Fair Value Disclosures [Text Block] | 2. FAIR VALUE In accordance with the Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures Topic of the FASB ASC 820, the Company groups its financial assets and financial liabilities generally measured at fair value in three levels, based on the markets in which the assets and liabilities are traded and the reliability of the assumptions used to determine fair value. ⋅ Level 1: Input prices quoted in an active market for identical financial assets or liabilities. ⋅ Level 2: Inputs other than prices quoted in Level 1, such as prices quoted for similar financial assets and liabilities in active markets, prices for identical assets and liabilities in markets that are not active or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data. ⋅ Level 3: Input prices quoted that are significant to the fair value of the financial assets or liabilities which are not observable or supported by an active market. To the extent that the valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by the Company in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. A financial instrument’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement. In February 2013, the Company issued warrants in a public offering (“February 2013 Public Offering Warrants”), of which 550,000 4,943,023 September 30, 2015 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Fair Value Liabilities: February 2013 Public Offering Warrants $ $ $ 594,000 $ 594,000 August 2014 Warrants 4,057,000 4,057,000 Total $ $ 4,057,000 $ 594,000 $ 4,651,000 December 31, 2014 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Fair Value Liabilities: July 2010 Warrants $ $ 999 $ $ 999 February 2013 Public Offering Warrants 1,127,500 1,127,500 August 2014 Warrants 4,048,416 4,048,416 Total $ $ 4,049,415 $ 1,127,500 $ 5,176,915 In order to estimate the fair value of the July 2010 Warrants, the Company used the Black-Scholes option pricing model and assumptions that consider, among other variables, the fair value of the underlying stock, risk-free interest rate, volatility, expected life and dividend rates. Assumptions used are generally consistent with those disclosed for stock-based compensation (see Note 5). In order to estimate the value of the February 2013 Public Offering Warrants considered to be derivative instruments as of September 30, 2015, the Company uses a Monte Carlo simulation technique together with assumptions that consider, among other variables, the fair value of the underlying stock, risk-free interest rate of . 82 87.3 2.39 The assumptions used to estimate the value of the February 2013 Public Offering Warrants as of December 31, 2014 include the fair value of the underlying stock, risk free interest rates ranging from 1.07 2.63 100 115 3.14 3.89 Nine Months Twelve Months September 30, December 31, 2015 2014 Beginning balance Fair value $ 1,127,500 $ 3,355,000 Gain on derivatives resulting from change in fair value (533,500) (2,227,500) Ending balance Fair value $ 594,000 $ 1,127,500 To estimate the fair value of the August 2014 Warrants, the Company calculated the weighted average closing price of the August 2014 Warrants for the 10 trading day period that ended on the balance sheet date. |