was deposited
in
an escrow account for the benefit of the holder of the Asset-Backed Notes,
to be
used by IPH solely for the purchase of certain intellectual property assets.
IPH
redeemed $12 million of the Asset-Backed Notes without penalty as the purchase
of these intellectual property assets did not occur. Costs associated with
the
debt issuances of approximately $1.8 million have been deferred and are being
amortized using the interest method over the 7 year life of the Asset-Backed
Notes.
In
April
2006, the Company, through IPH, acquired certain assets of Mudd (USA) LLC
(“Mudd
(USA)”) related to the Mudd brand, including trademarks, intellectual property
and related names worldwide, excluding China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan.
The
financing for the acquisition was accomplished through the private placement
on
April 11, 2006 by IPH of approximately $136 million principal amount of
Asset-Backed Notes. The issuance of the Asset-Backed Notes raised $49 million
in
new financing for IPH (before giving effect to the payment of expenses in
connection with the issuance of the Asset-Backed Notes and required deposits
to
reserve funds), and approximately $87 million principal amount of the
Asset-Backed Notes was exchanged for Asset Backed Notes previously issued
by
IPH. The Asset-Backed Notes are secured by the acquired assets, as well as
by
other intellectual property assets owned by IPH. The payment of the principal
of
and interest on the Asset-Backed Notes has been made from amounts received
by
IPH under license agreements with various licensees of the acquired assets
and
IPH’s other intellectual property assets.
The
portion of the Asset-Backed Notes representing new financing were used as
follows: $45.0 million was paid to the sellers of the Mudd brand, approximately
$490,000 was used to pay costs associated with the financing, approximately
$2.45 million was placed in a liquidity reserve account, approximately $785,000
was used to pay professional fees associated with the acquisition and
approximately $275,000 of which was available for working capital purposes.
The
costs relating to the $49 million in new financing of approximately $490,000
have been deferred and are being amortized over the 5 year life of the financed
debt.
Subject
to terms of the Asset-Backed Notes, if by April 1, 2006, IPH had not entered
into or renewed certain licensing agreement(s) with respect to the Joe Boxer
brand that guarantees certain royalty thresholds, IPH is required to deposit,
from revenues generated from the Joe Boxer brand, to a renewal reserve account
$3.75 million for each quarter beginning in April 2006 and ending in December
2007. Such deposits shall continue to be made until IPH enters into or renews
such licensing agreement(s) with respect to the Joe Boxer brand meeting the
minimum royalty thresholds, at which time any funds on deposit in the renewal
reserve account will be released to IPH. If IPH does not enter into or renew
such licensing agreement(s) by January 1, 2007, any funds on deposit in the
renewal reserve account will be applied as a reduction of the principal without
penalty and all future payments that are deposited to the renewal reserve
account will also be applied as a reduction of the principal without penalty.
As
of July 27, 2006, IPH had not entered into or renewed such licensing
agreement(s); accordingly, IPH made one payment of $3.75 million to the renewal
reserve account, which was included in current restricted cash, and classified
$15 million principal amount of the Asset Backed Notes from long-term debt
to
current debt on its balance sheet. If IPH enters into or renews such licensing
agreement(s) by January 1, 2007 IPH will adjust the related debt classification
on its balance sheet accordingly.
Cash
on
hand in the bank account of IPH is restricted at any point in time up to
the
amount of the next debt principal and interest payment required under the
Asset-Backed Notes. Accordingly, $9.0 million and $4.1 million as of June
30,
2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively, have been disclosed as restricted
cash
within the Company’s current assets. Further, in connection with IPH’s issuance
of Asset Backed Notes, a reserve account has been established and the funds
on
deposit in such account will be applied to the last principal payment with
respect to the Asset Backed Notes. Accordingly, $8.5 million and $5.0 million
as
of June 30, 2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively, have been disclosed
as
restricted cash within the Company’s other assets.
Interest
rates and terms on the outstanding principal amount of the Asset-Backed Notes
are as follows: $63 million principal amount bears interest at a fixed interest
rate of 8.45% with a 7-year term, $28 million principal amount bears interest
at
a fixed rate of 8.12% with a 7- year term, and $49 million principal amount
bears interest at a variable interest rate of LIBOR + 4% in the first year
of
the 5-year term and a fixed interest rate of applicable treasury rate + 4.5%
for
the remaining 4 years. There are no principal payments required with respect
to
$49 million in new financing in the first year.
Neither
the Company nor any of its subsidiaries (other than IPH) is obligated to
make
any payment with respect to the Asset-Backed Notes, and the assets of the
Company and its subsidiaries (other than IPH) are not available to IPH’s
creditors. The assets of IPH are not available to the creditors of the Company
or its subsidiaries (other than IPH).
The
Kmart Note
In
connection with the acquisition of Joe Boxer in July, 2005, the Company assumed
a promissory note, dated August 13, 2001 in the amount of $10.8 million that
originated with the execution of the exclusive license with Kmart Stores,
Inc.
by the former owners of Joe Boxer (the “Kmart Note”). The Kmart Note
provides for interest at 5.12% and is payable in three (3) equal annual
installments, on a self-liquidating basis, on the last day of each year
commencing on December 31, 2005 and continuing through December 31, 2007.
Payments due under the Kmart Note may be off-set against any royalties owed
under the Kmart License. As of June 30, 2006, the outstanding balance of
the note was $7.4 million. The Kmart Note may be pre-paid without penalty.
The
following is a summary of debt maturities for the periods indicated that
existed
as of June 30, 2006 (amounts in thousands):
Debt
Maturities
|
Total
|
2006
|
2007
-2008
|
2009-2010
|
After
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kmart
Note
|
$7,377
|
$3,596
|
$3,781
|
$
-
|
$
-
|
Sweet
Note (See Notes G and H)
|
3,054
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
3,054
|
Asset-backed
Notes *
|
133,276
|
12,458
|
51,121
|
39,704
|
29,993
|
Total
Debt Maturitis
|
$143,707
|
$16,054
|
$54,902
|
$39,704
|
$33,047
|
*
Includes the additional quarter payment of $3.75 million deposited in the
renewal reserve account beginning in April 2006 and ending December 2007.
See
“Assets Backed Notes” above.
NOTE
E
EARNINGS
PER SHARE
Basic
earnings per share includes no dilution and is computed by dividing earnings
attributable to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common
shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per share reflects, in
periods in which they have a dilutive effect, the effect of common shares
issuable upon exercise of stock options and warrants. As a result of the
Company’s decision to accelerate the vesting of options granted as of December
31, 2005, all options except certain options based on performance became
exercisable immediately and were included in the calculation of dilution.
At
June 30, 2006, 8.8 million options/warrants were outstanding.
The
following is a reconciliation of the shares used in calculating basic and
diluted earnings per share:
|
Three
months ended June 30,
|
|
Six
months ended June 30,
|
|
2006
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
2005
|
Basic
|
38,680
|
28,602
|
|
37,208
|
28,516
|
Effect
of assumed conversions of stock options and warrants
|
6,032
|
1,645
|
|
5,664
|
1,599
|
Diluted
|
44,712
|
30,247
|
|
42,872
|
30,115
|
NOTE
F
INCOME
TAXES
The
Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 109, (“SFAS 109”) “Accounting for Income Taxes.” Under
SFAS No. 109, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on
differences between the financial reporting and tax basis of assets and
liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will
be
in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance
is
established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected
to be realized. In determining the need for a valuation allowance, management
reviews both positive and negative evidence pursuant to the requirements
of SFAS
No. 109, including current and historical results of operations, the annual
limitation on utilization of net operating loss carry forwards pursuant to
Internal Revenue Code section 382, future income projections and the overall
prospects of the Company’s business. Based upon management’s assessment of all
available evidence, including the Company’s completed transition into a
licensing business, estimates of future profitability based on projected
royalty
revenues from its licensees, and the overall prospects of the Company’s
business, management concluded in the Current Quarter that it is more likely
than not that a portion of previously unrecognized deferred income tax benefits
will be realized. Accordingly, the Company reduced a portion of the related
valuation allowance which resulted in a $347,000 and $1.6 million net tax
benefit for the Current Quarter and Current Six Months, respectively.
Approximately $2.4 million was recorded as a credit to additional paid in
capital for realization of deferred tax assets generated from exercise of
stock
options in prior years. Based on current estimates of pre-tax income for
the
year ending December 31, 2006, the management anticipates a net income tax
expense for this year.
NOTE
G
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Sweet
Sportswear/Unzipped litigation
On
August
5, 2004, the Company, along with its subsidiaries, Unzipped Apparel LLC
(“Unzipped”), Michael Caruso & Co. Inc. and IPH (collectively referred to as
the “plaintiffs”), commenced a lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, Los
Angeles County, against Unzipped's former manager, former supplier and former
distributor, Sweet Sportswear LLC (“Sweet”), Azteca Production International,
Inc. (“Azteca”), and Apparel Distribution Services, LLC (“ADS”), respectively,
and a principal of these entities and former member of the Company’s board of
directors, Hubert Guez (collectively referred to as the “defendants”).
Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 22, 2004. In the amended
complaint, plaintiffs alleged that defendants fraudulently induced them to
purchase Sweet's 50% interest in Unzipped for an inflated price, that Sweet
and
Azteca committed material breaches of the Unzipped management agreement and
supply and distribution agreements, described below, and that Mr. Guez
materially breached his fiduciary obligations to the Company while a member
of
its Board of Directors. Also, plaintiffs alleged that defendants have imported,
distributed and sold goods bearing the Company’s Bongo trademarks in violation
of federal and California law. Plaintiffs sought damages in excess of $50
million. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss certain of the claims asserted
in
the amended complaint, which was denied by the Court in its entirety on February
7, 2005.
By
order
dated June 8, 2006, the Court entered summary judgment in defendants’ favor with
respect to plaintiffs’ fraud claims asserted
within plaintiffs' amended complaint. However, by order dated July 19,
2006, the Court granted plaintiffs' request to assert new fraud claims via
a
second amended complaint. Plaintiffs' second amended complaint also
incorporates the non-fraud claims asserted within plaintiffs' amended complaint,
and seeks damages in excess of $50 million.
On
March
10, 2005, Sweet, Azteca and ADS (collectively referred to as the
“cross-complainants”), filed an answer to plaintiffs' amended complaint and a
cross-complaint against plaintiffs and the Company’s chief executive officer,
Neil Cole (collectively referred to as the “cross-defendants”), seeking
compensatory, punitive and exemplary damages and litigation costs, as well
as
the establishment of a constructive trust for their benefit. The
cross-complainants alleged that some or all of the cross-defendants breached
the
Unzipped management agreement and supply and distribution agreements; that
IPH
and Mr. Cole interfered with Sweet's performance under the Unzipped management
agreement; and that the Company, Caruso and Mr. Cole interfered with
cross-complainants' relationships with Unzipped and caused Unzipped to breach
its agreements with Azteca and ADS. Cross-complainants also alleged that
some or
all of the Company, Caruso and Mr. Cole fraudulently induced Sweet to sell
its
50% interest in Unzipped to the Company for a deflated price and accept the
8%
senior subordinated note in the principal amount of $11 million that the
Company
issued to Sweet in connection therewith.
The
Company had previously entered into a management agreement with Sweet wherein
Sweet guaranteed that the net income of Unzipped, as defined, would be no
less
than $1.7 million for each year during the term. In the event that this
guaranteed amount of net income was not met, Sweet was obligated to pay the
difference between the actual net income, as defined, and such guaranteed
amount, referred to as the shortfall payment. The cross-complaint alleged
that
the Company breached its obligations to Sweet arising under the Company’s 8%
note to Sweet by, among other things, understating Unzipped's earnings for
the
fiscal year ended January 31, 2004 and the first three quarters of the fiscal
year ended January 31, 2005 for the purpose of causing Unzipped to fall short
of
the guaranteed net income amount for these periods, and improperly offsetting
the shortfall payment against the note. Lastly, the cross-complaint alleged
that
the understatements in Unzipped's earnings and offsets against the 8% note
were
incorporated into the Company’s public filings for the periods identified above,
causing it to overstate materially its earnings and understate its liabilities
for such period with the effect of improperly inflating the public trading
price
of the Company’s common stock.
Cross-defendants
filed a motion to dismiss certain of the claims asserted in the cross-complaint,
and, on June 28, 2005, the Court granted cross-defendants' motion in part.
On
July 22, 2005, cross-complainants amended their cross-complaint, omitting
their
previously asserted claim that some or all of the Company, Caruso and Mr.
Cole
fraudulently induced Sweet to sell its 50% interest in Unzipped for a deflated
price and accept the 8% note. Although the amended cross-complaint no longer
sought relief for this purported fraud, the substance of the allegations
remained largely unchanged and cross-complainants' alleged that they were
entitled to equivalent relief because cross-defendants' actions instead
constituted a breach of fiduciary duty.
Cross-defendants
filed a motion to dismiss certain of the claims asserted in the amended
cross-complaint, and, on October 25, 2005, the Court granted cross-defendants’
motion in part, dismissing all claims asserted against Mr. Cole along with
the
cross-complainants' sole remaining fraud claim. On March 24, 2006,
cross-defendants filed a motion seeking the dismissal of cross-complainants'
claim for breach of fiduciary duty, and on June 21, 2006, the Court dismissed
this claim.
The
remaining cross-defendants deny cross-complainants' allegations and intend
to
vigorously defend against the amended cross-complaint.
Sweet/Cole
litigation
On
May
11, 2006, Sweet commenced a related lawsuit in the Superior Court of California,
Los Angeles County, against Mr. Cole and the Company’s independent registered
public accountants. In this lawsuit, Sweet alleges that Mr. Cole and the
Company’s accountants induced the breach of and/or interfered with the Unzipped
management agreement, the Company’s 8% note to Sweet and an engagement agreement
entered into between Sweet, on behalf of Unzipped, and the Company’s accountants
whereby they agreed to audit Unzipped’s financial performance for the year ended
January 31, 2004. Sweet alleges that Mr. Cole and the accountants agreed
to
inaccurately certify the value of Unzipped’s inventory and thereby improperly
enabled the Company to avoid payments required under the 8% note. Mr. Cole
intends to seek dismissal of each of the claims asserted against him.
Bader/Unzipped
litigation
On
November 5, 2004, Unzipped commenced a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of New
York,
New York County, against Unzipped's former president of sales, Gary Bader,
alleging that Mr. Bader breached certain fiduciary duties owed to Unzipped
as
its president of sales, unfairly competed with Unzipped and tortuously
interfered with Unzipped's contractual relationships with its employees.
On
October 5, 2005, Unzipped amended its complaint to assert identical claims
against Bader's company, Sportswear Mercenaries, Ltd. On October 14, 2005,
Bader
and Sportswear Mercenaries filed an answer containing counterclaims to
Unzipped's amended complaint, and a third-party complaint against The Company
and Mr. Cole, seeking unspecified damages in excess of $4 million. On December
2, 2005, The Company, together with Unzipped and Mr. Cole, filed motions
seeking
the dismissal of the majority of the claims asserted against them by Bader
and
Sportswear Mercenaries. By order dated June 9, 2006, the Court granted these
motions in their entirety, thereby dismissing The Company and Mr. Cole from
this
litigation. Unzipped denies the one remaining claim asserted against it,
a claim
that it failed to pay Bader and Sportswear Mercenaries $72,000 in commissions
and bonuses, and intends to vigorously defend against such claim.
Redwood
Shoe litigation
In
January 2002, Redwood Shoe Corporation, one of the Company’s former buying
agents of footwear, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York, alleging that the Company breached various
contractual obligations to Redwood and seeking to recover damages in excess
of
$20 million plus its litigation costs. The Company filed a motion to dismiss
certain counts of the complaint based upon Redwood's failure to state a claim,
in response to which Redwood has filed an amended complaint. The Company
also
moved to dismiss certain parts of the amended complaint. The magistrate assigned
to the matter granted, in part, the Company’s motion to dismiss. By Order dated
November 28, 2005, the District Court adopted the Magistrate's ruling in
its
entirety, thereby accepting the Company’s position that it never agreed to
purchase a minimum quantity of footwear from Redwood and dismissing
approximately $20 million of Redwood's asserted claims. On December 14, 2005,
the Company filed an answer asserting 13 counterclaims against Redwood and
Redwood's affiliate, Mark Tucker, Inc., or MTI. On the same date, the Company
filed a motion to have MTI joined with Redwood as a defendant in the action,
and
that motion was granted by the District Court. MTI filed a motion seeking
to
have all of the counterclaims asserted against it dismissed. Redwood has
filed a
motion seeking the dismissal of certain of these counterclaims. These motions
are pending before the District Court.
The
Company intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit, and to vigorously prosecute
the claims it has asserted against Redwood and MTI. At June 30, 2006 and
December 31, 2005, the payable to Redwood totaled approximately $1.8 million
which is subject to any claims, offsets or other deductions the Company may
assert against Redwood, and was reflected in The Company’s consolidated
financial statements under “Accounts payable, subject to
litigation.”
The
Bongo Apparel, Inc. Litigation
On
or
about June 12, 2006, one of The Company’s licensees, Bongo Apparel, Inc., or
BAI, filed a complaint in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County
of
New York, against the Company and its subsidiary, IPH. BAI alleges that
defendants engaged in conduct that damaged the Bongo apparel brand and/or
BAI’s
relationships with its customers. BAI asserts various claims of breach of
contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraudulent
inducement and unfair competition, and seeks damages of at least $25 million
and
recovery of its litigation costs as well as seeking a declaratory judgment
that
the Company and IPH breached certain license agreements between the parties
and
that BAI is not in breach of those agreements. The Company and IPH believe
that,
in addition to other defenses and counterclaims that they intend to assert,
the
claims in the lawsuit are the subject of a release and settlement agreement
that
was entered into by the parties in August 2005, and they intend to file a
motion
to dismiss the complaint based on the release, among other reasons. The Company
is in the process of transitioning the Bongo jeanswear license to another
licensee.
Other
From
time
to time, the Company is also made a party to litigation incurred in the normal
course of business. While any litigation has an element of uncertainty, the
Company believes that the final outcome of any of these routine matters will
not
have a material effect on its financial position or future liquidity. Except
as
set forth herein, the Company knows of no material legal proceedings, pending
or
threatened, or judgments entered, against any of its directors or officers
in
their capacity as such.
NOTE
H
UNZIPPED
APPAREL, LLC
Equity
Investment:
On
October 7, 1998, the Company formed Unzipped with joint venture partner Sweet,
the purpose of which was to market and distribute apparel under the BONGO
label.
The Company and Sweet each had a 50% interest in Unzipped. Pursuant to the
terms
of the joint venture, the Company licensed the BONGO trademark to Unzipped
for
use in the design, manufacture and sale of certain designated apparel products.
Acquisition:
On
April
23, 2002, the Company acquired the remaining 50% interest in Unzipped from
Sweet
for a purchase price of three million shares of the Company’s common stock and
$11 million in debt evidenced by the Sweet Note. In connection with the
acquisition of Unzipped, the Company filed a registration statement with
the SEC
for the three million shares of the Company’s common stock issued to Sweet,
which was declared effective by the SEC on July 29, 2003.
Related
Party Transactions:
Prior
to
August 5, 2004, Unzipped was managed by Sweet pursuant to the Management
Agreement, pursuant to which Sweet was obligated to manage the operations
of
Unzipped in return for, commencing in the fiscal year ended January 31, 2004
(“Fiscal 2004”), a management fee based upon certain specified percentages of
net income that Unzipped would achieve during the three-year term. In addition,
Sweet entered into the Guarantee that the net income, as defined, of Unzipped
commencing in Fiscal 2004 would be no less than $1.7 million for each year
during the term. In the event that the Guarantee was not met, under the
Management Agreement, Sweet was obligated to pay to the Company the difference
between the actual net income of Unzipped, as defined, and the Guarantee.
The
Shortfall Payment could be offset against the amounts due under the Sweet
Note
at the option of either Sweet or the Company.
Unzipped’s
operation has been discontinued since January 31, 2005. For the Current Six
Months, Unzipped had no operations, as compared to a net loss (as defined
for
the purpose of determining if the Guarantee had been met) of $296,000 in
the
quarter ended March 31, 2005. Consequently for the Current Six Months there
was
no Shortfall Payment, as compared to a Shortfall Payment of $438,000 in the
Prior Year Six Months. The adjusted Shortfall Payment had been recorded in
the
consolidated income statements as a reduction of Unzipped’s cost of sales (since
the majority of Unzipped’s operations were with entities under common ownership
with Sweet, including all of the purchases of inventory) and on the balance
sheet as a reduction of the Sweet Note based upon the right to offset in
the
Management Agreement. After adjusting for the Shortfall Payment in Prior
Year
Six Month, Unzipped reported a net loss of $37,500 on sales of $448,000.
Due to
the immaterial nature of the related amounts, the net loss of $37,500 from
Unzipped was included in the selling, general and administrative expense
in the
Company’s Condensed Consolidated Income Statements for the Prior Year Six
Months.
On
August
5, 2004, Unzipped terminated the Management Agreement with Sweet, the supply
agreement with Azteca and the distribution agreement with ADS and commenced
a
lawsuit against Sweet, Azteca, ADS and Mr. Guez. See Note G.
At
June
30, 2006, the Company included in “accounts payable, subject to litigation”
amounts due to Azteca and ADS of $847,000 and $2.3 million respectively,
the
same as reported as of December 31, 2005. See Note F.
In
a
separate transaction concerning Unzipped with BAI, BAI is the licensee of
the
BONGO jeans wear business formerly managed by Sweet. Prior to August 26,
2005,
BAI managed the operations of Unzipped following the termination of Sweet
as the
manager on August 5, 2004. In connection with BAI’s license and this transition,
the designees of TKO Apparel (an affiliate of BAI) purchased one million
shares
of the common stock of the Company at a price of $2.20 per share. In a separate
transaction, TKO Apparel agreed to lend Unzipped $2.5 million, which the
Company
repaid in 2005. See Note F.
NOTE
I
ACQUISITION OF JOE BOXER
On
July
22, 2005, the Company acquired the Joe Boxer brand from Joe Boxer Company,
LLC
and its affiliates. Joe Boxer is a leading lifestyle brand of apparel, apparel
accessories and home goods for men, women, teens and children. The Joe Boxer
brand is currently licensed exclusively to Kmart in the United States and
internationally to manufacturers in Canada, Mexico and Scandinavia.
The
aggregate purchase price paid was $88.9 million as detailed in the table
below.
Based on the Company’s assessment of the fair value of the assets acquired,
approximately $79.8 million has been assigned to the Joe Boxer trademark.
Under
the purchase method of accounting, tangible and identifiable intangible assets
acquired and liabilities assumed are recorded at their estimated fair values.
The estimated fair values and useful lives of intangible assets acquired
have
been supported by third party valuation based on a discounted cash flow
analysis. The Joe Boxer trademark has been determined to have an indefinite
useful life and accordingly, consistent with FAS 142, no amortization will
be
recorded in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. Instead, the
related intangible asset will be tested for impairment at least annually,
using
discounted cash flow analysis and estimates of future sales proceeds with
any
related impairment charge recorded to the statement of operations at the
time of
determining such impairment.
Total
purchase price was comprised as follows (in thousands):
Cash
paid for acquisition
|
$
40,755
|
|
|
Fair
value of 4,350,000 restricted shares of common stock at $8.33 per
share
|
36,236
|
Value
of warrants issued as a cost of the acquisition
|
788
|
Total
equity consideration
|
37,024
|
|
|
Assumption
of Kmart loan, including $3,509 due within 12 months
|
10,798
|
Accrued
interest, Kmart loan
|
309
|
Total
cost of acquisition
|
$
88,886
|
The
purchase price was allocated to the estimated fair value of the assets acquired
as follows (in thousands):
Accounts
receivable
|
$
3,121
|
Deferred
tax asset
|
2,700
|
Licensing
contracts
|
1,333
|
Joe
Boxer trademark
|
79,800
|
Goodwill
|
1,932
|
Total
allocated purchase price
|
$
88,886
|
The
$1.3
million of licensing contracts is being amortized on a straight-line basis
over
the remaining contractual period of approximately 29 months. The goodwill
of
$1.9 million is not being amortized but instead is subject to a test for
impairment on at least an annual basis. Any adjustments resulting from the
finalization of the purchase price allocations will affect the amounts assigned
to goodwill.
As
part
of this acquisition, the Company entered into an employment agreement with
Mr.
William Sweedler (“Sweedler”) as Executive Vice President of the Company and
President of the Joe Boxer division. As part of his compensation, on July
22,
2005, he was granted 1,425,000 stock options of which 225,000 vested
immediately, and 1,200,000 would vest contingent upon achievement by the
Joe
Boxer division of certain revenues levels. On June 8, 2006, the Company and
Sweedler entered into an agreement (the “Sweedler Agreement”), which provides
for the termination of the employment agreement between the Company and Sweedler
dated July 22, 2005, the resignation of Sweedler as Executive Vice President
of
the Company, President of its Joe Boxer Division and a member of the Company’s
Board of Directors, and the termination of the approximately 1,200,000 unvested
options previously issued to Sweedler in connection with the employment
agreement. Under the Sweedler Agreement, Sweedler will be employed on a
part-time basis to assist the Company during a transition period of between
30
and 120 days, after which the Company will enter into a consulting agreement
with Sweedler whereby he will perform services for the Company with respect
to
finding, negotiating, financing or otherwise advising the Company regarding
potential acquisition opportunities (the “Consulting Agreement”). Under the
Consulting Agreement, the Company will issue to Sweedler ten-year warrants,
with
certain registration rights, to purchase 400,000 shares of the Company’s common
stock at an exercise price of $8.81 per share (the “Sweedler Warrants”), vesting
at the rate of one-third, one-third, one-third upon the closing of each of
the
first three Qualified Company Acquisitions (as defined in the Consulting
Agreement) and pay him a fee of approximately $333,333 upon the closing of
each
of such Qualified Company Acquisitions. The Sweedler Warrants will be issued
pursuant to an exemption from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities
Act of 1933 (the “Act”).
The
Company obtained $40 million in cash to pay a portion of the purchase price
for
the Joe Boxer assets through the debt issuance by IPH of a $63 million
Asset-Backed Note. Approximately $17.5 million of the proceeds of the
Asset-Backed Notes were used to refinance previously existing Asset-Backed
Notes, as described in Note D,
$40.0
million was paid to the sellers, approximately $1.0 million was used to pay
costs associated with the debt issuance, $310,000 was deposited in a reserve
account as required by the holder
of
the Asset-Backed Note,
and
approximately $4.0 million was available to the Company for working capital
purposes. Costs associated with the debt issuance of approximately $1.0 million
have been deferred and are being amortized over the 7-year life of the
refinanced debt.
UCC
Capital Corporation (“UCC”) acted as a financial advisor to IPH in connection
with the Joe Boxer and the Rampage brand acquisitions. On June 7, 2005, the
Company entered into a financial advisory agreement with UCC to issue UCC
a
ten-year warrant ("Warrant") to purchase an aggregate of 1,000,000 shares
of the
Company's common stock ("Warrant Shares") at a price of $5.98 per share,
subject
to anti-dilution adjustments under certain conditions. One third of the Warrant
Shares vests upon consummation of each acquisition, for a total of three
acquisitions. On July 22, 2005, 333,334 of the Warrants Shares vested, with
a
fair value of $788,000, upon consummation of the acquisition of Joe
Boxer.
Pursuant
to this financial advisory agreement, UCC acted as the Company's exclusive
advisor in connection with providing various advisory services relating to
the
Company's acquisitions. On June 2, 2006, the Company and UCC agreed to terminate
the existing exclusive financial advisory agreement and effect a new
non-exclusive arrangement for advisory services rendered by UCC in connection
with the Company’s previously announced agreement to acquire Mossimo (the
“Mossimo Acquisition”) (the “Non-Exclusive Agreement”). See Note O.
The
Non-Exclusive Agreement provides for the Company to pay to UCC, upon the
closing
of the Mossimo Acquisition, a one-time $2.5 million fee (the “UCC Fee”) and to
issue to its designees ten-year non-transferable warrants to purchase an
aggregate of 250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, at a price of $15.93
per share (the “UCC Warrants”) in consideration of the advisory services
rendered by UCC in connection with the Mossimo Acquisition. The Company may
defer payment of up to $500,000 of the UCC Fee through the issuance of a
promissory note, which would mature and become payable, together with interest
accruing at the rate of 6% per annum, on October 31, 2006. The UCC Warrants,
which were issued pursuant to an exemption from registration under Section
4(2)
of the Act on June 2, 2006, contain certain registration rights and will
vest
upon the consummation of the Mossimo Acquisition.
On
September 19, 2005, the Company filed with the SEC a registration statement
covering the resale of certain of the shares of common stock issued in
connection with the acquisition of Joe Boxer and the resale of the Warrant
Shares. The registration statement was declared effective by the SEC on October
12, 2005.
NOTE
J
ACQUISITION OF RAMPAGE
On
September 16, 2005, the Company acquired the Rampage brand from Rampage
Licensing, LLC, a California limited liability company.
The
purchase price for the acquisition was $48.1 million as detailed in the table
below. Based on the Company’s preliminary assessment of the fair value of the
assets acquired, approximately $41.1 million has been assigned to the Rampage
trademark. Under the purchase method of accounting, tangible and identifiable
intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed are recorded at their
estimated fair values. The estimated fair values and useful lives of the
intangible assets acquired have been supported by third party valuation.
The
Rampage trademark has been determined to have an indefinite useful life,
and
accordingly, consistent with FAS 142, no amortization will be recorded in
the
Company’s consolidated statements of operations. Instead, the related intangible
asset will be tested for impairment at least annually, with any related
impairment charge recorded to the statement of operations at the time of
determining such impairment.
Total
purchase price was determined as follows (in thousands):
Cash
paid for acquisition
|
$
26,159
|
|
|
Fair
value of 2,171,336 restricted shares of common stock at $9.28 per
share
|
20,150
|
Value
of warrants issued as a cost of the acquisition
|
1,653
|
Total
equity consideration
|
21,803
|
|
|
Other
estimated costs of acquisition
|
150
|
Total
cost of acquisition
|
$
48,112
|
The
purchase price was allocated to the estimated fair value of the assets acquired
as follows (in thousands):
Rampage
licensing contract
|
$
550
|
Rampage
domain name
|
230
|
Rampage
non-compete agreement
|
600
|
Rampage
trademark
|
41,070
|
Goodwill
|
5,662
|
Total
allocated purchase price
|
$
48,112
|
The
licensing contracts are to be amortized on a straight-line basis over the
remaining contractual period of approximately 3 years, the Rampage domain
name
is to be amortized on a straight-line basis over 5 years, and the value of
the
non-compete agreement is to be amortized on a straight-line basis over 2
years.
A net adjustment of $669,000 resulted from the finalization of the purchase
price allocations was made in prior year to increase the amounts assigned
to
goodwill previously. The goodwill of approximately $5.7 million is subject
to a
test for impairment on an annual basis.
The
Company obtained $25.8 million in cash to pay a portion of the purchase price
of
the Rampage assets through the debt issuance by IPH of $103 million of
Asset-Backed Notes. Approximately $63 million of the proceeds of the
Asset-Backed Notes were used to refinance the previously issued Asset-Backed
Note described in Note I, $25.8 million was paid to the sellers of the Rampage
brand, approximately $774,000 was used to pay costs associated with the debt
issuance, $1.4 million was deposited in a liquidity reserve account, and
$12
million was deposited in an escrow account for the benefit of the holders
of the
Asset-Backed Notes, to be used by IPH only for the purchase of additional
intellectual property assets. The purchase did not occur prior to November
15,
2005 so IPH redeemed $12 million principal amount of the Asset-Backed Notes
in
November 2005 with no penalty. Costs associated with the debt issuance have
been
deferred and are being amortized over the 7-year life of the Asset-Backed
Notes.
In
accordance with the agreement with UCC (See Note I), an additional 333,333
of
the Warrants Shares vested on September 16, 2005 with a fair value of
approximately $1.7 million upon consummation of the Rampage acquisition,
for
which UCC acted as a financial advisor to IPH
On
October 17, 2005, the Company filed with the SEC a registration statement
covering the resale of the shares of common stock issued in connection with
the
acquisition of Rampage. The registration statement was declared effective
by the
SEC on October 27, 2005.
NOTE
K -
ACQUISITION OF MUDD
In
April
2006, the Company, through IPH, acquired certain assets of Mudd (USA) LLC
related to the Mudd brand, including trademarks, intellectual property and
related names worldwide, excluding China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. In
consideration for the purchase of the assets, the Company paid the seller
$45
million in cash and issued to the seller 3,269,231 restricted shares of the
Company common stock. In connection with this acquisition, IPH entered into
a
license agreement with Mudd (USA) giving Mudd (USA) the exclusive right to
use
the Mudd trademark in connection with the design, manufacture, sale and
distribution of women’s and children’s jeanswear and related products in the
United States, in return for which Mudd (USA) has guaranteed IPH a minimum
amount of revenues with respect to the royalties due to IPH under its license
and royalties due to IPH from all other license agreements assumed by IPH
with
respect to the Mudd brand for a period of two years. Mudd (USA)’s obligations to
IPH under the guarantee and to the Company under other agreements are secured
by
its pledge of a portion of the cash and shares issued by the Company as
consideration in the acquisition. The Company agreed to file a registration
statement to allow the seller to publicly sell the shares issued to it in
connection with the acquisition and the seller agreed to certain contractual
restriction on the sale of the shares by it.
The
financing for the purchase of the Mudd brand was accomplished through the
private placement on April 11, 2006 by IPH of approximately $136 million
principal amount of Asset-Backed Notes. The issuance of the Asset-Backed
Notes
raised $49 million in new financing for IPH (before giving effect to the
payment
of expenses in connection with the issuance of the Asset-Backed Notes and
required deposits to reserve accounts), and approximately $87 million principal
amount of the Asset-Backed Notes was exchanged for notes previously issued
by
IPH. The Asset-Backed Notes are secured by the intellectual property assets
owned by IPH, including those related to the Mudd brand.
The
portion of the Asset Backed Notes representing new financing were used as
follows: $45.0 million was paid to the sellers of the Mudd brand, approximately
$490,000 was used to pay costs associated with the financing, approximately
$2.45 million was placed in a liquidity reserve account, approximately $785,000
was used to pay professional fees associated with the acquisition and
approximately $275,000 of which was available for working capital purposes.
The
costs relating to the $49 million in new financing of approximately $490,000
have been deferred and are being amortized over the 5 year life of the financed
debt.
Total
purchase price was determined as follows (in thousands):
Cash
paid for acquisition
|
$
45,000
|
|
|
Fair
value of 3,269,231 shares of $.001 par value common stock at $14.64
fair
market value per share
|
47,862
|
Value
of 408,334 warrants ($5.98 exercise price for 333,334 and $8.58
exercise
price for 75,000) issued as a cost of the acquisition
|
4,596
|
Total
equity consideration
|
52,458
|
|
|
Other
estimated costs of acquisition, including $990 to be paid after
closing
|
1,775
|
Total
cost of acquisition
|
$
99,233
|
The
purchase price was allocated to the estimated fair value of the assets acquired
as follows (in thousands):
Mudd
Trademarks
|
$
87,100
|
Mudd
domain name
|
340
|
Mudd
license agreements
|
700
|
Mudd
non-compete agreement
|
1,400
|
Goodwill
|
9,693
|
Total
allocated purchase price
|
$
99,233
|
The
licensing contracts are being amortized on a straight-line basis over the
remaining contractual period of approximately 2 years, the Mudd domain name
is
being amortized on a straight-line basis over 5 years, and the value of the
non-compete agreement is being amortized on a straight-line basis over 4
years.
The goodwill of approximately $9.7 million is subject to a test for impairment
on an annual basis. Any adjustments resulting from the finalization of the
purchase price allocations will affect the amounts assigned to
goodwill.
In
accordance with the agreement with UCC (See Note I), an additional 408,334
of
the Warrants Shares vested on April 11, 2006 with a fair value of $4.6 million
upon consummation of the Mudd acquisition, for which UCC acted as a financial
advisor to IPH.
The
following unaudited pro-forma information presents a summary of the Company's
consolidated results of operations as if the Mudd acquisition and its related
financing had occurred on January 1, 2005. These pro forma results have been
prepared for comparative purposes only and do not purport to be indicative
of
the results of operations which actually would have resulted had the acquisition
occurred on January 1, 2005, or which may result in the future.
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended June 30,
|
Six
Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2006*
|
2005**
|
|
2006
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(000's
omitted, except per share)
|
Licensing
revenues
|
|
$18,409
|
$8,300
|
|
$36,284
|
$28,961
|
Operating
income
|
|
$10,880
|
$4,323
|
|
$22,691
|
$17,072
|
Net
Income
|
|
|
$8,345
|
$3,774
|
|
$17,416
|
$9,873
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
earnings per common share
|
$0.22
|
$0.12
|
|
$0.43
|
$0.26
|
Diluted
earnings per common share
|
$0.19
|
$0.11
|
|
$0.37
|
$0.25
|
*
Due to
the Mudd acquisition on April 11, 2006, the financial results for three months
ended June 30, 2006 included the operation of Mudd from April 11, 2006. The
financial results from April 1 to 10, 2006 were not deemed
material.
**
The
financial results related to the Joe Boxer and Rampage for the three months
ended June 30, 2005 was not available and therefore was not included in the
pro
forma information for the three months ended June 30, 2005.
NOTE
L
SPECIAL
CHARGES
During
the Current Quarter and Current Six Months, the Company recorded $712,000
and
$1.3 million of special charges in connection with its litigation related
to
Unzipped, compared to $328,000 and $707,000 in the Prior Year Quarter and
Prior
Year Six Months, respectively. See Note G.
NOTE
M -
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
Comprehensive
income for the Six Months was $15.9 million. Included in comprehensive
income is
$166,000 of other comprehensive income, net of taxes, representing unrealized
gain on marketable securities (common stock of Mossimo).
NOTE
N
RECENT
ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
In
February 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 155, "Accounting for Certain Hybrid
Financial Instruments -an amendment of FASB Statements No. 133 and 140,"
which
simplifies accounting for certain hybrid financial instruments by permitting
fair value remeasurement for any hybrid instrument that contains an embedded
derivative that otherwise would require bifurcation and eliminates a restriction
on the passive derivative instruments that a qualifying special-purpose entity
may hold. SFAS No. 155 is effective for all financial instruments acquired,
issued or subject to a remeasurement (new basis) event occurring after the
beginning of an entity's first fiscal year that begins after September 15,
2006.
The adoption of SFAS No. 155 will have no impact on the Company’s results of
operations or its financial position.
In
March
2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 156, "Accounting for Servicing of Financial
Assets - an amendment of FASB Statement No. 140," which establishes, among
other
things, the accounting for all separately recognized servicing assets and
servicing liabilities by requiring that all separately recognized servicing
assets and servicing liabilities be initially measured at fair value, if
practicable. SFAS No. 156 is effective as of the beginning of an entity's
first
fiscal year that begins after September 15, 2006. The adoption of SFAS No.
156
will have no impact on the Company’s results of operations or its financial
position.
In
June
2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48 ("FIN 48"), "Accounting
for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes - an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109,"
which establishes that the financial statement effects of a tax position
taken
or expected to be taken in a tax return are to be recognized in the financial
statements when it is more likely than not, based on the technical merits,
that
the position will be sustained upon examination. FIN 48 is effective for
fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2006. The adoption of FIN 48 is not expected
to have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations or its
financial position.
NOTE
O
MERGER
WITH MOSSIMO INC
On
April
3, 2006, the Company announced that it had entered into a definitive agreement
(the “Merger Agreement”) to acquire Mossimo, Inc. (“Mossimo”), a public company
in the business of licensing the MOSSIMO brand. Subject to the terms of the
Merger Agreement, the Company will acquire all of the outstanding shares
of
Mossimo through a merger (the “Merger”) in consideration for cash and common
stock of the Company worth $7.50 per Mossimo share, totaling approximately
15.9
million Mossimo shares as of March 31, 2006, provided, however that if the
Company’s common stock does not close at or above $18.71 during a specified
period following the Merger, the Company will issue additional shares of
the
Company’s common stock such that the total value of the cash and common stock of
the Company issued to the Mossimo shareholders in connection with the Merger
will be worth $8.50 per Mossimo share.
On
April
27, 2006, Mossimo received an unsolicited proposal from Cherokee, Inc.
(“Cherokee”) to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Mossimo. While unable
to conclude that Cherokee’s proposal was, in fact, a superior proposal within
the meaning of the merger agreement, Mossimo’s board agreed to provide
information to Cherokee pursuant to a confidentiality agreement as restrictive
as the one executed between Mossimo and Iconix. Cherokee and Iconix subsequently
entered into a termination and settlement agreement pursuant to which Cherokee
agreed to withdraw its proposal (and not to reinstate or make any new offer)
to
acquire all or substantially all of the capital stock of Mossimo and to
terminate, simultaneously with the merger, a finders agreement between Mossimo
and Cherokee in respect of Mossimo’s royalties from Target Stores in exchange
for Iconix’s agreement to pay Cherokee $33 million upon the closing of the
merger.
On
June
30, 2006, the Company filed a registration statement with the SEC, covering
the
issuance by the Company of its shares of common stock to the holders of Mossimo
common stock in the Merger and the resale of certain of the shares by certain
of
the Mossimo stockholders. The registration statement has not yet become
effective.
NOTE
P
OTHER
In
June
2006, the Company agreed to purchase all of the rights, title and interest
of
certain parties, relating to a 5% interest in the Badgley Mischka trademark
(the
“Rights”) under the Letter Agreement dated October 29, 2004 between the Company
and UCC Funding Corporation (“UCCF”) which UCCF subsequently assigned to certain
third parties. The Company purchased from these parties the Rights under
the
Letter Agreement for $1.5 million, of which $750,000 was paid in cash upon
execution of the agreement and the remaining $750,000 was evidenced by the
Company’s issuance of promissory notes, which accrue interest at the rate of 6%
per annum and mature and become payable on October 31, 2006. The
Company allocated approximately $1.35 million of the purchase price to the
purchase of the parties’ rights under the Letter Agreement to receive a cash
payment calculated under a formula based on the sales price should the Company
sell all or substantially all of the acquired Badgley Mischka assets. In
addition, the Company allocated the balance of approximately $150,000 relating
to its purchase of the parties’ rights under the Letter Agreement to receive a
fee of 5% of the gross revenues that the Company derives from the Badgley
Mischka trademark and all derivative trademarks.
Item
2. MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Safe
Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995.
The
statements that are not historical facts contained in this report are forward
looking statements that involve a number of known and unknown risks,
uncertainties and other factors, all of which are difficult or impossible
to
predict and many of which are beyond the control of the Company, which may
cause
the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially
different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed
or
implied by such forward looking statements. These risks are detailed in the
Company's Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 and other
SEC
filings. The words "believe", "anticipate," "expect", "confident", "project",
provide "guidance" and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements.
Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward looking
statements, which speak only as of the date the statement was made.
Executive
Summary. The
Company is in the business of owning, licensing and marketing a growing and
diversified portfolio of consumer brands that are sold across every major
segment of retail distribution from the luxury market to the mass market.
During
the Current Quarter, the Company owned six brands, five of which it owned
prior
to the Current Quarter, CANDIE'S®, BONGO®, BADGLEY MISCHKA®, JOE BOXER® and
RAMPAGE®, and one that was acquired on April 11, 2006, MUDD®. The Company
licenses its brands to retailers and wholesalers worldwide for use in connection
with a broad variety of consumer products including apparel, footwear,
accessories, fragrance and beauty products and home accessories. The Company’s
business model is designed to allow the Company to focus on its core competency
of marketing and managing brands without the risk, complexity and investment
inherent under the traditional operating model. The Company has long term
contracts with minimum guaranteed sales, and therefore has greater revenue
predictability than traditional operating businesses.
The
Company's growth strategy is focused on increasing licensing revenue from
its
existing portfolio of brands, continuing to acquire new brands that further
diversify the Company’s portfolio and licensing its brands to a growing network
of retailers and wholesalers internationally.
Results
of Operations
For
the three months ended June 30, 2006
Revenue.
Revenue
for the Current Quarter increased to $18.4 million, from $4.3 million in
the
Prior Year Quarter. This revenue growth of $14.1 million was balanced between
the growth in revenue generated from brands that were owned in the prior
year
quarter, notably the Company’s Candie’s brand, that is licensed to Kohl’s
Department Stores and new revenues of approximately $11.8 million associated
with the two brands acquired in the third quarter of last year, Joe Boxer
and
Rampage, and the Mudd acquisition completed in the Current Quarter.
Operating
Expenses.
Selling,
general and administrative (“SG&A”)
expenses totaled $6.8 million in the Current Quarter compared to $2.7 million
in
the Prior Year Quarter, an increase of $4.1 million. The increase in SG&A
expense was primarily related to increased advertising obligations connected
to
the growth in licensing revenue, additional operating expense related to
the
Mudd licensing operation, and compensation related to new executives that
joined
the Company in the Joe Boxer and Rampage transactions. Further in the Current
Quarter, the Company recorded a $625,000 reserve against its accounts
receivables, compared to no reserve in the Prior Year Quarter. For the Current
Quarter and Prior Year Quarter, the Company’s special charges included $712,000
and $328,000 respectively, incurred by the Company relating to litigation
involving Unzipped. See Note H of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Operating
Income for the Current Quarter increased to $10.9 million, or approximately
59%
of total revenue compared to $1.2 million or 29% of total revenue in the
Prior
Year Quarter.
Net
Interest
Expense.
Net
Interest expense increased by $2.4 million in the Current Quarter to $2.9
million, compared to $504,000 in the Prior Year Quarter. This increase was
due
primarily to an increase in the Company’s debt through financing arrangements in
connection with the acquisitions of Joe Boxer and Rampage, and the acquisition
of Mudd in April 2006. See Notes I, J and K of Notes to Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements. Included in the interest expense was $163,000 amortization
expense of deferred financing cost, compared to $104,000 amortization expense
reclassified from SG&A in the Prior Year Quarter. In addition, $37,000 in
interest expense was included in the Current Quarter from the Sweet Note
as
compared to $38,000 in the Prior Year Quarter. A total of $191,000 in interest
income for the Current Quarter partially offset the increase in interest
expense, compared to $21,000 offset in the Prior Year Quarter.
Provision
(Benefit) for Income Taxes.
The
Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 109, (“SFAS 109”) “Accounting for Income Taxes.” Under
SFAS No. 109, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on
differences between the financial reporting and tax basis of assets and
liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will
be
in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance
is
established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected
to be realized. In determining the need for a valuation allowance, management
reviews both positive and negative evidence pursuant to the requirements
of SFAS
No. 109, including current and historical results of operations, the annual
limitation on utilization of net operating loss carry forwards pursuant to
Internal Revenue Code section 382, future income projections and the overall
prospects of the Company’s business. Based upon management’s assessment of
information which became available in the Current Quarter management concluded
that it is more likely than not that a portion of previously unrecognized
deferred income tax benefits will be realized. Accordingly, the Company reduced
the balance of the related valuation allowance which resulted in a $347,000
net
tax benefit for the Current Quarter. Approximately $2.4 million was recorded
in
the Current Quarter as a credit to additional paid in capital for realization
of
deferred tax assets generated from exercise of stock options in prior years.
Based on current estimates of pre-tax income for the year ending December
31,
2006, management expects to record a net income tax expense for the year.
See
Note F of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Net
income.
The
Company’s net income was $8.3 million in the Current Quarter, compared to net
income of $2.5 million in the Prior Year Quarter, as a result of the factors
discussed above.
For
the
six months ended June 30, 2006
Revenue.
Revenue
for the Current Six Months increased to $31.7 million, from $8.6 million
in the
Prior Year Six Months. This revenue growth of $23.1 million was balanced
between
expansion of brands the Company owned in the Prior Year Six Months, notably
the
Company’s Candie’s brand, whose license with Kohl’s Department Stores continues
to rollout, and new revenue of approximately $19.4 million associated with
the
two acquisitions completed in the third quarter of last year, Joe Boxer and
Rampage, and the acquisition of Mudd completed in April 2006.
Operating
Expenses.
SG&A
expenses totaled $11.5 million in the Current Six Months compared to $5.3
million in the Prior Year Six Months, an increase of $6.2 million. The increase
in SG&A expense was primarily related to increased advertising obligations
connected to the growth in licensing revenue, additional operating expense
related to the Mudd licensing operation, as well as new executives that joined
the Company in the Joe Boxer and Rampage transactions. Included in the Prior
Year Six Months’s SG&A expense was $37,500 for Unzipped’s net loss which was
related to the Company’s transition of the Bongo jeanswear business into a
licensing business. For the Current Six Months and Prior Year Six Months,
the
Company’s special charges included $1.3 million and $707,000 respectively,
incurred by the Company relating to litigation involving Unzipped.
Operating
Income for the Current Six Months increased to $18.9 million, or approximately
60% of total revenue compared to $2.6 million or 30% of total revenue in
the
Prior Year Six Months.
Net
Interest
Expense.
Net
Interest expense increased by approximately $3.8 million in the Current Six
Months to $4.8 million, compared to approximately $1.1 million in the Prior
Year
Six Months. This increase was due primarily to an increase in the Company’s debt
through financing arrangements in connection with the acquisitions of Joe
Boxer
and Rampage in the third quarter of 2005 and the most recent acquisition
of Mudd
in April 2006. See Notes I, J and K of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements. Included in the interest expense in the Current Six Month was
$295,000 amortization expense of deferred financing cost, compared to $209,000
amortization expense reclassified from SG&A in the Prior Year Six Months. A
total of $352,000 in interest income for the Current Six Months partially
offset
the increase in interest expense, compared to $35,000 offset in the Prior
Year
Six Months.
Provision
(Benefit) for Income Taxes.
The
Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 109, (“SFAS 109”) “Accounting for Income Taxes.” Under
SFAS No. 109, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on
differences between the financial reporting and tax basis of assets and
liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will
be
in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance
is
established when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount expected
to be realized. In determining the need for a valuation allowance, management
reviews both positive and negative evidence pursuant to the requirements
of SFAS
No. 109, including current and historical results of operations, the annual
limitation on utilization of net operating loss carry forwards pursuant to
Internal Revenue Code section 382, future income projections and the overall
prospects of the Company’s business. Based upon management’s assessment of
information which became available in the Current Six Months management
concluded that it is more likely than not that a portion of previously
unrecognized deferred income tax benefits will be realized. Accordingly,
the
Company reduced the balance of the related valuation allowance which resulted
in
a $1.6 million net tax benefit for the Current Six Months. Approximately
$2.4
million was recorded in the Current Quarter as a credit to additional paid
in
capital for realization of deferred tax assets generated from exercise of
stock
options in prior years. Based on current estimates of pre-tax income for
the
year ended December 31, 2006, management expects to record a net income tax
expense for that period. See Note E of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Net
income.
The
Company’s net income was $15.7 million in the Current Six Months, compared to
net income of $3.3 million in the Prior Year Six Months, as a result of the
factors discussed above.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Liquidity
The
Company’s primary sources of cash is from cash from operations. As of June 30,
2006 and December 31, 2005 the Company’s cash and cash equivalents totaled $13.6
million and $11.7 million, including $9.0 million and $4.1 million restricted
cash, respectively. The increase resulted from the timing of receipt of certain
royalty payments at end of the Current Six Months as well as the additional
quarterly payment of $3.75 million deposited in the renewal reserve account
that
was classified as short-term restricted cash. See Note D of Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
The
Company’s cash requirements to support working capital needs, including
operating expenses, interest payments and its minimal capital expenditures,
are
met from its existing cash and cash provided from its operations. Based on
the
Company’s current internal estimates, the Company believes that its existing
cash and cash provided from future operations will be sufficient to meet
its
cash requirements over the next twelve months.
Changes
in Working Capital
At
June
30, 2006 and December 31, 2005 the working capital ratio (current assets
to
current liabilities) was 0.73 to 1 and 0.84 to 1 respectively. The main driver
of the decrease is that as
of
June 30, 2006, the Company classified $15 million in debt from long-term
to
current liabilities on its balance sheet as the Company has not entered into
or
renewed certain licensing arrangements with respect to the Joe Boxer brand.
Subject to terms in the Asset-Backed Notes, since by April 1, 2006, the Company
had not entered into or renewed certain licensing agreement(s) with respect
to
the Joe Boxer brand that guarantees certain thresholds, the Company is required
to make additional quarterly principal payments of $3.75 million in the seven
quarters following April 2006, without penalty, which are deposited in the
renewal reserve account as restricted cash. If the Company, prior to December
1,
2006, enters into or renews such licensing arrangements, above certain royalty
thresholds, the requirement to pay such additional quarterly principal payments
will cease and the Company will adjust the related debt classification on
its
balance sheet appropriately. The additional restricted liquidity reserve
fund
deposited in the renewal reserve account will be released and become available
to the Company for working capital purpose. See Note D of
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Operating
Activities
Net
cash
provided by operating activities totaled $7.8 million in the Current Six
Months,
as compared to $2.1 million of net cash provided in the Prior Year Six Months.
Cash provided by operating activities in the Current Six Months was increased
primarily due to net income of $15.7 million, offset by primary uses of cash
from an increase of $5.3 million in accounts receivable, a decrease of $2.1
million in deferred revenues. The Company continues to rely upon cash generated
from licensing and commission operations to finance its operations. Further,
the
Company believes that such cash from operations will be sufficient to satisfy
its anticipated working capital requirements for the foreseeable
future.
Investing
Activities
Net
cash
used in investing activities in the Current Six Months totaled $47.3 million,
as
compared to $244,000 in the Prior Year Six Months. In the Current Six Months,
the Company paid $45.0 million in cash for certain assets relating to the
Mudd
brand. See Note K of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Capital expenditures in the Current Six Months were $558,000, compared to
$26,000 in capital expenditures in the Prior Year Six Month. Capital
expenditures in the six months ended June 30, 2006 were primarily attributable
to the acquisition of office equipment and leasehold improvements relating
to
the Company’s relocation of its headquarters and the construction of new
showrooms in New York City. In June 2006, the Company acquired UCC’s right to
receive a cash payment upon the Company’s sale of all or substantially all of
the Badgley Mischka assets for approximately $600,000 in cash and $750,000
in a
promissory note (See Note P of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements). In addition, the Company also spent $231,000 in connection with
the
registration and maintenance of its trademarks.
Financing
Activities
Net
cash
provided by financing activities was $36.4 million in the Current Six Months,
compared with $2.2 million net cash used in the Prior Year Six Month. Of
the
$38.8 million in net cash provided by financing activities, $49.0 million
was
provided from the net proceeds of the issuance of long-term asset - backed
notes, and $931,000 from proceeds in connection with the exercise of stock
options. This was offset by $4.5 million used for principal payments related
to
the Asset-Backed Notes, $3.6 million in cash placed in a non-current reserve
account, $4.9 million in cash placed in a current reserve account (both reserve
accounts are required by the lender in connection to the Asset-Backed Notes,
including one additional quarterly payment of $3.75 million deposited in
the
renewal reserve account (See Notes D of Notes to Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements), and $490,000 used to pay the costs associated with
the
issuance of the long term debt (see Asset-Backed Notes below). In Prior Year
Six
Months, approximately $1.4 million was used for principal payments related
to
Asset-Backed Notes. The Company also repaid $2 million for a loan from TKO
Apparel, which during the Prior Year Six Months was a related
party.
Asset-Backed
Notes
In
August
2002, IPH, a subsidiary of the Company, issued in a private placement $20
million of Asset-Backed Notes secured by intellectual property assets (trade
names, trademarks, license agreements and payments and proceeds with respect
thereto) of IPH. The Asset-Backed Notes had a 7-year term with a fixed interest
rate of 7.93% with quarterly principal and interest payments of approximately
$859,000. After funding a liquidity reserve account in the amount of $2.9
million, the net proceeds of the Asset-Backed Notes ($16.2 million) were
used by
the Company to reduce amounts due by the Company under its then-existing
revolving credit facilities. In April 2004, IPH issued an additional $3.6
million in subordinated Asset-Backed Notes secured by its intellectual property
assets. The additional borrowing had a maturity date of August 2009, with
a
floating interest rate of LIBOR + 4.45% and quarterly principal and interest
payments and $500,000 of interest prepaid at closing. The net proceeds of
$2.9
million were used for general working capital purposes. As of July 22, 2005,
the
total principal on these notes was approximately $17.5 million, which were
refinanced in connection with the Joe Boxer acquisition described
below.
In
the
fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2005, the Company, through IPH, acquired
the
Joe Boxer brand from Joe Boxer Company, LLC and its affiliates, and the Rampage
brand from Rampage Licensing, LLC. See Notes I and J of Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements. The financing for the acquisitions was
accomplished through two private placements by IPH of Asset-Backed Notes,
secured by the intellectual property assets owned by IPH. The combined proceeds
of the Asset-Backed Notes, totaling $103 million, were used as follows:
approximately $17.5 million was used to refinance previously issued Asset-Backed
Notes, $40.0 million was paid to the sellers of the Joe Boxer brand,
approximately $25.8 million was paid to the sellers of the Rampage brand,
$1.7
million was placed in a liquidity reserve account as required by the holder
of
the Asset-Backed Notes, approximately $1.8 million was used to pay costs
associated with the debt issuance, approximately $200,000 was paid to legal
professionals associated with the acquisitions, approximately $4.0 million
was
available to the Company for working capital purposes, and $12 million was
deposited in an escrow account for the benefit of the holder of the Asset-Backed
Notes, to be used by IPH solely for the purchase of certain intellectual
property assets. IPH redeemed $12 million of the Asset-Backed Notes without
penalty as the purchase of the assets did not occur. Costs associated with
the
debt issuances of approximately $1.8 million have been deferred and are being
amortized using the interest method over the 7 year life of the Asset-Backed
Notes.
In
April
2006, the Company, through IPH, acquired certain assets of Mudd (USA) related
to
the Mudd brand, including trademarks, intellectual property and related names
worldwide, excluding China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. The financing for
the
acquisition was accomplished through the private placement on April 11, 2006
by
IPH of approximately $136 million principal amount of Asset-Backed Notes.
The
issuance of the Asset-Backed Notes raised $49 million in new financing for
IPH
(before giving effect to the payment of expenses in connection with the issuance
of the Asset-Backed Notes and required deposits to reserve funds), and
approximately $87 million principal amount of the Asset-Backed Notes was
exchanged for Asset Backed Notes previously issued by IPH. The Asset-Backed
Notes are secured by the acquired assets, as well as by other intellectual
property assets owned by IPH. The payment of the principal of and interest
on
the Asset-Backed Notes will be made from amounts received by IPH under license
agreements with various licensees of the acquired assets and IPH’s other
intellectual property assets.
The
portion of the Asset-Backed Notes representing new financing were used as
follows: $45.0 million was paid to the sellers of the Mudd brand, approximately
$490,000 was used to pay costs associated with the financing, approximately
$2.45 million was placed in a liquidity reserve account, approximately $785,000
was used to pay professional fees associated with the acquisition and
approximately $275,000 of which was available for working capital purposes.
The
costs relating to the $49 million in new financing of approximately $490,000
have been deferred and are being amortized over the 5 year life of the financed
debt.
Subject
to terms of the Asset-Backed Notes, if by April 1, 2006, IPH had not entered
into or renewed certain licensing agreement(s) with respect to the Joe Boxer
brand that guarantees certain royalty thresholds, IPH is required to deposit,
from revenues generated from the Joe Boxer brand, to a renewal reserve account
$3.75 million for each quarter beginning in April 2006 and ending in December
2007. Such deposits shall continue to be made until IPH enters into or renews
such licensing agreement(s) with respect to the Joe Boxer brand meeting the
minimum royalty thresholds, at which time any funds on deposit in the renewal
reserve account will be released to IPH. If IPH does not enter into or renew
such licensing agreement(s) by January 1, 2007, any funds on deposit in the
renewal reserve account will be applied as a reduction of the principal without
penalty and all future payments that are deposited to the renewal reserve
account will also be applied as a reduction of the principal without penalty.
As
of July 27, 2006, IPH had not entered into or renewed such licensing
agreement(s); accordingly, IPH made one payment of $3.75 million to the renewal
reserve account, which was included in current restricted cash, and classified
$15 million principal amount of the Asset Backed Notes from long-term debt
to
current debt on its balance sheet. If IPH enters into or renews such licensing
agreement(s) by January 1, 2007 IPH will adjust the related debt classification
on its balance sheet accordingly.
Cash
on
hand in the bank account of IPH is restricted at any point in time up to
the
amount of the next debt payment required under the Asset-Backed Notes.
Accordingly, $9.0 million and $4.1 million as of June 30, 2006 and December
31,
2005, respectively, have been disclosed as restricted cash within the Company’s
current assets. Further, in connection with IPH’s issuance of Asset Backed
Notes, a reserve account has been established and the funds on deposit in
such
account will be applied to the last principal payment with respect to the
Asset
Backed Notes. Accordingly, $8.5 million and $5.0 million as of June 30, 2006
and
December 31, 2005, respectively, have been disclosed as restricted cash within
the Company’s other assets.
Interest
rates and terms on the outstanding principal amount of the Asset-Backed Notes
are as follows: $63 million principal amount bears interest at a fixed interest
rate of 8.45% with a 7-year term, $28 million principal amount bears interest
at
a fixed rate of 8.12% with a 7- year term, and $49 million principal amount
bears interest at a variable interest rate of LIBOR + 4% in the first year
of
the 5-year term and a fixed interest rate of applicable treasury rate + 4.5%
for
the remaining 4 years. There are no principal payments required with respect
to
$49 million in new financing in the first year.
Neither
the Company nor any of its subsidiaries (other than IPH) is obligated to
make
any payment with respect to the Asset-Backed Notes, and the assets of the
Company and its subsidiaries (other than IPH) are not available to IPH’s
creditors. The assets of IPH are not available to the creditors of the Company
or its subsidiaries (other than IPH).
Matters
Pertaining to Unzipped.
See
Notes
G and H of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
For
the
Current Six Months, Unzipped had no operations, as compared to a net loss
(as
defined for the purpose of determining if the Guarantee had been met) of
$296,000 in the Prior Year Six Months. Consequently for the Current Six Months
there was no Shortfall Payment, as compared to a Shortfall Payment of $438,000
in the Prior Year Six Months. The adjusted Shortfall Payment had been recorded
in the Condensed Consolidated Income Statements as a reduction of Unzipped’s
cost of sales (since the majority of Unzipped’s operations were with entities
under common ownership with Sweet, including its exclusive supplier/ supply
agent) and on the balance sheet as a reduction of the Sweet Note based upon
the
right to offset in the Management Agreement. After adjusting for the Shortfall
Payment in Prior Year Six Months, Unzipped reported a net loss of $37,500
on
sales of $448,000. Due to the immaterial nature of the related amounts, the
net
loss of $37,500 from Unzipped was included in the SG&A in the Company’s
Condensed Consolidated Income Statements for the Prior Year Six
Months.
Other
Matters
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies.
The
condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company
and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany transactions
and
items have been eliminated in consolidation. The Company acquired the Joe
Boxer
brand on July 22, 2005, the Rampage brand on September 16, 2005, and the
Mudd
brand on April 11, 2006. All acquisitions have been accounted for using purchase
price accounting. The purchase method of accounting requires that the total
purchase price of an acquisition be allocated to the assets acquired and
liabilities assumed based on their fair values on the date of the business
acquisition. Any excess of the purchase price over the estimated fair values
of
the net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill. See Notes I, J and K of
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
The
preparation of the condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts
of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at
the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and
expenses during the reporting period. The Company reviews all significant
estimates affecting the financial statements on a recurring basis and records
the effect of any adjustments when necessary.
In
June
2001, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142
(SFAS
No. 142), “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets,” which changes the accounting
for goodwill and other intangible assets without determinable lives from
an
amortization method to an impairment-only approach. The Candie’s and Bongo
trademarks had previously been amortized on a straight-line basis over their
estimated useful lives of approximately 20 years. Effective July 1, 2005
the
Company had a change in estimate of the useful lives of both the Candie’s and
Bongo trademarks to indefinite life. The impact of this change in estimate
for
the Current Quarter and Current Six Months were a reduction in amortization
expense relating to the Candie’s and Bongo trademarks totaling $296,000 and
$593,000, respectively. As of June 30, 2006, the net book value of the Candie’s
and Bongo trademarks totaled $14.3 million. Impairment losses are recognized
for
long-lived assets, including certain intangibles, used in operations when
indicators of impairment are present and the undiscounted cash flows estimated
to be generated by those assets are not sufficient to recover the assets'
carrying amount. Impairment losses are measured by comparing the fair value
of
the assets to their carrying amount.
The
Company has entered into various trade name license agreements that provide
revenues based on minimum royalties and additional revenues based on a
percentage of defined sales. Minimum royalty revenue is recognized on a
straight-line basis over each period, as defined, in each license agreement.
Royalties exceeding the defined minimum amounts are recognized as income
during
the period corresponding to the licensee’s sales. Beginning January 2005, the
Company changed its business practices with respect to Bright Star Footwear,
Inc
(“Bright Star”), a subsidiary of the Company, which resulted in a change in
revenue recognition from prior year. Bright Star now acts as an agent, therefore
only net commission revenue is recognized commencing January 1, 2005.
Effective
January 1, 2006, the Company adopted Statement No. 123(R), “Accounting for
Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS 123(R)”), which requires companies to measure and
recognize compensation expense for all stock-based payments at fair value.
Under
SFAS 123(R), using the modified prospective method, compensation expense
is
recognized for all share-based payments granted prior to, but not yet vested
as
of, January 1, 2006. In
December 2005, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the accelerated vesting
of all employee service-based stock options previously granted under the
Company’s various non-qualified stock option plans, which would have been
unvested as of December 31, 2005. As a result, all options granted as of
December 31, 2005, except certain options based on performance became
exercisable immediately. The number of shares, exercise prices and other
terms
of the options subject to the acceleration remain unchanged. The acceleration
of
such option vesting resulted in an additional $446,000 of compensation expense
reflected in pro forma net income for the year ended December 31, 2005, an
amount that would have otherwise been recorded as compensation expense in
the
years ending December 31, 2006 and 2007, but had no impact on compensation
recognition in 2005 as the options would have otherwise vested. Prior to
the
adoption of SFAS 123(R), the Company accounted for its stock-based compensation
plans under the recognition and measurement principles of Accounting Principles
Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees”, and
related interpretations. Accordingly, the compensation cost for stock options
had been measured as the excess, if any, of the quoted market price of the
Company’s stock at the date of the grant over the amount the employee must pay
to acquire the stock. In accordance with the modified prospective transition
method, the consolidated financial statements have not been restated to reflect
the impact of SFAS 123(R). The
impact on the Company's financial condition and results of operations of
adopting FAS No. 123(R) will depend on the number and terms of stock options
granted in future years under the modified prospective method, the amount
of
which can not currently be estimated by management.
On
July
1, 2005, the Company changed its corporate name to Iconix Brand Group, Inc.
and
its NASDAQ symbol to ICON.
Seasonal
and Quarterly Fluctuations.
The
Company's results may fluctuate quarter to quarter as a result of its licensees'
sales and business generally, which can be impacted by holidays, weather,
the
timing of product shipments, market acceptance of the applicable branded
product, the mix, pricing and presentation of the product and general economic
conditions beyond the Company’s control. Accordingly, the results of operations
in any quarter will not necessarily be indicative of the results that may
be
achieved for a full fiscal year or any future quarter.
Other
Factors
The
Company continues to seek to expand and diversify the types of licensed products
being produced under its various brands, as well as diversify the distribution
channels within which licensed products are sold, in an effort to reduce
dependence on any particular retailer, consumer or market sector. The success
of
the Company, however, will still largely remain dependent on its ability
to
contract with and retain key licensees, its licensee’s ability to predict
accurately upcoming fashion trends among its customer base, to build and
maintain brand awareness and to fulfill the product requirements of the retail
channel within a global marketplace. Unanticipated changes in consumer fashion
preferences, slowdowns in the United States economy, changes in the prices
of
supplies, gasoline, consolidation of retail establishments, among other factors
noted herein and the Company’s other filing with the SEC, could adversely affect
the Company's licensees’ from meeting and/or exceeding their contractual
commitments to the Company and thereby adversely impact the Company’s future
operating results.
Effects
of Inflation.
The
Company does not believe that the relatively moderate rates of inflation
experienced over the past few years in the United States, where it primarily
competes, have had a significant effect on its revenues or
profitability.
Item
3. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
As
a
result of the Company’s financing activities, the Company was exposed to the
risk of rising interest rates. The following table provides information on
the
Company’s fixed maturity debt as of June 30, 2006 that was sensitive to changes
in interest rates.
The
IPH’s
additional assets-backed note, in connection with the
new
financing for the acquisition of Mudd had an average interest
rate
of
9.03% for the three month period ended June 30, 2006 $49.0
million
See
Notes
D and K of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Item
4. Controls
and Procedures
The
Company maintains “disclosure controls and procedures, “ as such term is defined
under Rule 13a-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”),
that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in
the
Company’s Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized and reported
within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such
information is accumulated and communicated to its management, including
its
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosures. In designing and evaluating
the
disclosure controls and procedures, the Company’s management recognized that any
controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide
only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives and
the
Company’s management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in
evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
The Company has carried out an evaluation, as of the end of period covered
by
this report, under the supervision and with the participation of the Company’s
management, including its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure
controls and procedures. Based upon the management’s evaluation and subject to
the foregoing, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded
that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective in ensuring
that material information relating to the Company that is required to be
disclosed in the Company’s Exchange Act reports is made known to the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer by others within the Company
in a
timely manner.
There
have been no significant changes in the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f)) that occurred
during the quarter and six months ended June 30, 2006 that have materially
affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal
control over financial reporting.
PART
II.
Other Information
Item
1. Legal
Proceedings
See
Note
G of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Item 1A.
Risk
Factors.
In
addition to the risk factors disclosed in Part 1, Item 1A, “Risk
Factors” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2005 set forth below are certain factors that have affected, and in the future
could affect, our operations or financial condition. The risks
described below and in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2005 are not the only risks we face. Additional risks
and
uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be
immaterial also may materially adversely affect our financial condition
and/or operating results.
Our
business is dependent on continued market acceptance of our
Candie’s,
Bongo, Badgley Mischka, Joe Boxer, Rampage and Mudd trademarks and the products
of our licensees bearing these brands.
Although
the licensees of the current trademarks we own guarantee minimum net sales
and
minimum royalties to us, a failure of our current or future trademarks or
of
products utilizing our trademarks to achieve or maintain market acceptance
could
cause a reduction of our licensing revenues, thereby negatively affecting
our
cash flow. Such failure could also cause the devaluation of our trademarks,
which are our primary assets, making it more difficult for us to renew our
current licenses upon their expiration or enter into new or additional licenses
for our trademarks. In addition, if such devaluation of our trademarks were
to
occur, a material impairment in the carrying value of one or more of our
trademarks could also occur and be charged as an expense to our operating
results. Continued market acceptance for our trademarks and our licensees’
products, as well as market acceptance of any future products bearing our
trademarks, is subject to a high degree of uncertainty, made more so by
constantly changing consumer tastes and preferences. Maintaining market
acceptance for our licensees’ products and creating market acceptance for new
products and categories of products bearing our marks will require our
continuing and substantial marketing and product development efforts, which
may,
from time to time, also include our expenditure of significant additional
funds,
to keep pace with changing consumer demands. Additional marketing efforts
and
expenditures may not, however, result in either increased market acceptance
of,
or additional licenses for, our current or future trademarks or increased
market
acceptance, or sales, of our licensees’ products. Furthermore, while we believe
that we currently maintain sufficient control over the products our licensees’
produce under our brand names through the provision of trend direction and
our
right to preview and approve a majority of such products as well as their
presentation and packaging, we do not actually design or manufacture our
licensed products and therefore have more limited control over such products’
quality and design than a traditional product manufacturer might
have.
We
will require additional capital to finance the acquisition of additional
brands
and our inability to raise such capital on beneficial terms or at all could
restrict our growth
We
will
in the future require additional capital to help fund all or part of potential
trademark acquisitions. If, at the time required, we have not generated
sufficient cash from operations to finance those additional capital needs,
we
will need to raise additional funds through bank financing or other private
or
public equity and/or debt financing. We cannot assure you that, if and when
needed, additional financing will be available to us on acceptable terms
or at
all. If additional capital is needed and is either unavailable or cost
prohibitive, our growth may be limited as we may need to change our business
strategy to slow the rate of, or eliminate, our expansion plans. In addition,
any additional financing we undertake could impose covenants upon us that
restrict our operating flexibility, and, if we issue equity securities to
raise
capital, our existing stockholders may experience dilution or the new securities
may have rights senior to those of our common stock. Any such dilution could
reduce the market price of our common stock unless and until we were able
to
achieve revenue growth or cost savings and other business economies sufficient
to offset the effect of such an issuance. There is no guarantee that our
stockholders will achieve greater returns as a result of any future acquisitions
we complete.
Item
6. Exhibits
Exhibit
2.1
Amendment
dated April 11, 2006 to Asset Purchase Agreement dated as of March 31, 2006
between the Company and Mudd (USA), LLC.
4.1
Fourth
Amended and Restated Indenture dated as of April 11, 2006 by and among IP
Holdings LLC, as issuer, and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee.
(1)
10.1
Termination
and Settlement Agreement dated as of April 27, 2006 among the Company, Moss
Acquisition Corp., and Cherokee Inc. (2)
10.2
Agreement
dated June 2, 2006 among the Company, UCC Consulting, Content Holdings, James
Haran and Robert D’Loren. (3)
10.3
Purchase
and Sale Agreement dated June 2, 2006 by and among the Company, Content
Holdings, Robert D’Loren, Seth Burroughs and Catherine Twist. (3)
10.4
Stock
Purchase Warrant dated June 2, 2006 issued to Content Holdings. (3)
10.5
Stock
Purchase Warrant dated June 2, 2006 issued to James Haran. (3)
10.6
Non
Competition and Non-Solicitation Agreement between the Company and Neil Cole.*
10.7
Agreement
dated June 8, 2006 between the Company and William Sweedler. (3)
31.1
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant To Rule 13a-14 Or 15d-14 Of The Securities
Exchange Act Of 1934, As Adopted Pursuant To Section 302 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley
Act Of 2002.
31.2 Certification
of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant To Rule 13a-14 Or 15d-14 Of The Securities
Exchange Act Of 1934, As Adopted Pursuant To Section 302 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley
Act Of 2002.
32.1 Certification
of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted
Pursuant To Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002.
32.2 Certification
of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted
Pursuant To Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002.
________
(1) |
Incorporated
by reference to the applicable exhibit filed with the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K for the event dated April 11,
2006.
|
(2) |
Incorporated
by reference to the applicable exhibit filed with the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K for the event dated April 27,
2006.
|
(3) |
Incorporated
by reference to the applicable exhibit filed with the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K for the event dated June 2,
2006.
|
*
Denotes
management compensation plan or arrangement.
Signatures
Pursuant
to the requirements 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.
Iconix
Brand
Group, Inc.
__________________________________
(Registrant)
Date: August
9,
2006 /s/
Neil
Cole
__________________________________ __________________________________
Neil
Cole
Chairman
of the
Board, President
and
Chief Executive
Officer
(on
Behalf of the
Registrant)
Date:
August
9,
2006 /s/
Warren Clamen
__________________________________ __________________________________
Warren
Clamen
Chief
Financial
Officer
29