We maintain several business relationships with IDT and its affiliates. For example, in the three and six months ended January 31, 2005, we provided carrier services to IDT of $2.0 million and $4.2 million, respectively. In the three and six months ended January 31, 2004, we provided carrier services to IDT of $1.3 million and $2.6 million, respectively. In the three and six months ended January 31, 2005, we purchased wholesale carrier services from IDT of $0.9 million and $2.2 million, respectively. In the three months and six months ended January 31, 2004, we purchased wholesale carrier services from IDT of $0.9 million and $1.9 million, respectively.
Our corporate headquarters and several other facilities are leased from IDT. In the three and six months ended January 31, 2005, IDT charged us $0.5 million and $0.9 million, respectively, for leasing their facilities. In the three and six months ended January 31, 2004, we paid IDT $0.5 million and $1.0 million, respectively, in facilities lease payments. On occasion, IDT’s treasury function provides investment management services relating to our portfolio of marketable securities. During the three and six months ended January 31, 2005, IDT’s treasury group did not process any securities purchases or sales for us. During the fiscal second quarter of 2004, $11.5 million in securities purchases and sales were settled through IDT.
On occasion, we have aggregated long distance minutes and other services purchases with IDT.
We outsource some of our administrative and support functions to IDT. These administrative functions include, but are not limited to, tax consulting services, payroll services and internal audit support services. In most cases, fees for services are negotiated on a cost recovery basis. We are party to a Tax Services Agreement pursuant to which we pay IDT $10,000 a month for tax services, and an Internal Audit Agreement pursuant to which we pay IDT on a cost recovery basis. We are also a party to an Intellectual Property Legal Services Agreement pursuant to which we pay IDT $25,000 a month for intellectual property services, including patent and trademark prosecution, and a percentage of licensing fees we may receive related to specific technologies as a result of IDT’s assistance in these matters. We are currently negotiating other service agreements with IDT. During the three and six months ended January 31, 2005, we paid IDT approximately $0.2 million and $0.3 million, respectively, for such services. During the three and six months ended January 31, 2004 we made payments totaling $0.08 million and $0.1 million, respectively, for such services.
On occasion, we provide administrative, technical development and support services to IDT based on the need for such services. During the three and six months ended January 31, 2005, we charged IDT reimbursement fees of $0.1 million and $0.4 million, respectively, and for the three and six months ended January 31, 2004 we charged IDT reimbursement fees of $0.05 million and $0.1 million, respectively, for such services.
The due to (from) IDT balances represent net amounts due to (from) IDT, principally for wholesale carrier services and facilities lease payments. On January 31, 2005, IDT owed us a net $0.2 million and on July 31, 2004, we owed IDT a net $1.0 million. The average net balance we owed to IDT during the three and six months ended January 31, 2005 was $0.1 million and $0.4 million, respectively, compared with an average net balance of $0.6 million and $0.5 million, respectively, that was owed to IDT for the three and six months ended January 31, 2004.
During the second quarter of fiscal 2004, we executed an agreement with Union Telecard Alliance, LLC (“UTA”), a subsidiary of IDT, which ended UTA’s distribution of Net2Phone disposable calling cards effective December 31, 2003, and provided for an orderly wind-down over a two-year period of our disposable calling card business. This resulted in exit costs of $0.5 million to compensate UTA for estimated obligations associated with the Net2Phone disposable calling cards currently in the marketplace. These exit costs were recorded in restructuring, severance, impairment and other items during the three months ended January 31, 2004. Pursuant to the terms of our agreement with UTA, the parties will settle the aforementioned obligations over a two-year period ending December 31, 2005, through monthly reconciliations of on-going wind down activities, with final settlement to be completed by February 15, 2006. Consequently, no sales of disposable calling cards to IDT affiliates were recorded for the three and six months ended January 31, 2005 and nominal sales were recorded for the three and six months ended January 31, 2004.
On October 29, 2003, we entered into a binding memorandum of understanding (“MOU”) with IDT, which requires us to issue 6.9 million shares of Class A common stock to IDT at the time we execute definitive telecommunications services and related agreements with IDT. No definitive agreements have been executed as of March 21, 2005. Once issued, the shares will be held in escrow to secure IDT’s performance obligations under the agreements and are to be released to IDT in equal annual installments over five years, with the first release to occur when definitive agreements are signed. During the second quarter of fiscal 2004, IDT started providing us with services and benefits under the terms of the MOU. Pursuant to the terms of the MOU, IDT will provide certain services to us at IDT’s cost plus 5%, which we will record to our direct cost of revenue.
We maintain a close working relationship with IDT, and we do business with them on a variety of levels. The fact that we have not completed definitive agreements has not stopped us from working together pursuant to the terms of the MOU and for IDT to support our cable telephony service offerings while we negotiate definitive agreements. While the MOU identifies the scope of services to be provided and the consideration and methodology for paying for such services, we cannot finalize the definitive agreements until our business units and technical teams further develop the details of the services to be provided by IDT.
Back to Contents
The issuance of the 6.9 million shares is subject to variable accounting treatment and, therefore, the shares must be marked-to-market each quarter based on their current market value. Consequently, we recorded net charges of $1.0 million to non-cash services provided by IDT related to this agreement during the six months ended January 31, 2005, which represents marked-to-market adjustments on the 1.0 million shares we have previously recognized as potentially earned by IDT during fiscal 2004, plus new charges relating to 0.7 million shares, which we have recognized as potentially earned by IDT during the six months ended January 31, 2005, that we may issue and subsequently release from escrow to IDT for services and benefits provided by IDT during the aforementioned periods. During the three months ended January 31, 2005, we reversed $0.5 million of previous charges due to the decline in our stock price at January 31, 2005 compared with October 31, 2004. During the three and six months ended January 31, 2004, we recorded a charge of $2.3 million to non-cash services related to this agreement, which represents the fair value of the 0.4 million shares that vested during the three months ended January 31, 2004.
We followed the guidance in EITF 96-18, Accounting for Equity Instruments That are Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services, in determining to apply variable accounting treatment to the shares that will be held in escrow under the definitive agreements until they are released to IDT. While we have no expectation of changing the type or amount of consideration to be paid to IDT under the MOU, if we do, EITF 96-18 may no longer apply, which would cause us to apply different accounting rules to this transaction, which could adversely affect our financial results.
We determined that non-cash services provided by IDT are attributable to direct cost of revenue and selling, general and administrative expense. However, given that the services provided by IDT do not individually have readily identifiable market values, and that the variable accounting treatment will result in different values being ascribed to the same services from period to period, we believe differentiating between direct cost of revenue and selling, general and administrative expense is not practicable. Therefore, we have classified the non-cash services provided by IDT in a separate line in the condensed consolidated statements of operations.
We have determined that, beginning in the second quarter of fiscal 2004 through and including the first quarter of fiscal 2005, we incorrectly included the shares we may issue (related to the first year of the agreement) upon reaching a definitive agreement, and subsequently release from escrow to IDT in our calculation of basic net loss per share, and also incorrectly included such shares as outstanding on our condensed consolidated balance sheets. However, this error did not have any impact on basic net loss per share for any quarterly or yearly fiscal periods, and was not material to the number of outstanding shares included on our condensed consolidated balance sheets and has been corrected. In accordance with EITF Topic D-90, Grantor Balance Sheet Presentation of Unvested, Forfeitable Equity Instruments Granted to a Nonemployee, shares we may release from escrow for services received from IDT will not be included in the total number of Class A common stock shares reported as issued and outstanding until a definitive agreement is reached and such shares vest. The cumulative amount of equity on our condensed consolidated balance sheets related to this agreement was $4.3 million as of January 31, 2005 and $3.4 million as of July 31, 2004.
Liberty Media Corporation
As reported in a Schedule 13D/A filed by IDT and related reporting persons, on March 8, 2005, IDT purchased all of Liberty Media Corporation’s direct and indirect interests in Net2Phone. Consequently, Liberty Media Corporation no longer beneficially owns any of our outstanding stock, but continues to maintain business relationships with us through its participation on our Cable Advisory Board. On October 22, 2003, one of our wholly owned subsidiaries, Net2Phone Cable Telephony, LLC and Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, Inc., then an affiliate of Liberty Media Corporation, executed a Cable Telephony Production Agreement. According to the terms of this agreement, Net2Phone Cable Telephony provides cable telephony services to Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico’s customers, and Net2Phone Cable Telephony acts as Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico’s agent in requisitioning, configuring, staging and installing all infrastructure and technology components that facilitate these telecommunication services. During the three and six months ended January 31, 2005, we recorded $0.3 million and $0.6 million, respectively, in revenue from Liberty Cablevision of Puerto Rico, $0.2 million and $0.5 million in receivables and $0.6 million and $0.7 million in deferred revenue from this agreement as of January 31, 2005 and July 31, 2004, respectively. Net2Phone Cable Telephony obtains up-front fees for services that are amortized over the life of the agreement, as Net2Phone Cable Telephony has a continuing performance obligation under the terms of the agreement to maintain and provide access to its platform for the life of the agreement.
31
Back to Contents
Loans with Chairman
In April 2002, we loaned Mr. Greenberg, who was then our Chief Executive Officer and is now our Chairman, the sum of $3.6 million. The loan bears interest at the short-term applicable federal rate under code section 1274(d) and principal and interest are due on April 9, 2005 (“Maturity Date”). The loan is non-recourse to Mr. Greenberg and is secured by options to purchase 300,000 shares, which carry a strike price of $5.08, of our common stock granted to Mr. Greenberg in April 2002. Under certain circumstances, the Board of Directors may request Mr. Greenberg to exercise sufficient options and sell sufficient stock to pay the unpaid balance of the loan. In addition, the Board may request that Mr. Greenberg not sell the stock, which will result in the unpaid loan and interest balance being reduced based upon a formula set forth in the loan agreement. Due to the uncertainty surrounding the number of options Mr. Greenberg will ultimately receive, we are accounting for the options using a variable accounting model until the options are exercised or returned to us. Furthermore, due to the non-recourse nature of the loan, we are recording compensation expense for the $3.6 million principal amount of the note over its three-year maturity period. However, total compensation expense will be calculated at each reporting date as the greater of the compensation expense resulting from (i) variable accounting treatment of the options, or (ii) amortizing the $3.6 million loan balance over the maturity period of the loan. We recorded compensation expense of $0.3 million and $0.6 million, respectively, during both the three and six months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004.
We previously loaned Mr. Greenberg $600,000 pursuant to his original employment agreement with us entered into in July 2000, which was paid in full, plus interest, in the first quarter of fiscal 2004.
Agreement with Chief Executive Officer
On September 23, 2004, we announced that Liore Alroy would become our Chief Executive Officer, and that our then current Chief Executive Officer, Stephen Greenberg, would assume the role of Chairman of the Board. This management change took effect on October 31, 2004. Pursuant to an employment agreement we entered into with Mr. Alroy effective October 31, 2004, we granted Mr. Alroy 800,000 stock options and 800,000 shares of restricted stock pursuant to our 1999 Amended and Restated Stock Option and Incentive Plan. The stock options have a grant price equal to $3.45, which was the fair market value of our stock on the grant date, and will vest over the three-year term of the agreement, 33 percent on each anniversary of the effective date of the agreement. Similarly, the restrictions on the sale of the restricted stock will lapse over the three-year term of the agreement, 33 percent on each anniversary of the effective date of the agreement. During the three months ended October 31, 2004, we recorded $2.8 million in deferred compensation related to Mr. Alroy’s restricted stock grant and during the three and six months ended January 31, 2005, we recorded $0.3 million of non-cash compensation expense related to this agreement.
Effects of Inflation
Due to relatively low levels of inflation over the last several years, inflation has not had a material effect on our results of operations.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
On December 16, 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, which is a revision of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. SFAS No. 123 (R) supersedes APB No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and amends SFAS No. 95, Statement of Cash Flows. SFAS No. 123 (R) requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the financial statements based on their fair values (i.e., pro forma disclosure is no longer an alternative to financial statement recognition). SFAS No. 123 (R) is effective for public companies at the beginning of the first interim or annual period beginning after June 15, 2005. This would require us to adopt SFAS No. 123 (R) effective August 1, 2005.
32
Back to Contents
As permitted by SFAS No. 123, the Company currently accounts for share-based payments to employees using the intrinsic value method in accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees (“APB 25”), and related Interpretations. As such, the Company generally recognizes no compensation cost on grants of employee stock options. Accordingly, the adoption of SFAS No. 123 (R) may have a significant impact on the Company’s results of operations, although it will have no impact on its overall financial position. The impact of adoption of SFAS No. 123 (R) cannot be predicted at this time because it will depend on levels of share-based payments granted in the future. However, had we adopted SFAS No. 123 (R) in prior periods, the impact of that standard would have approximated the impact of SFAS No. 123 as described in the disclosure of pro forma net income (loss) and earnings per share in Note 3 to our condensed consolidated financial statements. SFAS No. 123 (R) also requires the benefits of tax deductions in excess of recognized compensation cost to be reported as a financing cash flow, rather than as an operating cash flow as required under current literature. This requirement is not anticipated to be material since the Company does not currently recognize a benefit of excess tax deductions because of federal and state net operating loss carryforwards available to offset future U.S. federal and state taxable income.
Public entities that used the fair-value-based method of accounting under the original provisions of SFAS No. 123 (whether for recognition or pro forma disclosure purposes) must adopt the provisions of SFAS No. 123 (R) using either the modified-prospective-transition (MPT) or the modified-retrospective-transition (MRT) methods. Under the MPT transition method entities will be required to apply all the measurement, recognition and attribution provisions of SFAS No. 123 (R) to all share-based payments granted, modified or settled after the date of adoption, while under the MRT transition method companies would restate prior periods by recognizing in the financial statements the same amount of compensation cost as previously reported in the pro forma footnote disclosures under the provisions of SFAS No. 123. We will use the MPT transition method when we adopt SFAS No. 123 (R).
Cautionary Statement Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
The Securities and Exchange Commission encourages companies to disclose forward-looking information so that investors and stockholders can better understand a company’s future prospects and make informed investment decisions. This Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements that set out anticipated results based on management’s plans and assumptions. We have tried, wherever possible, to identify such statements by using words such as “anticipates,” “estimates,” “expects,” “projects,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes” and words and terms of similar substance in connection with any discussion of future operating or financial performance.
Achievement of future results is subject to risks, uncertainties and inaccurate assumptions. Should known or unknown risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove inaccurate, actual results could vary materially from those anticipated, estimated or projected. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results to be materially different from any future results that may be expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-Q:
– our ability to expand our customer base and to develop additional and leverage our existing distribution channels for our products and solutions,
– dependence on strategic and channel partners including their ability to distribute our products and meet or renew their financial commitments,
– our ability to address international markets,
– the effectiveness of our sales and marketing activities,
– the acceptance of our products in the marketplace,
– the timing and scope of deployments of our products by customers,
– fluctuations in customer sales cycles,
– our customers’ ability to obtain additional funding,
33
Back to Contents
– technical difficulties with respect to our products or products in development,
– the need for ongoing product development in an environment of rapid technological change,
– the emergence of new competitors in the marketplace,
– our ability to compete successfully against established competitors with greater resources,
– the uncertainty of future governmental regulation,
– our ability to manage growth and obtain patent protection and additional funds,
– general economic conditions,
– and other risks discussed in this report and in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
An additional risk factor that could affect investor confidence and market value relates to our compliance with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto (“Section 404 Rules”). As of July 31, 2005, our system of internal controls over financial reporting must comply with the requirements of the Section 404 Rules. We are currently undergoing a comprehensive effort to document and test our internal controls over financial reporting and to assess that such controls are designed and operating effectively. As discussed in Item 4 below, we have identified deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting and we may identify additional deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting in the future that we may not be able to remediate prior to reporting on internal controls over financial reporting. If we are unable to timely conclude on the effectiveness of our system of internal controls over financial reporting under the Section 404 Rules, or if we must disclose material weaknesses related to our system of internal controls over financial reporting, such as the material weakness disclosed in Item 4 below, investor confidence in our internal controls over financial reporting and financial statements could be damaged and cause our stock price to decline.
We undertake no obligation to publicly update forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. This discussion of potential risks and uncertainties is by no means complete but is designed to highlight important factors that may impact our financial condition or results of operations. Other sections of this Form 10-Q may include additional factors which could adversely effect our business and financial performance. Moreover, we operate in a competitive environment. New risks emerge from time to time and it is not always possible for management to predict all such risk factors, nor can management assess the impact of all such risk factors on our business or to which any factor or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Given these risks and uncertainties, shareowners should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements as a prediction of actual results.
34
Back to Contents
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market RiskThe Securities and Exchange Commission’s rule related to market risk disclosure requires that we describe and quantify our potential losses from market risk sensitive instruments attributable to reasonably possible market changes. Market risk sensitive instruments include all financial or commodity instruments and other financial instruments (such as investments and debt) that are sensitive to future changes in interest rates, currency exchange rates, commodity prices or other market factors. We are not materially exposed to market risks from changes in foreign currency exchange rates or commodity prices. We do not hold derivative financial instruments nor do we hold securities for trading or speculative purposes. We are exposed to changes in interest rates primarily from our investments in cash equivalents. Under our current policies, we do not use interest rate derivative instruments to manage our exposure to interest rate changes. Our reported financial results may vary significantly based upon fluctuations in our stock price. Our long-term obligation with Deutsche Bank changes based upon our stock price. If our stock price decreases, this will increase our overall obligation. If our stock price increases, this will decrease our overall obligation. In addition, we have repriced stock options and granted restricted shares that require variable accounting treatment and, therefore, must be marked-to-market each quarter based on their current fair value.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. Our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, such officers have concluded that, as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures were ineffective, solely as a result of the material weakness in our internal controls over financial reporting identified below. To address the material weakness described below, we have implemented changes to our internal controls over financial reporting which we believe will remediate this material weakness, subject to the testing described below. We also performed additional analysis and other post-closing procedures to ensure our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Accordingly, management believes that the consolidated financial statements, and other financial information, in this report fairly present in all material respects our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented.
Evaluation of Internal Controls over Financial Reporting. We recently identified deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting. The first of these relates to fixed assets and depreciation expense. Management believes the systems previously in place to track the company’s fixed assets and record depreciation expense were “significantly deficient” as defined by Public Company Accounting Oversight Board’s Auditing Standard No. 2 (“AS No. 2”). New systems have been designed and are currently in service; and we are testing these systems and expect to determine through this testing whether our remediation steps have fully addressed the deficiency no later than July 31, 2005, the date we must have tested our internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to the Section 404 Rules (as defined above).
The second financial control deficiency relates to deferred revenue, which is the accounting liability recorded to reflect prepayments by customers. Controls are in place to evaluate the adequacy of our deferred revenue liability as reflected on our balance sheet. However, management believes those controls may not have adequately reflected certain terms and conditions related to some of our products. We have updated these controls and revised our revenue recognition policy to reflect the current process of reviewing deferred revenue balances in light of the current terms and conditions related to these products and we believe the deferred revenue balance reflected in this filing is an appropriate reflection of our liability to provide services to our prepaid customers as of January 31, 2005. As a result of the two aforementioned control issues, and additional process related deficiencies, which primarily relate to our financial statement close process and the adequacy of our finance department staffing levels, we have determined that the deficiencies, taken in the aggregate, are significant enough to be reported as a “material weakness” in our internal controls over financial reporting as defined in AS No. 2. This material weakness resulted in our need to issue, on March 9, 2005, an earnings release with preliminary financial information and caused us to file this Report on Form 10-Q with final financial information later than our expected filing date of March 14, 2005 pursuant to a five day extension permitted by Rule 12b-25 of the Exchange Act. The financial control deficiency relating to our deferred revenue resulted in a cumulative adjustment to our revenue, reducing the preliminary revenue we reported for this quarter by $2.0 million. This had the additional impact of increasing our preliminary loss from operations of $8.6 million to a final loss from operations of $10.6 million and preliminary loss per share from $0.11 to a final loss per share of $0.14. Our financial control deficiency related to systems previously in place to track our fixed assets and record depreciation expense. Upon review, only minor adjustments of $22,000 to our preliminary selling, general and administrative expense and $26,000 depreciation and amortization expense, were required.
35
Back to Contents
Changes in Internal Controls over Financial Reporting. We have implemented several changes to our internal financial controls in response to the aforementioned deficiencies identified during the second quarter of fiscal 2005:
(A) New systems have been designed and are currently in service to, subject to additional required testing, accurately report fixed assets, depreciation expenses and accumulated depreciation. (B) We have (1) revised our revenue recognition policy as it relates to our deferred revenue account and (2) established additional controls to ensure our deferred revenue liability properly takes into account the current terms and conditions of our product offerings.
(C) We have instituted a comprehensive review of our financial statement close process and expect to see immediate improvements to the process beginning with the third quarter of fiscal 2005.
(D) We are conducting a comprehensive review of the staffing needs of our finance department and in the interim have hired temporary resources to address specific resource requirements.
There were no additional changes in our internal control over financial reporting made during the second quarter of fiscal 2005 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II—OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
We are subject to legal proceedings that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and have not been finally adjudicated. Although there can be no assurance in this regard, in the opinion of management, none of the legal proceedings to which we are currently a party will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows or our financial condition.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
Not applicable.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
Not applicable.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
We held our Annual Meeting of Stockholders on December 16, 2004. At this meeting, the stockholders voted in favor of the following items listed in the Proxy Statement dated November 19, 2004:(1) Election of Directors:
| Nominee | For | | Withheld | |
|
|
|
|
| |
| | | | | |
| Liore Alroy | 93,788,899 | | 4,587,416 | |
| Harry C. McPherson, Jr. | 91,990,232 | | 6,386,083 | |
| Marc J. Oppenheimer | 92,628,260 | | 5,748,055 | |
| | |
| (2) | Approval of the Net2Phone, Inc. 1999 Amended and Restated Stock Option and Incentive Plan, including an amendment to increase the number of shares reserved for issuance thereunder by 2,000,000 shares to an aggregate of 20,940,000 shares. |
| | |
| | |
| For | | Against | | Abstain | | Broker Non-Votes | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| | | | | | | | |
| 65,693,340 | | 10,023,208 | | 81,804 | | 22,577,963 | |
| | | | | | | | |
36
Back to Contents
| (3) | Ratification of the selection of Ernst & Young, LLP as our independent auditors for the fiscal year ending July 31, 2005 |
| | |
| For | | Against | | Abstain | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| 98,222,045 | | 106,732 | | 47,538 | |
Item 5. Other Information
There was no information required to be disclosed as a Current Report on Form 8-K during the second quarter of fiscal 2005 that was not previously reported.
Item 6. Exhibits
Exhibit No. | | Description |
| |
|
| | |
31.1 | | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
| | |
31.2 | | Certification of the Chief Financial Officer, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
| | |
32 | | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
| | |
| | |
37
Back to Contents
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
| | NET2PHONE, INC. |
| | |
Date: March 21, 2005 | By: | /s/ Liore Alroy |
| | Liore Alroy |
| | Chief Executive Officer |
| | |
Date: March 21, 2005 | By: | /s/ Arthur Dubroff |
| | Arthur Dubroff |
| | Chief Financial Officer |
| | |
38