posam
As Filed With The United States Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 7, 2006
Registration
No. 333-123228
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to
Form S-1
REGISTRATION STATEMENT
Under
THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
Spark Networks plc
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
|
|
England and Wales |
|
7389 |
|
98-0200628 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization) |
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number) |
|
(IRS Employer
Identification Number) |
8383 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 800
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
(323) 836-3000
(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including
area code, of Registrants principal executive offices)
David E. Siminoff
President and Chief Executive Officer
Spark Networks plc
8383 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 800
Beverly Hills, California 90211
Telephone: (323) 836-3000
Fax: (323) 836-3333
(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including area code, of agent for service)
Copies to:
Thomas J. Poletti, Esq.
Katherine J. Blair, Esq.
Anh Q. Tran, Esq.
Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP
10100 Santa Monica Boulevard, 7th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: (310) 552-5000
Fax: (310) 552-5001
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: From time to time after this Registration Statement
is declared effective.
If any of the securities being registered on this form are to be
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, please check
following box: þ
If this form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act
of 1933, check the following box and list the Securities Act
registration statement number of the earlier effective
registration statement for the same
offering: o
If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, please check
the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement
for the same
offering: o
If this form is a post effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act of 1933, please check
the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earliest effective registration
statement for the same
offering: o
If delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to
Rule 434 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the
following
box: o
CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum |
|
|
Proposed Maximum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount to be |
|
|
Offering Price |
|
|
Aggregate Offering |
|
|
Amount of |
Title of Each Class of Securities to be Registered |
|
|
Registered(1) |
|
|
Per Share(2) |
|
|
Price |
|
|
Registration Fee |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ordinary Shares, par value £0.01 per share(3)
|
|
|
30,238,996 |
|
|
$7.12 |
|
|
$215,301,652 |
|
|
$25,341 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ordinary Shares, par value £0.01 per share(3)(4)
|
|
|
3,025,000 |
|
|
$7.12 |
|
|
$21,538,000 |
|
|
$2,535 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Registration Fee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$27,876(5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
In accordance with Rule 416(a), the Registrant is also
registering hereunder an indeterminate number of additional
shares of common stock that shall be issuable pursuant to
Rule 416 to prevent dilution resulting from stock splits,
stock dividends or similar transactions. |
(2) |
Estimated pursuant to Rule 457(c) of the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, solely for the purpose of computing the amount
of the registration fee based on the average of the high and low
sales prices of the ordinary shares traded in the form of Global
Depositary Receipts, or GDRs, as reported by the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange in Germany on September 15, 2005. For purposes of
this calculation the sales price of the GDRs is converted into
U.S. dollars at an exchange rate of
0.81413 per $1.00, which is based on the average bid and
ask currency exchange price as reported by OANDA on
September 15, 2005. |
(3) |
Consists of ordinary shares that are to be offered and sold in
the form of American Depositary Shares, or ADSs, by the selling
shareholders identified in this prospectus and any prospectus
supplement. The ADSs, each representing one ordinary share,
evidenced by American Depositary Receipts, or ADRs, upon deposit
of the ordinary shares registered hereby, are being registered
under a separate registration statement on
Form F-6. |
(4) |
Represents shares of the Registrants ordinary shares being
registered for resale that have been or may be acquired upon the
exercise of warrants or options issued to the selling
shareholders named in this prospectus and any prospectus
supplement. |
(5) |
Previously paid. Pursuant to Rule 457(p), the registration
fee was partially offset by a previously paid filing fee of
$12,670 paid in connection with the filing on August 4,
2004 by MatchNet, Inc. of a registration statement on
Form S-1 (file
number 333-117940).
In addition, $15,210 was also previously paid. |
The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this Registration Statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the Registration
Statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission,
acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.
The information
in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. The
selling shareholders may not sell these securities until the
Securities and Exchange Commission declares our registration
statement effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell
these securities and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these
securities in any state where the offer or sale is not
permitted.
|
Subject to completion dated
April 7, 2006
33,263,996 American Depositary Shares
SPARK NETWORKS PLC
Representing 33,263,996 Ordinary Shares
|
|
|
|
|
The selling shareholders identified in this prospectus and any
prospectus supplement are offering 33,263,996 ordinary shares in
the form of American Depositary Shares, or ADSs. Each ADS
represents the right to receive one ordinary share. We will not
receive any proceeds from the sale of our shares by the selling
shareholders, except for funds received from the exercise of
warrants and options held by selling shareholders, if and when
exercised. |
|
|
|
No established public market for our ordinary shares or ADSs
currently exists in the United States of America. |
|
|
|
Our ordinary shares in the form of Global Depositary Shares, or
GDSs, currently trade on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange under the
symbol MHJG. The last reported sales price of the
GDSs on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange on April 5, 2006 was
5.12 per GDS, or $6.24 per GDS. |
|
|
|
Our ordinary shares in the form of ADSs currently trade on the
American Stock Exchange under the symbol LOV. The
last reported sales price of the ADSs on the American Stock
Exchange on April 5, 2006 was $7.10 per ADS. |
|
|
|
The current offering price as of the date of this prospectus is
between approximately $4.68 and $6.24, which is approximately
75% and 100% of the last reported sales price of the GDSs on the
Frankfurt Stock Exchange as of April 5, 2006. Selling
shareholders will sell the ADSs at this price until our ADSs are
listed on the American Stock Exchange and there is an
established market for these shares, the selling shareholders
may sell the ADSs from time to time at market price prevailing
on the American Stock Exchange at the time of offer and sale, or
at prices related to such prevailing market prices or in
negotiated transactions or a combination of such methods of sale
directly or through brokers. |
This investment involves risk. See Risk Factors
beginning on page 7.
Neither the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission nor
any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of
anyones investment in these securities or determined if
this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to
the contrary is a criminal offense.
NOTICE TO RESIDENTS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND OTHER MEMBER
STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION: The shares and ADSs referred to in
this document may only be sold or offered to, and this
prospectus and any other invitation or inducement to buy or
participate in the offer or sale of shares or ADSs may only be
communicated to persons outside the United Kingdom and other
member states of the European Union (Relevant
Persons). The shares and ADSs to which this prospectus
relates are available only to Relevant Persons and this
prospectus must not be acted on or relied on by persons that are
not Relevant Persons. Any investment or investment activity to
which this prospectus relates is available only to Relevant
Persons and may be engaged in only with Relevant Persons. Any
person communicating any information relating to this prospectus
or the shares and ADSs in the UK or another member state of the
European Union should comply with all applicable provisions of
the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 in the UK
(FSMA) and/or other applicable legislation of the
relevant member state of the European Union (including the
applicable provisions of the Prospectus Directive (2003/71/EC))
and any regulations made thereunder in so doing. Persons in the
UK or another member state of the European Union who are in any
doubt as to the action they should take are recommended to seek
their own personal financial advice from their stockbroker, bank
manager, accountant or other financial adviser who is authorized
under the FSMA or the relevant competent authority or national
regulator of that member state.
The date of this prospectus
is ,
2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
You should rely only on information contained in this
prospectus. We have not authorized any other person to provide
you with different information. This prospectus is not an offer
to sell, nor is it seeking an offer to buy, these securities in
any state where the offer or sale is not permitted. The
information in this prospectus is complete and accurate as of
the date on the front cover, but the information may have
changed since that date.
i
PROSPECTUS SUMMARY
This summary highlights information continued elsewhere in
this prospectus and does not contain all the information you
should consider in your investment decision. You should read
this summary, which includes material information, with the more
detailed information set out in this prospectus and the
financial statements and related notes. You should carefully
consider, among other things, the matters discussed in
Risk Factors. We were incorporated in September 1998
under the laws of England and Wales as a public limited company.
Throughout this prospectus, we refer to Spark Networks plc
(known as MatchNet plc until January 10, 2005) and our
subsidiaries as we, us, our,
our company, Spark Networks and
MatchNet unless otherwise indicated. Spark Networks,
MatchNet, JDate, AmericanSingles and MingleMatch are some of our
trademarks. Trade names, trademarks and service marks of other
companies appearing in this prospectus are the property of the
respective holders.
Our Business
We are a leading provider of online personals services in the
United States and internationally. Our Web sites enable adults
to meet online and participate in a community, become friends,
date, form a long-term relationship or marry. We provide this
opportunity through the many features on our Web sites, such as
detailed profiles, onsite email centers, real-time chat rooms
and instant messaging services. In 2005, Spark Networks averaged
approximately 3.3 million monthly unique visitors to our
Web sites in the United States, according to comScore Media
Metrix, which ranked us as the third largest provider of online
personals services in the United States. comScore Media Metrix
defines total unique visitors as the estimated
number of different individuals that visited any content of a
Web site, a category, a channel, or an application during the
reporting period. The number of total unique
visitors to our Web sites as measured by comScore Media
Metrix does not correspond to the number of members we have in
any given period. Currently, our key Web sites are JDate.com and
AmericanSingles.com. We operate several international Web sites
and maintain operations in both the United States and Israel.
Information regarding the geographical source of our revenues
can be found in Note 12 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this prospectus. Membership on our sites
is free and allows a registered user to post a personal profile
and to access our searchable database of member profiles. The
ability to initiate most communication with other members
requires the payment of a monthly subscription fee, which
represents our primary source of revenue. We also offer
discounted subscription rates for members who subscribe for
longer periods, ranging from three to twelve months. Following
their initial terms, subscriptions on our Web sites renew
automatically for subsequent one-month periods until paying
subscribers terminate them.
We believe that online personals fulfill significant needs for
single adults who are looking to meet a companion or date.
Traditional methods such as printed personals advertisements,
offline dating services and public gathering places often do not
meet the needs of time-constrained single people. Printed
personals advertisements offer individuals limited personal
information and interaction before meeting. Offline dating
services are time-consuming, expensive and offer a smaller
number of potential partners. Public gathering places such as
restaurants, bars and social venues provide a limited ability to
learn about others prior to an in-person meeting. In contrast,
online personals services facilitate interaction between singles
by allowing them to screen and communicate with a large number
of potential companions. With features such as detailed personal
profiles, email and instant messaging, this medium allows users
to communicate with other singles at their convenience and
affords them the ability to meet multiple people in a safe and
secure online setting.
1
For the year ended December 31, 2005, we had approximately
220,000 average paying subscribers, representing a decrease of
2.7% from 2004. Our JDate and AmericanSingles segments had
approximately 70,500 and 105,300 average paying subscribers for
the year ended December 31, 2005, an increase of 1% and a
decrease of 20.5%, respectively, compared to 2004.
We intend to grow our business in the following ways:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increasing our base of members in the United States and
internationally through consistent and targeted marketing
efforts. We define a member as an individual who has posted a
personal profile during the immediately preceding 12 months
or an individual who has previously posted a personal profile
and has subsequently logged on to one of our Web sites at least
once in the preceding 12 months. Members may or may not be
paying subscribers which we define as individuals who have paid
a monthly fee for access to communication and Web site features
beyond those provided to our members. Accordingly, the number of
members we have at any given time may not directly affect our
revenue. |
|
|
|
|
Increasing the number of our members who become paying
subscribers by offering improved technology and communications
features and by utilizing our strong customer service focus. |
|
|
|
|
Extending into new vertical affinity markets that we believe
will be receptive to paid online personals and are large enough
to enable us to attain enough paying subscribers sufficient to
support an online community. We view vertical affinity markets
as identifiable groups of people who share common interests,
backgrounds and traits and the desire to meet companions or
dates with similar interests, backgrounds or traits. |
|
Office Location
Our principal executive offices are located at 8383 Wilshire
Boulevard, Suite 800, Beverly Hills, California 90211. Our
telephone number at that location is
(323) 836-3000.
Our registered office is located at 24/26 Arcadia Avenue,
London, N3 2JU, England. Our corporate Web site address is
www.spark.net. This is a textual reference only. We do not
incorporate the information on our Web site into this
prospectus, and you should not consider any information on, or
that can be accessed through, our Web site as part of this
prospectus.
Our Securities
Our ordinary shares currently trade on the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange in the form of Global Depositary Shares, or GDSs, and
on the American Stock Exchange in the form of American
Depositary Shares, or ADSs, each of which represents the right
to receive one ordinary share. The selling shareholders
identified in this prospectus and any prospectus supplement are
offering 33,263,996 ordinary shares in the form of ADSs, each of
which represents the right to receive one ordinary share. ADSs
may be issued to persons located in the United States and the
selling shareholders may sell their ordinary shares in the form
of ADSs after this registration statement or any post-effective
amendment to this registration statement, if applicable, is
declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission,
except during any time with respect to which we inform those
shareholders that this registration statement may not be relied
upon. Selling shareholders that hold their ordinary shares in
the form of GDSs may offer and sell their shares in the United
States by surrendering those GDSs to our depositary bank, The
Bank of New York, and requesting the depositary bank to deliver
ADSs to the order of the purchaser. Once GDSs have been
surrendered for ordinary shares, the shares may not be
re-deposited for GDSs because the GDS facility has been closed
to any deposits of shares for GDSs,
2
and if and when all GDSs have been surrendered, we intend to
terminate our GDS deposit agreement such that our ordinary
shares will only be publicly traded in the form of ADSs.
We are registering the ordinary shares in the form of ADSs, and
not directly as ordinary shares. An acquisition or transfer of
an ordinary share in the United States will generally trigger a
charge to United Kingdom stamp duty, and such stamp duty is
generally not triggered when the sale or transfer of the
beneficial interest in the ordinary shares is effected by a
transfer of ADSs. See Taxation on page 117 for
additional information regarding taxation of our ordinary shares
and ADSs.
The Offering
|
|
|
ADSs offered by selling shareholders |
|
33,263,996
ADSs(1) |
|
|
Total ordinary shares outstanding after the offering, including
ordinary shares underlying ADSs and GDSs |
|
30,247,996 Ordinary
Shares(2) |
|
|
Use of Proceeds |
|
We will not receive any of the net proceeds from the sale of
shares by the selling shareholders. See Use of
Proceeds. |
|
American Stock Exchange symbol |
|
LOV |
|
|
|
(1) |
Consists of 30,238,996 ordinary shares, 2,595,000 ordinary
shares underlying options and 430,000 ordinary shares underlying
warrants. The ordinary shares are to be offered and sold in the
form of American Depositary Shares, or ADSs. The ADSs, each
representing one ordinary share, evidenced by American
Depositary Receipts, or ADRs, upon deposit of the ordinary
shares registered hereby, have been registered under a separate
registration statement on
Form F-6. |
|
|
|
(2) |
The total number of ordinary shares to be outstanding
immediately after this offering is based on 30,247,996 ordinary
shares outstanding as of February 1, 2006. This information
excludes: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,655,201 ordinary shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding options as of February 1, 2006, with exercise
prices ranging from $0.89 to $9.56 per share and a weighted
average exercise price of $5.70 per share; |
|
|
|
|
|
430,000 ordinary shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants
outstanding as of February 1, 2006, with an exercise price
an exercise price of $2.52 per share; and |
|
|
|
|
|
14,424,049 ordinary shares available for issuance under our
share option schemes. |
|
3
Summary Consolidated Financial Data
The following summary consolidated financial data should be read
in conjunction with Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
and the consolidated financial statements, related notes, and
other financial information included herein.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31,(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004(6) | |
|
2003(6) | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands, except per share amounts) | |
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$ |
65,511 |
|
|
$ |
65,052 |
|
|
$ |
36,941 |
|
|
$ |
16,352 |
|
|
$ |
10,434 |
|
Direct marketing expenses
|
|
|
24,411 |
|
|
|
31,240 |
|
|
|
18,395 |
|
|
|
5,396 |
|
|
|
2,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution margin
|
|
|
41,100 |
|
|
|
33,812 |
|
|
|
18,546 |
|
|
|
10,956 |
|
|
|
8,390 |
|
Operating
expenses:*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
|
1,208 |
|
|
|
2,607 |
|
|
|
986 |
|
|
|
403 |
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
2,827 |
|
|
|
3,379 |
|
|
|
2,536 |
|
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
7,546 |
|
|
|
7,184 |
|
|
|
4,481 |
|
|
|
1,587 |
|
|
|
1,772 |
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
4,118 |
|
|
|
2,013 |
|
|
|
959 |
|
|
|
603 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
25,074 |
|
|
|
29,253 |
(2) |
|
|
18,537 |
(2) |
|
|
7,996 |
|
|
|
5,496 |
|
|
Amortization of intangible assets other than goodwill
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
860 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
524 |
|
|
|
2,137 |
|
|
Impairment of long-lived assets
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
1,532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,997 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
41,963 |
|
|
|
45,504 |
|
|
|
29,586 |
|
|
|
12,320 |
|
|
|
14,942 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss)
|
|
|
(863 |
) |
|
|
(11,692 |
) |
|
|
(11,040 |
) |
|
|
(1,364 |
) |
|
|
(6,552 |
) |
Interest (income) and other expenses, net
|
|
|
711 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
1,627 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(1,574 |
) |
|
|
(11,626 |
) |
|
|
(10,852 |
) |
|
|
(524 |
) |
|
|
(8,179 |
) |
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss)
|
|
|
(1,438 |
) |
|
|
(11,627 |
) |
|
|
(10,852 |
) |
|
|
(524 |
) |
|
|
(8,179 |
) |
Net (loss) per share basic and
diluted(3)
|
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
(0.51 |
) |
|
|
(0.57 |
) |
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
(0.47 |
) |
Weighted average shares outstanding-basic and
diluted(3)
|
|
|
26,105 |
|
|
|
22,667 |
|
|
|
18,970 |
|
|
|
18,460 |
|
|
|
17,460 |
|
Other Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
3,624 |
|
|
|
3,065 |
|
|
|
1,441 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
544 |
|
Additional Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average paying subscribers(4)
|
|
|
220,000 |
|
|
|
226,100 |
|
|
|
125,800 |
|
|
|
58,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004(6) | |
|
2003(6) | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
*
Operating expenses include share-based compensation as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
2,063 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
1,652 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
|
|
|
17,292 |
|
|
|
7,423 |
|
|
|
5,815 |
|
|
|
7,755 |
|
|
|
7,569 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
48,620 |
|
|
|
27,359 |
|
|
|
16,969 |
|
|
|
17,461 |
|
|
|
16,352 |
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
4,991 |
|
|
|
3,933 |
|
|
|
3,232 |
|
|
|
1,535 |
|
|
|
993 |
|
Capital lease obligations and notes payable
|
|
|
10,830 |
|
|
|
1,873 |
|
|
|
487 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
23,437 |
|
|
|
16,872 |
|
|
|
11,659 |
|
|
|
3,998 |
|
|
|
3,238 |
|
Shares subject to
rescission(5)
|
|
|
6,089 |
|
|
|
3,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(45,073 |
) |
|
|
(43,635 |
) |
|
|
(32,008 |
) |
|
|
(21,156 |
) |
|
|
(20,632 |
) |
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
19,094 |
|
|
|
6,668 |
|
|
|
5,310 |
|
|
|
13,463 |
|
|
|
13,114 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Refer to Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations for a
discussion of certain asset and business acquisitions. |
|
|
(2) |
In 2004, general and administrative expenses included an expense
of approximately $2.4 million related to an employee
severance, $2.1 million related to the United States
initial public offering of MatchNet, Inc. that was planned for
mid-2004, but which was withdrawn shortly after the related
registration statement was filed in the third quarter of 2004,
as well as one legal settlement resulting in the recognition of
$900,000 in expenses in the third quarter and two legal
settlements resulting in the recognition of $2.1 million in
expenses in the fourth quarter of 2004. In 2003, general and
administrative expenses included a charge of $1.7 million
primarily related to a settlement with Comdisco. |
|
|
(3) |
For information regarding the computation of per share amounts,
refer to note 1 of our consolidated financial statements. |
|
|
(4) |
Average paying subscribers for each month are calculated as the
sum of the paying subscribers at the beginning and the end of
the month, divided by two. Average paying subscribers for
periods longer than one month are calculated as the sum of the
average paying subscribers for each month, divided by the number
of months in such period. Additionally, refer to
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations for a discussion of
business metrics we use to evaluate our business. We did not
track data for the year ended December 31, 2001 sufficient
to accurately set forth the number of average paying subscribers
for the respective periods. |
|
|
(5) |
Under our 2000 Executive Share Option Scheme (2000 Option
Scheme), we granted options to purchase ordinary shares to
certain of our employees, directors and consultants. The
issuances of securities upon exercise of options granted under
our 2000 Option Scheme may not have been exempt from
registration and qualification under federal and California
state securities laws, and as a result, we may have potential
liability to those employees, directors and consultants to whom
we issued securities upon the exercise of these options. In
order to address that issue, we may elect to make a rescission
offer to those persons who exercised all, or a portion, of those
options and continue to hold the shares issued upon exercise, to
give them the opportunity to rescind the issuance of those
shares. However, it is the Securities and Exchange
Commissions position that a rescission offer will not bar
or extinguish any liability under the Securities Act of 1933
with respect to these options and shares, nor will a rescission
offer extinguish a holders right to rescind the issuance
of securities that were not registered or exempt from the
registration requirements under the Securities Act of 1933. As
of December 31, 2005, assuming every eligible person that
continues to hold the securities issued upon exercise of options
granted under the 2000 Option Scheme were to accept a rescission
offer, we estimate the total cost to us to complete the
rescission would be approximately $6.1 million including
statutory interest at 7% per annum, accrued since the date
of exercise of the options. The rescission acquisition price is
calculated as equal to the original exercise price paid by the
optionee to our company upon exercise of their option. |
|
|
(6) |
For the purposes of this and all future filings, prior period
classification of share-based compensation was reclassified to
conform to current period classification. |
|
5
Presentation of Financial Information
We report our financial statements in U.S. dollars and
prepare our financial statements in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles in the United States. In this
prospectus, except where otherwise indicated, references to
$ or U.S. dollars are to the lawful
currency of the United States, references to
or
euro are to the single currency of the European
Union, and references to £ or pound
sterling are to the currency of the United Kingdom. Unless
otherwise noted, the exercise prices of options and warrants as
outstanding on December 31, 2005 noted in this prospectus
are presented on an as converted basis into U.S. dollars at
an exchange rate of
0.84427 per
$1.00, which is based on the average bid and ask exchange price
as reported by OANDA for the day December 31, 2005. The
exercise prices of options and warrants as outstanding on
February 1, 2006 utilize the exchange rate as of such date,
which was
0.82565 per $1.00.
6
RISK FACTORS
You should carefully consider the risks described below
together with all of the other information included in this
prospectus before making an investment decision. The risks
described below are the material risks that we are currently
aware of that are facing our company. In addition, other
sections of this prospectus may include additional factors that
could adversely impact our business and operating results. If
any of the following risks actually occurs, our business,
financial condition or results of operations could be materially
adversely affected. In that case, the trading price of our
ordinary shares, in the form of ADSs, would decline and you may
lose all or part of your investment.
Risks Related To Our Business
We have significant operating losses and we may incur
additional losses in the future.
We have historically generated significant operating losses. As
of December 31, 2005, we had an accumulated deficit of
approximately $45.1 million. We had net loss of
approximately $1.4 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 and a net loss of $11.6 million for
the year ended December 31, 2004. We expect that our
operating expenses will continue to increase during the next
several years as a result of the promotion of our services, the
hiring of additional key personnel, the expansion of our
operations, including the launch of new Web sites, and entering
into acquisitions, strategic alliances and joint ventures. If
our revenues do not grow at a substantially faster rate than
these expected increases in our expenses or if our operating
expenses are higher than we anticipate, we may not be profitable
and we may incur additional losses, which could be significant.
Our limited operating history and relatively new business
model in an emerging and rapidly evolving market makes it
difficult to evaluate our future prospects.
We derive nearly all of our net revenues from online
subscription fees for our services, which is an early-stage
business model for us that has undergone, and continues to
experience, rapid and dramatic changes. As a result, we have
very little operating history for you to evaluate in assessing
our future prospects. You must consider our business and
prospects in light of the risks and difficulties we will
encounter as an early-stage company in a new and rapidly
evolving market. Our performance will depend on the continued
acceptance and evolution of online personal services and other
factors addressed herein. We may not be able to effectively
assess or address the evolving risks and difficulties present in
the market, which could threaten our capacity to continue
operations successfully in the future.
If our efforts to attract a large number of members, convert
members into paying subscribers and retain our paying
subscribers are not successful, our revenues and operating
results would suffer.
Our future growth depends on our ability to attract a large
number of members, convert members into paying subscribers and
retain our paying subscribers. This in turn depends on our
ability to deliver a high-quality online personals experience to
these members and paying subscribers. As a result, we must
continue to invest significant resources in order to enhance our
existing products and services and introduce new high-quality
products and services that people will use. If we are unable to
predict user preferences or industry changes, or if we are
unable to modify our products and services on a timely basis, we
may lose existing members and paying subscribers and may fail to
attract new members and paying subscribers. Our revenue and
expenses would also be adversely affected if our innovations are
not responsive to the needs of our members and paying
subscribers or are not brought to market in an effective or
timely manner.
7
Our subscriber acquisition costs vary depending upon
prevailing market conditions and may increase significantly in
the future.
Costs for us to acquire paying subscribers are dependent, in
part, upon our ability to purchase advertising at a reasonable
cost. Our advertising costs vary over time, depending upon a
number of factors, many of which are beyond our control.
Historically, we have used online advertising as the primary
means of marketing our services.
In general, the costs of online advertising have recently
increased substantially and we expect those costs to continue to
increase as long as the demand for online advertising remains
robust. If we are not able to reduce our other operating costs,
increase our paying subscriber base or increase revenue per
paying subscriber to offset these anticipated increases, our
profitability will be adversely affected.
Competition presents an ongoing threat to the performance of
our business.
We expect competition in the online personals business to
continue to increase because there are no substantial barriers
to entry. For example, an article in the USA Today stated that
there are signs of fierce competition among online personals
sites, and that an Internet tracking firm found that the number
of online personals sites it monitors had reached 836 in
February 2005, up from 611 in January 2004. We believe that our
ability to compete depends upon many factors both within and
beyond our control, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
the size and diversity of our member and paying subscriber bases; |
|
|
|
|
|
the timing and market acceptance of our products and services,
including the developments and enhancements to those products
and services relative to those offered by our competitors; |
|
|
|
|
|
customer service and support efforts; |
|
|
|
|
|
selling and marketing efforts; and |
|
|
|
|
|
our brand strength in the marketplace relative to our
competitors. |
|
We compete with traditional personals services, as well as
newspapers, magazines and other traditional media companies that
provide personals services. We compete with a number of large
and small companies, including Internet portals and
specialty-focused media companies that provide online and
offline products and services to the markets we serve. Our
principal online personals services competitors include Yahoo!
Personals, Match.com, a wholly-owned subsidiary of
InterActiveCorp, and eHarmony, all of which operate primarily in
North America. In addition, we face competition from social
networking Web sites such as MySpace and Friendster. Many of our
current and potential competitors have longer operating
histories, significantly greater financial, technical, marketing
and other resources and larger customer bases than we do. These
factors may allow our competitors to respond more quickly than
we can to new or emerging technologies and changes in customer
requirements. These competitors may engage in more extensive
research and development efforts, undertake more far-reaching
marketing campaigns and adopt more aggressive pricing policies
which may allow them to build larger member and paying
subscriber bases than we have. Our competitors may develop
products or services that are equal or superior to our products
and services or that achieve greater market acceptance than our
products and services. These activities could attract members
and paying subscribers away from our Web sites and reduce our
market share.
In addition, current and potential competitors are making, and
are expected to continue to make, strategic acquisitions or
establishing cooperative and, in some cases, exclusive
relationships with significant companies or competitors to
expand their businesses or to offer more comprehensive products
and services. To the extent these competitors or potential
competitors establish exclusive relationships with major
portals, search engines and Internet service providers, or ISPs,
our ability to reach potential members through online
advertising may be restricted. Any of these competitors could
8
cause us difficulty in attracting and retaining members and
converting members into paying subscribers and could jeopardize
our existing affiliate program and relationships with portals,
search engines, ISPs and other Web properties.
Our efforts to capitalize upon opportunities to expand into
new vertical affinity markets may fail and could result in a
loss of capital and other valuable resources.
One of our strategies is to expand into new vertical affinity
markets to increase our revenue base. We view vertical affinity
markets as identifiable groups of people who share common
interests and the desire to meet companions or dates with
similar interests, backgrounds or traits. Our planned expansion
into such vertical affinity markets will occupy our
managements time and attention and will require us to
invest significant capital resources. The results of our
expansion efforts into new vertical affinity markets are
unpredictable, and there is no guarantee that our efforts will
have a positive effect on our revenue base. We face many risks
associated with our planned expansion into new vertical affinity
markets, including but not limited to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
competition from pre-existing competitors with significantly
stronger brand recognition in the markets we enter; |
|
|
|
|
|
our improper evaluations of the potential of such markets; |
|
|
|
|
|
diversion of capital and other valuable resources away from our
core business and other opportunities that are potentially more
profitable; and |
|
|
|
|
|
weakening our current brands by over expansion into too many new
markets. |
|
If we fail to keep pace with rapid technological change, our
competitive position will suffer.
We operate in a market characterized by rapidly changing
technologies, evolving industry standards, frequent new product
and service announcements, enhancements and changing customer
demands. Accordingly, our performance will depend on our ability
to adapt to rapidly changing technologies and industry
standards, and our ability to continually improve the speed,
performance, features, ease of use and reliability of our
services in response to both evolving demands of the marketplace
and competitive service and product offerings. There have been
occasions when we have not been as responsive as many of our
competitors in adapting our services to changing industry
standards and the needs of our members and paying subscribers.
Our industry has been subject to constant innovation and
competition. Historically, new features may be introduced by one
competitor, and if they are perceived as attractive to users,
they are often copied later by others. Over the last few years,
such new feature introductions in the industry have included
instant messaging, message boards, ecards, personality profiles,
and mobile content delivery. We are currently unable to deliver
mobile features until completion of our new system architecture.
Introducing new technologies into our systems involves numerous
technical challenges, substantial amounts of capital and
personnel resources and often takes many months to complete. We
intend to continue to devote efforts and funds toward the
development of additional technologies and services. For
example, in 2004 and 2005 we introduced a number of new Web
sites and features, and we anticipate the introduction of
additional Web sites and features in 2006 and 2007. We may not
be able to effectively integrate new technologies into our Web
sites on a timely basis or at all, which may degrade the
responsiveness and speed of our Web sites. Such technologies,
even if integrated, may not function as expected.
Our business depends on establishing and maintaining strong
brands and if we are not able to maintain and enhance our
brands, we may be unable to expand or maintain our member and
paying subscriber bases.
We believe that establishing and maintaining our brands is
critical to our efforts to attract and expand our member and
paying subscriber bases. We believe that the importance of brand
recognition will
9
continue to increase, given the growing number of Internet sites
and the low barriers to entry for companies offering online
personals services. For example, an article in the USA Today
stated that there are signs of fierce competition among online
personals sites, and that an Internet tracking firm found that
the number of online personals sites it monitors had reached 836
in February 2005, up from 611 in January 2004. To attract and
retain members and paying subscribers, and to promote and
maintain our brands in response to competitive pressures, we
intend to substantially increase our financial commitment to
creating and maintaining distinct brand loyalty among these
groups. If visitors, members and paying subscribers to our Web
sites and our affiliate and distribution associates do not
perceive our existing services to be of high quality, or if we
introduce new services or enter into new business ventures that
are not favorably received by such parties, the value of our
brands could be diluted, thereby decreasing the attractiveness
of our Web sites to such parties. In addition, we changed our
corporate name in January 2005 from MatchNet plc to Spark
Networks plc, however, we did not change the names of our Web
sites or brand names. Our adoption of a new corporate name may
prevent us from taking advantage of goodwill that potential and
existing customers may have associated with our old corporate
name. As a result, our results of operations may be adversely
affected by decreased brand recognition.
We may have potential liability under California state and
federal securities laws with respect to the grant of share
options to certain of our employees, directors and consultants
and the exercise of these options.
Under our 2000 Executive Share Option Scheme (2000 Option
Scheme), we granted options to purchase ordinary shares to
certain of our employees, directors and consultants. California
state securities laws generally require qualification for the
offer and sale of securities subject to California law. Under
California law, the grant of an option constitutes a sale of the
underlying shares at the time of the option grant and not at the
exercise of the option. Our option grants were not qualified and
may not have been exempt from qualification under California
state securities laws. As a result, we may have potential
liability to those employees, directors and consultants to whom
we granted options under the 2000 Option Scheme. In order to
address that issue, we may elect to make a rescission offer to
the holders of outstanding options under the 2000 Option Scheme
to give them the opportunity to rescind the grant of their
options.
As of December 31, 2005, assuming every eligible optionee
were to accept a rescission offer, we estimate the total cost to
us to complete the rescission would be approximately
$1.9 million including statutory interest at 7% per
annum. These amounts reflect the costs of offering to rescind
the issuance of the outstanding options by paying an amount
equal to 20% of the aggregate exercise price for the entire
option.
In addition, issuances of securities upon exercise of options
granted under our 2000 Option Scheme may not have been exempt
from registration and qualification under California state
securities laws as a result of the option grants themselves and
also may not have been exempt from registration under federal
securities laws. Federal securities laws prohibit the offer or
sale of securities unless the sales are registered or exempt
from registration. The issuances of ordinary shares upon the
exercise of our options were not registered and may not have
been exempt from registration under California state and federal
securities laws. As a result, we may have potential liability to
those employees, directors and consultants to whom we issued
securities upon the exercise of these options. In order to
address that issue, we may elect to make a rescission offer to
those persons who exercised all, or a portion, of those options
and continue to hold the shares issued upon exercise, to give
them the opportunity to rescind the issuance of those shares
(Option Shares).
As of December 31, 2005, assuming every eligible person
that continues to hold the securities issued upon exercise of
options granted under the 2000 Option Scheme were to accept a
rescission offer, we estimate the total cost to us to complete
the rescission would be approximately $6.1 million including
10
statutory interest at 7% per annum, accrued since the date
of exercise of the options. These amounts are calculated by
reference to the acquisition price of the Option Shares.
A holder could argue that this process does not represent an
adequate remedy for issuance of an option and securities issued
upon exercise of an option in violation of California state or
federal securities laws and, if a court were to impose a greater
remedy, our financial exposure could be greater. In addition, it
is the Securities and Exchange Commissions position that a
rescission offer will not bar or extinguish any liability under
the Securities Act of 1933 with respect to these options and
shares, nor will a rescission offer extinguish a holders
right to rescind the issuance of securities that were not
registered or exempt from the registration requirements under
the Securities Act of 1933. If any or all of the holders reject
or fail to respond to our rescission offer, the holders will
keep their options and securities and we may continue to be
liable under federal and California state securities laws for up
to an amount equal to the value of the options and securities
granted or issued plus any statutory interest we may be required
to pay. Further, claims or actions based on fraud may not be
waived or barred pursuant to a rescission offer and there can be
no assurance that we will be able to enforce any waivers that we
may receive in connection with the rescission offer in order to
bar such claims or other causes of action until the applicable
statute of limitations has run. In addition, despite a
rescission offer, whether accepted or not, if it is determined
that we offered securities without properly registering them
under federal or state law, or securing an exemption from
registration, regulators could impose monetary fines or other
sanctions as provided under these laws.
For the purposes of English company law, a rescission offer in
respect of our Option Shares would take the form of a purchase
by our company of the relevant Option Shares. The Companies Act
1985 (Companies Act) provides that we may only
purchase our own shares using our distributable
profits (as defined by the Companies Act), also known as
distributable reserves (Distributable Reserves), or
the proceeds from the issuance of new shares for that purpose.
When we issue shares at a value which represents a premium over
their nominal value, we are required by the Companies Act to
transfer the premium (subject to certain limited exceptions) to
a share premium account. Under the Companies Act, our ability to
utilize our share premium account is very limited and does not
include the payment of dividends. However, in accordance with a
procedure set out in the Companies Act, we have obtained
approval from our shareholders and from the High Court of
Justice in England and Wales (the Court) to reduce
our share premium account by US$44,000,000 with effect from
December 8, 2005 (the Effective Date) in order
to reduce or eliminate the deficit on our profit and loss
account, which had arisen as a result of previous accumulated
losses. This will enable profits, if any, arising after
December 31, 2005 to give rise to Distributable Reserves,
which we could use to purchase our own shares pursuant to a
rescission offer. In connection with the approval from the
Court, we have given an undertaking to the Court for the
protection of our creditors, which requires us to transfer to a
non-distributable reserve (the Special Reserve) the
amount (if any) by which the deficit on our profit and loss
account at December 31, 2005 falls short of the amount of
the reduction (being US$44,000,000), and any profits made by us
or any of our subsidiaries prior to December 31, 2005,
until our non-consenting creditors at the Effective Date
(Non-Consenting Creditors) have been paid off. In
other words, if there is a surplus on our profit and loss
account after application of the $44.0 million from the
share premium reduction and any additional profits made by us
prior to December 31, 2005 (Special Reserve
Surplus), then we would not be permitted to use the
Special Reserve Surplus to purchase our own shares until all
Non-Consenting Creditors are paid . However, we do not currently
expect that any sums will be required to be transferred to the
Special Reserve since we do not anticipate that there will be a
surplus on our profit and loss account after application of the
share premium reduction and any profits made before
December 31, 2005, although this will need to be confirmed
when we prepare our audited UK GAAP profit and loss account and
balance sheet for the year ended December 31, 2005.
Although we believe we have substantially reduced our
accumulated profit and loss account deficit pursuant to the
Companies Act, we are not permitted to purchase any of our own
shares until we have
11
sufficient Distributable Reserves in order to fund such
purchases of our own shares or sufficient proceeds of a new
issuance of shares made for the purposes of such purchases of
our own shares. As of December 31, 2005, if every eligible
person holding Option Shares were to accept the rescission
offer, we estimate that the amount we would need in
Distributable Reserves is approximately $6.1 million. After
application of the share premium reduction to the accumulated
profit and loss account deficit, we anticipate that the deficit
will be substantially reduced; however, we will not have any
Distributable Reserves, which we will accumulate to the extent
that we make any distributable profits in the future. We do not
intend to make a rescission offer until we have the
Distributable Reserves required to make a rescission offer of
the Option Shares.
The undertaking to the Court also prevents us from making any
distribution to shareholders, or redeeming or purchasing our own
shares, until we have obtained approval at a shareholders
general meeting of our audited UK GAAP balance sheet for the
year ended December 31, 2005. It is likely that our UK GAAP
balance sheet for the year ended December 31, 2005 will be
ready for approval by shareholders on or about May 31,
2006. The share premium reduction will only be reflected on our
UK GAAP balance sheet for the purposes of UK law. It will not be
reflected on our US GAAP balance sheet.
Any purchase of the Option Shares pursuant to a rescission offer
would not only need to be made out of Distributable Reserves,
but would also require shareholder approval given in accordance
with the requirements of the Companies Act. Such approval must
be given by resolution passed with a majority of at least 75% of
the votes cast on the resolution (excluding votes carried by the
Option Shares proposed to be purchased), having made a copy of
the contract for the purchase of the Option Shares available for
inspection both at our registered office for at least
15 days prior to the date of the meeting to approve the
purchase and at the meeting itself. Once a purchase has been
completed, we would be subject to further disclosure obligations
in relation to information about the purchase.
We do not intend to seek shareholder approval for a purchase of
Option Shares until we have made a rescission offer which has
been accepted by any one or more shareholders and it has become
necessary to seek such approval.
In summary, in order to effectuate a rescission offer and
repurchase any of our own shares upon any acceptances of the
rescission offer, we must satisfy the following conditions:
(1) obtain shareholder approval of our audited UK GAAP
balance sheet for the year ended December 31, 2005;
(2) obtain additional shareholder approval, as further
discussed above, of any acceptances of the rescission offer to
repurchase shares; and (3) have sufficient Distributable
Reserves to repurchase shares subject to the rescission offer.
If we do not obtain the requisite shareholder approval of
acceptances to a rescission offer or if we continue to
accumulate a deficit on our profit and loss account and we do
not issue new shares for additional funds for a rescission
offer, then we will not be able to effectuate a rescission offer.
We have terminated and no longer grant options under our 2000
Option Scheme, but options previously granted under the 2000
Option Scheme remain in full force and effect. We filed a
registration statement on
Form S-8 covering
the issuance of future shares upon exercise of presently
unexercised options under the 2000 Option Scheme. However, none
of the shares (including shares underlying unexercised options)
registered on the
Form S-8 will be
eligible for resale if they are tendered as part of the
rescission offer.
If we are unable to attract, retain and motivate key
personnel or hire qualified personnel, or such personnel do not
work well together, our growth prospects and profitability will
be harmed.
Our performance is largely dependent on the talents and efforts
of highly skilled individuals. We have recently recruited many
of our directors, executive officers and other key management
talent, some of which have limited or no experience in the
online personals industry. For example, David E. Siminoff,
12
our President and Chief Executive Officer, joined us in August
2004 and each of our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating
Officer and General Counsel, and Chief Technology Officer joined
us in October 2004. Because members of our executive management
have only worked together as a team for a limited time, there
are inherent risks in the management of our company with respect
to decision-making, business direction, product development and
strategic relationships. In the event that the members of our
executive management team are unable to work well together or
agree on operating principles, business direction or business
transactions or are unable to provide cohesive leadership, our
business could be harmed and one or more of those individuals
may discontinue their service to our company, and we would be
forced to find a suitable replacement. The loss of any of our
management or key personnel could seriously harm our business.
Furthermore, we have recently experienced significant turnover
on our board of directors. We currently have seven members
serving on our board of directors. Since October 2004, we have
had two directors resign from our board of directors and five
directors join our board of directors. Alon Carmel, one of our
companys co-founders and co-chairmen, resigned from his
position in February 2005 to pursue other entrepreneurial and
philanthropic interests.
In August 2004, we initiated a cost reduction program and
terminated the employment of 40 full-time and temporary
employees, and, as a result, our future recruiting efforts may
become more difficult. We may also encounter difficulties in
recruiting personnel as we become a more mature company in a
competitive industry. Competition in our industry for personnel
is intense, and we are aware that our competitors have directly
targeted our employees. We do not have non-competition
agreements with most employees and, even in cases where we do,
these agreements are of limited enforceability in California. We
also do not maintain any key-person life insurance policies on
our executives. The incentives to attract, retain and motivate
employees provided by our option grants or by future
arrangements, such as cash bonuses, may not be as effective as
they have been in the past. If we do not succeed in attracting
necessary personnel or retaining and motivating existing
personnel, we may be unable to grow effectively.
Our inability to effectively manage our growth could have a
materially adverse effect on our profitability.
We have experienced rapid growth since inception. The growth and
expansion of our business and service offerings places a
continuous significant strain on our management, operational and
financial resources. We are required to manage multiple
relations with various strategic associates, technology
licensors, members, paying subscribers and other third parties.
In the event of further growth of our operations or in the
number of our third-party relationships, our computer systems or
procedures may not be adequate to support our operations and our
management may not be able to manage such growth effectively. To
effectively manage our growth, we must continue to implement and
improve our operational, financial and management information
systems and to expand, train and manage our employee base. If we
fail to do so, our management, operational and financial
resources could be overstrained and adversely impacted.
We expect our growth rates to decline and our operating
margins could deteriorate.
We believe our revenue growth rate will decline as our net
revenues increase to higher levels and as the growth of the
online personals industry begins to slow. We have seen a decline
in our growth rates during the latter stages of 2004 and through
2005. A February 2005 report by Jupiter Research forecasts the
online personals industry would experience single digit growth
in 2005 as compared to 77% growth in 2003. It is possible that
our operating margins will deteriorate if revenue growth does
not exceed planned increases in expenditures for all aspects of
our business in an increasingly competitive environment,
including sales and marketing, general and administrative and
technical operations expenses.
13
Our business depends on our server and network hardware and
software and our ability to obtain network capacity; our current
safeguard systems may be inadequate to prevent an interruption
in the availability of our services.
The performance of our server and networking hardware and
software infrastructure is critical to our business and
reputation, to our ability to attract visitors and members to
our Web sites, to convert them into paying subscribers and to
retain paying subscribers. An unexpected and/or substantial
increase in the use of our Web sites could strain the capacity
of our systems, which could lead to a slower response time or
system failures. Although we have not yet experienced many
significant delays, any future slowdowns or system failures
could adversely affect the speed and responsiveness of our Web
sites and would diminish the experience for our visitors,
members and paying subscribers. We face risks related to our
ability to scale up to our expected customer levels while
maintaining superior performance. If the usage of our Web sites
substantially increases, we may need to purchase additional
servers and networking equipment and services to maintain
adequate data transmission speeds, the availability of which may
be limited or the cost of which may be significant. Any system
failure that causes an interruption in service or a decrease in
the responsiveness of our Web sites could reduce traffic on our
Web sites and, if sustained or repeated, could impair our
reputation and the attractiveness of our brands as well as
reduce revenue and negatively impact our operating results.
Furthermore, we rely on many different hardware systems and
software applications, some of which have been developed
internally. If these hardware systems or software applications
fail, it would adversely affect our ability to provide our
services. If we are unable to protect our data from loss or
electronic or magnetic corruption, or if we receive a
significant unexpected increase in usage and are not able to
rapidly expand our transaction-processing systems and network
infrastructure without any systems interruptions, it could
seriously harm our business and reputation. We have experienced
occasional systems interruptions in the past as a result of
unexpected increases in usage, and we cannot assure you that we
will not incur similar or more serious interruptions in the
future. From time to time, our company and our Web sites have
been subject to delays and interruptions due to software
viruses, or variants thereof, such as internet worms. To date,
we have not experienced delays or systems interruptions that
have had a material impact on our business.
In addition, we do not currently have adequate disaster recovery
systems in place, which means in the event of any catastrophic
failure involving our Web sites, we may be unable to serve our
Web traffic for a significant period of time. Our servers
primarily operate from only a single site in Southern California
and the absence of a backup site could exacerbate this
disruption. Any system failure, including network, software or
hardware failure, that causes an interruption in the delivery of
our Web sites and services or a decrease in responsiveness of
our services would result in reduced visitor traffic, reduced
revenue and would adversely affect our reputation and brands.
The failure to establish and maintain affiliate agreements
and relationships could limit the growth of our business.
We have entered into, and expect to continue to enter into,
arrangements with affiliates to increase our member and paying
subscribers bases, bring traffic to our Web sites and enhance
our brands. Pursuant to our arrangements, an affiliate generally
advertises or promotes our Web site on its Web site, and earns a
fee whenever visitors to its Web site click though the
advertisement to one of our Web sites and registers or
subscribes on our Web site. Affiliate arrangements constitute
over half of our marketing program. These affiliate arrangements
are easily cancelable, often with one day notice. We do not
typically have any exclusivity arrangements with our affiliates,
and some of our affiliates may also be affiliates for our
competitors. None of these affiliates, individually, represents
a material portion of our revenue. If any of our current
affiliate agreements is terminated, we may not be able to
replace the terminated agreement with an equally beneficial
arrangement. We cannot assure you that we will be able to renew
any of our current agreements when they terminate or, if we are
able to do so, that such renewals will be available on
acceptable terms. We also do not know whether we will be
14
able to enter into additional agreements or that any
relationships, if entered into, will be on terms favorable to us.
We rely on a number of third-party providers and their
failure or unwillingness to continue to perform could harm
us.
We rely on third parties to provide important services and
technologies to us, including a third party that manages and
monitors our offsite data center located in Southern California,
ISPs, search engine marketing providers and credit card
processors. In addition, we license technologies from third
parties to facilitate our ability to provide our services. Any
failure on our part to comply with the terms of these licenses
could result in the loss of our rights to continue using the
licensed technology, and we could experience difficulties
obtaining licenses for alternative technologies. Furthermore,
any failure of these third parties to provide these and other
services, or errors, failures, interruptions or delays
associated with licensed technologies, could significantly harm
our business. Any financial or other difficulties our providers
face may have negative effects on our business, the nature and
extent of which we cannot predict. Except to the extent of the
terms of our contracts with such third party providers, we
exercise little or no control over them, which increases our
vulnerability to problems with the services and technologies
they provide and license to us. In addition, if any fees charged
by third-party providers were to substantially increase, such as
if ISPs began charging us for email sent by our paying
subscribers to other members or paying subscribers, we could
incur significant additional losses.
If we fail to develop or maintain an effective system of
internal controls over financial reporting, we may not be able
to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As
a result, current and potential shareholders could lose
confidence in our financial reporting, which would harm the
value of our shares.
Effective internal controls over financial reporting are
necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports,
effectively prevent fraud and operate as a public company. If we
cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our
reputation and operating results would be harmed. We have, in
the past, discovered and may, in the future, discover areas of
our internal controls over financial reporting that need
improvement. For example, during our audit of 2003 results, our
external auditors brought to our attention a need to restate
2001 and 2002 results and also noted, in a letter to management,
certain conditions involving internal controls and operations,
none of which were a material weakness. Furthermore, in 1994, a
civil action was filed in Israeli district court (the
Action) involving Videomatrix Industries, LTD
(Videomatrix), a company unrelated to Spark Networks
except of which our former Co-chairman and current Chairman were
officers. In that Action, our former Co-chairman was a
respondent, the Israeli equivalent of a defendant, and our
current Chairman was a formal respondent, but not a defendant.
The Action was initiated by a venture capital lender to, and
investor in, Videomatrix. The Israeli court appointed an
investigator to make factual findings. The investigator noted
that there were inaccurate records and/or entries in corporate
books, incomplete disclosures and/or inaccurate representations
in a prospectus, questionable documents, and undisclosed related
party transactions, involving Videomatrix. Thereafter, the court
issued an order providing for a four month moratorium on
litigation to permit Videomatrix, its audit committee, and its
auditors to conduct an examination and form conclusions. Our
Chairman and former Co-chairman purchased the entire ownership
interest of the venture capital lender in Videomatrix during the
moratorium provided for in the court order and no further action
was taken by the venture capital lender in connection with this
matter.
As a U.S. public company, we are subject to the reporting
requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. We will be
required to annually assess and report on our internal controls
over financial reporting. If we are unable to adequately
establish or improve our internal controls over financial
reporting, we may report that our internal controls are
ineffective and our external auditors will not
15
be able to issue an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of
our internal controls. Ineffective internal controls over
financial reporting could also cause investors to lose
confidence in our reported financial information, which would
likely have a negative effect on the trading price of our
securities or could affect our ability to access the capital
markets and which could result in regulatory proceedings against
us by, among others, the U.S. Securities Exchange
Commission.
We face risks related to our recent accounting restatements,
which could result in costly litigation or regulatory
proceedings against us.
Our ordinary shares in the form of GDSs trade on the Frankfurt
Stock Exchange in Germany. Pursuant to the laws governing this
exchange, we have been publicly reporting our quarterly and
annual operating results. On April 28, 2004, we publicly
announced that we had discovered accounting inaccuracies in
previously reported financial statements. As a result, following
consultation with our new auditors, we restated our financial
statements for the nine months ended September 30, 2003 and
for each of the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2002 to
correct inappropriate accounting entries. The restatements
primarily related to the timing of recognition of deferred
revenue and the capitalization of bounty costs, which are the
amounts paid to online marketers to acquire members. The
restatements are in accordance with United States generally
accepted accounting principles and pertain primarily to timing
matters and had no impact on cash flow from operations or our
ongoing operations. The impact on net loss for 2001 and 2002 was
an increase of $1.5 million and $1.0 million,
respectively.
The restatement of the financial statements may lead to
litigation claims and/or regulatory proceedings against us. The
defense of any such claims or proceedings may cause the
diversion of managements attention and resources, and we
may be required to pay damages if any such claims or proceedings
are not resolved in our favor. Any litigation or regulatory
proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could cause us to
incur significant legal and other expenses. Moreover, we may be
the subject of negative publicity focusing on the financial
statement inaccuracies and resulting restatement. The occurrence
of any of the foregoing could divert our resources, harm our
reputation and cause the price of our securities to decline.
Acquisitions could result in operating difficulties, dilution
and other harmful consequences.
In May 2005, we acquired MingleMatch, Inc., and we plan, during
the next few years, to further extend and develop our presence,
both within the United States and internationally, partially
through acquisitions of entities offering online personals
services and related businesses. We have limited experience
acquiring companies and the companies we have acquired have been
small. We have evaluated, and continue to evaluate, a wide array
of potential strategic transactions. From time to time, we may
engage in discussions regarding potential acquisitions, some of
which may divert significant resources away from our daily
operations. In addition, the process of integrating an acquired
company, business or technology is risky and may create
unforeseen operating difficulties and expenditures. For example,
we have been engaged in significant litigation in the past, but
which has since settled, with respect to our acquisition of
SocialNet, Inc. in 2001. Some areas where we may face risks
include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
the need to implement or remediate controls, procedures and
policies of acquired companies that lacked appropriate controls,
procedures and policies prior to the acquisition; |
|
|
|
|
|
diversion of management time and focus from operating our
business to acquisition integration challenges; |
|
|
|
|
|
cultural challenges associated with integrating employees from
an acquired company into our organization; |
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
retaining employees from the businesses we acquire; and |
|
|
|
|
|
the need to integrate each companys accounting, management
information, human resource and other administrative systems to
permit effective management. |
|
The anticipated benefit of many of our acquisitions may not
materialize. Future acquisitions could result in potentially
dilutive issuances of our equity securities, the incurrence of
debt, contingent liabilities or amortization expenses, or
write-offs, any of which could harm our financial condition.
Future acquisitions may require us to obtain additional equity
or debt financing, which may not be available on favorable terms
or at all.
We may not be effective in protecting our Internet domain
names or proprietary rights upon which our business relies or in
avoiding claims that we infringe upon the proprietary rights of
others.
We regard substantial elements of our Web sites and the
underlying technology as proprietary, and attempt to protect
them by relying on trademark, service mark, copyright, patent
and trade secret laws, and restrictions on disclosure and
transferring title and other methods. We also generally enter
into confidentiality agreements with our employees and
consultants, and generally seek to control access to and
distribution of our technology, documentation and other
proprietary information. Despite these precautions, it may be
possible for a third party to copy or otherwise obtain and use
our proprietary information without authorization or to develop
similar or superior technology independently. Effective
trademark, service mark, copyright, patent and trade secret
protection may not be available in every country in which our
services are distributed or made available through the Internet,
and policing unauthorized use of our proprietary information is
difficult. Any such misappropriation or development of similar
or superior technology by third parties could adversely impact
our profitability and our future financial results.
We believe that our Web sites, services, trademarks, patent and
other proprietary technologies do not infringe upon the rights
of third parties. However, there can be no assurance that our
business activities do not and will not infringe upon the
proprietary rights of others, or that other parties will not
assert infringement claims against us. We are aware that other
parties utilize the Spark name, or other marks that
incorporate it, and those parties may have rights to such marks
that are superior to ours. From time to time, we have been, and
expect to continue to be, subject to claims in the ordinary
course of business including claims of alleged infringement of
the trademarks, service marks and other intellectual property
rights of third parties by us. Although such claims have not
resulted in any significant litigation or had a material adverse
effect on our business to date, any such claims and resultant
litigation might subject us to temporary injunctive restrictions
on the use of our products, services or brand names and could
result in significant liability for damages for intellectual
property infringement, require us to enter into royalty
agreements, or restrict us from using infringing software,
services, trademarks, patents or technologies in the future.
Even if not meritorious, such litigation could be time-consuming
and expensive and could result in the diversion of
managements time and attention away from our
day-to-day business.
We currently hold various Web domain names relating to our
brands and in the future may acquire new Web domain names. The
regulation of domain names in the United States and in foreign
countries is subject to change. Governing bodies may establish
additional top level domains, appoint additional domain name
registrars or modify the requirements for holding domain names.
As a result, we may be unable to acquire or maintain relevant
domain names in all countries in which we conduct business.
Furthermore, the relationship between regulations governing
domain names and laws protecting trademarks and similar
proprietary rights is unclear. We may be unable to prevent third
parties from acquiring domain names that are similar to,
infringe upon or otherwise decrease the value of our existing
trademarks and other proprietary rights or those we may seek to
acquire. Any such inability to protect ourselves could cause us
to lose a significant portion of our members and paying
subscribers to our competitors.
17
We may face potential liability, loss of users and damage to
our reputation for violation of our privacy policy or privacy
laws and regulations.
Our privacy policy prohibits the sale or disclosure to any third
party of any members personal identifying information,
except to the extent expressly set forth in the policy. Growing
public concern about privacy and the collection, distribution
and use of information about individuals may subject us to
increased regulatory scrutiny and/or litigation. In the past,
the Federal Trade Commission has investigated companies that
have used personally identifiable information without permission
or in violation of a stated privacy policy. If we are accused of
violating the stated terms of our privacy policy, we may be
forced to expend significant amounts of financial and managerial
resources to defend against these accusations and we may face
potential liability. Our membership database holds confidential
information concerning our members, and we could be sued if any
of that information is misappropriated or if a court determines
that we have failed to protect that information.
In addition, our affiliates handle personally identifiable
information pertaining to our members and paying subscribers.
Both we and our affiliates are subject to laws and regulations
related to Internet communications (including the
CAN-SPAM Act of 2003),
consumer protection, advertising, privacy, security, and data
protection. If we or our affiliates are found to be in violation
of these laws and regulations, we may become subject to
administrative fines or litigation, which could materially
increase our expenses and cause the value of our securities to
decline.
We may be liable as a result of information retrieved from or
transmitted over the Internet.
We may be sued for defamation, civil rights infringement,
negligence, copyright or trademark infringement, invasion of
privacy, personal injury, product liability or under other legal
theories relating to information that is published or made
available on our Web sites and the other sites linked to it.
These types of claims have been brought, sometimes successfully,
against online services in the past. We also offer email
services, which may subject us to potential risks, such as
liabilities or claims resulting from unsolicited email or
spamming, lost or misdirected messages, security breaches,
illegal or fraudulent use of email or personal information or
interruptions or delays in email service. Our insurance does not
specifically provide for coverage of these types of claims and,
therefore, may be inadequate to protect us against them. In
addition, we could incur significant costs in investigating and
defending such claims, even if we ultimately are not held
liable. If any of these events occurs, our revenues could be
materially adversely affected or we could incur significant
additional expense, and the market price of our securities may
decline.
Our quarterly results may fluctuate because of many factors
and, as a result, investors should not rely on quarterly
operating results as indicative of future results.
Fluctuations in operating results or the failure of operating
results to meet the expectations of public market analysts and
investors may negatively impact the value of our ordinary shares
and depositary shares. Quarterly operating results may fluctuate
in the future due to a variety of factors that could affect
revenues or expenses in any particular quarter. Fluctuations in
quarterly operating results could cause the value of our
securities to decline. Investors should not rely on
quarter-to-quarter
comparisons of results of operations as an indication of future
performance. Factors that may affect our quarterly results
include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
the demand for, and acceptance of, our online personals services
and enhancements to these services; |
|
|
|
|
|
the timing and amount of our subscription revenues; |
|
|
|
|
|
the introduction, development, timing, competitive pricing and
market acceptance of our Web sites and services and those of our
competitors; |
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
the magnitude and timing of marketing initiatives and capital
expenditures relating to expansion of our operations; |
|
|
|
|
|
the cost and timing of online and offline advertising and other
marketing efforts; |
|
|
|
|
|
the maintenance and development of relationships with portals,
search engines, ISPs and other Web properties and other entities
capable of attracting potential members and paying subscribers
to our Web sites; |
|
|
|
|
|
technical difficulties, system failures, system security
breaches, or downtime of the Internet, in general, or of our
products and services, in particular; |
|
|
|
|
|
costs related to any acquisitions or dispositions of
technologies or businesses; and |
|
|
|
|
|
general economic conditions, as well as those specific to the
Internet, online personals and related industries. |
|
As a result of the factors listed above and because the online
personals business is still immature, making it difficult to
predict consumer demand, it is possible that in future periods
results of operations may be below the expectations of public
market analysts and investors. This could cause the market price
of our securities to decline.
We may need additional capital to finance our growth or to
compete, which may cause dilution to existing shareholders or
limit our flexibility in conducting our business activities.
We currently anticipate that existing cash, cash equivalents and
marketable securities and cash flow from operations will be
sufficient to meet our anticipated needs for working capital,
operating expenses and capital expenditures for at least the
next 12 months. We may need to raise additional capital in
the future to fund expansion, whether in new vertical affinity
or geographic markets, develop newer or enhanced services,
respond to competitive pressures or acquire complementary
businesses, technologies or services. Such additional financing
may not be available on terms acceptable to us or at all. To the
extent that we raise additional capital by issuing equity
securities, our shareholders may experience substantial
dilution, and to the extent we engage in debt financing, if
available, we may become subject to restrictive covenants that
could limit our flexibility in conducting future business
activities. If additional financing is not available or not
available on acceptable terms, we may not be able to fund our
expansion, promote our brands, take advantage of acquisition
opportunities, develop or enhance services or respond to
competitive pressures.
Our limited experience outside the United States increases
the risk that our international efforts and operations will not
be effective.
Although we currently have offices in Germany, Israel and the
United Kingdom and Web sites that serve the Australian,
Canadian, Israeli and United Kingdom markets, we have only
limited experience with operations outside the United States.
Our primary international operations are in Israel, which
carries additional risk for our business as a result of
continuing hostilities there. Operations in international
markets requires management time and capital resources. In
addition, we face the following additional risks associated with
our operations outside the United States:
|
|
|
|
|
|
challenges caused by distance, language and cultural differences; |
|
|
|
|
|
local competitors with substantially greater brand recognition,
more users and more traffic than we have; |
|
|
|
|
|
our need to create and increase our brand recognition and
improve our marketing efforts internationally and build strong
relationships with local affiliates; |
|
|
|
|
|
longer payment cycles in some countries; |
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
credit risk and higher levels of payment fraud in some countries; |
|
|
|
|
|
different legal and regulatory restrictions among jurisdictions; |
|
|
|
|
|
political, social and economic instability; |
|
|
|
|
|
potentially adverse tax consequences; and |
|
|
|
|
|
higher costs associated with doing business internationally. |
|
Our international operations subject us to risks associated
with currency fluctuations.
Our foreign operations may subject us to currency fluctuations
and such fluctuations may adversely affect our financial
position and results. However, sales and expenses to date have
occurred primarily in the United States. For this reason, we
have not engaged in foreign exchange hedging. In connection with
our planned international expansion, currency risk positions
could change correspondingly and the use of foreign exchange
hedging instruments could become necessary. Effects of exchange
rate fluctuations on our financial condition, operations, and
profitability may depend on our ability to manage our foreign
currency risks. There can be no assurance that steps taken by
management to address foreign currency fluctuations will
eliminate all adverse effects and, accordingly, we may suffer
losses due to adverse foreign currency fluctuation.
Our business could be significantly impacted by the
occurrence of natural disasters and other catastrophic
events.
Our operations depend upon our ability to maintain and protect
our network infrastructure, hardware systems and software
applications, which are housed primarily at a data center
located in Southern California that is managed by a third party.
Our business is therefore susceptible to earthquakes, tsunamis
and other catastrophic events, including acts of terrorism. We
currently lack adequate redundant network infrastructure,
hardware and software systems supporting our services at an
alternate site. As a result, outages and downtime caused by
natural disasters and other events out of our control, which
affect our systems or primary data center, could adversely
affect our reputation, brands and business.
We hold a fixed amount of insurance coverage, and if we were
found liable for an uninsured claim, or claim in excess of our
insurance limits, we may be forced to expend a significant
capital to resolve the uninsured claim.
We contract for a fixed amount of insurance to cover potential
risks and liabilities, including, but not limited to, property
and casualty insurance, general liability insurance, and errors
and omissions liability insurance. Although we have not recently
experienced any significantly increased premiums as a result of
changing policies of our providers, we have experienced
increasing insurance premiums due to the increasing size of our
business, and thus the increased potential risk to underwriters
for insuring our business. If we decide to obtain additional
insurance coverage in the future, it is possible that we may not
be able to get enough insurance to meet our needs, we may have
to pay very high prices for the coverage we do get, or we may
not be able to acquire any insurance for certain types of
business risk or may have gaps in coverage for certain risks.
This could leave us exposed to potential uninsured claims for
which we could have to expend significant amounts of capital
resources. Consequently, if we were found liable for a
significant uninsured claim in the future, we may be forced to
expend a significant amount of our operating capital to resolve
the uninsured claim.
Our services are not well-suited to many alternate Web access
devices, and as a result, the growth of our business could be
negatively affected.
The number of people who access the Internet through devices
other than desktop and laptop computers, including mobile
telephones and other handheld computing devices, has increased
20
dramatically in the past few years, and we expect this growth to
continue. The lower resolution, functionality and memory
currently associated with such mobile devices may make the use
of our services through such mobile devices more difficult and
generally impairs the member experience relative to access via
desktop and laptop computers. If we are unable to attract and
retain a substantial number of such mobile device users to our
online personals services or if we are unable to develop
services that are more compatible with such mobile
communications devices, our growth could be adversely affected.
Risks Related to Our Industry
The percentage of canceling paying subscribers in comparison
to other subscription businesses requires that we continuously
seek new paying subscribers to maintain or increase our current
level of revenue.
Internet users in general, and users of online personals
services specifically, freely navigate and switch among a large
number of Web sites. Monthly subscriber churn represents the
ratio expressed as a percentage of (a) the number of paying
subscriber cancellations during the period divided by the
average number of paying subscribers during the period and
(b) the number of months in the period. The number of
average paying subscribers is calculated as the sum of the
paying subscribers at the beginning and end of the month,
divided by two. Average paying subscribers for periods longer
than one month are calculated as the sum of the average paying
subscribers for each month, divided by the number of months. For
the year ended December 31, 2005, the monthly subscriber
churn for (1) the JDate segment was 25.9% (2) the
AmericanSingles segment was 36.3% and (3) the Web sites in
our Other Businesses segment was 25.6%. We cannot assure you
that our monthly average subscriber churn will remain at such
levels, and it may increase in the future. This makes it
difficult for us to have a stable paying subscriber base and
requires that we constantly attract new paying subscribers at a
faster rate than subscription terminations to maintain or
increase our current level of revenue. If we are unable to
attract new paying subscribers on a cost-effective basis, our
business will not grow and our profitability will be adversely
affected.
Our network is vulnerable to security breaches and
inappropriate use by Internet users, which could disrupt or
deter future use of our services.
Concerns over the security of transactions conducted on the
Internet and the privacy of users may inhibit the growth of the
Internet and other online services generally, and online
commerce services, like ours, in particular. To date, we have
not experienced any material breach of our security systems;
however, our failure to effectively prevent security breaches
could significantly harm our business, reputation and results of
operations and could expose us to lawsuits by state and federal
consumer protection agencies, by governmental authorities in the
jurisdictions in which we operate, and by consumers. Anyone who
is able to circumvent our security measures could misappropriate
proprietary information, including customer credit card and
personal data, cause interruptions in our operations or damage
our brand and reputation. Such breach of our security measures
could involve the disclosure of personally identifiable
information and could expose us to a material risk of
litigation, liability or governmental enforcement proceeding. We
cannot assure you that our financial systems and other
technology resources are completely secure from security
breaches or sabotage, and we have occasionally experienced
security breaches and attempts at hacking. We may be
required to incur significant additional costs to protect
against security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by
such breaches. Any well-publicized compromise of our security or
the security of any other Internet provider could deter people
from using our services or the Internet to conduct transactions
that involve transmitting confidential information or
downloading sensitive materials, which could have a detrimental
impact on our potential customer base.
Computer viruses may cause delays or other service interruptions
and could damage our reputation, affect our ability to provide
our services and adversely affect our revenues. The inadvertent
transmission of computer viruses could also expose us to a
material risk of loss or litigation and
21
possible liability. Moreover, if a computer virus affecting our
system were highly publicized, our reputation could be
significantly damaged, resulting in the loss of current and
future members and paying subscribers.
We face certain risks related to the physical and emotional
safety of our members and paying subscribers.
The nature of online personals services is such that we cannot
control the actions of our members and paying subscribers in
their communication or physical actions. There is a possibility
that one or more of our members or paying subscribers could be
physically or emotionally harmed following interaction with
another of our members or paying subscribers. We warn our
members and paying subscribers that we do not and cannot screen
other members and paying subscribers and, given our lack of
physical presence, we do not take any action to ensure personal
safety on a meeting between members or paying subscribers
arranged following contact initiated via our Web sites. If an
unfortunate incident of this nature occurred in a meeting of two
people following contact initiated on one of our Web sites or a
Web site of one of our competitors, any resulting negative
publicity could materially and adversely affect us or the online
personals industry in general. Any such incident involving one
of our Web sites could damage our reputation and our brands.
This, in turn, could adversely affect our revenues and could
cause the value of our ordinary shares and depositary shares to
decline. In addition, the affected members or paying subscribers
could initiate legal action against us, which could cause us to
incur significant expense, whether we were successful or not,
and damage our reputation.
We face risks of litigation and regulatory actions if we are
deemed a dating service as opposed to an online personals
service.
We supply online personals services. In many jurisdictions,
companies deemed dating service providers are subject to
additional regulation, while companies that provide personals
services are not generally subject to similar regulation.
Because personals services and dating services can seem similar,
we are exposed to potential litigation, including class action
lawsuits, associated with providing our personals services. In
the past, a small percentage of our members have alleged that we
are a dating service provider, and, as a result, they claim that
we are required to comply with regulations that include, but are
not limited to, providing language in our contracts that may
allow members to (1) rescind their contracts within a
certain period of time, (2) demand reimbursement of a
portion of the contract price if the member dies during the term
of the contract and/or (3) cancel their contracts in the
event of disability or relocation. If a court holds that we have
provided and are providing dating services of the type the
dating services regulations are intended to regulate, we may be
required to comply with regulations associated with the dating
services industry and be liable for any damages as a result our
past and present non-compliance.
Three separate yet similar class action complaints have been
filed against us. On June 21, 2002, Tatyana Fertelmeyster
filed an Illinois class action complaint against us in the
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, based on an alleged
violation of the Illinois Dating Referral Services Act. On
September 12, 2002, Lili Grossman filed a New York class
action complaint against us in the Supreme Court in the State of
New York based on alleged violations of the New York Dating
Services Act and the Consumer Fraud Act. On November 14,
2003, Jason Adelman filed a nationwide class action complaint
against us in the Los Angeles County Superior Court based on an
alleged violation of California Civil Code section 1694
et seq., which regulates businesses that provide dating
services. In each of these cases, the complaint included
allegations that we are a dating service as defined by the
applicable statutes and, as an alleged dating service, we are
required to provide language in our contracts that allows
(i) members to rescind their contracts within three days,
(ii) reimbursement of a portion of the contract price if
the member dies during the term of the contract and/or
(iii) members to cancel their contracts in the event of
disability or relocation. Causes of action include breach of
applicable state and/or federal laws, fraudulent and deceptive
business practices, breach of contract
22
and unjust enrichment. The plaintiffs are seeking remedies
including declaratory relief, restitution, actual damages
although not quantified, treble damages and/or punitive damages,
and attorneys fees and costs.
Huebner v. InterActiveCorp., Superior Court of the State
of California, County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC 305875
involves a similar action, involving the same
plaintiffs counsel as Adelman, brought against
InterActiveCorps Match.com that has been ruled related to
Adelman, but the two cases have not been consolidated. We
have not been named a defendant in the Huebner case.
Adelman and Huebner each seek to certify a nationwide
class action based on their complaints. Because the cases are
class actions, they have been assigned to the Los Angeles
Superior Court Complex Litigation Program. The court has ordered
a bifurcation of the liability issue. At an August 15, 2005
Status Conference, the court set the bifurcated trial on the
issue of liability for March 27, 2006. The parties have
agreed in principle to continue the bifurcated trial to
approximately May 15, 2006 and extend the time for filing
briefs and completing discovery, in Adelman, with respect
to the bifurcated trial. In addition, the parties resumed
mediation on February 23, 2006, but it did not result in a
settlement.
On March 25, 2005, the court in Fertelmeyster
entered its Memorandum Opinion and Order (Memorandum
Opinion) granting summary judgment in our favor on the
grounds that Fertelmeyster lacks standing to seek injunctive
relief or restitutionary relief under the Illinois Dating
Services Act, Fertelmeyster did not suffer any actual damages,
and we were not unjustly enriched as a result of our contract
with Fertelmeyster. The Memorandum Opinion disposes of all
matters in controversy in the litigation and also provides
that we are subject to the Illinois Dating Services Act and, as
such, our subscription agreements violate the act and are void
and unenforceable. This ruling may subject us to potential
liability for claims brought by the Illinois Attorney General or
customers that have been injured by our violation of the
statute. Fertelmeyster filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the
Memorandum Opinion and, on August 26, 2005, the court
issued its opinion denying Fertelmeysters Motion for
Reconsideration. In the opinion, the court, among other things:
(i) decertified the class, eliminating the last remnant of
the litigation; (ii) rejected each of the plaintiffs
arguments based on the arguments and law that we provided in our
opposition; (iii) stated that the court would not
judicially amend the Illinois statute to provide for restitution
when the legislature selected damages as the sole remedy;
(iv) noted that the cases cited by plaintiff in connection
with plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration actually
support the courts prior order granting summary judgment
in our favor; and (v) denied plaintiffs Motion for
Reconsideration in its entirety. The time for filing an appeal
from the Memorandum Opinion and the courts order denying
Fertelmeysters Motion for Reconsideration has now lapsed
and as a result thereof, this litigation has concluded.
In December 2002, the Supreme Court of New York dismissed the
case brought by Ms. Grossman. Although the plaintiff
appealed the decision, in October 2004, the New York Supreme
Court, Appellate Division upheld the lower courts
dismissal. In addition, two Justices wrote concurring opinions
stating their opinion that our services were not covered under
the New York Dating Services Act. We intend to defend vigorously
against each of the pending lawsuits, however, no assurance can
be given that these matters will be resolved in our favor and,
depending on the outcome of these lawsuits, we may choose to
alter our business practices.
We are exposed to risks associated with credit card fraud and
credit payment, which, if not properly addressed, could increase
our operating expenses.
We depend on continuing availability of credit card usage to
process subscriptions and this availability, in turn, depends on
acceptable levels of chargebacks and fraud performance. We have
suffered losses and may continue to suffer losses as a result of
subscription orders placed with fraudulent credit card data,
even though the associated financial institution approved
payment. Under current credit card practices, a merchant is
liable for fraudulent credit card transactions when, as is the
case with the transactions we process, that merchant does not
obtain a cardholders signature. Our failure to adequately
control fraudulent credit card transactions would result in
significantly higher credit card-
23
related costs and, therefore, increase our operating expenses
and may preclude us from accepting credit cards as a means of
payment.
We face risks associated with our dependence on computer and
telecommunications infrastructure.
Our services are dependent upon the use of the Internet and
telephone and broadband communications to provide high-capacity
data transmission without system downtime. There have been
instances where regional and national telecommunications outages
have caused us, and other Internet businesses, to experience
systems interruptions. Any additional interruptions, delays or
capacity problems experienced with telephone or broadband
connections could adversely affect our ability to provide
services to our customers. The temporary or permanent loss of
all, or a portion, of the telecommunications system could cause
disruption to our business activities and result in a loss of
revenue. Additionally, the telecommunications industry is
subject to regulatory control. Amendments to current
regulations, which could affect our telecommunications
providers, could disrupt or adversely affect the profitability
of our business.
In addition, if any of our current agreements with
telecommunications providers were terminated, we may not be able
to replace any terminated agreements with equally beneficial
ones. There can be no assurance that we will be able to renew
any of our current agreements when they expire or, if we are
able to do so, that such renewals will be available on
acceptable terms. We also do not know whether we will be able to
enter into additional agreements or that any relationships, if
entered into, will be on terms favorable to us.
Our business depends, in part, on the growth and maintenance
of the Internet, and our ability to provide services to our
members and paying subscribers may be limited by outages,
interruptions and diminished capacity in the Internet.
Our performance will depend, in part, on the continued growth
and maintenance of the Internet. This includes maintenance of a
reliable network backbone with the necessary speed, data
capacity and security for providing reliable Internet services.
Internet infrastructure may be unable to support the demands
placed on it if the number of Internet users continues to
increase, or if existing or future Internet users access the
Internet more often or increase their bandwidth requirements. In
addition, viruses, worms and similar programs may harm the
performance of the Internet. We have no control over the
third-party telecommunications, cable or other providers of
access services to the Internet that our members and paying
subscribers rely upon. There have been instances where regional
and national telecommunications outages have caused us to
experience service interruptions during which our members and
paying subscribers could not access our services. Any additional
interruptions, delays or capacity problems experienced with any
points of access between the Internet and our members could
adversely affect our ability to provide services reliably to our
members and paying subscribers. The temporary or permanent loss
of all, or a portion, of our services on the Internet, the
Internet infrastructure generally, or our members and
paying subscribers ability to access the Internet could
disrupt our business activities, harm our business reputation,
and result in a loss of revenue. Additionally, the Internet,
electronic communications and telecommunications industries are
subject to federal, state and foreign governmental regulation.
New laws and regulations governing such matters could be enacted
or amendments may be made to existing regulations at any time
that could adversely impact our services. Any such new laws,
regulations or amendments to existing regulations could disrupt
or adversely affect the profitability of our business.
We are subject to burdensome government regulations and legal
uncertainties affecting the Internet that could adversely affect
our business.
Legal uncertainties surrounding domestic and foreign government
regulations could increase our costs of doing business, require
us to revise our services, prevent us from delivering our
services over the Internet or slow the growth of the Internet,
any of which could increase our expenses, reduce our
24
revenues or cause our revenues to grow at a slower rate than
expected and materially adversely affect our business, financial
condition and results of operations. Laws and regulations
related to Internet communications, security, privacy,
intellectual property rights, commerce, taxation, entertainment,
recruiting and advertising are becoming more prevalent, and new
laws and regulations are under consideration by the United
States Congress, state legislatures and foreign governments. For
example, during 2004 and 2005, legislation related to the use of
background checks for users of online personals services was
proposed in Ohio, Texas, California, Michigan and Florida. None
of these states enacted these proposed laws, however, state
legislatures including Illinois and Florida are still
considering the implementation of such legislation. The
enactment of any of these proposed laws could require us to
alter our service offerings and could negatively impact our
performance by making it more difficult and costly to obtain new
subscribers and may also subject us to additional liability for
failure to properly screen our subscribers. Any legislation
enacted or restrictions arising from current or future
government investigations or policy could dampen the growth in
use of the Internet, generally, and decrease the acceptance of
the Internet as a communications, commercial, entertainment,
recruiting and advertising medium. In addition to new laws and
regulations being adopted, existing laws that are not currently
being applied to the Internet may subsequently be applied to it
and, in several jurisdictions, legislatures are considering laws
and regulations that would apply to the online personals
industry in particular. Many areas of law affecting the Internet
and online personals remain unsettled, even in areas where there
has been some legislative action. It may take years to determine
whether and how existing laws such as those governing consumer
protection, intellectual property, libel and taxation apply to
the Internet or to our services.
In the normal course of our business, we handle personally
identifiable information pertaining to our members and paying
subscribers residing in the United States and other countries.
In recent years, many of these countries have adopted privacy,
security, and data protection laws and regulations intended to
prevent improper uses and disclosures of personally identifiable
information. In addition, some jurisdictions impose database
registration requirements for which significant monetary and
other penalties may be imposed for noncompliance. These laws may
impose costly administrative requirements, limit our handling of
information, and subject us to increased government oversight
and financial liabilities. Privacy laws and regulations in the
United States and foreign countries are subject to change and
may be inconsistent, and additional requirements may be imposed
at any time. These laws and regulations, the costs of complying
with them, administrative fines for noncompliance and the
possible need to adopt different compliance measures in
different jurisdictions could materially increase our expenses
and cause the value of our securities to decline.
Risks Related to Owning Our Securities
The price of our ADSs may be volatile, and if an active
trading market for our ADSs does not develop, the price of our
ADSs may suffer and decline.
Prior to the registration of all of our issued and outstanding
ordinary shares in February 2006, there was no public market for
our securities in the United States. Accordingly, we cannot
assure you that an active trading market will develop or be
sustained or that the market price of our ADSs will not decline.
The price at which our ADSs will trade is likely to be highly
volatile and may fluctuate substantially due to many factors,
some of which are outside of our control. In addition, the stock
market has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations
that have affected the market price for the stock of many
technology, communications and entertainment and media
companies. Those market fluctuations were sometimes unrelated or
disproportionate to the operating performance of these
companies. Any significant stock market fluctuations in the
future, whether due to our actual performance or prospects or
not, could result in a significant decline in the market price
of our securities.
25
Our principal shareholders can exercise significant influence
over us, and, as a result, may be able to delay, deter or
prevent a change of control or other business combination.
As of March 15, 2006, Joe Y. Shapira, Alon Carmel, Great
Hill Investors, LLC and Tiger Global Management, L.L.C. and
their respective affiliates beneficially owned approximately, in
the aggregate, 52% of our outstanding share capital.
Mr. Shapira is a co-founder of our company and current
Chairman of our Board of Directors. Mr. Carmel is a
co-founder, former President and former Executive Co-Chairman of
our Board of Directors. Great Hill Investors, LLC and its
affiliates (Great Hill) became our largest
shareholder on December 1, 2005 when it purchased an
aggregate of 6,000,000 ordinary shares in four privately
negotiated transactions. Of the 6,000,000 shares purchased,
(i) 1,250,000 shares were purchased from
Mr. Shapira at $4.60 per share,
(ii) 1,250,000 shares were purchased from
Mr. Carmel at $4.60 per share,
(iii) 1,500,000 shares were purchased from Criterion
Capital Management LLC, a more than 5% holder of our securities,
at $5.35 per share and (iv) 2,000,000 shares were
purchased from affiliates of Tiger Global Management L.L.C. at
$5.35 per share. Tiger Global Management, L.L.C.
(Tiger Global Management) is our second largest
shareholder, and one of our directors, Scott Shleifer, is a
limited partner of Tiger Global, L.P., an affiliate of Tiger
Global Management. These shareholders possess significant
influence over our company. Such share ownership and control may
have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of
our company, impeding a merger, consolidation, takeover or other
business combination involving our company or discourage a
potential acquirer from making a tender offer or otherwise
attempting to obtain control of our company. Furthermore, such
share ownership may have the effect of control over
substantially all matters requiring shareholder approval,
including the election of directors. Other than the arrangement
to elect a director at the selection of Great Hill, as discussed
below, we do not expect that these shareholders will vote
together as a group.
Our largest shareholder, Great Hill, also possesses a
significant amount of voting power and an ability to elect a
director of our company.
Great Hill beneficially owns 6,000,000 shares of our
company, or approximately 19.8% of our outstanding shares, and
has voting control of an aggregate of approximately 60.3% of our
securities to elect a director of our company subject to the
terms and conditions of the share purchase agreements entered
into on December 1, 2005 with each of Mr. Shapira,
Mr. Carmel, affiliates of Tiger Global Management, and
Criterion Capital Management, LLC (Criterion Capital
Management, and collectively with Mr. Shapira,
Mr. Carmel and Tiger Global Management, the Selling
Shareholders). Pursuant to the terms of the share purchase
agreements with each of the Selling Shareholders, for so long as
Great Hill collectively owns: (i) in the case of the share
purchase agreements entered into with Messrs. Shapira and
Carmel, at least 10% of the outstanding ordinary shares; and
(ii) in the case of the share purchase agreements entered
into with Tiger Global Management and Criterion Capital
Management, at least 5% of the outstanding ordinary shares, each
Selling Shareholder agreed that:
|
|
|
|
|
|
if at any time Great Hill notifies a Selling Shareholder of its
desire and intention to designate a single director (Great
Hill Director) in advance of any meeting of the
shareholders for the election of directors or when any other
approval is sought with respect to the election of directors,
such Selling Shareholder agreed to vote all of its voting shares
that are owned or held of record by such Selling Shareholder or
to which it has voting power or can direct, restrict or control
any such voting power (the Remaining Shares) to
elect such Great Hill Director; and |
|
|
|
|
|
if at any time Great Hill notifies a Selling Shareholder of its
desire and intention to remove or replace a Great Hill Director
or to fill a vacancy caused by the resignation of a Great Hill
Director, such Selling Shareholder agreed to cooperate in
causing the requested removal and/or replacement by voting in
the appropriate manner. |
|
26
Each Selling Shareholder also irrevocably granted, and appointed
Michael A. Kumin, and any other person who shall be designated
by Great Hill, as such Selling Shareholders proxy and
attorney (with full power of substitution), to vote all of such
Selling Shareholders Remaining Shares held at the time
such consent is sought or meeting is held in any circumstances
where a vote, consent or other approval is sought to elect a
Great Hill Director. The covenants and obligations of each
Selling Shareholder terminate after a Great Hill Director
(together with any replacements therefore) has served a single,
full term of office of three years, in accordance with the our
articles and memorandum of association, as in effect on
December 1, 2005.
As a result of its voting arrangement with the Selling
Shareholders, Great Hill is able to select a member of our Board
of Directors at its discretion and is able to exercise
significant influence over our company. This influence has the
potential to delay, prevent, change or initiate a change in
control, acquisition, merger or other transaction, such as a
transaction to take the company private.
We have entered into a standstill agreement pursuant to which
Great Hill and its affiliates are permitted to acquire
additional voting securities of our company in the future and
may initiate and participate in any tender, takeover or exchange
offer, other business combination or other transaction, such as
taking our company private, any of which may be to the detriment
of our shareholders.
On December 1, 2005, we and Great Hill Equity
Partners II, which is one of the affiliates of Great Hill,
entered into a Standstill Agreement with a term of five years,
unless terminated earlier.
Pursuant to the Standstill Agreement, for a period of
14 months from the date of the Standstill Agreement (the
Fourteen Month Period), Great Hill Equity
Partners II agreed that it would not, without the prior
written consent by us:
|
|
|
|
|
|
acquire or seek to acquire, directly or indirectly, ownership of
any of our voting securities (or rights to acquire any of our
class of securities or any subsidiary thereof) such that Great
Hill Equity Partners II and its affiliates (the Great
Hill Group) would beneficially own more than 29.9% of our
total voting power (the Total Voting Power), which
is defined as the aggregate number of votes which may be cast by
holders of outstanding voting securities on a poll at a general
meeting of ours taking into account any voting restrictions
imposed by our Articles of Association, or take any action that
would require us to make a public announcement regarding the
foregoing under applicable law; |
|
|
|
|
|
participate in any of the following with respect to us or our
subsidiaries: (i) any tender, takeover or exchange offer or
other business combination, (ii) any recapitalization,
restructuring, liquidation, dissolution or other extraordinary
transaction, or (iii) any solicitation of proxies or
consents to vote any voting securities; |
|
|
|
|
|
form, join or participate in a group as defined in
Section 13(d)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, in connection with any of the foregoing; |
|
|
|
|
|
seek to control our Board of Directors; and |
|
|
|
|
|
enter into any arrangements with any third party with respect to
any of the above. |
|
After the expiration of the Fourteen Month Period, Great Hill
Equity Partners II agreed that it would not acquire or seek
to acquire beneficial ownership of any of our voting securities
(or rights to acquire any class of our securities or any
subsidiary thereof) or participate in any tender, takeover or
exchange offer or other business combination, or any
recapitalization, restructuring, dissolution or other
extraordinary transaction if (i) prior to giving effect
thereto, the Great Hill Group beneficially owns less than 60% of
Total Voting Power and (ii) after giving effect, the Great
Hill Group would beneficially own more than 29.9% of Total
Voting Power.
Under the Standstill Agreement, Great Hill is permitted to,
subject to the conditions of the Standstill Agreement, increase
its holding of voting securities in our company after the
expiration of the Fourteen
27
Month Period, and after expiration of the Standstill Agreement,
Great Hill may increase its share ownership without restriction.
As such, Great Hill may participate in and initiate any tender,
takeover or exchange offer, other business combination or other
transaction, such as taking our company private, any of which
may be to the detriment of our shareholders.
Most of our ordinary shares and ordinary shares issuable upon
the exercise of our warrants and options are eligible for sale,
which results in dilution and may cause the price of our ADSs to
decrease.
If our shareholders sell a substantial number of our shares,
including those represented by ADSs and GDSs, in the public
market, the market price of our ADSs could fall. Our ordinary
shares in the form of GDSs also trade on the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange. We have filed a registration statement to register for
sale in the United States all of our issued and outstanding
ordinary shares, ordinary shares underlying all of our
outstanding warrants and ordinary shares underlying all of the
options held by our officers, directors and shareholders who own
more than 10% of our issued and outstanding securities. This
registration statement registers an aggregate of 33,263,996
ordinary shares and ordinary shares underlying warrants or
options. In addition, we have filed a registration statement
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, on
Form S-8 covering
all of the ordinary shares issuable upon exercise of our
outstanding options and options available for future grant under
our share option schemes. As of February 1, 2006, we had
4,655,201 ordinary shares underlying outstanding options and
14,424,049 ordinary shares underlying options available for
future grant. Sales of ordinary shares by existing shareholders
in the public market, or the availability of such ordinary
shares for sale, could materially and adversely affect the
market price of our securities.
You may not be able to exercise your right to vote the
ordinary shares underlying your ADSs.
Under the terms of the ADSs, you have a general right to direct
the exercise of the votes on the ordinary shares underlying ADSs
that you hold, subject to limitations on voting ordinary shares
contained in our Memorandum of Association and Articles of
Association, as amended. You may instruct the depositary bank,
Bank of New York, to vote the ordinary shares underlying our
ADSs, but only if we request Bank of New York to ask for your
instructions. Otherwise, you will not be able to exercise your
right to vote unless you withdraw the ordinary shares underlying
the ADSs. However, you may not receive voting materials in time
to ensure that you are able to instruct Bank of New York to vote
your shares or receive sufficient notice of a shareholders
meeting to permit you to withdraw your ordinary shares to allow
you to cast your vote with respect to any specific matter. In
addition, Bank of New York and its agents may not be able to
timely send out your voting instructions or carry out your
voting instructions in the manner you have instructed. As a
result, you may not be able to exercise your right to vote and
you may lack recourse if your ordinary shares are not voted as
you requested.
Your right or ability to transfer your ADSs may be limited in
a number of circumstances.
Your ADSs are transferable on the books of the depositary.
However, the depositary may close its transfer books at any time
or from time to time when it deems expedient in connection with
the performance of its duties. In addition, the depositary may
refuse to deliver, transfer or register transfers of ADSs
generally when our books or the books of the depositary are
closed, or at any time if we or the depositary deem it advisable
to do so because of any requirement of law or of any government
or governmental body, or under any provision of the deposit
agreement, or for any other reason.
Our ordinary shares in the form of ADSs or GDSs are traded on
more than one market and this may result in price variations.
Our ordinary shares are currently traded on the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange in the form of GDSs and our ordinary shares are listed
for trading on the American Stock Exchange in the form of ADSs.
28
Trading in our ordinary shares in the form of ADSs or GDSs on
these markets will be made in different currencies (dollars on
the American Stock Exchange and euros on the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange), and at different times (resulting from different time
zones, different trading days and different public holidays in
the U.S. and Germany). The trading prices of our ordinary shares
in the form of ADSs or GDSs on these two markets may differ due
to these and other factors. Any decrease in the trading price of
our ordinary shares in the form of ADSs or GDSs on one of these
markets could cause a decrease in the trading price of our
ordinary shares in the form of ADSs or GDSs on the other market.
Any difference in prices of our ordinary shares in the form of
ADSs or GDSs on these two markets could create an arbitrage
opportunity whereby an investor could take advantage of the
price difference by trading between the markets, thereby
potentially increasing the volatility of trading prices of our
ADSs and having an adverse affect on the price of our ADSs.
If we offer any subscription rights to our shareholders, your
right or ability to perform a sale, deposit, cancellation or
transfer of any ADSs issued after exercise of rights might be
restricted.
If we offer holders of our ordinary shares any rights to
subscribe for additional shares or any other rights, the
depositary may make these rights available to you after
consultation with us. However, the depositary may allow rights
that are not distributed or sold to lapse. In that case, you
will receive no value for them. In addition,
U.S. securities laws may restrict the sale, deposit,
cancellation and transfer of the ADSs issued after exercise of
rights. However, we cannot make rights available to you in the
United States unless we register the rights and the securities
to which the rights relate under the Securities Act or an
exemption from the registration requirements is available. In
addition, under the deposit agreement, the depositary will not
distribute rights to holders of ADSs unless the distribution and
sale of rights and the securities to which the rights relate are
either exempt from registration under the Securities Act with
respect to all holders of ADSs, or are registered under the
provisions of the Securities Act. We can give no assurance that
we can establish an exemption from registration under the
Securities Act, and we are under no obligation to file a
registration statement with respect to these rights or
underlying securities or to endeavor to have a registration
statement declared effective. Accordingly, you may be unable to
participate in our rights offerings, if any, and may experience
dilution of your holdings as a result.
Investors may be subject to both United States and United
Kingdom taxes.
Investors are strongly urged to consult with their tax advisors
concerning the consequences of investing in our company by
purchasing ADSs. Our ADSs are being sold in the United States,
but we are incorporated under the laws of England and Wales. A
U.S. holder of our ADSs will generally be treated as the
beneficial owner of the underlying ordinary shares, as
represented by ADSs, for purposes of U.S. and U.K. tax laws.
Therefore, U.S. federal, state and local tax laws and U.K.
tax laws will generally apply to ownership and transfer of our
ADSs and the underlying ordinary shares. Tax laws of other
jurisdictions may also apply.
If you hold shares in the form of ADSs, you may have less
access to information about our company and less opportunity to
exercise your rights as a shareholder than if you held ordinary
shares.
There are risks associated with holding our shares in the form
of ADSs, since we are a public limited company incorporated
under the laws of England and Wales. We are subject to the
Companies Act 1985, as amended, our Memorandum and Articles of
Association, and other aspects of English company law. The
depositary, the Bank of New York and/or its various nominees,
will appear in our records as the holder of all our shares
represented by the ADSs and your rights as a holder of ADSs will
be contained
29
in the deposit agreement. Your rights as a holder of ADSs will
differ in various ways from a shareholders rights, and you
may be affected in other ways, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
you may not be able to participate in rights offers or dividend
alternatives if, in the discretion of the depositary, after
consultation with us, it is unlawful or not practicable to do so; |
|
|
|
|
|
you may not receive certain copies of reports and information
sent by us to the depositary and may have to go to the office of
the depositary to inspect any reports issued; |
|
|
|
|
|
the deposit agreement may be amended by us and the depositary,
or may be terminated by us or the depositary, each with thirty
(30) days notice to you and without your consent in a
manner that could prejudice your rights, and the deposit
agreement limits our obligations and liabilities and those of
the depositary. |
|
Your rights as a shareholder will be governed by English law
and will differ from and may be inferior to the rights of
shareholders under U.S. law.
We are a public limited company incorporated under the laws of
England and Wales. Our corporate affairs are governed by our
Memorandum and Articles of Association, by the Companies Act
1985, each as amended, and other common and statutory laws in
England and Wales. The rights of shareholders to take action
against the directors and actions by minority shareholders are
to a large extent governed by the common law and statutory laws
of England and Wales. These rights differ from the typical
rights of shareholders in U.S. corporations. Facts that,
under U.S. law, would entitle a shareholder in a
U.S. corporation to claim damages may give rise to an
alternative cause of action under English law entitling a
shareholder in an English company to claim damages in an English
court. However, this will not always be the case. For example,
the rights of shareholders to bring proceedings against us or
against our directors or officers in relation to public
statements are different under English law than the civil
liability provisions of the U.S. securities laws. In
addition, shareholders of English companies may not have
standing to initiate shareholder derivative actions in various
courts, including before the federal courts of the United
States. As a result, our public shareholders may face different
considerations in protecting their interests in actions against
our company, management, directors or our controlling
shareholders, than would shareholders of a corporation
incorporated in a jurisdiction in the United States, and our
ability to protect our interests if we are harmed in a manner
that would otherwise enable us to sue in a United States federal
court, may be limited.
You may have difficulties enforcing, in actions brought in
courts in jurisdictions located outside the United States,
liabilities under the U.S. securities laws. In particular,
if you sought to bring proceedings in England based on
U.S. securities laws, the English court might consider:
|
|
|
|
|
|
that it did not have jurisdiction; and/or |
|
|
|
|
|
that it was not the appropriate forum for such proceedings;
and/or |
|
|
|
|
|
that, applying English conflict of laws rules, U.S. law
(including U.S. securities laws) did not apply to the
relationship between you and us or our directors and officers;
and/or |
|
|
|
|
|
that the U.S. securities laws were of a public or penal
nature and should not be enforced by the English court. |
|
Alternatively, if you were to bring an action in a
U.S. Court, and we were to bring a competing action in an
English Court, the English Court may grant an order seeking to
prohibit you from pursuing the action before the U.S. court.
You should also be aware that English law does not allow for any
form of legal proceedings directly equivalent to the class
action available in U.S. courts. In addition, awards of
punitive damages (or their nearest English law equivalent), are
rare in English courts.
30
In addition, we are required by the Companies Act 1985 to
prepare for each financial year audited accounts which comply
with the requirements of that Act. These UK audited accounts are
distributed to holders of our ordinary shares in advance of our
annual shareholder meeting at which the UK audited accounts are
voted on by our shareholders and are then filed with the
Registrar of Companies for England and Wales. The UK audited
accounts will be audited by an accounting firm eligible under UK
statutory requirements, currently the UK firm Ernst &
Young LLP. The UK audited accounts are likely to be materially
different to the US GAAP financial statements which will be
prepared in a form similar to those included within this
prospectus and which will be filed with the US Securities and
Exchange Commission. Our shareholders will not have an
opportunity to vote on our US GAAP financial statements. Our
ability to pay future dividends will be determined by reference
to the distributable reserves shown by our UK audited accounts
and this may restrict our ability to pay such dividends.
You may have difficulty in effecting service of process or
enforcing judgments obtained in the United States against one of
our directors named in this prospectus who is not a resident of
the United States.
Currently, one of our directors, Martial Chaillet, named in this
prospectus is a resident of a country other than the United
States. Furthermore, all or a substantial portion of his assets
may be located outside the United States. As a result, it may
not be possible for you to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
effect service of process within the United States upon such
director; or |
|
|
|
|
|
enforce in U.S. courts judgments obtained against such
director in the U.S. courts in any action, including
actions under the civil liability provisions of
U.S. securities laws; or |
|
|
|
|
|
enforce in U.S. courts judgments obtained against such
director in courts of jurisdictions outside the United States in
any action, including actions under the civil liability
provisions of U.S. securities laws. |
|
You may also have difficulties enforcing in courts outside the
United States judgments obtained in the U.S. courts against
any of our directors and some of the experts named in this
prospectus or us (including actions under the civil liability
provisions of the U.S. securities laws). In particular,
there is doubt as to the enforceability in England of
U.S. civil judgments predicated purely on
U.S. securities laws. In any event, there is no system of
reciprocal enforcement in England and Wales of judgments
obtained in the U.S. courts. Accordingly, a judgment
against any of those persons or us may only be enforced in
England and Wales by the commencement of an action before the
English court, seeking the recognition of the judgment of the
U.S. court at common law in England. Judgment against any
of those persons or us, as the case may be, may be granted by
the English court without requiring the issues on the merits in
the U.S. litigation to be reopened on the basis that those
matters have already been decided by the U.S. court. To
recognize a U.S. court Judgment, the English court must be
satisfied that:
|
|
|
|
|
|
that the judgment is final and conclusive; |
|
|
|
|
|
that the U.S. court had jurisdiction (as a matter of
English law); |
|
|
|
|
|
that the U.S. judgment is not impeachable for fraud and is
not contrary to English rules of natural justice; |
|
|
|
|
|
that the enforcement of the judgment will not be contrary to
public policy or statute in England; |
|
|
|
|
|
that the judgment is for a liquidated sum; |
|
|
|
|
|
that the English proceedings were commenced within the relevant
limitation period; |
|
|
|
|
|
that the judgment is not directly or indirectly for the payment
of taxes or other charges of a like nature or a fine or penalty; |
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
that the judgment remains valid and enforceable in the court in
which it was obtained unless and until it is stayed or set
aside; and |
|
|
|
|
|
that, before the date on which the U.S. court gave
judgment, the issues in question had not been the subject of a
final judgment of an English court or of a court of another
jurisdiction whose judgment is enforceable in England. |
|
We have never paid any dividend and we do not intend to pay
dividends in the foreseeable future.
To date, we have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our
ordinary shares and currently intend to retain any future
earnings for funding growth. We do not anticipate paying any
dividends in the foreseeable future. Moreover, companies
incorporated under the laws of England and Wales cannot pay
dividends unless they have distributable profits as defined in
the Companies Act 1985 as amended. As a result, you should not
rely on an investment in our shares if you require dividend
income. Capital appreciation, if any, of our shares may be your
sole source of gain for the foreseeable future.
Currency fluctuations may adversely affect the price of the
ADSs relative to the price of our GDSs.
The price of our GDSs is quoted in euros. Movements in the euro/
U.S. dollar exchange rate may adversely affect the
U.S. dollar price of our ADSs and the U.S. dollar
equivalent of the price of our GDSs. For example, if the euro
weakens against the U.S. dollar, the U.S. dollar price
of the ADSs could decline, even if the price of our GDSs in
euros increases or remains unchanged.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This prospectus, including the sections entitled
Prospectus Summary, Risk Factors,
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and
Business, contains forward-looking statements that
involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements
other than statements of historical facts contained in this
prospectus, including statements regarding our future financial
position, business strategy and plans and objectives of
management for future operations, are forward-looking
statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking
statements by terminology such as believes,
expects, anticipates,
intends, estimates, may,
will, continue, should,
plan, predict, potential or
the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. We
have based these forward-looking statements on our current
expectations and projections about future events and financial
trends that we believe may affect our financial condition,
results of operations, business strategy and financial needs.
Our actual results could differ materially from those
anticipated in these forward-looking statements, which are
subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions
described in Risk Factors section and elsewhere in
this prospectus, regarding, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
our significant operating losses and uncertainties relating to
our ability to generate positive cash flow and operating profits
in the future; |
|
|
|
difficulty in evaluating our future prospects based on our
limited operating history and relatively new business model; |
|
|
|
our ability to attract members, convert members into paying
subscribers and retain our paying subscribers, in addition to
maintain paying subscribers; |
|
|
|
the highly competitive nature of our business; |
|
|
|
our ability to keep pace with rapid technological change; |
|
|
|
the strength of our existing brands and our ability to maintain
and enhance those brands; |
32
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to effectively manage our growth; |
|
|
|
our dependence upon the telecommunications infrastructure and
our networking hardware and software infrastructure; |
|
|
|
risks related to our recent accounting restatements; |
|
|
|
uncertainties relating to potential acquisitions of companies; |
|
|
|
the volatility of the price of our ADSs after this offering; |
|
|
|
the strain on our resources and management team of being a
public company in the United States; |
|
|
|
the ability of our principal shareholders to exercise
significant influence over our company; and |
|
|
|
other factors referenced in this prospectus and other reports. |
You should not rely upon forward-looking statements as
predictions of future events. We cannot assure you that the
events and circumstances reflected in the forward-looking
statements will be achieved or occur. Although we believe that
the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are
reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of
activity, performance or achievements. Moreover, neither we nor
any other person assume responsibility for the accuracy and
completeness of the forward-looking statements. Except as
required by law, we undertake no obligation to update publicly
any forward-looking statements for any reason after the date of
this prospectus to conform these statements to actual results or
to changes in our expectations.
You should read this prospectus, and the documents that we
reference in this prospectus and have filed as exhibits to the
related registration statement with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, completely and with the understanding that our
actual future results, levels of activity, performance and
achievements may materially differ from what we expect. We
qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these
cautionary statements.
33
USE OF PROCEEDS
We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of ordinary
shares in the form of ADSs by the selling security holders
listed in this prospectus and any prospectus supplement, except
for funds received from the exercise of warrants and options
held by selling security holders, if and when exercised. We plan
to use the net proceeds received from the exercise of any
warrants and options for working capital and general corporate
purposes. The actual allocation of proceeds realized from the
exercise of these securities will depend upon the amount and
timing of such exercises, our operating revenues and cash
position at such time and our working capital requirements.
There can be no assurances that any of the outstanding warrants
and options will be exercised. The total maximum proceeds
possible from the exercise of options and warrants at
February 1, 2006 was approximately $26.5 million and
$1.1 million, respectively.
RESCISSION OFFER
Under our 2000 Option Scheme, we granted options to purchase
ordinary shares to certain of our employees, directors and
consultants. California state securities laws generally require
qualification for the offer and sale of securities subject to
California law. Under California law, the grant of an option
constitutes a sale of the underlying shares at the time of the
option grant and not at the exercise of the option. Our option
grants were not qualified and may not have been exempt from
qualification under California state securities laws. As a
result, we may have potential liability to those employees,
directors and consultants to whom we granted options under the
2000 Option Scheme. In order to address that issue, we may elect
to make a rescission offer to the holders of outstanding options
under the 2000 Option Scheme to give them the opportunity to
rescind the grant of their options.
As of December 31, 2005, assuming every eligible optionee
were to accept a rescission offer, we estimate the total cost to
us to complete the rescission would be approximately
$1.9 million including statutory interest at 7% per
annum. These amounts reflect the costs of offering to rescind
the issuance of the outstanding options by paying an amount
equal to 20% of the aggregate exercise price for the entire
option, which we believe would comply with California state
securities laws.
In addition, issuances of securities upon exercise of options
granted under our 2000 Option Scheme may not have been exempt
from registration and qualification under California state
securities laws as a result of the option grants themselves, but
also may not have been exempt from registration under federal
securities laws. Federal securities laws prohibit the offer or
sale of securities unless the sales are registered or exempt
from registration. The issuances of ordinary shares upon the
exercise of our options were not registered and may not have
been exempt from registration under California state and federal
securities laws. As a result, we may have potential liability to
those employees, directors and consultants to whom we issued
securities upon the exercise of these options. In order to
address that issue, we may elect to make a rescission offer to
those persons who exercised all, or a portion, of those options
and continue to hold the shares issued upon exercise, to give
them the opportunity to rescind the issuance of those shares
(Option Shares).
As of December 31, 2005, assuming every eligible person
that continues to hold the securities issued upon exercise of
options granted under the 2000 Option Scheme were to accept a
rescission offer, we estimate the total cost to us to complete
the rescission would be approximately $6.1 million
including statutory interest at 7% per annum, accrued since
the date of exercise of the options. These amounts are
calculated by reference to the acquisition price of the Option
Shares.
For the purposes of English company law, a rescission offer in
respect of our Option Shares would take the form of a purchase
by our company of the relevant Option Shares. The Companies Act
1985 (Companies Act) provides that we may only
purchase our own shares using our distributable
profits (as defined by the Companies Act), also known as
distributable reserves (Distributable Reserves), or
the proceeds from the issuance of new shares for that purpose.
When we issue shares at a value which represents a premium over
their nominal value, we are required by the Companies Act
34
to transfer the premium (subject to certain limited exceptions)
to a share premium account. Under the Companies Act, our ability
to utilize our share premium account is very limited and does
not include the payment of dividends. However, in accordance
with a procedure set out in the Companies Act, we have obtained
approval from our shareholders and from the High Court of
Justice in England and Wales (the Court) to reduce
our share premium account by US$44,000,000 with effect from
December 8, 2005 (the Effective Date) in order
to reduce or eliminate the deficit on our profit and loss
account, which had arisen as a result of previous accumulated
losses. This will enable profits, if any, arising after
December 31, 2005 to give rise to Distributable Reserves,
which we could use to purchase our own Shares pursuant to a
rescission offer. In connection with the approval from the
Court, we have given an undertaking to the Court for the
protection of our creditors, which requires us to transfer to a
non-distributable reserve (the Special Reserve) the
amount (if any) by which the deficit on our profit and loss
account at December 31, 2005 falls short of the amount of
the reduction (being US$44,000,000), and any profits made by us
or any of our subsidiaries prior to December 31, 2005,
until our non-consenting creditors at the Effective Date
(Non-Consenting Creditors) have been paid off. In
other words, if there is a surplus on our profit and loss
account after application of the $44.0 million from the
share premium reduction and any additional profits made by us
prior to December 31, 2005 (Special Reserve
Surplus), then we would not be permitted to use the
Special Reserve Surplus to purchase our own shares until all
Non-Consenting Creditors are paid . However, we do not currently
expect that any sums will be required to be transferred to the
Special Reserve since we do not anticipate that there will be a
surplus on our profit and loss account after application of the
share premium reduction and any profits made before
December 31, 2005, although this will need to be confirmed
when we prepare our audited UK GAAP profit and loss account and
balance sheet for the year ended December 31, 2005.
Although we believe we have substantially reduced our
accumulated profit and loss account deficit pursuant to the
Companies Act, we are not permitted to purchase any of our own
shares until we have sufficient Distributable Reserves in order
to fund such purchases of our own shares or sufficient proceeds
of a new issuance of shares made for the purposes of such
purchases of our own shares. As of December 31, 2005, if
every eligible person holding Option Shares were to accept the
rescission offer, we estimate that the amount we would need in
Distributable Reserves is approximately $6.1 million. After
application of the share premium reduction to the accumulated
profit and loss account deficit, we anticipate that the deficit
will be substantially reduced; however, we will not have any
Distributable Reserves, which we will accumulate to the extent
that we make any distributable profits in the future. We do not
intend to make a rescission offer until we have the
Distributable Reserves required to make a rescission offer of
the Option Shares.
The undertaking to the Court also prevents us from making any
distribution to shareholders, or redeeming or purchasing our own
shares, until we have obtained approval at a shareholders
general meeting of our audited UK GAAP balance sheet for the
year ended December 31, 2005. It is likely that our UK GAAP
balance sheet for the year ended December 31, 2005 will be
ready for approval by shareholders on or about May 31,
2006. The share premium reduction will only be reflected on our
UK GAAP balance sheet for the purposes of UK law. It will not be
reflected on our US GAAP balance sheet.
Any purchase of the Option Shares pursuant to a rescission offer
would not only need to be made out of Distributable Reserves,
but would also require shareholder approval given in accordance
with the requirements of the Companies Act.
Such approval must be given by resolution passed with a majority
of at least 75% of the votes cast on the resolution (excluding
votes carried by the Option Shares proposed to be purchased),
having made a copy of the contract for the purchase of the
Option Shares available for inspection both at our registered
office for at least 15 days prior to the date of the meeting to
approve the purchase and at the meeting itself. Once a purchase
has been completed, we would be subject to further disclosure
obligations in relation to information about the purchase.
35
We do not intend to seek shareholder approval for a purchase of
Option Shares until we have made a rescission offer which has
been accepted by any one or more shareholders and it has become
necessary to seek such approval.
In summary, in order to effectuate a rescission offer and
repurchase any of our own shares upon any acceptances of the
rescission offer, we must satisfy the following conditions:
(1) obtain shareholder approval of our audited UK GAAP
balance sheet for the year ended December 31, 2005;
(2) obtain additional shareholder approval, as further
discussed above, of any acceptances of the rescission offer to
repurchase shares; and (3) have sufficient Distributable
Reserves to repurchase shares subject to the rescission offer.
We have terminated and no longer grant options under our 2000
Option Scheme, but options previously granted under 2000 Option
Scheme remain in full force and effect. We filed a registration
statement on
Form S-8 to cover
the issuance of future shares upon exercise of presently
unexercised options under the 2000 Option Scheme. However, none
of the shares (including shares underlying unexercised options)
registered on the
Form S-8 will be
eligible for resale if they are tendered as part of the
rescission offer.
36
PRICE RANGE OF GLOBAL DEPOSITARY SHARES
Our ordinary shares in the form of ADSs were approved in
February 2006 for trading on the American Stock Exchange under
the trading symbol LOV. The last reported sales
price of the ADSs on the American Stock Exchange on
April 5, 2006 was $7.10 per ADS. As of the date of this
prospectus, an established public trading market for our ADSs
has not yet developed. Our ordinary shares in the form of GDSs
currently trade on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange under the symbol
MHJG. The following table summarizes the high and
low sales prices of our GDSs in euros as reported by the
Frankfurt Stock Exchange for the periods noted below, and as
translated into U.S. dollars at the currency exchange rate
in effect on the date the price was reported on the Frankfurt
Stock Exchange. The currency exchange rate is based on the
average bid and ask exchange price as reported by OANDA for such
date.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Year ended December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
|
11.85 |
|
|
$ |
14.68 |
|
|
|
4.20 |
|
|
$ |
5.39 |
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
9.85 |
|
|
$ |
11.79 |
|
|
|
6.30 |
|
|
$ |
7.63 |
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
8.00 |
|
|
$ |
9.62 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
|
|
$ |
3.49 |
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
7.33 |
|
|
$ |
9.68 |
|
|
|
4.75 |
|
|
$ |
6.06 |
|
Year ended December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
|
8.25 |
|
|
$ |
10.66 |
|
|
|
6.16 |
|
|
$ |
8.02 |
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
8.00 |
|
|
$ |
10.37 |
|
|
|
5.26 |
|
|
$ |
6.47 |
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
7.50 |
|
|
$ |
9.28 |
|
|
|
5.25 |
|
|
$ |
6.85 |
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
6.29 |
|
|
$ |
7.50 |
|
|
|
4.45 |
|
|
$ |
5.22 |
|
The last reported sales price of our GDSs on the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange on April 5, 2006 was
5.12 per GDS, or $6.24 per GDS.
As of March 15, 2006, there were approximately
122 holders of record of our shares, including each account
held by our depository and its record holder. These figures do
not include beneficial owners who hold shares in nominee name.
DIVIDEND POLICY
We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our ordinary
shares. We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our
ordinary shares in the foreseeable future. We currently intend
to retain all available funds and any future earnings to fund
the development and growth of our business.
Under English law, any payment of dividends would be subject to
the Companies Act 1985, as amended, which requires that all
dividends be approved by our board of directors and, in some
cases, our shareholders. Moreover, under English law, we may pay
dividends on our shares only out of profits available for
distribution determined in accordance with the Companies Act
1985, as amended, and accounting principles generally accepted
in the United Kingdom, which differ in some respects from
U.S. GAAP. We also may incur indebtedness in the future
that may prohibit or effectively restrict the payment of
dividends on our ordinary shares. Any future determination
related to our dividend policy will be made at the discretion of
our Board of Directors. In the event that dividends are paid in
the future, holders of the ADSs will be entitled to receive
payments in U.S. dollars in respect of dividends on the
underlying shares in accordance with the deposit agreement. See
Description of Share Capital Description of
Ordinary Shares Dividends and
Description of Share Capital Description of
American Depositary Shares Dividends and
Distributions.
37
CAPITALIZATION
The following table summarizes our capitalization as of
December 31, 2005.
You should read this table in conjunction with Selected
Consolidated Financial Data, Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations and our consolidated financial statements and
related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands | |
|
|
except per share | |
|
|
data) | |
Notes payable, including current portion
|
|
$ |
10,830 |
|
Shares subject to rescission
|
|
|
6,089 |
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ordinary shares, £0.01 par value,
80,000,000 shares authorized; 30,241,496 shares issued
and outstanding
|
|
|
487 |
|
|
Additional paid-in-capital
|
|
|
64,064 |
|
|
Deferred share-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(302 |
) |
|
Notes receivable from employees
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(45,073 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
19,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capitalization
|
|
$ |
36,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
The number of our ordinary shares shown above is based on
30,241,496 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2005.
This information excludes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,703,250 ordinary shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding options as of December 31, 2005, with exercise
prices ranging from $0.86 to $9.34 per share and a weighted
average exercise price of $5.57 per share; |
|
|
|
|
|
430,000 ordinary shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants
outstanding as of December 31, 2005, with an exercise price
of $2.46 per share; and |
|
|
|
|
|
14,386,500 ordinary shares available for issuance under our
share option schemes. |
|
38
DILUTION
Since this offering is being made solely by the selling
shareholders and none of the proceeds will be paid to us, except
for funds received from the exercise of warrants and options
held by selling shareholders, if and when exercised, our net
tangible book value per share will not be affected by this
offering.
39
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following table sets forth our selected consolidated
financial data. The data should be read in conjunction with
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and the consolidated
financial statements, related notes, and other financial
information included herein. The following selected consolidated
statement of operations data for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 2005, and the selected
consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2004 and
2003, are derived from the audited consolidated financial
statements of our company included elsewhere in this prospectus.
The consolidated statement of operations data for the year ended
December 31, 2001 and the selected consolidated balance
sheet data as of December 31, 2002 and 2001 are derived
from the audited consolidated financial statements of our
company not included in this prospectus. Our ordinary shares in
the form of GDSs currently trade on the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange, in Germany. Pursuant to the laws governing this
exchange, we publicly reported our quarterly and annual
operating results. On April 28, 2004, we publicly announced
that we had discovered accounting inaccuracies in previously
reported financial statements. As a result, following
consultation with our new auditors, we restated our financial
statements for the first three quarters of 2003 and for each of
the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001 to correct
inappropriate accounting entries. You should therefore not rely
on data derived from such financial statements. The historical
results are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected
in any future period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31,(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004(6) | |
|
2003(6) | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands, except per share amounts) | |
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$ |
65,511 |
|
|
$ |
65,052 |
|
|
$ |
36,941 |
|
|
$ |
16,352 |
|
|
$ |
10,434 |
|
Direct marketing expenses
|
|
|
24,411 |
|
|
|
31,240 |
|
|
|
18,395 |
|
|
|
5,396 |
|
|
|
2,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution margin
|
|
|
41,100 |
|
|
|
33,812 |
|
|
|
18,546 |
|
|
|
10,956 |
|
|
|
8,390 |
|
Operating expenses:*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
|
1,208 |
|
|
|
2,607 |
|
|
|
986 |
|
|
|
403 |
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
2,827 |
|
|
|
3,379 |
|
|
|
2,536 |
|
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
7,546 |
|
|
|
7,184 |
|
|
|
4,481 |
|
|
|
1,587 |
|
|
|
1,772 |
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
4,118 |
|
|
|
2,013 |
|
|
|
959 |
|
|
|
603 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
25,074 |
|
|
|
29,253 |
(2) |
|
|
18,537 |
(2) |
|
|
7,996 |
|
|
|
5,496 |
|
|
Amortization of intangible assets other than goodwill
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
860 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
524 |
|
|
|
2,137 |
|
|
Impairment of long-lived assets
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
1,532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,997 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
41,963 |
|
|
|
45,504 |
|
|
|
29,586 |
|
|
|
12,320 |
|
|
|
14,942 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss)
|
|
|
(863 |
) |
|
|
(11,692 |
) |
|
|
(11,040 |
) |
|
|
(1,364 |
) |
|
|
(6,552 |
) |
Interest (income) and other expenses, net
|
|
|
711 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
(840 |
) |
|
|
1,627 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(1,574 |
) |
|
|
(11,626 |
) |
|
|
(10,852 |
) |
|
|
(524 |
) |
|
|
(8,179 |
) |
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss)
|
|
$ |
(1,438 |
) |
|
$ |
(11,627 |
) |
|
$ |
(10,852 |
) |
|
$ |
(524 |
) |
|
$ |
(8,179 |
) |
Net (loss) per share basic and
diluted(3)
|
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.57 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.47 |
) |
Weighted average shares outstanding-basic and
diluted(3)
|
|
|
26,105 |
|
|
|
22,667 |
|
|
|
18,970 |
|
|
|
18,460 |
|
|
|
17,460 |
|
Other Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
3,624 |
|
|
|
3,065 |
|
|
|
1,441 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
544 |
|
Additional Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average paying
subscribers(4)
|
|
|
220,000 |
|
|
|
226,100 |
|
|
|
125,800 |
|
|
|
58,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004(6) | |
|
2003(6) | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
* Operating expenses include share-based compensation as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
2,063 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
1,652 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2001 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
|
|
|
17,292 |
|
|
|
7,423 |
|
|
|
5,815 |
|
|
|
7,755 |
|
|
|
7,569 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
48,620 |
|
|
|
27,359 |
|
|
|
16,969 |
|
|
|
17,461 |
|
|
|
16,352 |
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
4,991 |
|
|
|
3,933 |
|
|
|
3,232 |
|
|
|
1,535 |
|
|
|
993 |
|
Capital lease obligations and notes payable
|
|
|
10,830 |
|
|
|
1,873 |
|
|
|
487 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
23,437 |
|
|
|
16,872 |
|
|
|
11,659 |
|
|
|
3,998 |
|
|
|
3,238 |
|
Shares subject to
rescission(5)
|
|
|
6,089 |
|
|
|
3,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(45,073 |
) |
|
|
(43,635 |
) |
|
|
(32,008 |
) |
|
|
(21,156 |
) |
|
|
(20,632 |
) |
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
19,094 |
|
|
|
6,668 |
|
|
|
5,310 |
|
|
|
13,463 |
|
|
|
13,114 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Refer to Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations for a
discussion of certain asset and business acquisitions. |
|
|
|
(2) |
In 2004, general and administrative expenses included an expense
of approximately $2.4 million related to an employee
severance, $2.1 million related to the United States
initial public offering of MatchNet, Inc. that was planned for
mid-2004, but which was withdrawn shortly after the related
registration statement was filed in the third quarter of 2004,
as well as one legal settlement resulting in the recognition of
$900,000 in expenses in the third quarter and two legal
settlements resulting in the recognition of $2.1 million in
expenses in the fourth quarter of 2004. In 2003, general and
administrative expenses included a charge of $1.7 million
primarily related to a settlement with Comdisco. |
|
|
|
(3) |
For information regarding the computation of per share amounts,
refer to note 1 of our consolidated financial statements. |
|
|
|
(4) |
Average paying subscribers for each month are calculated as the
sum of the paying subscribers at the beginning and the end of
the month, divided by two. Average paying subscribers for
periods longer than one month are calculated as the sum of the
average paying subscribers for each month, divided by the number
of months in such period. Additionally, refer to
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations for a discussion of
business metrics we use to evaluate our business. We did not
track data for the year ended December 31, 2001 sufficient
to accurately set forth the number of average paying subscribers
for the respective periods. |
|
|
|
(5) |
Under our 2000 Executive Share Option Scheme (2000 Option
Scheme), we granted options to purchase ordinary shares to
certain of our employees, directors and consultants. The
issuances of securities upon exercise of options granted under
our 2000 Option Scheme may not have been exempt from
registration and qualification under federal and California
state securities laws, and as a result, we may have potential
liability to those employees, directors and consultants to whom
we issued securities upon the exercise of these options. In
order to address that issue, we may elect to make a rescission
offer to those persons who exercised all, or a portion, of those
options and continue to hold the shares issued upon exercise, to
give them the opportunity to rescind the issuance of those
shares. However, it is the Securities and Exchange
Commissions position that a rescission offer will not bar
or extinguish any liability under the Securities Act of 1933
with respect to these options and shares, nor will a rescission
offer extinguish a holders right to rescind the issuance
of securities that were not registered or exempt from the
registration requirements under the Securities Act of 1933. As
of December 31, 2005, assuming every eligible person that
continues to hold the securities issued upon exercise of options
granted under the 2000 Option Scheme were to accept a rescission
offer, we estimate the total cost to us to complete the
rescission would be approximately $6.1 million including
statutory interest at 7% per annum, accrued since the date of
exercise of the options. The rescission acquisition price is
calculated as equal to the original exercise price paid by the
optionee to our company upon exercise of their option. |
|
|
|
(6) |
For the purposes of this and all future filings, prior period
classification of share-based compensation was reclassified to
conform to current period classification. |
|
41
PRO FORMA COMBINED FINANCIAL DATA
The following unaudited pro forma combined financial information
gives effect to the acquisition on May 19, 2005, by Spark
Networks plc (formerly MatchNet plc) of MingleMatch, Inc., a
corporation based in Provo, Utah. The purchase price for the
acquisition was $12 million in cash, which will be paid
over 12 months (as discussed further in note 9 to our
consolidated financial statements, notes payable), as well as
150,000 shares of the Companys ordinary shares which, on
the date of the acquisition, carried a value of approximately
$1.2 million.
The unaudited pro forma combined financial information is for
illustrative purposes only and reflects certain estimates and
assumptions. These unaudited pro forma combined financial
statements should be read in conjunction with the accompanying
notes, our historical consolidated financial statements and
MingleMatchs historical financial statements, including
the notes thereto, and Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,
all of which are included elsewhere in this prospectus.
The pro forma combined statements of operation for the years
ended December 31, 2005 gave effect to the acquisition of
MingleMatch, Inc. as if it had been completed on January 1,
2005. Our combined financial statements include the results of
operations of MingleMatch, Inc. from its acquisition date
May 19, 2005 to December 31, 2005. The MingleMatch
column for the year ended December 31, 2005 includes
MingleMatch activity for the period prior to its acquisition
date from January 1, 2005 to May 18, 2005. The pro
forma combined financial statements are not necessarily
indicative of operating results which would have been achieved
had the foregoing transaction actually been completed at the
beginning of the subject periods and should not be construed as
representative of future operating results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Spark | |
|
Mingle | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
Pro Forma | |
|
|
Networks | |
|
Match | |
|
Adjustments | |
|
Consolidated | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands, except per share amounts) | |
Net revenues
|
|
$ |
65,511 |
|
|
$ |
1,453 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
66,964 |
|
Direct marketing expenses
|
|
|
24,411 |
|
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,152 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution margin
|
|
|
41,100 |
|
|
|
712 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,812 |
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
|
1,208 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,287 |
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
2,827 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,974 |
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
7,546 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,896 |
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
4,118 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,231 |
|
|
General and administrative (excluding share-based compensation)
|
|
|
25,074 |
|
|
|
986 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,060 |
|
|
Amortization of intangible assets other than goodwill
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
313(1 |
) |
|
|
1,400 |
|
|
Impairment of long lived assets
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
41,963 |
|
|
|
1,677 |
|
|
|
313 |
|
|
|
43,953 |
|
Operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(863 |
) |
|
|
(965 |
) |
|
|
(313 |
) |
|
|
(2,141 |
) |
Interest (income) and other expenses, net
|
|
|
711 |
|
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax (loss)
|
|
|
(1,574 |
) |
|
|
(756 |
) |
|
|
(313 |
) |
|
|
(2,643 |
) |
Income taxes
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss)
|
|
$ |
(1,438 |
) |
|
$ |
(756 |
) |
|
$ |
(313 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,507 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income per ordinary share basic and
diluted
|
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.10 |
) |
Weighted average ordinary shares outstanding basic
and diluted
|
|
|
26,105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,105 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Represents amortization of intangible assets that would have
occurred if the purchase had happened on January 1, 2005. |
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stub Period Ended | |
|
|
May 18, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
Domain Names
|
|
$ |
297 |
|
Subscriber Discounts
|
|
|
|
|
Developed Software
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total Amortization
|
|
|
313 |
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the estimated fair values of the
assets acquired and liabilities assumed at the date of
acquisition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At May | |
|
|
19, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
(In thousands) | |
Current assets (including cash acquired of $221)
|
|
$ |
295 |
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
162 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
9,742 |
|
Domain names and databases
|
|
|
4,655 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets acquired
|
|
|
14,854 |
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
41 |
|
Deferred tax liability
|
|
|
1,823 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets acquired
|
|
$ |
12,990 |
|
Of the $4,655,000 of acquired intangible assets, $2,360,000 was
assigned to member databases and will be amortized over three
years, $370,000 was assigned to subscriber databases which will
be amortized over three months, $205,000 was assigned to
developed software which will be amortized over five years, and
$1,720,000 was assigned to domain names which are not subject to
amortization.
Of the $9,742,000 of acquired goodwill, $400,000 was assigned to
assembled workforce and $1,823,000 was as a result of recording
a deferred tax liability resulting from differences between tax
and book bases as proscribed by SFAS 109.
43
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion of our financial condition and
results of operations should be read in conjunction with our
unaudited and audited consolidated financial statements and the
related notes thereto included elsewhere in this prospectus.
This prospectus, including the sections entitled
Prospectus Summary, Risk Factors,
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and
Business, contains forward-looking statements that
involve substantial risks and uncertainties. All statements
other than statements of historical facts contained in this
prospectus, including statements regarding our future financial
position, business strategy and plans and objectives of
management for future operations, are forward-looking
statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking
statements by terminology such as believes,
expects, anticipates,
intends, estimates, may,
will, continue, should,
plan, predict, potential or
the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. We
have based these forward-looking statements on our current
expectations and projections about future events and financial
trends that we believe may affect our financial condition,
results of operations, business strategy and financial needs.
Our actual results could differ materially from those
anticipated in these forward-looking statements, which are
subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions
described in Risk Factors section and elsewhere in
this prospectus.
General
We are a public limited company incorporated under the laws of
England and Wales and our ordinary shares in the form of GDSs
currently trade on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange and in the form
of ADSs on the American Stock Exchange. We are a leading
provider of online personals services in the United States and
internationally. Our Web sites enable adults to meet online and
participate in a community, become friends, date, form a
long-term relationship or marry.
Our revenues have grown from $659,000 in 1999 to
$65.5 million in 2005. For the year ended December 31,
2005, we had approximately 220,000 average paying subscribers,
representing a decrease of 2.7% from the same period in 2004. We
define a member as an individual who has posted a personal
profile during the immediately preceding 12 months or an
individual who has previously posted a personal profile and has
subsequently logged on to one of our Web sites at least once in
the preceding 12 months. Paying subscribers are defined as
individuals who have paid a monthly fee for access to
communication and Web site features beyond those provided to our
members, and average paying subscribers for each month are
calculated as the sum of the paying subscribers at the beginning
and the end of the month, divided by two. Our key Web sites are
JDate.com, which targets the Jewish singles community in the
United States, at a current monthly subscription fee of $34.95
and AmericanSingles.com, which targets the U.S. mainstream
online singles community, at a current monthly subscription fee
of $29.99. Our subscription fees are charged on a monthly basis,
with discounts for longer-term subscriptions ranging from three
to twelve months. Longer-term subscriptions are charged up-front
and we recognize revenue over the terms of such subscriptions.
We have grown both internally and through acquisitions of
entities, and selected assets of entities, offering online
personals services and related businesses. As a result of each
of these acquisitions, we have been able to expand and
cross-promote into vertical affinity markets, combine the target
entitys existing database of online personals customers
into one of our Web sites databases, with the goal of
attracting new members to our Web sites, retaining as many of
them as possible and converting them into paying subscribers.
Through our business acquisitions, we have expanded into new
markets, leveraged and enhanced our existing brands to improve
our position within new markets, and gained valuable
intellectual property. During the last three years, we made the
following acquisitions:
|
|
|
|
|
In May 2005, we acquired MingleMatch, Inc., a company that
operates religious, ethnic, special interest and geographically
targeted online singles communities. The acquisition of |
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
MingleMatch fits with our strategy of creating affinity-focused
online personals that provide quality experiences for our
members. We expect that our purchase of MingleMatch will allow
for numerous cost savings and revenue synergies. Expected cost
savings include savings from cost reductions in customer service
and marketing, where we plan to be able to market to existing
members of our other Web sites, particularly AmericanSingles.
Expected revenue synergies include cross-promotion and bundled
subscription opportunities with members of our other Web sites,
particularly AmericanSingles. |
|
|
|
|
|
In September 2004, we purchased a 20% equity interest, with an
option to acquire the remaining interest, in Duplo AB, an online
provider of social networking products and services in Sweden,
with the intent of expanding into new markets and strengthening
our existing brands. |
|
|
|
|
|
In January 2004, we purchased Point Match Ltd., a competitor of
JDate.co.il in Israel. |
|
Our future performance will depend on many factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
continued acceptance of online personals services; |
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to attract a large number of new members and paying
subscribers, and retain those members and paying subscribers; |
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to increase brand awareness, both domestically and
internationally; |
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to sustain and, when possible, increase subscription
fees for our services; and |
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to introduce new targeted Web sites, affiliate
programs, fee-based services and advertising as additional
sources of revenues. |
|
Our ability to compete effectively will depend on the timely
introduction and performance of our future Web sites, services
and features, the ability to address the needs of our members
and paying subscribers and the ability to respond to Web sites,
services and features introduced by competitors. To address this
challenge, we have invested and will continue to invest existing
personnel resources, namely Internet engineers and programmers,
in order to enhance our existing services and introduce new
services, which may include new Web sites as well as new
features and functions designed to increase the probability of
communication among our members and paying subscribers and to
enhance their online personals experiences. Our software
development team consisted of 20 employees as of
December 31, 2005, who are focused on expanding and
improving the features and functionality of our Web sites. The
Company believes that it has sufficient cash resources on hand
to accomplish the enhancements that are currently contemplated.
Critical Accounting Policies, Estimates and Assumptions
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and
results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial
statements, which have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
The preparation of these financial statements requires us to
make certain estimates and judgments that affect the reported
amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and
related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an
on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those
related to revenue recognition, prepaid advertising, Web site
and software development costs, goodwill, intangible and other
long-lived assets, accounting for business combinations,
contingencies and income taxes. We base our estimates on
historical experience and on various other assumptions that we
believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of
which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying
values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent
from other sources. Actual results may differ from these
estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
45
Management has discussed the development and selection of our
critical accounting policies, estimates and assumptions with our
Board of Directors and the Board has reviewed these disclosures.
We believe the following critical accounting policies reflect
the more significant judgments and estimates we used in the
preparation of our consolidated financial statements:
Revenue Recognition and Deferred Revenue
Substantially all of our revenues are derived from subscription
fees. Revenues are presented net of credits and credit card
chargebacks. We recognize revenue in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States and with
Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 104, Revenue Recognition.
Recognition occurs ratably over the subscription period,
beginning when there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement,
delivery has occurred (access has been granted), the fees are
fixed and determinable, and collection is reasonably assured.
Paying subscribers primarily pay in advance using a credit card
and all purchases are final and nonrefundable. Subscription fees
collected in advance are deferred and recognized as revenue,
using the straight-line method, over the term of the
subscription. We reserve for potential credit card chargebacks
based on our historical chargeback experience.
Direct Marketing Expenses
We incur substantial expenses related to our advertising in
order to generate traffic to our Web sites. These advertising
costs are primarily online advertising, including affiliate and
co-brand arrangements, and are directly attributable to the
revenues we receive from our subscribers. We have entered into
numerous affiliate arrangements, under which our affiliate
advertises or promotes our Web site on its Web site, and earns a
fee whenever visitors to its Web site click though the
advertisement to one of our Web sites and registers or
subscribes on our Web site. Affiliate deals may fall in the
categories of either CPS, CPA, CPC, or CPM, as discussed below.
We do not typically have any exclusivity arrangements with our
affiliates, and some of our affiliates may also be affiliates
for our competitors. Under our co-branded arrangements, our
co-brand partners may operate their own separate Web sites where
visitors can register and subscribe to our Web sites. Our
co-brand arrangements are usually CPS type arrangements.
Our advertising expenses are recognized based on the terms of
each individual contract. The majority of our advertising
expenses are based on four pricing models:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost per subscription (CPS) where we pay an online
advertising provider a fee based upon the number of new paying
subscribers that it generates; |
|
|
|
|
|
Cost per acquisition (CPA) where we pay an online
advertising provider a fee based on the number of new member
registrations it generates; |
|
|
|
|
|
Cost per click (CPC) where we pay an online advertising
provider a fee based on the number of clicks to our Web sites it
generates; and |
|
|
|
|
|
Cost per thousand for banner advertising (CPM) where we pay
an online advertising provider a fee based on the number of
times it displays our advertisements. |
|
We estimate in certain circumstances the total clicks or
impressions delivered by our vendors in order to determine
amounts due under these contracts.
Prepaid Advertising Expenses
In certain circumstances, we pay in advance for Internet-based
advertising on other Web sites, and expense the prepaid amounts
as direct marketing expenses over the contract periods as the
contracted
46
Web site delivers on its commitment. We evaluate the realization
of prepaid amounts at each reporting period and expense prepaid
amounts if the contracted Web site is unable to deliver on its
commitment.
Web Site and Software Development Costs
We capitalize costs related to developing or obtaining
internal-use software. Capitalization of costs begins after the
conceptual formulation stage has been completed. Product
development costs are expensed as incurred or capitalized into
property and equipment in accordance with Statement of Position
(SOP) 98-1 Accounting for the Costs of
Computer Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use.
SOP 98-1 requires
that costs incurred in the preliminary project and
post-implementation stages of an internal-use software project
be expensed as incurred and that certain costs incurred in the
application development stage of a project be capitalized. We
exercise judgment in determining which stage of development a
software project is in at any point in time.
In accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
00-2 Accounting
for Web Site Development Costs, we expense costs related
to the planning and post-implementation phases of our Web site
development efforts. Direct costs incurred in the development
phase are capitalized. Costs associated with minor enhancements
and maintenance for the Web site are included in expenses in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
Capitalized Web site and software development costs are included
in internal-use software in property and equipment and amortized
over the estimated useful life of the products, which is usually
three years. In accordance with the above accounting literature,
we estimate the amount of time spent by our engineers in
developing our software and enhancements to our Web sites.
On a regular basis, management reviews the capitalized costs of
Web sites and software developed to ensure that these costs
relate to projects that will be completed and placed in service.
Any projects determined not to be viable will be reviewed for
impairment in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 144, Accounting for
the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.
Valuation of Goodwill, Identified Intangibles and Other
Long-lived Assets
We test goodwill and intangible assets for impairment in
accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets and test property, plant and equipment
for impairment in accordance with SFAS No. 144. We
assess goodwill, and other indefinite-lived intangible assets at
least annually, or more frequently when circumstances indicate
that the carrying value may not be recoverable. Factors we
consider important and which could trigger an impairment review
include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
a significant decline in actual projected revenue; |
|
|
|
|
|
a significant decline in the market value of our depositary
shares; |
|
|
|
|
|
a significant decline in performance of certain acquired
companies relative to our original projections; |
|
|
|
|
|
an excess of our net book value over our market value; |
|
|
|
|
|
a significant decline in our operating results relative to our
operating forecasts; |
|
|
|
|
|
a significant change in the manner of our use of acquired assets
or the strategy for our overall business; |
|
|
|
|
|
a significant decrease in the market value of an asset; |
|
|
|
|
|
a shift in technology demands and development; and |
|
|
|
|
|
a significant turnover in key management or other personnel. |
|
47
When we determine that the carrying value of goodwill, other
intangible assets and other long-lived assets may not be
recoverable based upon the existence of one or more of the above
indicators of impairment, we measure any impairment based on a
projected discounted cash flow method using a discount rate
determined by our management to be commensurate with the risk
inherent in our current business model. In the case of the other
intangible assets and other long-lived assets, this measurement
is only performed if the projected undiscounted cash flows for
the asset are less than its carrying value. No indicators of
impairment in goodwill were present in 2005, 2004 and 2003. We
had impairment charges related to long-lived assets of
$1.5 million in 2003 in accordance with
SFAS No. 144.
Accounting for Business Combinations
We have acquired the stock or specific assets of a number of
companies from 1999 through 2004 some of which were considered
to be business acquisitions. Under the purchase method of
accounting, the cost, including transaction costs, are allocated
to the underlying net assets, based on their respective
estimated fair values. The excess of the purchase price over the
estimated fair values of the net assets acquired is recorded as
goodwill.
The judgments made in determining the estimated fair value and
expected useful life assigned to each class of assets and
liabilities acquired can significantly impact net income.
Different classes of assets will have useful lives that differ.
For example, the useful life of a member database, which is
three years, is not the same as the useful life of a paying
subscriber list, which is three months, or a domain name, which
is indefinite. Consequently, to the extent a longer-lived asset
is ascribed greater value under the purchase method than a
shorter-lived asset, there may be less amortization recorded in
a given period or no amortization for indefinite lived
intangibles.
Determining the fair value of certain assets and liabilities
acquired is subjective in nature and often involves the use of
significant estimates and assumptions.
The value of our intangible and other long-lived assets,
including goodwill, is exposed to future adverse changes if we
experience declines in operating results or experience
significant negative industry or economic trends or if future
performance is below historical trends. We review intangible
assets and goodwill for impairment at least annually or more
frequently when circumstances indicate that the carrying value
may not be recoverable using the guidance of applicable
accounting literature. We continually review the events and
circumstances related to our financial performance and economic
environment for factors that would provide evidence of the
impairment of goodwill, identifiable intangibles and other
long-lived assets.
We use the equity method of accounting for our investments in
affiliates over which we exert significant influence.
Significant influence is generally having between a 20% to 50%
ownership interest. At December 31, 2005, we owned a 20%
interest in Duplo AB which we account for using the equity
method.
Legal Contingencies
We are currently involved in certain legal proceedings, as
discussed in the notes to the financial statements and under
Business Legal Proceedings. To the
extent that a loss related to a contingency is reasonably
estimable and probable, we accrue an estimate of that loss.
Because of the uncertainties related to both the amount and
range of loss on certain pending litigation, we may be unable to
make a reasonable estimate of the liability that could result
from an unfavorable outcome of such litigation. As additional
information becomes available, we will assess the potential
liability related to our pending litigation and make or, if
necessary, revise our estimates. Such revisions in our estimates
of the potential liability could materially impact our results
of operations and financial position.
48
Accounting for Income Taxes
We account for income taxes using the asset and liability
method, which requires the recognition of deferred tax assets
and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of
temporary differences between the carrying amounts and tax bases
of the assets and liabilities. In accordance with the provisions
of SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes, we record a valuation allowance to reduce deferred
tax assets to the amount expected to more likely than not to be
realized in our future tax returns. As of December 31, 2005
and 2004, we had a valuation allowance that completely offset
our net deferred tax asset. Should we determine in the future
that we will likely realize all or part of our net deferred tax
assets, we will adjust the valuation allowance so that we will
have a deferred tax asset available that will be realized in our
future tax returns.
At December 31, 2005, we had net operating loss
carry-forwards of approximately $54.4 million and
$50.4 million to reduce future federal and state taxable
income, respectively. Under section 382 of the Internal
Revenue Code, the utilization of the net operating loss
carry-forwards can be limited based on changes in the percentage
ownership of our company. Of the net operating losses available,
approximately $1.6 million and $500,000 for federal and
state purposes, respectively, are attributable to losses
incurred by an acquired subsidiary. Such losses are subject to
other restrictions on usage including the requirement that they
are only available to offset future income of the subsidiary. In
addition, the available net operating losses do not include any
amounts generated by the acquired subsidiary prior to the
acquisition date due to substantial uncertainty regarding our
ability to realize the benefit in the future.
Adoption of SFAS 123(R)
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued Statement No. 123 (revised 2004),
Share-Based Payment
(Statement 123(R)), a revision of
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation. Statement 123(R) requires a company to
recognize compensation expense based on the fair value at the
date of grant for share options and other share-based
compensation, eliminating the use of the intrinsic value method.
We adopted Statement 123(R) on July 1, 2005, and as a
result, our loss before income taxes for the year ended
December 31, 2005, is $2.7 million higher, than if we
had continued to account for share-based compensation under APB
Opinion No. 25. Basic and diluted income per share for the
year ended December 31, 2005 would have been $0.05, if we
had not adopted Statement 123(R), compared to reported
basic and diluted loss per share of $(0.06).
At December 31, 2005, we had two share-based employee
compensation plans, which are described more fully in
Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements contained
herein. Prior to July 1, 2005, we accounted for those plans
under the recognition and measurement provisions of APB Opinion
No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,
and related Interpretations, as permitted by FASB Statement
No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.
Only share-based employee compensation related to variable
accounting (as discussed in Note 10 to the consolidated
financial statements) was recognized in our Statements of
Operations for the years ended December 31, 2004 or 2003,
and in the six month period ended June 30, 2005, as all
options granted under those plans had an exercise price equal to
the market value of the underlying ordinary share on the date of
grant. Effective July 1, 2005, we adopted the fair value
recognition provisions of Statement 123(R), using the
modified-prospective-transition method. Under that transition
method, compensation cost recognized in the second half of 2005
includes: (i) compensation cost for all share-based
payments granted prior to, but not yet vested as of July 1,
2005, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance
with the original provisions of Statement 123, and
(ii) compensation cost for all share-based payments granted
subsequent to July 1, 2005, based on the grant-date fair
value estimated in accordance with the provisions of
Statement 123(R). Results for prior periods have not been
restated.
49
Prior to our adoption of Statement 123(R), we did not
record tax benefits of deductions resulting from the exercise of
share options because of the uncertainty surrounding the timing
of realizing the benefits of our deferred tax assets in future
tax returns. Statement 123(R) requires the cash flows
resulting from the tax benefits resulting from tax deductions in
excess of the compensation cost recognized for those options
(excess tax benefits) to be classified as financing cash flows.
Had we recognized a tax benefit from deductions resulting from
the exercise of stock options, we would have classified the
benefit as a financing cash inflow on the cash flow statement.
The following table illustrates the effect on net income and
earnings per share if we had applied the fair value recognition
provisions of Statement 123(R) to options granted under its
share option plans in all periods presented. For purposes of
this pro forma disclosure, the value of the options is estimated
using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model and amortized to
expense over the options vesting periods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands) | |
Net loss as reported
|
|
$ |
(1,438 |
) |
|
$ |
(11,627 |
) |
|
$ |
(10,852 |
) |
Add: SFAS 123(R) share based employee compensation expense
included in reported net income, net of related tax effects
|
|
|
2,717 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add: share based employee compensation expense recorded in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations
Pre-SFAS 123(R)
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
Deduct: Total share based employee compensation expense
determined under fair value based method for all awards, of
related tax effects
|
|
|
(5,460 |
) |
|
|
(3,452 |
) |
|
|
(3,645 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net loss
|
|
$ |
(4,211 |
) |
|
$ |
(14,712 |
) |
|
$ |
(14,422 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss Per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported basic & diluted
|
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.51 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.57 |
) |
Pro forma basic & diluted
|
|
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.65 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.76 |
) |
Note that the above pro forma disclosures are provided for 2004
and 2003 because employee share options were not accounted for
using the fair-value method during those periods. Disclosures
for 2005 are presented because employee share options were not
accounted for using the fair-value method during the first six
months of 2005.
In accordance with Statement 123(R), the fair value of each
option grant was estimated as of the grant date using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model for those options granted
prior to July 1, 2005, the following assumptions were used
to determine fair value:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months | |
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
Ended June 30, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Expected life in years
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Dividend per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
76.2 |
% |
|
|
70.0 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
3.5 |
% |
In accordance with Statement 123(R), we used historical and
empirical data to assess different forfeiture rates for three
different groups of employees. We must reassess forfeiture rates
when deemed necessary and we must calibrate actual forfeiture
behavior to what has already been recorded. For the six month
period ending December 31, 2005, we had three groups of
employees whose behavior was
50
significantly different than those of other groups, therefore we
estimated different forfeiture rates for each group.
Prospective compensation expense was calculated using a
bi-nomial or lattice
model with a volatility rate of 75%, a risk free rate of 3.5%
and a term of 4 years for options granted subsequent to
June 30, 2005. The volatility rate was derived by examining
historical share price behavior and assessing managements
expectations of share price behavior during the term of the
option.
The concepts that underpin lattice models and the
Black-Scholes-Merton formula are the same, but the key
difference between a lattice model and a closed-form model such
as the Black-Scholes-Merton formula is the flexibility of the
former. A lattice model can explicitly use dynamic assumptions
regarding the term structure of volatility, dividend yields, and
interest rates. Further, a lattice model can incorporate
assumptions about how the likelihood of early exercise of an
employee stock option may increase as the intrinsic value of
that option increases or how employees may have a high
propensity to exercise options with significant intrinsic value
shortly after vesting. Because of the versatility of lattice
models, we believe that it can provide a more accurate estimate
of an employee share options fair value than an estimate
based on a closed-form Black-Scholes-Merton formula.
We account for shares issued to non-employees in accordance with
the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) and
EITF 96-18,
Accounting for Equity Instruments That Are Issued to Other
Than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling,
Goods and Services.
51
The following table describes our pro forma statement of
consolidated operations and EBITDA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
|
|
Consolidated | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
|
Consolidated | |
|
|
Spark | |
|
2005 | |
|
Before | |
|
Spark | |
|
2004 | |
|
Before | |
|
|
Networks | |
|
Share-Based | |
|
Share-Based | |
|
Networks | |
|
Share-Based | |
|
Share-Based | |
|
|
Consolidated(1) | |
|
Compensation(2) | |
|
Compensation | |
|
Consolidated(1)(4) | |
|
Compensation(2)(4) | |
|
Compensation | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands) | |
Net revenues
|
|
$ |
65,511 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
65,511 |
|
|
$ |
65,052 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
65,052 |
|
Direct marketing expenses
|
|
|
24,411 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,411 |
|
|
|
31,240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution margin
|
|
|
41,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,100 |
|
|
|
33,812 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,812 |
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
|
1,208 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
1,184 |
|
|
|
2,607 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
2,451 |
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
2,827 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
2,783 |
|
|
|
3,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,379 |
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
7,546 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
7,208 |
|
|
|
7,184 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
7,162 |
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
4,118 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
3,870 |
|
|
|
2,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,013 |
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
25,074 |
|
|
|
2,063 |
|
|
|
23,011 |
|
|
|
29,253 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
27,727 |
|
|
Amortization of intangible assets other than goodwill
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
860 |
|
|
Impairment of long lived assets
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
41,963 |
|
|
|
2,717 |
|
|
|
39,246 |
|
|
|
45,504 |
|
|
|
1,704 |
|
|
|
43,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(863 |
) |
|
|
(2,717 |
) |
|
|
1,854 |
|
|
|
(11,692 |
) |
|
|
(1,704 |
) |
|
|
(9,988 |
) |
Interest (income) and other expenses, net
|
|
|
711 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
711 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax (loss) income
|
|
|
(1,574 |
) |
|
|
(2,717 |
) |
|
|
1,143 |
|
|
|
(11,626 |
) |
|
|
(1,704 |
) |
|
|
(9,922 |
) |
Income taxes
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$ |
(1,438 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,717 |
) |
|
$ |
1,279 |
|
|
$ |
(11,627 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,704 |
) |
|
$ |
(9,923 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
Income taxes
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
3,624 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,624 |
|
|
|
3,065 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,065 |
|
Amortization of intangible assets
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA(3)
|
|
$ |
3,328 |
|
|
$ |
(2,717 |
) |
|
$ |
6,045 |
|
|
$ |
(7,733 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,704 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,029 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles (GAAP). |
|
|
|
(2) |
We believe it is useful in measuring our operations to exclude
share-based compensation expense, which is a non-cash charge
recorded in our income statements for the first time in the
second half of 2005 as a result of the implementation of
SFAS 123(R). Using the non-GAAP measure limits the
users ability to judge true expenses of our company in the
current period. However, traditionally investors and analysts
using financial information discount GAAP operating results to
provide a better picture of the cash generating potential of a
company. To avoid the limitation, management provides the GAAP
measure in all of its financial information other than the
information listed in the chart above. We believe that the
non-GAAP measure provides useful information to management and
investors regarding how the expenses associated with the
application of SFAS 123(R) are reflected on the statements
of operations and facilitates comparisons to our historical
operating results. Our management uses this information
internally for reviewing the financial results, forecasting and
budgeting. |
|
|
|
(3) |
EBITDA is defined as earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation and amortization. EBITDA should not be construed as
a substitute for net income (loss) or net cash provided by (used
in) operating activities (all as determined in accordance with
GAAP) for the purpose of analyzing our operating performance,
financial position and cash flows, as EBITDA is not defined by
GAAP. We utilize EBITDA as a financial measure because
management believes that investors find it to be a useful tool
to perform more meaningful comparisons of past, present and
future operating results and as a means to evaluate the results
of core on-going operations. We believe it is a complement to
net income and other GAAP financial performance measures. |
|
|
|
(4) |
For the purposes of this and all future filings, prior period
classification of share-based compensation was reclassified to
conform to current period classification. |
|
52
Segment Reporting
We divide our business into three operating segments:
(1) the JDate segment, which consists of our JDate.com Web
site and its co-branded Web sites, (2) the AmericanSingles
segment, which consists of our AmericanSingles.com Web site and
its co-branded Web sites, and (3) the Other Businesses
segment, which consists of all our other Web sites and
businesses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in thousands) | |
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AmericanSingles
|
|
$ |
29,217 |
|
|
$ |
35,224 |
|
|
$ |
19,253 |
|
|
JDate
|
|
|
25,961 |
|
|
|
23,820 |
|
|
|
16,091 |
|
|
Other Businesses
|
|
|
10,333 |
|
|
|
6,008 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
65,511 |
|
|
$ |
65,052 |
|
|
$ |
36,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AmericanSingles
|
|
$ |
15,167 |
|
|
$ |
24,954 |
|
|
$ |
15,887 |
|
|
JDate
|
|
|
2,885 |
|
|
|
1,740 |
|
|
|
739 |
|
|
Other Businesses
|
|
|
6,359 |
|
|
|
4,546 |
|
|
|
1,769 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
24,411 |
|
|
$ |
31,240 |
|
|
$ |
18,395 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AmericanSingles
|
|
$ |
14,050 |
|
|
$ |
10,270 |
|
|
$ |
3,366 |
|
|
JDate
|
|
|
23,076 |
|
|
|
22,080 |
|
|
|
15,352 |
|
|
Other Businesses
|
|
|
3,974 |
|
|
|
1,462 |
|
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
41,100 |
|
|
$ |
33,812 |
|
|
$ |
18,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unallocated operating expenses
|
|
|
41,963 |
|
|
|
45,504 |
|
|
|
29,586 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss)
|
|
$ |
(863 |
) |
|
$ |
(11,692 |
) |
|
$ |
(11,040 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key Business Metrics
We regularly review certain operating metrics in order to
evaluate the effectiveness of our operating strategies and
monitor the financial performance of our business. The key
business metrics that we utilize include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Paying Subscribers: Paying subscribers are
defined as individuals who have paid a monthly fee for access to
communication and Web site features beyond those provided to our
members. Average paying subscribers for each month are
calculated as the sum of the paying subscribers at the beginning
and end of the month, divided by two. Average paying subscribers
for periods longer than one month are calculated as the sum of
the average paying subscribers for each month, divided by the
number of months in such period. |
|
|
|
|
|
Average Monthly Net Revenue per Paying Subscriber:
Average monthly net revenue per paying subscriber represents the
total net subscriber revenue for the period divided by the
number of average paying subscribers for the period, divided by
the number of months in the period. |
|
|
|
|
|
Direct Subscriber Acquisition Costs: Direct
subscriber acquisition cost is defined as total direct marketing
costs divided by the number of new paying subscribers during the
period. This represents the average cost of acquiring a new
paying subscriber during the period. |
|
|
|
|
|
Monthly Subscriber Churn: Monthly subscriber churn
represents the ratio expressed as a percentage of (a) the
number of paying subscriber cancellations during the period
divided by the number of average paying subscribers during the
period and (b) the number of months in the period. |
|
53
Selected statistical information regarding our key operating
metrics is shown in the table below. The references to
Other Businesses in this table indicate metrics data
for our Other Businesses segment, excluding travel and events.
Our Other Businesses segment includes all
MingleMatch Web sites, along with JDate.co.il (Israel), Cupid
(Israel), Date.ca (Canada), Matchnet.co.uk (United Kingdom),
Matchnet.de (Germany), Matchnet.com.au (Australia), Glimpse.com
(United States) and CollegeLuv.com (United States). At the time
of acquisition in May 2005, MingleMatch had approximately 23,000
average paying subscribers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Average Paying Subscribers (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AmericanSingles
|
|
|
105.3 |
|
|
|
132.5 |
|
|
|
71.5 |
|
|
JDate
|
|
|
70.5 |
|
|
|
69.8 |
|
|
|
50.7 |
|
|
Other Businesses
|
|
|
44.2 |
|
|
|
23.8 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
220.0 |
|
|
|
226.1 |
|
|
|
125.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Monthly Net Revenue per Paying Subscriber:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AmericanSingles
|
|
$ |
23.12 |
|
|
$ |
22.16 |
|
|
$ |
22.43 |
|
|
JDate
|
|
|
30.70 |
|
|
|
28.42 |
|
|
|
26.44 |
|
|
Other Businesses
|
|
|
17.58 |
|
|
|
16.75 |
|
|
|
23.72 |
|
|
Total
|
|
|
24.44 |
|
|
|
23.53 |
|
|
|
24.09 |
|
Direct Subscriber Acquisition Cost:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AmericanSingles
|
|
$ |
35.16 |
|
|
$ |
43.29 |
|
|
$ |
45.70 |
|
|
JDate
|
|
|
12.70 |
|
|
|
8.09 |
|
|
|
4.39 |
|
|
Other Businesses
|
|
|
32.05 |
|
|
|
34.74 |
|
|
|
80.32 |
|
|
Total
|
|
|
28.36 |
|
|
|
33.85 |
|
|
|
33.84 |
|
Monthly Subscriber Churn:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AmericanSingles
|
|
|
36.3 |
% |
|
|
35.6 |
% |
|
|
32.1 |
% |
|
JDate
|
|
|
25.9 |
% |
|
|
25.8 |
% |
|
|
22.4 |
% |
|
Other Businesses
|
|
|
25.6 |
% |
|
|
26.8 |
% |
|
|
33.4 |
% |
|
Total
|
|
|
30.8 |
% |
|
|
31.7 |
% |
|
|
28.2 |
% |
In 2003 and 2004, the larger increase in average paying
subscribers for AmericanSingles as compared to the increase for
JDate was primarily due to JDate possessing a larger portion of
its market, while AmericanSingles possessed a smaller portion of
its market and its average paying subscribers has, as a result,
grown more quickly. For the year ended December 31, 2005,
the decrease in average paying subscribers for AmericanSingles
as compared to the slight increase for JDate was primarily due
to a corporate initiative to reduce marketing spending related
to AmericanSingles and increase spending related to JDate.
We have embarked on increases in marketing spending for JDate,
primarily in the area of off-line marketing. Such marketing
initiatives are targeted at brand building and name recognition.
The marketing programs most prominently include print and
billboard advertising. We include the costs of these marketing
programs in the direct marketing expense for the JDate segment.
As these are new marketing initiatives and spending that we have
not previously undertaken, it has resulted in an increase in our
customer acquisition cost for JDate. Even after these increased
spending programs, the cost of customer acquisition for JDate is
significantly lower than for our other segments due to the
strong brand perception and word of mouth reputation of JDate.
Our recent marketing initiatives are targeted specifically at
maintaining that strong word of mouth name reputation and brand
recognition.
54
We expect the cost of customer acquisition for JDate to remain
below the acquisition cost for our other segments.
AmericanSingles and our other Web sites operate in much more
competitive environments, and therefore we generally must spend
more on marketing to attract new subscribers. Monthly subscriber
churn rate is somewhat independent from an increasing number of
subscribers opting for multi-month contracts. During a period
where the number of total new subscribers and subscribers
canceling are both increasing, but more new subscribers are
choosing longer term contracts, then churn rate can increase
while average revenue per subscriber falls. We are constantly
striving to improve our Web sites to retain our existing
subscribers. However, we do not forecast churn rates, and lack
the ability to accurately do so.
Results of Operations
The following is a more detailed discussion of our financial
condition and results of operations for the periods presented.
The following table presents our historical operating results as
a percentage of net revenues for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net revenues
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Direct marketing
|
|
|
37.3 |
|
|
|
47.7 |
|
|
|
49.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution margin
|
|
|
62.7 |
|
|
|
51.6 |
|
|
|
50.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
11.5 |
|
|
|
11.0 |
|
|
|
12.1 |
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
General and administrative (excluding share-based compensation)
|
|
|
38.3 |
|
|
|
44.7 |
|
|
|
50.2 |
|
|
Amortization of intangible assets other than goodwill
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
Impairment of long lived assets
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
64.1 |
|
|
|
69.6 |
|
|
|
80.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
(17.8 |
) |
|
|
(29.9 |
) |
Interest and other expenses, net
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss income before income taxes
|
|
|
(2.4 |
) |
|
|
(17.7 |
) |
|
|
(29.4 |
) |
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
|
(2.2 |
)% |
|
|
(17.7 |
)% |
|
|
(29.4 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the purposes of this and all future filings, prior period
classification of share-based compensation was reclassified to
conform to current period classification.
Year Ended December 31, 2005 Compared to Year Ended
December 31, 2004
Business Metrics
For the year ended December 31, 2005, average paying
subscribers for the JDate segment increased 1.0% to 70,500,
compared to 69,800 for the same period last year. For the year
ended December 31, 2005, average paying subscribers for the
AmericanSingles segment decreased 20.5% to 105,300 compared to
132,500 for the same period in 2004. For the year ended
December 31, 2005, average paying subscribers for Web sites
in our Other Businesses segment increased 85.7% to 44,200,
55
compared to 23,800 for the same period in 2004. The increase in
average paying subscribers for JDate for the year ended
December 31, 2005 is a result of increased marketing
spending to acquire new JDate members. The decrease in average
paying subscribers for AmericanSingles is due to a decline in
the total marketing expenditures in 2005 compared to 2004. In
the last three quarters of 2005, we stabilized our marketing
spending rate for AmericanSingles, and accordingly we expect
that the number of average paying subscribers for
AmericanSingles will begin to stabilize as well. The increase in
average paying subscribers for our Other Businesses segment is
due primarily to the acquisitions of MingleMatch in May 2005 and
the launch of our Cupid website in Israel, as well as increases
in our international Web sites which began operations in early
2004.
For the year ended December 31, 2005, average monthly net
revenue per paying subscriber for the JDate segment increased 8%
to $30.70 compared to $28.42 for the year ended
December 31, 2004. The increase was due to an increase in
net revenue associated with new subscriptions at a higher price
point. We believe JDate, which experienced more average daily
visitors and more page views than any other religious online
personals service in 2005 according to a report by comScore
Media Metrix, is the market leader for online personals in the
Jewish singles market and a market leader in raising our price
for this service in 2004. We believe JDate will continue to be
the market leader for online personals in the Jewish singles
market, and thus we expect that we will continue to be a pricing
leader in that market. For the year ended December 31,
2005, average monthly net revenue per paying subscriber for the
AmericanSingles segment increased 4.3% to $23.12 from $22.16 for
the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was due to a
price increase for AmericanSingles implemented in June 2005. We
believe AmericanSingles, which was ranked as the third largest
provider of online personals services in the United States in
terms of total unique visitors in 2005 according to comScore
Media Metrix, is a leading service in the general online
personals market but does not have a dominant position. Our
price increase in June 2005 followed price increases at
competing Web sites. We expect we will continue to have to
consider competitive pressures in setting pricing for
AmericanSingles. For the year ended December 31, 2005,
average monthly net revenue per paying subscriber for Web sites
in our Other Businesses segment increased 5.0% to $17.58,
compared to $16.75 for the year ended December 31, 2004.
The increase was primarily due to the addition of MingleMatch
during the second quarter of 2005.
For the year ended December 31, 2005, direct subscriber
acquisition cost for JDate increased 57.0% to $12.70 compared to
$8.09 for the same periods in 2004. The increase in direct
subscriber acquisition costs for JDate is due to new marketing
initiatives for the JDate site in order to attract new
subscribers. For the year ended December 31, 2005, direct
subscriber acquisition costs for AmericanSingles decreased 18.8%
to $35.16 compared to $43.29 for the same period in 2004 due to
a decrease in marketing expenditures associated with the
AmericanSingles Web site as well as increased efficiency of
marketing spending. For the year ended December 31, 2005,
direct subscriber acquisition cost for the Web sites in our
Other Businesses segment decreased 7.7% to $32.05 compared to
$34.74 for the same period in 2004. This decrease was primarily
due to the acquisition of MingleMatch which has a lower
acquisition cost per subscriber than the other sites included in
this segment.
For the year ended December 31, 2005, monthly subscriber
churn for JDate increased slightly to 25.9% compared to 25.8%
for the same period in 2004. For the year ended
December 31, 2005, monthly subscriber churn for
AmericanSingles increased to 36.3%, compared to 35.6% for the
same period in 2004. For the year ended December 31, 2005,
monthly subscriber churn for the Web sites in our Other
Businesses segment decreased to 25.6% compared to 26.8% for the
same period in 2004. The decrease in the churn at year end 2005
is due to the addition of MingleMatch.
Net Revenues
Substantially all of our net revenues are derived from
subscription fees. The remainder of our net revenues, accounting
for less than 2% of net revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004, are attributable to certain
promotional events. Revenues are presented net of credits and
credit
56
card chargebacks. We expect net revenues from promotional events
to comprise an even smaller percentage of net revenues in the
future. We also expect to generate revenues from advertising on
our Web sites in the future. Our subscriptions are offered in
durations of one, three, six and twelve months. Plans with
durations of longer than one month are available at discounted
rates. Most subscription programs renew automatically for
subsequent periods until subscribers terminate them.
Net revenues for JDate increased 9.2% to $26.0 million for
the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to
$23.8 million in 2004. The increase in net revenues for
JDate is due to an increase in pricing in mid 2004 which
contributed to increased revenues. Net revenues for
AmericanSingles decreased 17.1% to $29.2 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005, compared to
$35.2 million for the same period in 2004. The decrease in
AmericanSingles net revenue is due to the decrease in average
paying subscribers as discussed above. Net revenues for our
Other Businesses segment increased 71.7% to $10.3 million
for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to
$6.0 million for the same period in 2004, largely driven by
the purchase of MingleMatch, Inc. in the second quarter of 2005.
Direct Marketing Expenses
Direct marketing expenses for JDate increased 65.8% to
$2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2005
compared to $1.7 million in 2004. The increase in marketing
spent was due to new marketing initiatives for JDate. Direct
marketing expenses for AmericanSingles decreased 39.2% to
$15.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005
compared to $25.0 million for the same period in 2004. The
decrease in AmericanSingles marketing was due to a corporate
initiative to reduce marketing spending related to the site.
Direct marketing expenses for our Web sites in our Other
Businesses segment increased 39.9% to $6.4 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $4.5 million
for the same period in 2004. The increase in spending related to
our Web sites in our Other Businesses segment is attributed to
the acquisition of MingleMatch and additional advertising in
order to generate traffic to our newer international Web sites
which commenced operations in early 2004. The cost of customer
acquisition for JDate is significantly lower than for our other
segments due to the strong brand perception and name recognition
for and word of mouth reputation for JDate. AmericanSingles and
our other Web sites operate in much more competitive
environments, and must spend more on marketing to attract new
subscribers.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses consist primarily of indirect marketing,
customer service, technical operations, product development and
general and administrative expenses. Operating expenses
decreased 7.8% to $41.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to $45.5 million in the
same period in 2004. Stated as a percentage of net revenues,
operating expenses decreased to 64.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to 69.6% for the same period in
2004. The decrease is due primarily to a decrease in indirect
marketing expenses as discussed below.
Indirect Marketing. Indirect marketing expenses consist
primarily of salaries for our sales and marketing personnel and
other associated costs such as public relations. Indirect
marketing expenses decreased 53.7% to $1.2 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $2.6 million
for the same period in 2004. Stated as a percentage of net
revenues, indirect marketing expenses decreased to 1.8% for the
year ended December 31, 2005 compared to 4.0% for the same
period in 2004. The decrease is due to a decrease in headcount
in our marketing department, and the termination of the Chief
Marketing Officer in the fourth quarter of 2004 a position which
has not been replaced. We expect these costs to increase in
total dollars as we expand our marketing initiatives but to
decrease as a percentage of net revenues as we add additional
paying subscribers.
Customer Service. Customer service expenses consist
primarily of costs associated with our member services center.
Customer services expenses decreased 16.3% to $2.8 million
for the year ended
57
December 31, 2005 compared to $3.4 million for the
same period in 2004. Stated as a percentage of net revenues,
customer service expenses decreased to 4.3% for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to 5.2% for the same period in
2004. The decrease is due to a decrease in headcount from 2004
to 2005 offset by share-based compensation as a result of the
adoption of SFAS 123(R) of $44,000 for 2005. During the
first nine months of 2004 we had higher staffing in our member
services center in order to better serve our customers due to
the launch of new Web sites and new platforms. During the
remainder of 2004 and in 2005, we worked to increase our
efficiency in handling our call volume, and therefore reduced
our headcount accordingly. We expect these costs to continue to
increase in total dollars as we support our increasing base of
members and subscribers but to decrease as a percentage of net
revenues as we add additional paying subscribers.
Technical Operations. Technical operations expenses
consist primarily of the people and systems necessary to support
our network, Internet connectivity and other data and
communication support. Technical operations expenses increased
4.2% to $7.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2005 compared to $7.2 million in 2004. The increase is
primarily due to an increase in depreciation expense associated
with the increase in hardware to support our network and an
increase in capitalized software amortization associated with
redesigning our operating platform as well as an increase in
share based compensation as a result of the adoption of
SFAS 123(R) of $316,000 for 2005. As a percentage of net
revenues, technical operations decreased to 11.5% for the year
ended December 31, 2005 compared to 11.0% in the same
period last year. We expect technical operations costs to
increase in total dollars with any increase in traffic, members
or paying subscribers but to decrease as a percentage of net
revenues as we add additional paying subscribers.
Product Development. Product development expenses consist
primarily of costs incurred in the development, creation and
enhancement of our Web sites and services. Product development
expenses increased 105% to $4.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to $2.0 million in 2004. As
a percentage of net revenues, product development expenses
increased to 6.3% for the year ended December 31, 2005
compared to 3.1% in 2004. The increase is due primarily to an
increase in headcount associated with pursuing new business
opportunities as well as improving the infrastructure of our
existing businesses, as well as share based compensation, as a
result of the adoption of SFAS 123(R) of $248,000 in 2005.
We expect our product development costs to increase in total
dollars as we launch new Web sites and develop additional
features and functionality on our Web sites to enhance our
members experience and satisfaction and increase the
number, and percentage, of members that become paying
subscribers but to remain constant as a percentage of net
revenues as we add additional paying subscribers.
General and Administrative. General and administrative
expenses consist primarily of corporate personnel-related costs,
professional fees, credit card processing fees, and occupancy
and other overhead costs. General and administrative expenses
decreased 14.2% to $25.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005 compared to $29.3 million for the
same period in 2004. The decrease in general and administrative
expenses is due primarily to lower legal expenses and
capitalized IPO costs which were expensed in the third quarter
of 2004. The decrease was offset by an increase in consulting
services as well as an increase in credit card processing fees,
including charges and fines, and an increase in share based
compensation of $537,000 in 2005 as a result of the adoption of
SFAS 123(R). Stated as a percentage of net revenues,
general and administrative expenses decreased to 38.3% for the
year ended December 31, 2005 compared to 44.7% in 2004. We
expect these general and administrative expenses to increase in
total dollars as we continue to hire additional personnel, and
as sales and the inherent credit card processing fees increase.
We also expect general and administrative expenses to increase
in total dollars due to the anticipated increase in professional
fees resulting from the filing of our registration statement and
related documents and our subsequent obligations as a public
reporting company in the United States. However, we expect
general and administrative expenses, excluding credit card
processing fees, to decrease as a percentage of net revenues as
we add additional paying subscribers.
58
Amortization of Intangible Assets Other Than Goodwill.
Amortization expenses consist primarily of amortization of
intangible assets related to the MingleMatch acquisition as well
as previous acquisitions, primarily SocialNet and PointMatch.
Amortization expense increased 26.2% to $1.1 million for
the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $860,000 in
2004. The increase is due to the amortization of intangible
assets resulting from the MingleMatch acquisition in the second
quarter of 2005 partially offset by intangibles related to older
acquisitions being fully amortized in the first quarter of 2005.
Interest Income/ Loss and Other Expenses, Net. Interest
income/loss and other expenses consist primarily of interest
expense associated with notes payable, interest income from
temporary investments in interest bearing accounts and
marketable securities and income on our investments in
non-controlled affiliates. Expenses increased to $711,000 for
the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to a gain of
$66,000 for the same period in 2004. The increase was due
primarily to recognition of imputed interest expense on the
notes due to MingleMatch, losses upon liquidation of marketable
securities and loss from Duplo recognized under the equity
method of accounting.
Net Loss. Net loss in 2005 was affected by compensation
expense related to the adoption of SFAS 123(R) of
$2.7 million, increased amortization expense related to the
purchase of MingleMatch of $675,000, partially offset by a
decrease in indirect marketing costs of $1.1 million.
Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared to Year Ended
December 31, 2003
Business Metrics
Average paying subscribers for JDate increased 37.7%, to
approximately 69,800 for the year ended December 31, 2004
from approximately 50,700 for the year ended December 31,
2003. Average paying subscribers for AmericanSingles increased
85.3%, to approximately 132,500 for the year ended
December 31, 2004 from approximately 71,500 for the year
ended December 31, 2003. Average paying subscribers for Web
sites in our Other Businesses segment increased to approximately
23,800 for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
approximately 3,600 for the year ended December 31, 2003.
The increase in paying subscribers for all of our segments
corresponds to the increased marketing expenditures for all of
our segments. The larger increase in average paying subscribers
for AmericanSingles as compared to the increase for JDate was
primarily due to JDate possessing a larger portion of its
market. The increase in paying subscribers in our Other
Businesses segment was due to growth in our international Web
sites, including our Israel affiliate, which was acquired at the
beginning of 2004, and our Web sites in Israel, United Kingdom
and Canada.
Average monthly net revenue per paying JDate subscriber
increased 7.5%, to $28.42 for the year ended December 31,
2004 from $26.44 for the year ended December 31, 2003.
Average monthly net revenue per paying AmericanSingles
subscriber decreased 1.2% to $22.16 for the year ended
December 31, 2004 from $22.43 for the year ended
December 31, 2003. Average monthly net revenue per paying
subscriber for Web sites in our Other Businesses segment
decreased 29.4%, to $16.75 for the year ended December 31,
2004 from $23.72 for the year ended December 31, 2003. The
increase for JDate was primarily due to a price increase which
was put into effect in January 2004. The decrease for
AmericanSingles was due to an increase in the proportion of
subscribers paying for multi-month subscriptions, for which they
receive a discount on the monthly rate compared to the
single-month subscription price. The decrease for Web sites in
our Other Businesses segment was primarily due to the growth of
new Web sites with lower subscription prices than those Web
sites that represented our Other Businesses segment in 2003.
Direct subscriber acquisition cost for JDate increased 84.3%, to
$8.09 in 2004 from $4.39 in 2003. Direct subscriber acquisition
cost for AmericanSingles decreased 5.3%, to $43.29 in 2004 from
$45.70 in 2003. Direct subscriber acquisition cost for the Web
sites in our Other Businesses segment decreased 56.7%, to $34.74
in 2004 from $80.32 in 2003. The increase in direct subscriber
acquisition cost for JDate was due primarily to the cost of new
marketing initiatives, including offline billboard campaigns
59
designed to solidify and expand JDates brand awareness.
Despite this increase, the cost of customer acquisition for
JDate is significantly lower than for our other segments due to
the strong brand perception and name recognition for and word of
mouth reputation for JDate. AmericanSingles and our other Web
sites operate in much more competitive environments, and must
spend more on marketing to attract new subscribers. The decrease
in direct subscriber acquisition cost for AmericanSingles and
the Web sites in our Other Businesses segment was due improved
marketing efficiency, such that greater marketing expenditures
were made without significant increases in our average
subscriber acquisition costs. For AmericanSingles, we began to
put a greater emphasis on pay for performance advertising
models, such as cost per subscription (CPS) and cost per
acquisition (CPA) arrangements, where we are better able to
monitor and manage our cost of subscriber acquisition.
Monthly subscriber churn for JDate increased to 25.8% for the
year ended December 31, 2004 from 22.4% for the year ended
December 31, 2003. Monthly subscriber churn for
AmericanSingles increased to 35.6% for the year ended
December 31, 2004 from 32.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2003. Monthly subscriber churn for Web sites
in our Other Businesses segment decreased to 26.8% for the year
ended December 31, 2004 from 33.4% for the year ended
December 31, 2003. The increase in monthly subscriber churn
for JDate and AmericanSingles was due primarily to
implementation in late 2003 of the
pay-to-respond feature
which required members to upgrade to paying subscriber status
before they could respond to emails from other paying
subscribers. Members who subscribe specifically to utilize the
pay-to-respond feature
are less likely to renew their subscriptions than those who
subscribe to initiate communications. The decrease in monthly
subscriber churn for the Web sites in our Other Business segment
was due to growth and maturity of those businesses. Some of the
Web sites in our Other Businesses segment were launched in late
2003, including our sites in Canada and the UK. During the early
startup period for a Web site which requires a critical mass of
members in order to attract new members, churn rates are higher.
As subscribers see the same other members of the community
repeatedly, they are more prone to quit the service. As the Web
site community grows, churn rates typically decline as
subscribers take longer to feel they have exhausted their
possibilities within the community.
Net Revenues
Substantially all of our net revenues are derived from
subscription fees. The remainder of our net revenues, accounting
for less than 2% of net revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003, are attributable to certain
promotional events. Revenues are presented net of credits and
credit card chargebacks. We expect net revenues from promotional
events to comprise an even smaller percentage of net revenues in
the future. We also expect to generate revenues from advertising
on our Web sites in the future. Our subscriptions are offered in
durations of one, three, six and twelve months. Plans with
durations of longer than one month are available at discounted
rates. Most subscription programs renew automatically for
subsequent periods until subscribers terminate them.
Net revenues for JDate increased 48.0%, to $23.8 million
for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
$16.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003.
Net revenues for AmericanSingles increased 83.0%, to
$35.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004,
compared to $19.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003. Net revenues for our Other Businesses
segment increased 276.2%, to $6.0 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 compared to $1.6 million for
the year ended December 31, 2003. The increase in
JDates net revenues is primarily attributable to an
increase in JDates monthly subscription price during the
first quarter of 2004. The increase in net revenues for
AmericanSingles is primarily due to an increase in
subscriptions, as discussed above. The increase in net revenues
for our Other Businesses segment is due primarily to the growth
of our businesses in Israel, whose growth was aided by our
acquisition of Point Match Ltd. in the first quarter of 2004, as
well as growth in our UK and Canada Web sites.
60
Direct Marketing Expenses
Direct marketing expenses primarily consist of advertising costs
and direct costs to obtain new paying subscribers. Direct
marketing expenses for JDate increased 135.5%, to
$1.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
approximately $739,000 for the year ended December 31,
2003. Direct marketing expenses for AmericanSingles increased
57.1%, to $25.0 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004 compared to $15.9 million for the
year ended December 31, 2003. Direct marketing expenses for
Web sites in our Other Businesses segment increased 157.0%, to
$4.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 from
$1.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The
increases for JDate and AmericanSingles are due to an overall
increase in the cost of online advertising, which is our primary
source for advertising, as well as new marketing initiatives for
JDate. In addition, for our AmericanSingles Web site, we
initiated an aggressive marketing program in the second quarter
of 2004. We reduced our marketing for AmericanSingles in
subsequent quarters in 2004 in order to reduce our subscriber
acquisition cost. The cost of customer acquisition for JDate is
significantly lower than for our other segments due to the
strong brand perception and name recognition for and word of
mouth reputation for JDate. AmericanSingles and our other Web
sites operate in much more competitive environments, and must
spend more on marketing to attract new subscribers. For Web
sites in our Other Businesses segment, in addition to the
increase in the cost of online advertising, our direct marketing
expenses also increased because of the additional expenses
associated with the Web site assets acquired in the Point Match
Ltd. acquisition.
As a percentage of revenues, total direct marketing expenses for
JDate increased to 7.3% in 2004 from 4.6% in 2003. The increase
was due to new marketing initiatives for JDate. As a percentage
of revenues, total direct marketing expenses for AmericanSingles
decreased to 70.8% in 2004 from 82.5% in 2003. The decrease was
due to improved marketing efficiency, including greater emphasis
on pay for performance advertising models, such that greater
marketing expenditures were made without significant increases
in our average subscriber acquisition costs. As a percentage of
revenues, total direct marketing expenses for our Other
Businesses segment decreased to 75.7% in 2004 from 110.8% in
2003. The decrease was due to improved marketing efficiency,
including greater emphasis on pay for performance advertising
models, as well as emphasis on making the contribution of Web
sites in this segment a positive number. Overall, for all of our
segments, total direct marketing expenses decreased to 48.0%
from 49.8% for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003
respectively.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses primarily consist of indirect marketing,
customer service, technical operations, product development and
general and administrative expenses. Operating expenses
increased 53.8% to approximately $45.5 million in 2004 from
approximately $29.6 million in 2003. Stated as a percentage
of net revenues, operating expenses decreased to 70.0% for 2004
from 80.1% in 2003. The increase in total dollars was primarily
the result of a higher level of general and administrative
expenses, as well as an increase in indirect marketing and
technical operations as discussed below. The decrease as a
percentage of revenues was primarily the result of economies of
scale in customer service and technical operations costs
required to support an increasing revenue base.
Indirect Marketing. Indirect marketing expenses primarily
consist of salaries for our sales and marketing personnel and
other associated costs such as public relations. Indirect
marketing expenses increased 164.4%, to approximately
$2.6 million in 2004 compared to $986,000 in 2003. Stated
as a percentage of net revenues, indirect marketing expenses
increased to 4.0% for 2004 from 2.7% in 2003. The increase in
total dollars and as a percentage of net revenues was largely as
a result of an increase in headcount in our marketing department.
Customer Service. Customer service expenses primarily
consist of costs associated with our member service center.
Customer service expenses increased 33.2%, to $3.4 million
in 2004 compared to $2.5 million in 2003. Stated as a
percentage of net revenues, customer service expenses decreased
to
61
5.2% for 2004 from 6.9% in 2003. The increase in total dollars
was largely as a result of an increase in headcount, which
increase was driven by the larger number of members and paying
subscribers. The decrease as a percentage of revenues was
primarily the result of increased efficiency of usage of our
customer service personnel in supporting a larger member and
subscriber base.
Technical Operations. Technical operations expenses
primarily consist of the people and systems necessary to support
our network, Internet connectivity and other data and
communication support. Technical operations expenses increased
60.3% to $7.2 million in 2004 from $4.5 million in
2003. Stated as a percentage of net revenues, technical
operations expenses decreased to 11.0% in 2004 from 12.1% in
2003. The increase in total dollars was due to an increase in
headcount necessary to support the growth in the number of
members, paying subscribers and traffic to our Web sites. The
decrease as a percentage of revenues was primarily the result of
economies of scale in headcount required to support a larger
member and subscriber base.
Product Development. Product development expenses
primarily consist of costs incurred in the development, creation
and enhancement of our Web sites and services. Product
development expenses increased 109.9%, to $2.0 million in
2004 compared to $959,000 in 2003. Stated as a percentage of net
revenues, product development expenses increased to 3.1% in 2004
from 2.6% in 2003. The increase in total dollars and as a
percentage of net revenues was largely as a result of costs
associated with technical enhancements to our Web sites as well
as an increase in headcount necessary to support these
enhancements. We expense these costs as incurred unless they are
required to be capitalized under generally accepted accounting
principles in the United States. In addition to the expenses set
forth above, our capitalized product development costs were
approximately $658,000 and $825,000 in 2004 and 2003,
respectively. The amortization of those costs is included in
this line item.
General and Administrative Expenses. General and
administrative expenses primarily consist of corporate
personnel-related costs, professional fees, credit card
processing fees, and occupancy and other overhead costs. General
and administrative expenses increased 57.8%, to
$29.3 million in 2004 from $18.5 million in 2003.
Stated as a percentage of net revenues, general and
administrative expenses decreased to 45.1% in 2004 from 50.2% in
2003. The increase in total dollars was largely as a result of
an increase in hiring people to support our growth, an employee
severance charge of approximately $2.4 million, as well as
expenses of $2.1 million related to the United States
initial public offering of MatchNet, Inc. that was planned for
mid-2004, but which was withdrawn shortly after the related
registration statement was filed in the third quarter of 2004,
as well as one legal settlement resulting in the recognition of
$900,000 in expenses in the third quarter and two legal
settlements resulting in the recognition of $2.1 million in
expenses in the fourth quarter of 2004. The decrease as a
percentage of revenues was primarily the result of economies of
scale in supporting a larger member and subscriber base.
Amortization of Intangible Assets Other Than Goodwill.
Amortization expenses consist primarily of amortization of
intangible assets related to previous acquisitions, primarily
SocialNet and Point Match. Amortization expenses increased 55.0%
to $860,000 in 2004, compared to $555,000 in 2003. The increase
was primarily due to amortization related to the Point Match
acquisition, which was completed in January 2004.
Impairment of Long-lived Assets. In December 2004, based
on changes in management and reevaluation of existing projects
we determined that certain internally developed software
projects would not be completed. As such, we recorded an
impairment charge of $208,000.
Interest Income and Other Expenses, Net. Interest income
and other expenses, net primarily consist of gain (loss)
associated with temporary investments in interest bearing
accounts and marketable securities. Interest income and other
expenses, net decreased 64.9%, to approximately $66,000 in 2004
from $188,000 in 2003, principally due to foreign exchange
effects.
62
Quarterly Results of Operations
You should read the following tables presenting our quarterly
results of operations in conjunction with the consolidated
financial statements and related notes contained elsewhere in
this prospectus. We have prepared the unaudited information on
substantially the same basis as our audited consolidated
financial statements which, in the opinion of management,
includes all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring
adjustments, except as otherwise indicated, necessary for the
presentation of the results of operations for such periods. You
should also keep in mind, as you read the following tables, that
our operating results for any quarter are not necessarily
indicative of results for any future quarters or for a full year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months ended(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Dec 31, | |
|
Sep 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Mar 31, | |
|
Dec 31, | |
|
Sep 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Mar 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
(In thousands except per share amounts) |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$ |
16,586 |
|
|
$ |
16,935 |
|
|
$ |
15,464 |
|
|
$ |
16,526 |
|
|
$ |
17,052 |
|
|
$ |
17,138 |
|
|
$ |
15,812 |
|
|
$ |
15,050 |
|
Direct marketing expenses
|
|
|
6,059 |
|
|
|
7,073 |
|
|
|
6,051 |
|
|
|
5,228 |
|
|
|
6,628 |
|
|
|
8,748 |
|
|
|
9,325 |
|
|
|
6,539 |
|
|
|
Contribution margin
|
|
|
10,527 |
|
|
|
9,862 |
|
|
|
9,413 |
|
|
|
11,298 |
|
|
|
10,424 |
|
|
|
8,390 |
|
|
|
6,487 |
|
|
|
8,511 |
|
Operating expenses:*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
547 |
|
|
|
912 |
|
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
580 |
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
1,040 |
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
560 |
|
|
|
577 |
|
|
|
778 |
|
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
2,698 |
|
|
|
1,898 |
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
1,402 |
|
|
|
1,983 |
|
|
|
1,482 |
|
|
|
2,085 |
|
|
|
1,634 |
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
1,169 |
|
|
|
1,059 |
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
|
830 |
|
|
|
637 |
|
|
|
505 |
|
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
5,061 |
|
|
|
7,529 |
|
|
|
6,405 |
|
|
|
6,079 |
|
|
|
7,694 |
|
|
|
7,578 |
|
|
|
6,227 |
|
|
|
7,754 |
|
|
Amortization of intangible assets other than goodwill
|
|
|
237 |
|
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
301 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of long-lived assets
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
10,760 |
|
|
|
11,828 |
|
|
|
10,112 |
|
|
|
9,263 |
|
|
|
12,037 |
|
|
|
11,388 |
|
|
|
10,552 |
|
|
|
11,527 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(233 |
) |
|
|
(1,966 |
) |
|
|
(699 |
) |
|
|
2,035 |
|
|
|
(1,613 |
) |
|
|
(2,998 |
) |
|
|
(4,065 |
) |
|
|
(3,016 |
) |
Interest (income) and other expenses, net
|
|
|
426 |
|
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(659 |
) |
|
|
(2,107 |
) |
|
|
(867 |
) |
|
|
2,059 |
|
|
|
(1,561 |
) |
|
|
(2,952 |
) |
|
|
(4,093 |
) |
|
|
(3,020 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
(256 |
) |
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(403 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,163 |
) |
|
$ |
(859 |
) |
|
$ |
1,987 |
|
|
$ |
(1,561 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,952 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,093 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,021 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share
basic(2)
|
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.08 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.13 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.18 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.14 |
) |
Net income (loss) per share
diluted(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding
basic(2)
|
|
|
27,530 |
|
|
|
26,080 |
|
|
|
25,661 |
|
|
|
25,117 |
|
|
|
24,234 |
|
|
|
23,356 |
|
|
|
22,264 |
|
|
|
21,286 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding
diluted(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,236 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
$ |
913 |
|
|
$ |
942 |
|
|
$ |
919 |
|
|
$ |
848 |
|
|
$ |
857 |
|
|
$ |
839 |
|
|
$ |
790 |
|
|
$ |
579 |
|
Additional Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Paying
Subscribers(3)
|
|
|
224,200 |
|
|
|
220,800 |
|
|
|
215,600 |
|
|
|
222,600 |
|
|
|
229,000 |
|
|
|
239,600 |
|
|
|
228,400 |
|
|
|
207,400 |
|
Average monthly net revenue per paying
subscriber(4)
|
|
$ |
24.66 |
|
|
$ |
24.57 |
|
|
$ |
23.12 |
|
|
$ |
24.32 |
|
|
$ |
24.06 |
|
|
$ |
23.50 |
|
|
$ |
22.74 |
|
|
$ |
23.83 |
|
Subscriber
churn(5)
|
|
|
29.7 |
% |
|
|
31.4 |
% |
|
|
30.8 |
% |
|
|
31.7 |
% |
|
|
32.4 |
% |
|
|
31.6 |
% |
|
|
30.6 |
% |
|
|
32.1 |
% |
Average direct subscriber acquisition
cost(6)
|
|
$ |
27.78 |
|
|
$ |
30.23 |
|
|
$ |
31.11 |
|
|
$ |
23.84 |
|
|
$ |
29.37 |
|
|
$ |
37.41 |
|
|
$ |
40.53 |
|
|
$ |
27.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Dec 31, | |
|
Sep 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Mar 31, | |
|
Dec 31, | |
|
Sep 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Mar 31, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
* Operating expenses include share-based compensation as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect marketing
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
$ |
31 |
|
|
$ |
46 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
|
Customer service
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technical operations
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(379 |
) |
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
1,063 |
|
|
|
1,028 |
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
514 |
|
|
|
(891 |
) |
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
1,371 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Certain financial information for prior periods has been
reclassified to conform to the 2005 periods presentation. |
|
|
(2) |
For information regarding the computation of per share amounts,
refer to Note 1 of our consolidated financial statements. |
|
|
(3) |
Represents average paying subscribers calculated as the sum of
the average paying subscribers for each month, divided by the
number of months. Average paying subscribers for each month are
calculated as the sum of the paying subscribers at the beginning
and end of the month, divided by two. |
|
63
|
|
|
(4) |
Represents the total net subscriber revenue for the period
divided by the number of average paying subscribers for the
period, divided by the number of months in the period. |
|
|
(5) |
Represents the ratio expressed as a percentage of (i) the
number of paying subscriber cancellations during the period
divided by the number of average paying subscribers during the
period and (ii) the number of months in the period. On a
monthly basis, the average number of paying subscribers is
calculated as the sum of the paying subscribers at the beginning
and end of the period divided by two. |
|
|
(6) |
Represents direct marketing expense divided by the gross number
of subscribers added during the period. The historic direct
subscriber acquisition cost we reported included indirect
marketing costs. |
|
Restatement of Previous Consolidated Financial Statements for
the Nine Months Ended September 30, 2003
In previous periods, we incorrectly recognized a full month of
revenue in the month in which members paid in advance for their
membership subscription fees, regardless of the effective date
of the subscription, and deferred the balance of the fees for
multi-month subscriptions. In July 2003, we began to defer and
recognize revenue on a daily basis, based on the effective date
of the subscription, and restated prior periods financial
statements to reflect that policy.
In previous periods we had capitalized bounty costs, which
represented amounts paid to third parties for members acquired
on an individual basis through third party Web sites or email
campaigns. These costs were being amortized over a three year
period, on an accelerated basis. In July 2003, we determined
that these costs should be expensed as incurred, and that we
should restate the prior years financial statements to
conform to U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
The reason for the change was that bounty costs were meant to
drive free memberships or registrations and any resulting member
was not required to become a paying subscriber. Therefore, those
expenses should be recognized immediately, since a conversion
from non-paying member to a paying subscriber is not guaranteed.
Accordingly, we have restated the consolidated financial
statements to expense these costs as incurred.
From 1998 through 2002, we acquired several businesses and
assets. At the time of those acquisitions, the fair values of
the intangible assets acquired were not properly determined. In
2004, we hired a valuation expert to measure the fair value of
such assets at the date of each acquisition. As a result of this
process, we determined that certain allocations previously
reported were inappropriate. In addition, we did not properly
and timely accrue for some services provided and we identified
certain errors in prior years consolidation process.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of December 31, 2005, we had cash, cash equivalents and
marketable securities of $17.3 million. We have
historically financed our operations with internally generated
funds and offerings of equity securities. We have no revolving
or term credit facilities.
Net cash provided by operations was $3.9 million for the
year ended December 31, 2005 compared to net cash used of
$1.6 million for the same period in 2004. The increase is
primarily due to a significantly lower loss. In 2004, we had
negative operating cash flow due mainly to increased marketing
spending, primarily for AmericanSingles, which was designed to
boost revenues for that segment. During the second half of 2004,
and in the first quarter of 2005, marketing spending on
AmericanSingles was reduced in order to reduce the subscriber
acquisition cost, and improve the contribution margin (net
revenues minus direct marketing costs), and this also resulted
in improvement in cash flow from operations. In addition, net
loss was affected by higher non-cash charges for depreciation
and amortization as a result of the MingleMatch purchase as well
as SFAS 123(R) related charges. Operating cash flow in 2005
was negatively impacted by a decrease in accounts payable.
Net cash used by investing activities was $259,000 for 2005
compared to net cash used of $11.2 million for 2004. The
decrease in cash used was as a result of liquidating marketable
securities as well as a reduction in capital expenditures during
2005, partially offset by the purchase of
64
MingleMatch in 2005. During 2004, net cash used by investing
activities included acquisition of businesses, primarily
PointMatch of $5.6 million, as well as capital expenditures
for property and equipment of $5.5 million, mainly for
increased server and internet hosting equipment for our growing
Web sites. During 2005, net cash used by investing activities
included $1.8 million for the acquisition of MingleMatch
(net of cash acquired), as well as capital expenditures of
$1.4 million, primarily for hardware and software for our
Web sites. We anticipate that future capital expenditures for
equipment and software for our Web site re-architecture will
continue to be less than our pace of spending in 2004 as the
re-architecture project is primarily focused on software
architecture and is intended to make use of our existing
hardware capacity.
Net cash provided by financing activities was $9.1 million
for 2005 compared to $15.0 million for 2004. In 2004, we
completed a private placement of 600,000 ordinary shares which
resulted in net proceeds to the Company of $3.7 million, as
well as the exercise of share options and warrants which
resulted in net proceeds of $11.5 million. Cash provided by
financing activities in 2005 was due almost entirely to the
exercise of options and warrants offset by payments for notes
payable related to the MingleMatch acquisition.
As discussed in our financial statements, we issued certain
securities that may in the future be subject to a rescission
offer commenced by us. We do not believe such a rescission offer
would affect our ability to obtain financing in the future, due
to our belief that a rescission offer would not be accepted by
our shareholders or option holders in an amount that would
represent a material expenditure by us. This belief is based on
the fact that a rescission offer, if made, would result in our
offering to repurchase shares at a weighted average price of
$2.09 and to repurchase options with a weighted average exercise
price of $3.71, while the trading price of our shares closed at
$7.42 per share on December 31, 2005. As of
December 31, 2005, the cost to rescind shares issued
pursuant to options where the rescission value exceeds the
difference between the exercise price of the underlying option
and the market price for our securities as of the close of
trading on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange would be
$1.9 million including statutory interest, of which
$1.7 million relates to the 200,000 shares held by our
former Co-Chairman. As of December 31, 2005, assuming every
eligible optionee were to accept a rescission offer, we estimate
the total cost to us to complete the rescission for the
unexercised options would be approximately $1.9 million,
including statutory interest. As of December 31, 2005, the
total number of options subject to a rescission is 2,405,750
with a weighted average rescission offer repurchase price of
$0.80 per share, including statutory interest. As of
December 31, 2005, the cost to rescind unexercised options
where the rescission value exceeds the difference between the
options exercise price and the market price for our securities
as of the close of trading on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange would
be $551,000 including statutory interest.
We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents,
marketable securities and cash flow from operations will be
sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for working
capital, capital expenditures and contractual obligations,
including promissory note payments to MingleMatch in respect of
that acquisition, for at least the next 12 months. We had
positive operating cash flow in 2005 and anticipate continued
positive cash flow from operations. This belief is based on our
belief stated above that we do not anticipate that a rescission
offer will be accepted by our shareholders. Thus, we do not
anticipate requiring additional capital; however, if required or
desirable, we may raise additional funds through bank financing
or through the capital markets issuance of debt or equity.
As discussed in Note 9 to our consolidated financial
statements in this prospectus, in May 2005, the Company issued
five short term promissory notes in connection with the
MingleMatch acquisition in the cumulative face value amount of
$10 million with a computed principal of $9.7 million
after imputed interest and discount of $253,000, computed at a
3.08% interest rate.
In September 2004, the Company issued a promissory note to
Comdisco in the amount of $1.7 million as a final
settlement for a lawsuit. The note bears simple interest at the
rate of 2.75% per year and is payable in installments,
excluding accrued interest, on (i) September 15, 2005
in the amount of
65
$400,000 (paid); (ii) September 15, 2006 in the amount
of $400,000; and (iii) September 15, 2007 in the
amount of $900,000.
The following table describes our contractual commitments and
obligations as of December 31, 2005 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than | |
|
|
|
|
|
More than |
|
|
|
|
1 Year | |
|
1-3 Years | |
|
4-5 Years |
|
5 Years |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Operating leases
|
|
$ |
414 |
|
|
$ |
202 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
616 |
|
Other commitments and obligations
|
|
|
10,411 |
|
|
|
1,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,488 |
|
Total contractual obligations
|
|
$ |
10,825 |
|
|
$ |
1,279 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
12,104 |
|
We had other commitments and obligations consisting of notes
payable for acquisitions and legal settlements as well as,
contracts with software licensing, communications, computer
hosting and marketing service providers. These amounts totaled
$10.4 million for less than one year and $1.1 million
between one and three years. Contracts with other service
providers are for 30 day terms or less.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any relationships with unconsolidated entities or
financial partnerships, such as entities often referred to as
structured finance or special purpose entities, which would have
been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance
sheet arrangements or other contractually, narrow or limited
purposes. We do not have any outstanding derivative financial
instruments, off-balance sheet guarantees, interest rate swap
transactions or foreign currency forward contracts.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
We are exposed to market risk attributed to changes in interest
rates and foreign currency exchange rates.
Interest Rate Risk
Our exposure to market rate risk for changes in interest rates
relate primarily to our cash, cash equivalents and marketable
securities. We have not used derivative financial instruments to
mitigate such risk. We invest our excess cash in debt
instruments of the U.S. Government and its agencies.
Investments in both fixed-rate and floating-rate
interest-earning instruments carry a degree of interest rate
risk. Fixed-rate securities may have their market values
adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates, while
floating-rate securities may produce less income than expected
if interest rates fall. Due in part to these factors, our future
investment income may fall short of expectations due to changes
in interest rates or we may suffer losses in principal if forced
to sell securities which have declined in market value due to
changes in interest rates. Due to the short-term nature of our
investment portfolio, and our ability to liquidate this
portfolio in short order, we do not believe that a 10% increase
in interest rates would have a material effect on the fair
market value of our investment portfolio.
Foreign Currency Risk
Our exposure to foreign currency risk is due primarily to our
international operations. Revenues and certain expenses related
to our international Web sites are denominated in the functional
currencies of the local countries they serve. Primary currencies
include Israeli shekels, Canadian dollars, British pound
sterling and Euros. Our foreign subsidiary in Israel conducts
business in their local currency. We translate into
U.S. dollars the assets and liabilities using period-end
rates of exchange, and revenues and expenses using average rates
of exchange for the year. Any weakening of the U.S. dollar
against these foreign currencies will result in increased
revenue, expenses and translation gains and losses in our
66
consolidated financial statements. Similarly, any strengthening
of the U.S. dollar against these currencies will result in
decreased revenues, expenses and translation gains and losses.
Foreign exchange gains and losses were not material to our
earnings for the years ended December 31 2005, 2004 and
2003.
Change in Accountants
On March 23, 2004, upon the authorization of our Board of
Directors, we dismissed Stonefield Josephson, Inc. as our
U.S. auditors and engaged Ernst & Young LLP as our
independent auditors. Chantrey Vellacott DFK resigned as our UK
auditors on the same date. During the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the subsequent period from
January 1, 2004 to March 23, 2004, Stonefield
Josephson, Inc. did not have any disagreement with us on any
matter of accounting principles or practices, financial
statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedure, which
disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of Stonefield
Josephson, Inc., would have caused them to make reference to the
subject matter of the disagreement in connection with their
reports on our financial statements for such years. The reports
of Stonefield Josephson, Inc. on financial statements for the
years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001 did not contain an
adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion, and were not qualified
or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting
principles. We did not consult with Ernst & Young LLP
on any financial or accounting reporting matters before its
appointment. Notwithstanding the foregoing, during the course of
the preparation of our financial statements for the year ended
December 31, 2003, we discovered accounting inaccuracies in
previously reported financial statements, including those for
the years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001 that were
covered by reports issued by Stonefield Josephson, Inc.
Difficulties arose from differing views between Ernst &
Young LLP and Stonefield Josephson, Inc. regarding the necessity
and scope of a restatement of 2002 and 2001 financial
statements. Up to that point, we had expected to include
Stonefield Josephson, Inc.s reports on those years in a
registration statement that MatchNet, Inc. filed on
August 4, 2004. However, we were unable to timely obtain
concurrence from Stonefield Josephson, Inc. that restatements
were required and the extent of such restatements. As a result,
we directed Ernst & Young LLP to reaudit the years
ended December 31, 2002 and 2001 and restated our financial
statements for these years and for the first three quarters of
2003 to correct inappropriate accounting entries.
The restatements primarily related to the timing of recognition
of deferred revenue and the capitalization of bounty costs,
which are the amounts paid to online marketers to acquire
members. The restatements, which are in accordance with United
States generally accepted accounting principles, pertained
primarily to timing matters and had no impact on cash flow from
operations or our ongoing operations. The impact on net loss for
2002 and 2001 was an increase of $1.0 million and
$1.5 million, respectively.
Recent Accounting Developments
In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154,
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, a
replacement of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 20,
Accounting Changes, and SFAS No. 3,
Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim Financial
Statements (SFAS 154). SFAS 154
changes the requirements for the accounting for, and reporting
of, a change in accounting principle. Previously, voluntary
changes in accounting principles were generally required to be
recognized by way of a cumulative effect adjustment within net
income during the period of the change. SFAS 154 requires
retrospective application to prior periods financial
statements, unless it is impracticable to determine either the
period-specific effects or the cumulative effect of the change.
SFAS 154 is effective for accounting changes made in fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2005; however, the
statement does not change the transition provisions of any
existing accounting pronouncements. We do not believe adoption
of SFAS 154 will have a material effect on our financial
position, cash flows or results of operations.
67
BUSINESS
Throughout this prospectus, we refer to Spark Networks plc
(known as MatchNet plc until January 10, 2005), an English
company, and our subsidiaries as we, us,
our, our company, Spark
Networks and MatchNet unless otherwise
indicated. Spark Networks, MatchNet, JDate, AmericanSingles and
MingleMatch are our trademarks. Trade names, trademarks and
service marks of other companies appearing in this prospectus
are the property of the respective holders.
Our Business
We are a leading provider of online personals services in the
United States and internationally. Our Web sites enable adults
to meet online and participate in a community, become friends,
date, form a long-term relationship or marry. We provide this
opportunity through the many features on our Web sites, such as
detailed profiles, onsite email centers, real-time chat rooms
and instant messaging services. In 2005, Spark Networks averaged
approximately 3.3 million monthly unique visitors to our
Web sites in the United States, according to comScore Media
Metrix, which ranked us as the third largest provider of online
personals services in the United States. comScore Media Metrix
defines total unique visitors as the estimated
number of different individuals that visited any content of a
Web site, a category, a channel, or an application during the
reporting period. The number of total unique
visitors to our Web sites as measured by comScore Media
Metrix does not correspond to the number of members we have in
any given period. Currently, our key Web sites are JDate.com and
AmericanSingles.com. We operate several international Web sites
and maintain operations in both the United States and Israel.
Information regarding the geographical source of our revenues
can be found in Note 12 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this annual report. Membership on our
sites is free and allows a registered user to post a personal
profile and to access our searchable database of member
profiles. The ability to initiate most communication with other
members requires the payment of a monthly subscription fee,
which represents our primary source of revenue. We also offer
discounted subscription rates for members who subscribe for
longer periods, ranging from three to twelve months. Following
their initial terms, subscriptions on our Web sites renew
automatically for subsequent one-month periods until paying
subscribers terminate them.
For the year ended December 31, 2005, we had approximately
220,000 average paying subscribers, representing a decrease of
2.7% from 2004. Our JDate and AmericanSingles segments had
approximately 70,500 and 105,300 average paying subscribers for
the year ended December 31, 2005, an increase of 1% and a
decrease of 20.5%, respectively, compared to 2004.
Our Industry
We believe that online personals fulfill significant needs for
single adults who are looking to meet a companion or date.
Traditional methods such as printed personals advertisements,
offline dating services and public gathering places often do not
meet the needs of time-constrained single people. Printed
personals advertisements offer individuals limited personal
information and interaction before meeting. Offline dating
services are time-consuming, expensive and offer a smaller
number of potential partners. Public gathering places such as
restaurants, bars and social venues provide a limited ability to
learn about others prior to an in-person meeting. In contrast,
online personals services facilitate interaction between singles
by allowing them to screen and communicate with a large number
of potential companions. With features such as detailed personal
profiles, email and instant messaging, this medium allows users
to communicate with other singles at their convenience and
affords them the ability to meet multiple people in a safe and
secure online setting.
Our Competitive Strengths
|
|
|
|
|
Strength of JDate Brand. We believe that JDates
strong brand recognition in the Jewish community is a valuable
asset. An analysis of comScore Media Metrix data, for the twelve |
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
months ended December 31, 2005, reveals that JDate.com
experienced more average daily visitors and more page views than
any other religious online personals service, and that JDate.com
is the most popular religion-focused online personals service in
the United States. We believe the strength of the JDate brand
will continue to allow us to market to the Jewish community
profitably while maintaining a high penetration rate. Because of
the strength of the JDate brand, we are not required to spend as
much on marketing to drive a member to JDate as we are our other
Web sites, and as is typical of other Web sites in the industry. |
|
|
|
|
|
Web Site Functionality. We continually evaluate the
functionality of our Web sites to improve our members
online personals experience. Many of the features that we offer,
such as onsite email, real-time chat rooms and instant
messaging, increase the probability of communication between our
members, which we believe increases the number and percentage of
members who become paying subscribers. We believe those types of
functionality drives return visits to our Web sites and help us
retain paying subscribers who might otherwise consider switching
to our competitors Web sites. |
|
|
|
|
|
Customer Service Focus. We believe that our customer
service focus offers us a competitive advantage and
differentiates us from our major competitors. Our multi-lingual
call center is staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
with customer service representatives. These representatives
help members with a range of assistance, such as matters
relating to completing personal profiles and choosing photos for
their profiles, and answering questions about billing and
technical issues. We believe that the quality of our customer
service increases member satisfaction which, in turn, also
increases the number and percentage of members that become and
remain paying subscribers. |
|
Our Online Personals Services
Our online personals services offer single adults convenient and
secure settings for meeting other singles. Visitors to our Web
sites are encouraged to become registered members by posting
profiles. Posting a profile is a process where visitors are
asked various questions about themselves, including information
such as their tastes in food, hobbies and desired attributes of
potential partners. Members are also urged to post photos, since
this is likely to improve their chances of making successful
contact with other members. Members can perform detailed
searches of other profiles and save their preferences, and their
profiles can be viewed by other members. In most cases, in order
for a member to initiate email and instant message communication
with others, that member must purchase a subscription. A
subscription affords access to the paying subscribers
on-site email and
instant messaging systems, enabling such subscribers to
communicate with other members and paying subscribers. Our
subscription fees are charged on a monthly basis, with discounts
for longer-term subscriptions ranging from three to twelve
months.
Our Web Sites. We believe we are a unique company
in the online personals industry because, in addition to
servicing mass markets, we also operate Web sites targeted at
selected vertical affinity markets. We currently offer Web sites
in English and Hebrew. Our key Web sites are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
JDate.com. JDate was our first Web site and is dedicated
to the Jewish community and culture, and those who are seeking
to be part of it. An analysis of comScore Media Metrix data for
the twelve months ended December 31, 2005, revealed that
JDate.com experienced more average daily visitors and more page
views than any other religious online personals service, and
that JDate.com is the most popular religion-focused online
personals service in the United States. JDate members are
primarily concentrated in the New York, Los Angeles, Miami and
Chicago metropolitan areas. The current fee for a one-month
subscription on JDate is $34.95. |
69
|
|
|
|
|
|
AmericanSingles.com. AmericanSingles is our mainstream
U.S. online personals community, targeted at an audience of
singles between the ages of 25 and 49. The Web site caters to
singles of all races, ethnicities and interests. AmericanSingles
members are primarily concentrated in major metropolitan areas
across the United States. The current fee for a one-month
subscription on AmericanSingles is $29.99. |
|
|
|
|
|
Other Web sites. |
|
|
|
|
Web site |
|
Target Markets |
|
|
|
AdventistSinglesConnection.com*
|
|
Adventist singles |
AsianSinglesConnection.com*
|
|
Asian singles |
BBWPersonalsPlus.com*
|
|
Big beautiful women, big handsome men and their admirers |
BlackSinglesConnection.com*
|
|
African American singles |
CanadianPersonals.net*
|
|
Canadian singles |
CatholicMingle.com*
|
|
Catholic singles |
ChristianMingle.com*
|
|
Christian singles |
CollegeLuv.com
|
|
College singles |
Cupid.co.il
|
|
Jewish singles (Israel only) |
Date.ca
|
|
Canadian singles |
Date.co.uk
|
|
UK singles |
DeafSinglesConnection.com*
|
|
Deaf singles |
GreekSinglesConnection.com*
|
|
Greek singles |
IndianMatrimonialNetwork.com*
|
|
Indian singles |
InterracialSingles.net*
|
|
Interracial singles |
ItalianSinglesConnection.com*
|
|
Italian singles |
JDate.co.il
|
|
Jewish singles (Israel only) |
JewishMingle.com*
|
|
Jewish singles |
LatinSinglesConnection.com*
|
|
Hispanic/Latin singles |
LDSMingle.com*
|
|
Mormon singles |
MilitarySinglesConnection.com*
|
|
Military singles |
PrimeSingles.net*
|
|
Mature singles |
SingleParentsMingle.com*
|
|
Single parents |
UKSinglesConnection.com*
|
|
UK singles |
|
|
* |
Acquired through our acquisition of MingleMatch, Inc. |
Web Site Features. We strive to offer traditional
as well as new and different ways for our members to
communicate. Examples of ways our members and paying subscribers
can communicate include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-site Email. We provide all paying subscribers with
private message centers, dedicated to communications with other
paying subscribers. These personal
on-site email boxes
offer features such as customizable folders for storing
correspondence, the ability to know when sent messages were
read, as well as block and ignore functions, which afford paying
subscribers the ability to control future messages from specific
paying subscribers. |
|
|
|
|
|
Hot Lists and Favorites. Among the most popular features
on our Web sites, Hot Lists enable paying
subscribers to see whos interested in them and to save
those favorite members that they are interested in. Lists
include (1) who has viewed your profile, (2) your
favorites and (3) who has emailed you. Paying subscribers
can group their |
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
favorites into customized folders and add their own notes,
including details included in a members profile. |
|
|
|
|
|
Real-time Chat Rooms. Paying subscribers can utilize our
exclusive chat rooms to mix and mingle in real-time, building a
sense of community through group discussions. Additional
features enable users to add customized graphics such as
emoticons to their conversations. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ice Breakers. Members can send pre-packaged opening
remarks, referred to on the Web sites as flirts, to
other members or paying subscribers. |
|
|
|
|
|
Click! Our patented Click! feature connects
members who think they would be compatible with each other. A
member simply clicks yes, no or
maybe in another members profile. When two
members click yes in each others profiles, our
patented feature sends an email to both of them alerting them of
a possible connection. |
|
Travel and Events. As a complement to our online
services, we offer travel opportunities and other promotional
events which allow individuals to meet in a more personal
environment. Our travel and event programs are typically trips,
dinners or other mixer events designed to facilitate social
interaction. Less than 2% of our revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2005 were generated from travel and events.
Business Strategy
We intend to grow our subscription-based revenue by driving
additional traffic to our Web sites, through integrated and
targeted marketing and cross-promotion into vertical affinity
markets such as those acquired in the MingleMatch, Inc.
acquisition. In addition, by providing strong customer service
and improved features and functionality on our Web sites, we
intend to provide more reasons for visitors to our Web sites to
become and remain subscribers.
Drive Traffic. We believe there are significant
opportunities to drive additional traffic to our Web sites and
identify new markets, where we can leverage our existing
infrastructure to increase subscriptions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integrated and targeted marketing. We believe that
targeting potential members with consistent and compelling
marketing messages, delivered through a broad mix of marketing
channels, will be effective in driving more traffic and a higher
percentage of relationship-oriented singles to our Web sites. We
intend to use a variety of channels to build our brand and
increase our base of subscribers including online and offline
advertising customer relationship management tools, public
relations, promotional alliances and special events. |
|
|
|
|
|
Cross-Promote Into Vertical Affinity Markets. Our
large base of members provides us with a significant amount of
consumer data to evaluate cross-promotion opportunities for
growth into vertical affinity markets such as those acquired in
the MingleMatch acquisition. We are able to analyze different
groups of members by key metrics such as total potential
subscribers and average revenue per paying subscriber and
identify those targeted groups that may prefer a service
dedicated to their particular affinity groups. We intend to
target and cross-promote into vertical affinity markets that we
believe are receptive to paid online personals and are large
enough to attain a critical mass of members and paying
subscribers. |
|
|
|
|
|
Increase Subscription Rates. We had approximately 220,000
average paying subscribers for the year ended December 31,
2005. We believe that a significant growth opportunity lies in
our ability to increase the number of visitors to our Web sites
who become paying subscribers. |
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
Improved technology. We believe that the more successful
members are in finding matches in our database, the more likely
they are to want to communicate with those members. To initiate
email and instant message communication, members must become
paying subscribers. We intend to continue to enhance our
technology and the quality and relevance of our search results
to provide fast, relevant suggestions. |
|
|
|
|
|
Leveraging strong customer service. Each time a member or
potential member contacts our customer service center by email
or phone, he or she represents a potential new paying subscriber
to our services. By training our customer service
representatives on upselling opportunities, we believe they will
continue to be successful in selling and building loyalty to our
subscription-based services. |
|
|
|
|
|
Improved member communications. We believe that enhanced
member communication is a key component to growing our business.
We continue to focus on improving and enhancing our Web site
functionality and features to encourage communications between
members. Most of these communications require that members
become paying subscribers. We will also continue to inform
members of new features and functions with the goal of
increasing the number of visitors to our Web sites who become
paying subscribers. |
|
Customer Service
Our customer support and service function operates 24 hours
a day, 7 days a week. As of December 31, 2005, we
employed 42 customer service representatives at our Beverly
Hills, California facility, 19 representatives in Provo, Utah
and 13 customer service representatives at our facility in
Israel. Our team of customer service representatives helps
members with matters ranging from completing personal essays and
choosing photos for their profiles to answering questions about
billing and technical issues. Customer service representatives
receive ongoing training in an effort to better personalize the
experience for visitors, members and paying subscribers that
call in and to capitalize on upselling opportunities. On
average, our customer service center receives approximately
1,700 phone calls and 5,000 emails per day, and our average wait
time for phone calls and response time for emails are
approximately three minutes and four hours, respectively.
Marketing
We engage in a variety of marketing activities intended to drive
consumer traffic to our Web sites and allow us the opportunity
to introduce our products and services to prospective members.
Our marketing efforts are principally focused online, where we
employ a combination of banner and other display advertising on
Web portals and other specialized sites. We also rely on
commercial search listings and direct email campaigns to attract
potential members and paying subscribers, and utilize a network
of online affiliates, through which we acquire traffic. None of
these affiliates, individually, represents a material portion of
our revenue. These affiliate arrangements are easily cancelable,
often with only one-day notice. Typically, we do not have any
exclusivity arrangement with our affiliates, and some of our
affiliates may also be affiliates for our competitors.
In addition to our online marketing efforts, we supplement our
marketing by employing a variety of offline marketing
activities. These primarily consist of print and outdoor
advertising, public relations, event sponsorship and promotional
alliances. We believe that more targeted marketing messages,
delivered through an array of available marketing channels, will
improve consumer awareness of our brands, drive more traffic to
our Web sites and, therefore, increase the numbers of our
members and paying subscribers. Specifically for JDate, we
increased offline marketing spending. Such marketing initiatives
are targeted at brand building and name recognition.
72
Technology
Our software development team consisted of 20 employees as of
December 31, 2005, who are focused on expanding and
improving the features and functionality of our Web sites. Since
feature and functionality development is an important element of
our strategy, we plan to expand that team. In addition to our
development team, an additional 20 employees monitor and
maintain our software and hardware infrastructure.
Our network infrastructure and operations are designed to
deliver high levels of availability, performance, security and
scalability in a cost-effective manner. The majority of our
software architecture is based on standard modular Microsoft
technology, which we believe facilitates the addition of new Web
sites and features.
We recently completed a re-architecture of our primary system
based on distributed Service Oriented Architecture principles
using the Microsoft.Net platform. This re-architecture included
changes to our server and network configurations, database
schemas and deployment, web presentation methodologies and
introduced a variety of new application services. We believe
that this new architecture will enable us to more rapidly
develop new capabilities and enhance our ability to scale our
Web sites.
Our primary email system runs on dedicated appliances, with each
server capable of sending approximately 2 million messages
per hour. In addition to our email servers, we operate other Web
and database servers, which are co-located at a data center
facility in El Segundo, California that is operated by a third
party. We are currently increasing redundant hardware and
software systems in order to better support our services.
Intellectual Property
We rely on a combination of patent, trademark, copyright and
trade secret laws in the United States and other jurisdictions
as well as confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions
to protect our proprietary technology and our brands. We also
enter into confidentiality and invention assignment agreements
with our employees and consultants and confidentiality
agreements with other third parties.
Spark Networks, JDate and AmericanSingles are some of our
trademarks, whether registered or not, in the United States and
several other countries. AmericanSingles and JDate are
registered trademarks in the United States. JDate is also a
registered trademark in the EU, Australia, Israel and Canada.
Spark Networks is a registered trademark in the United States
and EU. Our rights to these registered trademarks are perpetual
as long as we use them and renew them periodically. We also have
a number of other registered and unregistered trademarks. In
addition, we hold a United States patent to Click!, which
lasts until January 24, 2017, that pertains to an automated
process for confidentially determining whether people feel
mutual attraction or have mutual interests. Click! is
important to our business in that it is a method and apparatus
for detection of reciprocal interests or feelings and subsequent
notification of such results. The patent describes the method
and apparatus for the identification of a persons level of
attraction and the subsequent notification when the feeling or
attraction is mutual.
Competition
We operate in a highly competitive environment with minimal
barriers to entry. We believe that the primary competitive
factors in creating a community on the Internet are
functionality, brand recognition, critical mass of members,
member affinity and loyalty,
ease-of-use, quality of
service and reliability. We compete with a number of large and
small companies, including vertically integrated Internet
portals and specialty-focused media companies that provide
online and offline products and services to the markets we
serve. Our principal online personals services competitors
include Yahoo! Personals, Match.com, a wholly-owned subsidiary
of InterActiveCorp, and eHarmony, all of which operate primarily
in North America. In addition, we face competition from social
networking Web
73
sites such as MySpace and Friendster. There are also numerous
other companies offering online personals services that compete
with us, but are smaller than we are in terms of paying
subscribers and annual revenue generation.
Employees
As of December 31, 2005, we had 193 full-time
employees. We are not subject to any collective bargaining
agreements and we believe that our relationship with our
employees is good.
Facilities
We do not own any real property. Our headquarters are located in
Beverly Hills, California, where we occupy approximately
26,500 square feet of office space that houses our
technology department, customer service operations, and most of
our corporate and administrative personnel. This lease expires
on July 31, 2007. Our monthly base rent for this facility
is $53,850. We also currently lease office space in Provo, Utah;
Cupertino, California; San Francisco, California, Israel;
England; and Germany. We believe that our facilities are
adequate for our current needs and suitable additional or
substitute space will be available in the future to replace our
existing facilities, if necessary, or accommodate expansion of
our operations.
Legal Proceedings
Three separate yet similar class action complaints have been
filed against us. On June 21, 2002, Tatyana Fertelmeyster
filed an Illinois class action complaint against us in the
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, based on an alleged
violation of the Illinois Dating Referral Services Act. On
September 12, 2002, Lili Grossman filed a New York class
action complaint against us in the Supreme Court in the State of
New York based on alleged violations of the New York Dating
Services Act and the Consumer Fraud Act. On November 14,
2003, Jason Adelman filed a nationwide class action complaint
against us in the Los Angeles County Superior Court based on an
alleged violation of California Civil Code section 1694 et
seq., which regulates businesses that provide dating services.
In each of these cases, the complaint included allegations that
we are a dating service as defined by the applicable statutes
and, as an alleged dating service, we are required to provide
language in our contracts that allows (i) members to
rescind their contracts within three days,
(ii) reimbursement of a portion of the contract price if
the member dies during the term of the contract and/or
(iii) members to cancel their contracts in the event of
disability or relocation. Causes of action include breach of
applicable state and/or federal laws, fraudulent and deceptive
business practices, breach of contract and unjust enrichment.
The plaintiffs are seeking remedies including declaratory
relief, restitution, actual damages although not quantified,
treble damages and/or punitive damages, and attorneys fees
and costs.
Huebner v. InterActiveCorp., Superior Court of the
State of California, County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC
305875 involves a similar action, involving the same
plaintiffs counsel as Adelman, brought against
InterActiveCorps Match.com that has been ruled related to
Adelman, but the two cases have not been consolidated. We
have not been named a defendant in the Huebner case.
Adelman and Huebner each seek to certify a
nationwide class action based on their complaints. Because the
cases are class actions, they have been assigned to the Los
Angeles Superior Court Complex Litigation Program.
A mediation occurred in Adelman in 2004 that did not
result in a settlement. A post-mediation status conference was
held on Friday, July 16, 2004. At that Status Conference,
the court suggested that the parties agree to a bifurcation of
the liability issue. The purpose of the bifurcation is to allow
the Court to determine whether as a matter of law the California
Dating Services Act (CDS Act) applies to us. In this
way, if the Court determines that the CDS Act is inapplicable,
all further expenses associated with discovery and class
certification can be avoided. The Court has permitted limited
discovery including document requests and interrogatories, the
parties will each be permitted to take one
74
deposition without further leave of the Court, the parties will
be allowed to designate expert witnesses, and the Court will
conduct a trial on the issue of the applicability of the CDS Act
to our business in the spring of 2006.
Although some written discovery relating to the bifurcated trial
has been completed, depositions have not yet been taken. A
second mediation occurred in Adelman on Friday,
February 10, 2006. The mediation resumed on
February 23, 2006, but did not result in a settlement. The
parties have agreed in principle to continue the bifurcated
trial to approximately May 15, 2006 and extend the time for
filing briefs and completing discovery.
On March 25, 2005, the court in Fertelmeyster
entered its Memorandum Opinion and Order (Memorandum
Opinion) granting summary judgment in our favor, on the
grounds that Fertelmeyster lacks standing to seek injunctive
relief or restitutionary relief under the Illinois Dating
Services Act, Fertelmeyster did not suffer any actual damages,
and that we were not unjustly enriched as a result of our
contract with Fertelmeyster. The Memorandum Opinion
disposes of all matters in controversy in the
litigation and also provides that we are subject to the Illinois
Dating Services Act and, as such, our subscription agreements
violate the act and are void and unenforceable. This ruling may
subject us to potential liability for claims brought by the
Illinois Attorney General or customers that have been injured by
our violation of the statute. Fertelmeyster filed a Motion for
Reconsideration of the Memorandum Opinion and, on
August 26, 2005, the court issued its opinion denying
Fertelmeysters Motion for Reconsideration. In the opinion,
the court, among other things: (i) decertified the class,
eliminating the last remnant of the litigation;
(ii) rejected each of the plaintiffs arguments based
on the arguments and law that we provided in our opposition;
(iii) stated that the court would not judicially amend the
Illinois statute to provide for restitution when the legislature
selected damages as the sole remedy; (iv) noted that the
cases cited by plaintiff in connection with plaintiffs
Motion for Reconsideration actually support the courts
prior order granting summary judgment in our favor; and
(v) denied plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration in
its entirety. The time period for filing an appeal from the
Memorandum Opinion in the Fertelmeyster Action has now expired,
and as a result, the Fertelmeyster litigation is now
concluded.
In December 2002, the Supreme Court of New York dismissed the
case brought by Ms. Grossman. Although the plaintiff
appealed the decision, in October 2004, the New York Supreme
Court, Appellate Division upheld the lower courts
dismissal. In addition, two Justices in a concurring opinion
concluded that our services were not covered under the New York
Dating Services Act.
A lawsuit was filed against us in the United States District
Court for the Central District of California by Datingcity, Ltd,
Case No. CV05-4463
SJO (SSx). The Complaint alleges causes of action for
(1) Breach of Contract, (2) Unjust Enrichment,
(3) Promissory Estoppel, and (4) Accounting.
Datingcity alleges that it entered into a contract with Spark
for the sale of a database owned by Datingcity. Datingcity
further alleges that Spark did not pay Datingcity the agreed
upon price for the purchase of the database. We contend that the
contract at issue was signed in error, Datingcity misrepresented
the quality of its database, and the information contained in
the database was virtually useless and without value.
Accordingly, on July 15, 2005, we filed an Answer and
Counterclaim against Datingcity alleging claims for
(1) Rescission based on Unilateral Mistake,
(2) Rescission based on Mutual Mistake, (3) Rescission
based on Failure of Consideration, (4) Rescission based on
Fraud in the Inducement, (5) Fraud, (6) Negligent
Misrepresentation, and (7) Declaratory Relief. At a status
conference that was held on August 22, 2005, the court
scheduled this matter for a jury trial on April 25, 2006.
However, in September 2005 we settled this litigation by paying
Datingcity $75,000.
On July 21, 2005, Leonard Kristal (Kristal) and
MatchPower Ltd. (MatchPower) filed an action in the
Los Angeles County Superior Court, Civil Action
No. SC086367, entitled LEONDARD KRISTAL, and
MATCHPOWER, LTD., Plaintiffs, v. MATCHNET, PLC; SPARK
NETWORKS, PLC, and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants (the
Kristal/ MatchPower Action). In their complaint,
Kristal and MatchPower assert claims for a breach of contract,
wrongful termination in violation of
75
public policy, and solicitation of employee by
misrepresentation. MatchPower alleges that it entered into an
agreement with us to pay MatchPower the sum of $15,000 per
month from March 30, 2004 through April 2005 and that we
now owe MatchPower the sum of $90,000 under the agreement. We
have filed a Motion to Dismiss and/or for Forum Non Conveniens
under the MatchPower agreement, which provides that the
exclusive jurisdiction for disputes is the English
courts, in order to require that MatchPower litigate its
claims, if any, in England. The court has granted that Motion
and MatchPower is no longer a party to the case. Kristal alleges
that (i) we entered into an employment agreement pursuant
to which Kristal was employed on a part-time basis at the rate
of $10,000 per month through April 2005, (ii) the
employment agreement was amended in July 2004 to increase
Kristals monthly salary to $15,000 per month,
(iii) Kristal was required to move and establish residency
in Los Angeles and (iv) the employment agreement was
terminated on December 22, 2004. Kristal alleges that we
owe him $85,000 under the agreement, plus a waiting time penalty
of $15,000. Kristal also alleges that, in August 2004, we orally
promised Kristal the right to purchase at least
110,000 shares of our shares at a purchase price of $2.50
and that he was terminated because he made a written complaint
that he had not been paid according to his contract and as a
result, his termination was a retaliatory termination in
violation of public policy. Kristal claims that he is entitled
to recover damages for pain and suffering and emotional distress
and punitive damages based on his retaliatory termination. In
addition, Kristal claims that he was induced to move to Los
Angeles for the purpose of accepting employment from us in Los
Angeles and that we promised Kristal employment at least through
April 2005, together with wages for employment at the rate of
$15,000 per month. According to Kristal, we misrepresented
to Kristal the length of his employment and the compensation
therefore, and as a result, he claims he is entitled to double
damages caused by misrepresentations allegedly made by us to
Kristal pursuant to California Labor Code § 972.
A mediation occurred in the Kristal/ MatchPower Action on
January 17, 2006. At the mediation, the parties entered
into a binding settlement stipulation (the
Stipulation). According to the terms of the
Stipulation, we will pay to Kristal the sum of $150,000 in equal
monthly installments of $8,333.33 commencing February 1,
2007, and Kristal and MatchPower will: (i) execute general
releases of known and unknown claims in our favor and
(ii) dismiss with prejudice the action they have filed
against us. A disagreement exists regarding the language to be
included, and the scope of, the General Release. We anticipate
that the Stipulation will be enforced according to its terms.
On March 10, 2005, Akonix Systems, Inc.
(Akonix) filed with the American Arbitration
Association a demand for arbitration against us. Akonix, which
provided software services to us pursuant to a Project Contract
and Amendment thereto (Akonix Contract), claims that
we breached an obligation under the Akonix Contract to issue to
Akonix an option to purchase 50,000 shares of our
common stock at a strike price equal to the October 23,
2000 last trading price of such stock on the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange (the Stock Option). Although the Akonix
Contract called for the Stock Option to be delivered to Akonix
by December 19, 2001, Akonix did not demand delivery of the
Stock Option until mid-2004.
Akonix claims damages in excess of $500,000, based on the
difference between the strike price for the Stock Option and the
highest trading price of our stock in 2004. We contend that
Akonix is not entitled to pursue any claim based on the Stock
Option because, among other things, (a) Akonix did not
timely demand issuance of the Stock Option, (b) Akonix did
not tender to us payment of the option price, and (c) the
provision in the Akonix Contract for issuance of the Stock
Option is unenforceable, as no agreement was reached on the
length of time within which Akonix was entitled to exercise the
Stock Option.
In Akonix, the parties have recently had a status
conference with the arbitrator, pursuant to which the applicable
deadlines for completing discovery and proceeding with the
arbitration have been continued indefinitely. In the status
conference, the parties agreed in concept to mediating this
dispute. The mediation in Akonix occurred on
January 31, 2006. At the mediation, we proposed to settle
the claims
76
of Akonix for a payment of $75,000. On February 16, 2006,
Akonix accepted our proposal. Settlement documents have been
executed, and a settlement payment was made.
On September 16, 2005, Soheil Davood (Davood)
filed a Complaint against Spark entitled Soheil Davood vs.
Spark Networks, plc, Los Angeles County Superior Court Case
No. BC 339998, alleging causes of action for
(1) Breach of Express Warranty, (2) Breach of Implied
Warranty, (3) Negligent Misrepresentation, and
(4) Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress. Davood
alleges (i) he subscribed to JDate, a website operated by
us; (ii) he communicated with a female; (iii) she gave
him what he thought was her phone number; and (iv) when he
called the number, it was a rejection hotline recording causing
him to be humiliated and suffer emotional distress. Davood has
dismissed this action against Spark.
We have filed an action in the Los Angeles County Superior Court
(JetPay) against JetPay Merchant Services,
LLC, Los Angeles Superior Court Civil Action No. BC346182.
In the Complaint in JetPay, we assert causes of action
against JetPay for breach of oral contract, intentional
misrepresentation, fraudulent inducement, intentional
interference with economic advantage, breach of fiduciary duty,
negligence, unfair business practices, and declaratory relief.
We seek compensatory damages against JetPay in the sum of
$2,277,095.38 together with punitive damages to the extent
permitted by applicable California law as provided in the
Complaint in the JetPay Action. After we filed the Complaint
against JetPay, we discovered that JetPay had retained,
converted, and/or not distributed to us funds belonging to us in
the aggregate amount of approximately $331,000 not reflected in
the Complaint filed by us against JetPay. We intend to amend our
Complaint to seek the recovery of all such funds. JetPay has
provided a written memorandum to us in which JetPay claims that
it suffered actual damages of $439,012.70 as of January 10,
2006 and is entitled to recover liquidated damages in the amount
of $682,514.54.
On February 21, 2006, JetPay filed a Notice of Removal of
our state court action against JetPay to the United States
District Court for the Central District of California
(California Federal Court Action). JetPay has filed
an Answer to our Complaint and a Counterclaim in the California
Federal Court Action in which JetPay asserts the claims
previously raised by JetPay in its correspondence with us. In
addition, JetPay has filed a Complaint against us in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
(Texas Federal Court Action) in which it asserts the
same claims it has alleged in its Counterclaim in the California
Federal Court Action. JetPay has announced its intention to file
a Motion to Stay or dismiss the California Federal Court Action
so that its claims can be prosecuted in the Texas Federal Court
Action, and when that motion is filed, we will vigorously oppose
it in order to prosecute our claims against JetPay in the
California Federal Court Action. For the reasons set forth in
our Complaint in JetPay among others, we believe that we
are not indebted to JetPay in any amount whatsoever, we intend
to vigorously defend any claim filed by JetPay against us,
whether in JetPay or otherwise, and we are in the process
of prosecuting JetPay for the recovery of the damages set
forth above suffered by the us as a result of the acts and
omissions of JetPay.
We intend to defend vigorously against each of the lawsuits.
However, no assurance can be given that these matters will be
resolved in our favor and, depending on the outcome of these
lawsuits, we may choose to alter our business practices.
We have additional existing legal claims and may encounter
future legal claims in the normal course of business. In our
opinion, the resolutions of the existing legal claims are not
expected to have a material impact on our financial position or
results of operations. We believe we has accrued appropriate
amounts where necessary in connection with the above litigation.
77
MANAGEMENT
Executive Officers and Directors
As of April 5, 2006, our executive officers and directors
are set forth below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Age | |
|
Position |
|
|
| |
|
|
David E. Siminoff
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director |
Gregory R. Liberman
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
Chief Operating Officer, General Counsel and Company Secretary |
Mark G. Thompson
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
Joe Y. Shapira
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
Chairman of the Board |
Michael A. Brown
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
Director |
Martial Chaillet
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
Director |
Benjamin Derhy
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
Director |
Laura Lauder
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
Director |
Scott L. Shleifer
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
Director |
David E. Siminoff has served as our President and Chief
Executive Officer since August 2004 and as a member of our Board
of Directors since March 2004. From October 2003 to February
2004, Mr. Siminoff was Chief Financial Officer of
PayByTouch, a company that produces biometric payment services
and during interim periods of employment, Mr. Siminoff was
a private investor of several
start-up companies.
From August 1994 to January 2003, Mr. Siminoff served as a
Research Analyst and Portfolio Manager for Capital Research and
Management Company, where he dealt primarily with Media and
Internet technologies. In 1998 he was named Best of the
Buyside by Institutional Investor Magazine. Prior to his
work with Capital Research, Mr. Siminoff founded EastNet, a
global syndicate barter company. Mr. Siminoff received both
BA and MBA degrees from Stanford University and a Masters degree
in Fine Arts from the University of Southern California film
school.
Gregory R. Liberman was appointed Chief Operating Officer
in August 2005 and has served as our General Counsel since
October 2004 and Company Secretary since January 2005. From
January 2004 to May 2004 Mr. Liberman served as General
Counsel and Corporate Secretary of CytRx Corporation, a
publicly-traded biotechnology company based in Los Angeles.
During his tenure there, Mr. Liberman oversaw legal
affairs, policy and strategy for the company. From January 2002
to December 2003, Mr. Liberman served as an independent
strategic consultant. Immediately prior to that consulting work,
from September 2001 to November 2001, he attended and completed
the Program for Management Development at Harvard Business
School. From March 1999 to August 2001, Mr. Liberman served
in a variety of senior legal and corporate development roles at
telecommunications firm Global Crossing and Internet
infrastructure providers GlobalCenter (then, a subsidiary of
Global Crossing) and Exodus Communications. Mr. Liberman
joined Exodus, where he ultimately served as Vice President,
Legal & Corporate Affairs, after Global Crossings
sale of GlobalCenter to Exodus. Immediately prior to
Exodus acquisition of GlobalCenter, Mr. Liberman
served as GlobalCenters Vice President, Corporate
Development and Associate General Counsel. While at Global
Crossing, Mr. Liberman served as Director, Business
Development Counsel. Mr. Liberman earned a JD, with Honors,
from The Law School at the University of Chicago and an AB, with
University Distinction and Honors in Economics, from Stanford
University.
78
Mark G. Thompson has served as our Chief Financial
Officer since October 2004. He brings 18 years of financial
management and capital markets experience to his current role.
From December 2002 to October 2003 and from February 2004 to
September 2004 Mr. Thompson served as CFO of Pay By Touch,
the leading provider of biometric payment authentication and
payment processing services. From October 2003 to February 2004
Mr. Thompson was Vice President Finance of Pay By Touch.
From August 2001 to October 2002 Mr. Thompson was CFO of
Vectiv and from July 1999 to July 2001 he was CFO of
MarketTools, a provider of online marketing research.
Previously, he was Corporate Treasurer of PeopleSoft and
Assistant Treasurer of Chiron. Mr. Thompson also held
senior positions in finance and engineering at Chevron. He holds
a BS degree in electrical engineering from Texas A&M
University and an MBA from The Haas School of Business at The
University of California at Berkeley.
Joe Y. Shapira has served as our Executive Chairman of
the Board of Directors since February 2005 but has resigned from
his executive operating role effective December 31, 2005.
Mr. Shapira remains Chairman of the Board. From February
2004 to February 2005, Mr. Shapira served as our Executive
Co-Chairman of the Board of Directors. From our inception in
September 1998 to February 2004, Mr. Shapira served as
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board. He was a
co-founder and director of NetCorp, the original developer and
owner of JDate. In 1995, Mr. Shapira developed a concept
for dating over the Internet and oversaw the software
development, design and implementation of the business model of
JDate.com. Previously, from 1991 until 1994, Mr. Shapira
co-founded and served as a director and officer of Matrix Video
Duplication Corporation, a publicly listed company on the Tel
Aviv Stock Exchange. From 1987 until 1991, Mr. Shapira
co-founded and served as a director and officer of Video Tape
Industries, Inc. From 1983 to 1987, Mr. Shapira was a
principal in Sha-Rub Investment Co., a Southern California real
estate development company. Mr. Shapira graduated from the
Ort Singlavosky Institution of Technology in Tel Aviv, Israel in
1972.
Michael A. Brown has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since December 2004. Since September 2002,
Mr. Brown has been a managing partner at government and
public affairs consulting firm Alcalde & Fay, based in
Washington, D.C. At Alcalde & Fay, Mr. Brown
is focused on international trade, foreign relations, federal
and state representation and public policy. In addition to
serving on the Board of Directors of Spark Networks,
Mr. Brown serves on the Board of Directors of Comcast of
Washington, DC. From June 1996 to September 2002, he practiced
law at Washington-based Patton Boggs LLP, where he concentrated
on a range of municipal issues. Mr. Brown has twice been
appointed as a member to the U.S. Presidential Delegations
to Africa and serves as the president of the Ronald H. Brown
Foundation, which seeks to carry on the work of
Mr. Browns father, who was U.S. Secretary of
Commerce under former President Bill Clinton. Mr. Brown
earned a BA degree from Clark University and a JD from Widener
University School of Law.
Martial Chaillet has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since February 2005. Mr. Chaillet founded
MediaWin & Partners in January 2003. MediaWin is a
private investment firm that focuses primarily on investments in
media and media-related companies. Prior to founding MediaWin,
Mr. Chaillet served in a variety of roles at The Capital
Group for thirty years, most recently as Senior Vice President
and Global Portfolio Manager of Capital Research and Management,
the mutual fund arm of the financial institution. In addition to
serving on our Board of Directors, Mr. Chaillet sits on the
Boards of Directors of Infosearch, Wisekey, Snap TV and Media
Partners. Mr. Chaillet earned a degree in Econometrics from
the University of Geneva and graduated, with honors, from the
Swiss Technical School.
79
Benjamin Derhy has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since October 2004. Over the last five years,
Mr. Derhy has not held any employment positions but has
been a private investor and entrepreneur, focusing on Internet,
consumer products and real estate sectors as well as
start-up companies in
Europe and Israel. His experience also includes working with
American companies and their expansion internationally. In 1984,
Mr. Derhy co-founded Turbo Sportswear, a successful
clothing manufacturer, and was employed there until 1997.
Previously, he was controller at the Hebrew University in
Jerusalem, responsible for annual budgets, financial planning
and cost accounting. Mr. Derhy holds both BA and MBA
degrees from the Hebrew University.
Laura Lauder has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since January 2005. Mrs. Lauder has served as a
General Partner at Lauder Partners, a Silicon Valley-based
venture capital fund, for the past ten years. At Lauder
Partners, Mrs. Lauder focuses primarily on Internet and
cable-related investments. In addition to her work at Lauder
Partners, Mrs. Lauder is involved in a variety of
philanthropic initiatives, particularly in the Jewish community.
In the past, she has served on the boards of numerous
organizations, including the San Francisco Jewish Community
Federation and its Endowment Committee, the Jewish Education
Service of North America, the Jewish Funders Network, American
Jewish World Service and the National Public Radio Foundation.
In 2004, Mrs. Lauder was named one of 10 Women to
Watch by Jewish Woman magazine. Mrs. Lauder
earned a BA in International Relations from the University of
North Carolina Chapel Hill and the Universidad de
Sevilla, Spain.
Scott L. Shleifer has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since December 2004. Mr. Shleifer joined Tiger
Global Management, L.L.C. in July 2002. Tiger Global Management
is an equity investment firm currently managing approximately
$1 billion. Mr. Shleifer is a Managing Director
focusing primarily on investments in the Internet, for-profit
education, and business services sectors. In addition to serving
on the Board of Directors of Spark Networks, Mr. Shleifer
sits on the Board of Directors of PRC.EDU, an online, for-profit
education company in China. Prior to joining Tiger Global
Management, Mr. Shleifer was a private equity investor at
The Blackstone Group from July 1999 to June 2002. He received a
BS in Economics from the Wharton School at the University of
Pennsylvania, where he graduated magna cum laude.
There are no family relationships among any of our executive
officers or directors.
Compensation of Directors
We pay non-employee directors an annual compensation of $30,000
for their services, except Scott Shleifer who does not receive
compensation as a director. In addition, non-employee directors
receive a fee of $1,000 for each board and committee meeting
attended in person and $500 for each such meeting attended by
phone. Non-employee directors are also reimbursed for reasonable
costs and expenses that are approved and incurred in the
performance of their duties. Officers of our company who are
members of the Board of Directors are not paid any
directors fees. Directors are eligible to receive, from
time to time, grants of options to purchase shares under our
2004 Share Option Scheme as determined by the Board of
Directors. In 2004, we granted options to purchase 80,000
ordinary shares, which vest over a four-year period, to Michael
Brown and Benjamin Derhy, and in February 2005 we made a similar
grant of options to purchase 80,000 ordinary shares to
Laura Lauder and Martial Chaillet.
Election of Directors
Our Articles of Association provide that all directors appointed
by the Board since the last annual general meeting are subject
to election by shareholders at the first annual general meeting
following their appointment. Our Articles of Association also
provide that the re-election of our Board of Directors shall be
performed through a retirement by rotation system.
At each annual general meeting one-third, or the number nearest
to but not exceeding one-third, of our Board of Directors
80
shall retire from office by rotation. Any retiring
director shall be eligible for re-election. Our directors who
retire by rotation include (1) any director who wishes to
retire and not to offer himself for re-election and (2) any
further directors who retire by rotation are those who have been
longest in office since their last election or re-election.
Where two or more persons became or were re-elected as directors
on the same day, those to retire, unless they otherwise agree
among themselves, are determined by lot.
Board Committees
Audit Committee. The audit committee consists of Martial
Chaillet, Michael Brown and Benjamin Derhy, each of whom are
independent directors. Mr. Chaillet, Chairman of the audit
committee, is an audit committee financial expert as
defined under Item 401(h) of
Regulation S-K.
The purpose of the audit committee is to represent and assist
our Board of Directors in its general oversight of our
accounting and financial reporting processes, audits of the
financial statements and internal control and audit functions.
The audit committees responsibilities include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
The appointment, replacement, compensation, and oversight of
work of the independent auditor, including resolution of
disagreements between management and the independent auditor
regarding financial reporting, for the purpose of preparing or
issuing an audit report or performing other audit, review or
attest services. |
|
|
|
|
|
Reviewing and discussing with management and the independent
auditor various topics and events that may have significant
financial impact on our company or that are the subject of
discussions between management and the independent auditors. |
|
Compensation Committee. The compensation committee
consists of Scott Shleifer, Benjamin Derhy and Laura Lauder,
each of whom are independent directors. Mr. Shleifer is the
Chairman of the compensation committee. The compensation
committee is responsible for the design, review, recommendation
and approval of compensation arrangements for our directors,
executive officers and key employees, and for the administration
of our share option schemes, including the approval of grants
under such schemes to our employees, consultants and directors.
The compensation committee also reviews and determines
compensation of our executive officers, including our Chief
Executive Officer.
Nominating Committee. The nominating committee consists
of Michael Brown, Martial Chaillet and Laura Lauder, each of
whom are independent directors. Mr. Brown is the Chairman
of the nominating committee. The nominating committee assists in
the selection of director nominees, approves director
nominations to be presented for shareholder approval at our
annual general meeting and fills any vacancies on our Board of
Directors, considers any nominations of director candidates
validly made by shareholders, and reviews and considers
developments in corporate governance practices.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation
To date, we have had a compensation committee or other Board
committee performing equivalent functions. All members of our
Board of Directors, some of whom were executive officers,
participated in deliberations concerning executive officer
compensation.
81
Summary Executive Compensation Table
The following table sets forth information concerning the annual
and long-term compensation earned by our Chief Executive Officer
and each of the other executive officers who served during the
year ended December 31, 2005, and whose annual salary and
bonus during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2003, 2004
and 2005 exceeded $100,000 (the Named Executive
Officers).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Compensation | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Securities | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Annual | |
|
Underlying | |
|
All Other | |
Name and Principal Position |
|
Year | |
|
Salary | |
|
Bonus | |
|
Compensation(3) | |
|
Options | |
|
Compensation(4) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
David E.
Siminoff(1)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
$ |
480,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
14,000 |
|
|
President and Chief |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
164,701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,275,000 |
|
|
|
800 |
|
|
Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Y.
Shapira(2)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
365,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
14,000 |
|
|
Chairman of |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
370,207 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,645 |
|
|
the Board |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
528,000 |
|
|
|
1,372,000 |
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,000 |
|
Gregory R.
Liberman(5)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
186,742 |
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
Chief Operating |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
33,409 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Officer and General Counsel |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip C.
Nelson(6)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
Chief Technology Officer |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
61,553 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
Mark G.
Thompson(7)
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
49,242 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
1,083 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Mr. Siminoff became our President and Chief Executive
Officer in August 2004 and has served on the Board of Directors
since March 2004. |
|
|
|
(2) |
Mr. Shapira served as our Chief Executive Officer in 2004
and 2003 and until he became Executive Co-Chairman in February
2004. Mr. Shapira became sole Executive Chairman in
February 2005. Mr. Shapira resigned from an executive
operating role with our company effective December 31,
2005, but remains Chairman of the Board. Compensation amounts
for 2005 exclude a severance payment of $125,000 from us to
Mr. Shapira pursuant to a Separation Agreement entered into
on January 27, 2006 with effect from January 1, 2006. |
|
|
|
(3) |
Represents an annual automobile allowance. |
|
|
|
(4) |
Represents the amount of our annual matching contribution to
each individuals 401(k) account. |
|
|
|
(5) |
Mr. Liberman has served as our General Counsel since
October 2004 and Chief Operating Officer since September 2005. |
|
|
|
(6) |
Mr. Nelson became our Chief Technology Officer in October
2004. Mr. Nelsons employment with our company ended
on April 4, 2006. |
|
|
|
(7) |
Mr. Thompson became our Chief Financial Officer in October
2004. |
|
Employment Agreements
We hired David E. Siminoff as our President and Chief Executive
Officer in August 2004 at an annual salary of $480,000. In
addition, we granted Mr. Siminoff options to
purchase 1,250,000 ordinary shares at a per share exercise
price of $4.24. Of these options, 156,250 vested and became
exercisable on February 12, 2005, and 156,250 options
vested and became exercisable on August 12, 2005 and
312,500 vest each of the three
12-month periods
thereafter. If Mr. Siminoff is terminated, including
82
voluntary termination, within six months after a change of
control, which is defined in Mr. Siminoffs option
agreement as an acquisition of more than 45% of our then
outstanding shares, or other acquisition of effective control of
our company, all of his options will vest immediately. If
Mr. Siminoff is terminated without cause or if he
terminates his employment with us for good reason, 30% of his
unvested options will be accelerated and he will also be
entitled to payment of his monthly salary in effect at the time
of termination for a period of nine months following such
termination. Pursuant to the terms of his Employment Agreement,
Mr. Siminoff may not directly or indirectly compete with us
or solicit our customers during the term of his Employment
Agreement and he may not disclose any confidential information
during or after his employment. In August 2004,
Mr. Siminoff also agreed to continue to serve as a member
of our Board of Directors. For his services as director,
Mr. Siminoff received options to purchase 25,000
ordinary shares at a per share exercise price of $9.55, all of
which are currently vested.
Pursuant to the offer letter and executive employment agreement
with Mark Thompson, we hired Mr. Thompson as our Chief
Financial Officer in October 2004 at an annual salary of
$200,000 and upon a successful listing of our shares or a
derivative security of our shares on a national exchange or the
Nasdaq National Market in the United States, we will pay him a
bonus of $80,000. This bonus was paid upon our listing on the
American Stock Exchange in February 2006. In addition, we
granted Mr. Thompson options to purchase 250,000
ordinary shares at a per share exercise price of $6.69. Those
options will vest at a rate of 12,500 shares per quarter
for quarterly periods commencing three months after the date his
employment commenced; provided, however, that options to
purchase 50,000 of those shares will accelerate upon a
successful listing of our shares or a derivative security of our
shares on a national exchange or the Nasdaq National Market in
the United States. These options were accelerated upon our
listing on the American Stock Exchange in February 2006. In
addition, all of the options will accelerate upon a change of
control of our company, which is defined in
Mr. Thompsons employment agreement as the acquisition
of more than 50% of our outstanding shares. Pursuant to the
terms of his Employment Agreement, Mr. Thompson may not
directly or indirectly solicit our customers using confidential
information for a period of 12 months following the
termination of his Employment Agreement and he may not disclose
any confidential information during or after his employment.
We hired Philip Nelson as our Chief Technology Officer in
October 2004 at an annual salary of $250,000.
Mr. Nelsons last date of employment with us was
April 4, 2006. At the commencement of
Mr. Nelsons employment, we granted him options to
purchase 250,000 ordinary shares at a per share exercise
price of $6.69. According to the terms of the share option
agreement, Mr. Nelsons options vested at a rate of
15,625 shares per quarter, with the first vesting date
occurring in January 2005. In addition, all unvested options
would have become vested upon a change of control of our
company, which was defined in Mr. Nelsons employment
agreement as the acquisition of more than 50% of our outstanding
shares. Pursuant to the terms of his Employment Agreement,
Mr. Nelson may not directly or indirectly solicit our
customers using confidential information for a period of
12 months following the termination of his Employment
Agreement and he may not disclose any confidential information
during or after his employment.
Pursuant to the Executive Employment Agreement with Joe Y.
Shapira, effective March 1, 2005, Mr. Shapira served
as the Executive Chairman of our Board of Directors at an annual
salary of $350,000. On December 31, 2005, Mr. Shapira
resigned from an executive operating role with our company. On
January 27, 2006, we entered into a separation agreement
with Mr. Shapira (the Separation Agreement)
with effect from January 1, 2006 pursuant to which
Mr. Shapiras Employment Agreement was terminated.
Mr. Shapira continues to be a director and serve as
Chairman of our Board of Directors. In connection with
Mr. Shapiras departure from an executive role with
our company, and pursuant to the Separation Agreement,
Mr. Shapira received a one-time severance payment of
$125,000. According to the Separation Agreement,
Mr. Shapira retained all share options previously awarded
to him, and such options will vest and become exercisable on the
terms set forth
83
in the respective option certificates. In the past, we had
granted Mr. Shapira options to purchase 250,000
ordinary shares at a per share exercise price of $10.50. The
options vest at a rate of 31,250 shares per quarter
commencing June 1, 2005 and will continue to vest so long
as Mr. Shapira remains a director. All unvested options
will become vested upon a change in control of our company,
which is defined as the acquisition of more than 50% of our
outstanding shares. Mr. Shapira may not disclose any
confidential information during or after his employment.
In August 2005, we entered into an executive employment
agreement with Gregory R. Liberman, our General Counsel and
Corporate Secretary, making Mr. Liberman our Chief
Operating Officer. Pursuant to terms of the employment
agreement, Mr. Liberman will be compensated at an annual
salary of $200,000, and upon a successful listing of our shares
or a derivative security of our shares on a national exchange or
the Nasdaq National Market in the United States, we will pay him
a bonus of $25,000. This bonus was paid upon our listing on the
American Stock Exchange in February 2006. In March 2006,
Mr. Libermans annual salary was raised to $250,000.
We also granted Mr. Liberman options, in addition to
options granted to him prior to becoming our Chief Operating
Officer, to purchase 115,000 ordinary shares at a per share
exercise price of $8.74. Those options will vest at a rate of
6.25% per quarter for quarterly periods commencing three
months after the date his employment commenced; provided,
however, that options to purchase 50,000 of those shares
will accelerate upon a successful listing of our shares or a
derivative security of our shares on a national exchange or the
Nasdaq National Market in the United States. These options were
accelerated upon our listing on the American Stock Exchange in
February 2006. In addition, all of the options will accelerate
upon a change of control of our company, which is defined in
Mr. Libermans employment agreement as the acquisition
of more than 50% of our outstanding shares. Pursuant to the
terms of his Employment Agreement, Mr. Liberman may not
directly or indirectly solicit our customers using confidential
information for a period of 12 months following the
termination of his Employment Agreement and he may not disclose
any confidential information during or after his employment.
Our Compensation Committee typically determines each executive
officers annual bonus and will consider the officers
performance in light of corporate goals and objectives relevant
to executive compensation, such as our net revenues, competitive
market data pertaining to executive compensation at comparable
companies, and such other factors, including factors unrelated
to our financial performance, as it may deem relevant. All of
our executive officers are eligible to receive an annual bonus
at the discretion of the Compensation Committee. There is no
specific limit on the amount of a bonus that an officer may
receive.
Options Granted in the Year Ended December 31, 2005
The following table sets forth information concerning individual
grants of stock options in 2005 to the Named Executive Officers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual Grants | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Potential Realizable Value | |
|
|
Number of | |
|
|
|
at Assumed Annual Rates | |
|
|
Securities | |
|
Percent of | |
|
|
|
of Stock Price Appreciation | |
|
|
Underlying | |
|
Total Options | |
|
Exercise or | |
|
|
|
for Option Term(3) | |
|
|
Options | |
|
Granted to | |
|
Base Price | |
|
Expiration | |
|
| |
Name |
|
Granted | |
|
Employees(1) | |
|
Per Share(2) | |
|
Date | |
|
5% | |
|
10% | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
David E. Siminoff
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Joe Y. Shapira
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
18.1 |
|
|
|
9.12 |
|
|
|
03/01/12 |
|
|
|
928,189 |
|
|
|
2,163,075 |
|
Gregory R. Liberman
|
|
|
35,000 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
7.72 |
|
|
|
02/03/12 |
|
|
|
109,999 |
|
|
|
256,343 |
|
Gregory R. Liberman
|
|
|
115,000 |
|
|
|
8.3 |
|
|
|
8.47 |
|
|
|
08/31/12 |
|
|
|
396,536 |
|
|
|
924,098 |
|
Mark G. Thompson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip C. Nelson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
(1) |
The total number of options granted to our employees, excluding
160,000 shares underlying options granted to non-employee
directors, during 2005 was 1,384,000. |
|
|
|
(2) |
The exercise price per share of options granted represents the
fair market value of the underlying shares on the date the
options were granted and are converted from Euros to
U.S. dollars using the exchange rate as of
December 31, 2005. |
|
|
|
(3) |
In order to comply with the rules of the SEC, we are including
the gains or option spreads that would exist for the
respective options we granted to the Named Executive Officers.
We calculated these gains by assuming an annual compound stock
price appreciation of 5% and 10% from the date of the option
grant until the termination date of the option, which is the
seventh anniversary of the grant date. These gains do not
represent our estimate or projection of the future price of the
ordinary shares. |
|
Options Exercises and Options Values for Year Ended
December 31, 2005
The following table sets forth information concerning option
exercises in 2005 and option values as of December 31, 2005
to the Named Executive Officers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities | |
|
Value of Unexercised | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underlying Unexercised | |
|
In-the-Money Options | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options at Fiscal Year-End | |
|
at Fiscal Year-End(3) | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Acquired on | |
|
Value | |
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Exercise(1) | |
|
Realized(2) | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Un-exercisable | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Un-exercisable | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
David E. Siminoff
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
337,500 |
|
|
|
937,500 |
|
|
$ |
1,162,193 |
|
|
$ |
3,486,578 |
|
Joe Y. Shapira
|
|
|
2,500,000 |
|
|
|
10,689,588 |
|
|
|
93,750 |
|
|
|
156,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory R. Liberman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,751 |
|
|
|
211,249 |
|
|
|
37,013 |
|
|
|
111,038 |
|
Mark G. Thompson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
79,947 |
|
|
|
319,788 |
|
Philip C. Nelson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,500 |
|
|
|
187,500 |
|
|
|
99,934 |
|
|
|
299,801 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Shares acquired on exercise includes all shares underlying the
share option or portion of the option exercised, without
deducting shares held to satisfy tax obligations, if any, sold
to pay the exercise price or otherwise disposed of. |
|
|
(2) |
The value realized of exercised options is the product of
(a) the excess of the per share fair market value of the
ordinary share on the date of exercise over the per share option
exercise price and (b) the number of shares acquired upon
exercise. |
|
|
(3) |
The value of unexercised
in-the-money
options is based on a price per share of $7.42, which was the
price of a share as quoted on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange at
the close of business on December 31, 2005, minus the
exercise price, multiplied by the number of shares underlying
the option. |
|
Benefit Plans
Our 2004 Share Option Scheme (2004 Option
Scheme) provides us the ability to grant share options to
employees, consultants and directors, and is administered by our
Board of Directors, which determines the option grant date,
option price and vesting schedule of each option in accordance
with the terms of our 2004 Option Scheme. Although our Board of
Directors determines the exercise prices of options granted
under the 2004 Option Scheme, the exercise price per share may
not be less than 85% of the fair market value, as
defined in the 2004 Option Scheme, on the date of grant. Options
granted under the 2004 Option Scheme vest and terminate over
various periods at the discretion of our Board of Directors, but
subject to the terms of the 2004 Option Scheme. Moreover, the
exercise of options may be made subject to such performance or
other conditions as our Board of Directors may
85
determine. Options granted under the 2004 Option Scheme are
personal to the option holder to whom they are granted and no
transfer or assignment is permitted, other than a transfer to
the option holders personal representatives on death.
Our 2004 Option Scheme terminates on September 20, 2014,
unless our Board of Directors terminates it earlier.
Nevertheless, options granted under the 2004 Option Scheme may
extend beyond the date of termination. Our Board of Directors
has the discretion, subject to limitations set forth in the 2004
Option Scheme, to determine different exercise and lapse
provisions. If a third party makes an offer to all shareholders
to acquire all or a majority of our issued and outstanding
shares, other than those shares which are already owned by the
offeror, an option holder under the 2004 Option Scheme may
exercise any of his or her options at any time within six months
of the offeror obtaining control of us; provided, however that
the options do not lapse pursuant to a separate provision under
the 2004 Option Scheme prior to exercise. If an effective
resolution in general meeting for our voluntary
winding-up is passed
before the date on which an option lapses, such an outstanding
option then becomes exercisable for a period of three months
after such resolution becomes effective. However, no exercise of
an option is permitted at any time after the option has lapsed
under a separate provision of the 2004 Option Scheme. At the end
of the three month period all options will lapse.
In addition to the terms described above, options granted to
employees and service providers of our Israeli subsidiary who
are resident in Israel are also subject to the
Sub-Plan for Israeli
Employees and Service Providers. The
Sub-Plan, which
incorporates the 2004 Plan by reference, provides additional
rules applicable to options granted to those Israeli Employees
and Service Providers, as defined by the
Sub-Plan.
As of December 31, 2005, 2,613,500 share options were
outstanding under the 2004 Option Scheme at prices ranging from
$5.90 to $9.34 per share.
2000 Share Option Scheme
Under the terms of our 2000 Executive Share Option Scheme
(2000 Option Scheme), our Board of Directors was
able to grant options, in their discretion, to our employees,
directors and consultants. The Board of Directors determined the
option price, vesting schedule and termination provisions of
each option, subject to limitations contained in the 2000 Option
Scheme. In September 2004, our Board of Directors resolved to
cease granting options under the 2000 Option Scheme although,
pursuant to the provisions of the 2000 Option Scheme, all
outstanding options previously granted under the 2000 Option
Scheme continue in full force and effect. Our Board of Directors
intends to use our 2004 Option Scheme to grant options to
employees, consultants and directors in the future.
As of December 31, 2005, 2,089,750 share options were
outstanding under the 2000 Option Scheme at prices ranging from
$0.86 to $9.34 per share.
Employee Benefit Plan
We have a defined contribution plan under Section 401(k) of
the U.S. Internal Revenue Code covering all full-time
employees, and providing for matching contributions by us, as
defined in the plan. Participants in the plan may direct the
investment of their personal accounts to a choice of mutual
funds consisting of various portfolios of stocks, bonds, or cash
instruments. Contributions made by us to the plan for the years
ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 were approximately
$234,000, $184,000, and $110,000, respectively.
86
Indemnification of Directors and Officers and Limitation of
Liability
Pursuant to our Articles of Association and in accordance with
the Companies Act 1985, we provide the following indemnification
to our directors and other officers:
|
|
|
(a) |
Indemnification of directors in respect of proceedings brought
by third parties (covering both legal costs and the financial
costs of any adverse judgment, except for the legal costs of
unsuccessful defenses of criminal proceedings, fines imposed in
criminal proceedings and penalties imposed by certain regulatory
bodies); |
|
|
|
(b) |
Payment of directors defense costs as they are incurred,
including if the action is brought by the company itself. A
director in this situation would still be liable to pay any
damages awarded to our company and to repay his defense costs to
the company if his defense were unsuccessful, other than where
the company chooses to indemnify him in respect of legal costs
incurred in certain types of civil third party
proceedings; and |
|
|
|
(c) |
Indemnification of our officers who are not directors without
many of the restrictions that apply to indemnification of
directors. |
We have entered into indemnification agreements with our
directors and executive officers that require us to indemnify
them from and against all liabilities, costs, including legal
costs, claims, actions, proceedings, demands, expenses and
damages arising in connection with the performance by them of
their respective duties to the fullest extent permitted by our
Memorandum and Articles of Association and applicable law, each
as modified from time to time.
We are required to disclose such indemnities in our annual
directors report which is publicly filed with the
Registrar of Companies for England and Wales. Shareholders are
able to inspect any relevant indemnification agreement.
We maintain a directors and officers insurance
policy. The policy insures directors and other officers against
unindemnified losses arising from certain wrongful acts in their
capacities as directors and officers and reimburses our company
for those losses for which we have lawfully indemnified our
directors and officers. The policy contains various exclusions.
87
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
Efficient Frontier
In 2004, we entered into an agreement with Efficient Frontier, a
provider of online marketing optimization services to procure
and manage a portion of our online paid search and keyword
procurement efforts. The Chief Executive Officer of Efficient
Frontier is Ms. Ellen Siminoff, who is the wife of our
Chief Executive Officer, David E. Siminoff. We paid
approximately $335,000 to Efficient Frontier in 2005 and $61,000
in 2004.
Yobon, Inc.
In 2004, we invested $250,000 in Yobon, Inc., a provider of Web
toolbar technology. Our former Chief Technology Officer, Phil
Nelson, is the Chairman of Yobon. In December 2005, we
determined that the value of the Yobon investment would not be
realized in full and recorded an impairment charge in the amount
of $105,000.
Other Relationships
Until August 31, 2005, we employed Elraz Sela, the nephew
of Alon Carmel, our former Co-Executive Chairman of the Board,
in an executive position for which we compensated him
$120,000 per year. In addition, several other relatives of
each of Joe Y. Shapira, currently our Chairman of the Board, and
Alon Carmel hold non-executive positions with us and Spark
Networks Israel for which they are compensated less than $60,000.
Other Agreements
On December 1, 2005, Great Hill Investors, LLC, Great Hill
Equity Partners II Limited Partnership and Great Hill
Affiliate Partners II L.P. purchased an aggregate of
6,000,000 ordinary shares in four privately negotiated
transactions. Of the 6,000,000 shares purchased,
(i) 1,250,000 shares were purchased from Joe Y.
Shapira, our Chairman of the Board of Directors, at
$4.60 per share, (ii) 1,250,000 shares were
purchased from Alon Carmel, our former Co-Executive Chairman of
the Board of Directors, at $4.60 per share,
(iii) 1,500,000 shares were purchased from Criterion
Capital Management LLC, a more than 5% holder of our securities,
at $5.35 per share, and (iv) 2,000,000 shares
were purchased from affiliates of Tiger Global Management, L.L.C
at $5.35 per share. Tiger Global Management was our largest
shareholder prior to the sale of the 2,000,000 shares, and
one of our directors, Scott Shleifer, is a limited partner of
Tiger Global, L.P., an affiliate of Tiger Global Management and
one of the sellers of the 2,000,000 shares.
We had entered into a confidentiality agreement dated
October 14, 2005 with Great Hill Equity Partners II
(Great Hill) that contained a provision (the
Standstill Provision) pursuant to which Great Hill
agreed not to, among other things, directly or indirectly
acquire, offer to acquire, or propose to acquire more than 2% of
any class of our securities or rights to acquire more than 2% of
any class of our securities for a period of one year from the
date of the confidentiality agreement without our prior written
consent. On December 1, 2005, we and Great Hill entered
into a standstill agreement (the Standstill
Agreement) pursuant to which we waived the Standstill
Provision and Great Hill agreed that its ability to increase its
beneficial ownership of our securities would be subject to the
terms and conditions of the Standstill Agreement, which has a
term of five years unless terminated earlier. Pursuant to the
Standstill Agreement, for a period of 14 months from the
date of the Standstill Agreement (the Fourteen Month
Period), Great Hill agreed that it would not, without the
prior written consent by us:
|
|
|
|
|
acquire or seek to acquire, directly or indirectly, by purchase
or otherwise, ownership of any of our voting securities (or
rights to acquire any of our class of securities or any
subsidiary thereof) such that Great Hill and its affiliates (the
Great Hill Group) would |
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
beneficially own more than 29.9% of our total voting power (the
Total Voting Power), which is defined as the
aggregate number of votes which may be cast by holders of
outstanding voting securities on a poll at a general meeting of
ours taking into account any voting restrictions imposed by our
Articles of Association, or take any action that would require
us to make a public announcement regarding the foregoing under
applicable law; |
|
|
|
|
|
participate in any of the following with respect to us or our
subsidiaries: (i) any tender, takeover or exchange offer or
other business combination, (ii) any recapitalization,
restructuring, liquidation, dissolution or other extraordinary
transaction, or (iii) any solicitation of proxies or
consents to vote any voting securities; |
|
|
|
|
|
form, join or participate in a group as defined in
Section 13(d)(3) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, in connection with any of the foregoing; |
|
|
|
|
|
seek to control our Board of Directors; and |
|
|
|
|
|
enter into any arrangements with any third party with respect to
any of the above. |
|
After the expiration of the Fourteen Month Period, Great Hill
agreed that it would not acquire or seek to acquire beneficial
ownership of any of our voting securities (or rights to acquire
any class of our securities or any subsidiary thereof) or
participate in any tender, takeover or exchange offer or other
business combination, or any recapitalization, restructuring,
dissolution or other extraordinary transaction if
(i) prior to giving effect thereto, the Great Hill
Group beneficially owns less than 60% of Total Voting Power and
(ii) after giving effect, the Great Hill Group would
beneficially own more than 29.9% of Total Voting Power.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Great Hill Group, after the
Fourteen Month Period, would not be deemed to beneficially own
any voting securities owned by another person if the sole reason
is being a member of a group with such person and there are no
other indicia of beneficial ownership of such securities that
are attributable to the Great Hill Group.
The provisions of the Standstill Agreement do not apply to
(i) repurchases, redemptions, a rights issue,
recapitalizations and consolidation or a share capital reduction
us, and (ii) offers to acquire securities by the Great Hill
Group to all of the holders of our voting securities.
Furthermore, each member of the Great Hill Group agreed not to
sell or transfer shares purchased pursuant to certain share
purchase agreements for 180 days from the date of the
Standstill Agreement without our written consent.
On December 1, 2005, in connection with the exercise of
options, each of Joe Y. Shapira and Alon Carmel entered into tax
indemnification agreements with us. Mr. Shapira is
currently the Chairman of our Board of Directors.
Mr. Carmel is a co-founder, our former President and former
Executive Co-Chairman of our Board of Directors. Pursuant to the
indemnification agreements, each of Messrs. Shapira and
Carmel agreed to indemnify and to pay us any taxes (including
income, employment or other withholding taxes), interest and/or
penalties and other costs and expenses (including
attorneys fees incurred by us) we are required to pay as a
result of our failure to withhold any federal, state, local or
foreign taxes in respect of the exercise of each of their
options, respectively.
On January 27, 2006, we entered into a separation agreement
with Joe Y. Shapira (the Separation Agreement) with
effect from January 1, 2006 pursuant to which
Mr. Shapiras employment agreement dated March 1,
2005 (the Employment Agreement) was terminated.
Mr. Shapira will continue as the non-executive Chairman of
our Board of Directors. According to the Separation Agreement,
we agreed to pay Mr. Shapira severance pay in the lump sum
amount of $125,000, minus applicable state and federal
withholdings. Mr. Shapira will retain all share options
previously awarded to him, and such options will vest and become
exercisable on the terms set forth in the respective option
certificates. For his services as a director, we will pay
Mr. Shapira a directors fee at the rate of
89
$30,000 per year, payable in monthly installments of $2,500
each for each month of service. In addition, Mr. Shapira
will receive $1,000 for his in-person attendance at a Board or
committee meeting and $500 for his attendance at a telephonic
Board or committee meeting, in addition to reimbursement for
approved expenses incurred in the performance of his duties.
According to the Separation Agreement, Mr. Shapira is
expected to attend at least four Board meetings and, if
applicable, four committee meetings per year.
Mr. Shapiras appointment to the Board will extend
until our next annual general meeting and continue as long as he
is reelected to the Board by our shareholders, unless
Mr. Shapira resigns or is removed in accordance with our
Memorandum and Articles of Association and applicable law. We
agreed to defend and indemnify Mr. Shapira to the fullest
extent permitted by our charter documents and applicable law
against any demand, claim, cause of action, action, loss, and/or
liability that is made against him arising from or relating to
Mr. Shapiras employment with us, service as a
director of our company, or otherwise. Mr. Shapira agreed
to release and discharge us from any and all employment
termination claims, actions, demands, rights, or damages of any
kind for termination of Mr. Shapiras employment,
Employment Agreement and/or separation from our company.
90
PRINCIPAL AND SELLING SHAREHOLDERS
This prospectus covers the offer and sale by the selling
shareholders from time to time of up to an aggregate of
33,263,996 ordinary shares in the form of ADSs, including
2,595,000 ordinary shares underlying options that were issued to
selling shareholders and 430,000 ordinary shares underlying
warrants that were issued to selling shareholders.
The following table sets forth certain information with respect
to the beneficial ownership of our ordinary shares, as of
March 15, 2006, for:
|
|
|
|
|
each selling shareholder; |
|
|
|
each person or entity who we know beneficially owns more than 5%
of our ordinary shares; |
|
|
|
each of our Named Executive Officers and each of our
directors; and |
|
|
|
all of our executive officers and directors as a group. |
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules
of the Securities and Exchange Commission and includes voting or
investment power with respect to the securities. The number of
ordinary shares outstanding, on an as-converted basis, used in
calculating the percentage for each listed person or entity
includes ordinary shares underlying options or a warrant held by
the person or entity, all of which are being registered in this
registration statement, but excludes ordinary shares underlying
options or warrants held by any other person or entity. In
addition, each persons or entitys warrants and
options that are exercisable within 60 days of
March 15, 2006 is disclosed below. Percentage of beneficial
ownership is based on 30,296,396 ordinary shares outstanding as
of March 15, 2006.
The term selling shareholders also includes any
transferees, pledgees, donees, or other successors in interest
to the selling shareholders named in the table below. To our
knowledge, except as provided below or in any prospectus
supplements, none of the selling shareholders has had a material
relationship with us within the past three years other than as a
result of the ownership of the shares covered by this
prospectus. To our knowledge, except as indicated by footnote
and subject to applicable community property laws, each person
named in the table has sole voting and investment power with
respect to the ordinary shares set forth opposite such
persons name. Unless otherwise indicated, the address of
our officers and directors is c/o: Spark Networks plc,
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 800, Beverly Hills,
California 90211.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
|
|
Beneficially Owned | |
|
|
Beneficially Owned Prior | |
|
|
|
After Completion of | |
|
|
to the Offering | |
|
Number of | |
|
the Offering(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
| |
|
|
Number of | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Registered for | |
|
Number of | |
|
Percentage | |
Name of Beneficial Owner |
|
Shares | |
|
of Shares | |
|
Sale Hereby | |
|
Shares | |
|
of Shares | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
5% stockholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Great Hill Investors,
LLC(2)
|
|
|
6,000,000 |
|
|
|
19.8 |
% |
|
|
6,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% |
Tiger Global Management,
L.L.C.(3)
|
|
|
4,631,085 |
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
4,631,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Research and Management Company
(4)
|
|
|
3,159,680 |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
|
|
3,159,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alon
Carmel(5)
|
|
|
2,753,848 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
2,753,848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FM Fund Management
Limited(6)
|
|
|
2,201,890 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
2,201,890 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Named Executive Officers and Directors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David E.
Siminoff(7)
|
|
|
2,124,500 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
2,124,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Y.
Shapira(8)
|
|
|
3,012,639 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
3,012,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
|
|
Beneficially Owned | |
|
|
Beneficially Owned Prior | |
|
|
|
After Completion of | |
|
|
to the Offering | |
|
Number of | |
|
the Offering(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
| |
|
|
Number of | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Registered for | |
|
Number of | |
|
Percentage | |
Name of Beneficial Owner |
|
Shares | |
|
of Shares | |
|
Sale Hereby | |
|
Shares | |
|
of Shares | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Gregory R.
Liberman(9)
|
|
|
262,500 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
262,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark
Thompson(10)
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip
Nelson(11)
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott
Shleifer(12)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael
Brown(13)
|
|
|
80,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
80,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin
Derhy(14)
|
|
|
80,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
80,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laura
Lauder(15)
|
|
|
180,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
180,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martial
Chaillet(16)
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All directors and executives as a group
(10 persons)(17)
|
|
|
6,439,639 |
|
|
|
19.6 |
% |
|
|
6,439,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% |
Other Selling Shareholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Criterion Capital Management
LLC(18)
|
|
|
1,126,337 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
1,126,337 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
European Catalyst
Fund(19)
|
|
|
823,966 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
823,966 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Absolute Return Europe
Fund(20)
|
|
|
800,501 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
800,501 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europlay Capital Advisors,
LLC(21)
|
|
|
447,711 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
447,711 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Absolute Octane
Fund(22)
|
|
|
380,978 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
380,978 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Absolute German
Fund(23)
|
|
|
304,263 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
304,263 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elmar Bob
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alex Sandel
|
|
|
122,781 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
122,781 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Yair Barzilay
|
|
|
100,710 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
100,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Levy Family Trust of 1997 Dtd 7/10/98 Charles M.
Levy & Lydia Levy TTEEs
|
|
|
96,776 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
96,776 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael McCullough & Ana Rowen McCullough Comm. Prop
|
|
|
82,350 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
82,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John B.
Peterson(24)
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natalie N.
Peterson(25)
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Absolute LargeCap
Fund(26)
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ursula Siekmann
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Karen Coster
|
|
|
27,500 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
27,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yoav Cohen
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brigitte Kandel
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Kandel
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yaacov Metzler & Nancy Metzler JTWROS
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick J. Ferrell
|
|
|
18,039 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
18,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Rhodes
|
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Benjamin Peterson and Natalie Nicole
Peterson(27)
|
|
|
13,188 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
13,188 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Martin
|
|
|
12,300 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
12,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debbie Rosten
|
|
|
12,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
12,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher Kandel
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
|
|
Beneficially Owned | |
|
|
Beneficially Owned Prior | |
|
|
|
After Completion of | |
|
|
to the Offering | |
|
Number of | |
|
the Offering(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
| |
|
|
Number of | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Registered for | |
|
Number of | |
|
Percentage | |
Name of Beneficial Owner |
|
Shares | |
|
of Shares | |
|
Sale Hereby | |
|
Shares | |
|
of Shares | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Norman Agran
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven G. Small
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John J. Lucena Sole TTEE John J. Lucena Living Trust
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reid Hoffman
|
|
|
9,478 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
9,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stefanie Giesen Anderle
|
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Andrew Nichols
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barry J. Uphoff and Linda A. Uphoff JTWROS
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ron Kenan
|
|
|
6,500 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
6,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Filer
|
|
|
6,250 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
6,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Pomije
|
|
|
5,918 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
5,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Henry C. McCullough & Dana McCullough JTWROS
|
|
|
5,500 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
5,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Eithan Ephrati
|
|
|
5,500 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
5,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brent E. Wood and Teresa D. Wood, Jt. Ten.
|
|
|
4,250 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Lahann
|
|
|
4,143 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barry J. Uphoff
|
|
|
4,100 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bruce Cunningham
|
|
|
4,034 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allen Blue
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Saccheri
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Cullinan
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lauren Jacobsen
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leslie Grant
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharon Shapira
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seymour Gussack
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isaac Zaharoni
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terra Terwilliger
|
|
|
2,959 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andres Martinez
|
|
|
2,600 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sung J. Chyun
|
|
|
2,500 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Kaufman
|
|
|
2,061 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Breskin
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Rowland
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Gerard
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Grant
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niel Bennet Brandon
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sanjay Zaveri
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent Eric Johnson
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Richard L. Turnure Ex
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Mcomber
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
|
|
Beneficially Owned | |
|
|
Beneficially Owned Prior | |
|
|
|
After Completion of | |
|
|
to the Offering | |
|
Number of | |
|
the Offering(1) | |
|
|
| |
|
Ordinary Shares | |
|
| |
|
|
Number of | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Registered for | |
|
Number of | |
|
Percentage | |
Name of Beneficial Owner |
|
Shares | |
|
of Shares | |
|
Sale Hereby | |
|
Shares | |
|
of Shares | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Sheila C. Ruby TTEE Sheila C. Ruby Trust
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stanley Lee Marshall
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Galli Francesco
|
|
|
1,350 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert E. Enslein Jr.
|
|
|
1,170 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nuri Halperin
|
|
|
1,150 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amit Korda
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amit Korda Avk Acct
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher Lee
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eli Amir
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gidon Hilb
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Naama Korda
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Mazer
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohad Safran
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Clearing Corp.
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tamara L. Thompson
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jedediah Rosenzweig
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<