Stockholders' Deficit | 3 Months Ended |
Mar. 31, 2014 |
Stockholders' Equity Note [Abstract] | ' |
Stockholders' Deficit | ' |
NOTE 9 - STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT |
|
Stock-Based Compensation |
|
During the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013, and for the period from March 28, 2006 (Inception) to March 31, 2014, the Company recognized stock-based compensation, including consultants, of approximately $37,000, $9,100, and $6,522,000 to general and administrative expenses and $0, $0, and $4,468,000 to project development expenses, respectively. There is no additional future compensation expense to record as of March 31, 2014 based on the previous awards. |
|
Stock Purchase Agreement |
|
On January 19, 2011, the Company signed a $10 million purchase agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) with Lincoln Park Capital Fund, LLC (“LPC”), an Illinois limited liability company. The Company also entered into a registration rights agreement with LPC whereby we agreed to file a registration statement related to the transaction with the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (“SEC”) covering the shares that may be issued to LPC under the Purchase Agreement within ten days of the agreement. Although under the Purchase Agreement the registration statement was to be declared effective by March 31, 2011, LPC did not terminate the Purchase Agreement. The registration statement was declared effective on May 10, 2011, without any penalty. |
|
After the SEC had declared effective the registration statement related to the transaction, the Company had the right, in their sole discretion, over a 30-month period to sell the shares of common stock to LPC in amounts from $35,000 and up to $500,000 per sale, depending on the Company’s stock price as set forth in the Purchase Agreement, up to the aggregate commitment of $10 million. |
|
There were no upper limits to the price LPC would pay to purchase our common stock and the purchase price of the shares related to the $10 million funding were based on the prevailing market prices of the Company’s shares immediately preceding the time of sales without any fixed discount, and the Company controlled the timing and amount of any sales of shares to LPC. LPC did not have the right or the obligation to purchase any shares of our common stock on any business day that the price of our common stock was below $0.15. The Purchase Agreement contained customary representations, warranties, covenants, closing conditions and indemnification and termination provisions by, among and for the benefit of the parties. LPC had covenanted not to cause or engage in any manner whatsoever, any direct or indirect short selling or hedging of the Company’s shares of common stock. The Purchase Agreement was terminated in July 18, 2013. |
|
Upon signing the Purchase Agreement, BlueFire received $150,000 from LPC as an initial purchase under the $10 million commitment in exchange for 428,571 shares of our common stock and warrants to purchase 428,571 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.55 per share. The warrants contain a ratchet provision in which the exercise price will be adjusted based on future issuances of common stock, excluding certain issuances; if issuances are at prices lower than the current exercise price (see Note 6). The warrants have an expiration date of January 2016. |
|
Concurrently, in consideration for entering into the $10 million agreement, we issued to LPC 600,000 shares of our common stock as a commitment fee and shall issue up to 600,000 shares pro rata as LPC purchases up to the remaining $9.85 million. |
|
During the three months ended March 31, 2014 and 2013 and the period from Inception to March 31, 2014 the Company drew $0, $0, and $385,000 on the Purchase Agreement. |
|
Equity Facility Agreement |
|
On March 28, 2012, BlueFire finalized a committed equity facility (the “Equity Facility”) with TCA Global Credit Master Fund, LP, a Cayman Islands limited partnership (“TCA”), whereby the parties entered into (i) a committed equity facility agreement (the “Equity Agreement”) and (ii) a registration rights agreement (the “Registration Rights Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms of the Equity Agreement, for a period of twenty-four (24) months commencing on the date of effectiveness of the Registration Statement (as defined below), TCA committed to purchase up to $2,000,000 of BlueFire’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share (the “Shares”), pursuant to Advances (as defined below), covering the Registrable Securities (as defined below). The purchase price of the Shares under the Equity Agreement is equal to ninety-five percent (95%) of the lowest daily volume weighted average price of BlueFire’s common stock during the five (5) consecutive trading days after BlueFire delivers to TCA an Advance notice in writing requiring TCA to advance funds (an “Advance”) to BlueFire, subject to the terms of the Equity Agreement. The “Registrable Securities” include (i) the Shares; and (ii) any securities issued or issuable with respect to the Shares by way of exchange, stock dividend or stock split or in connection with a combination of shares, recapitalization, merger, consolidation or other reorganization or otherwise. As further consideration for TCA entering into and structuring the Equity Facility, BlueFire paid to TCA a fee by issuing to TCA shares of BlueFire’s common stock that equal a dollar amount of $110,000 (the “Facility Fee Shares”). It is the intention of BlueFire and TCA that the value of the Facility Fee Shares shall equal $110,000. In the event the value of the Facility Fee Shares issued to TCA does not equal $110,000 after a nine month evaluation date, the Equity Agreement provides for an adjustment provision allowing for necessary action (either the issuance of additional shares to TCA or the return of shares previously issued to TCA to BlueFire’s treasury) to adjust the number of Facility Fee Shares issued. BlueFire also entered into the Registration Rights Agreement with TCA. Pursuant to the terms of the Registration Rights Agreement, BlueFire is obligated to file a registration statement (the “Registration Statement”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC’) to cover the Registrable Securities within 45 days of closing. BlueFire must use its commercially reasonable efforts to cause the Registration Statement to be declared effective by the SEC by a date that is no later than 90 days following closing. |
|
In connection with the issuance of approximately 280,000 shares for the $110,000 facility fee as described above, the Company capitalized said amount within deferred financings costs in the accompanying balance sheet as of March 31, 2012, along with other costs incurred as part Equity Facility and the Convertible Note described below. Additional costs related to the Equity Facility and paid from the funds of the Convertible Note described below, were approximately $60,000. Aggregate costs of the Equity Facility were $170,000. Because these costs were to access the Equity Facility, earned by TCA regardless of the Company drawing on the Equity Facility, and not part of a funding, they are treated akin to debt costs The deferred financings costs related to the Equity Facility were amortized over one (1) year on a straight-line basis. The Company believed this accelerated amortization, which is less than the two year Equity Facility term, was appropriate based on substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. As of December 31, 2012, the Company determined that it was not probable the Registration Statement would become effective under the original structure of the agreement and accordingly, wrote off all remaining deferred financing costs related to the Equity Agreement. |
|
On March 28, 2012, BlueFire entered into a security agreement (the “Security Agreement”) with TCA, related to a $300,000 convertible promissory note issued by BlueFire in favor of TCA (the “Convertible Note”). The Security Agreement grantsed to TCA a continuing, first priority security interest in all of BlueFire’s assets, wheresoever located and whether now existing or hereafter arising or acquired. On March 28, 2012, BlueFire issued the Convertible Note in favor of TCA. The maturity date of the Convertible Note was March 28, 2013, and the Convertible Note bears interest at a rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum with a default rate of eighteen percent (18%) per annum. The Convertible Note was convertible into shares of BlueFire’s common stock at a price equal to ninety-five percent (95%) of the lowest daily volume weighted average price of BlueFire’s common stock during the five (5) trading days immediately prior to the date of conversion. The Convertible Note had the option to be prepaid in whole or in part at BlueFire’s option without penalty. The proceeds received by the Company under the purchase agreement were used for general working capital purposes which include costs reimbursed under the DOE cost share program. |
|
In connection with the Convertible Note, approximately $93,000 was withheld and immediately disbursed to cover costs of the Convertible Note and Equity Facility described above. The costs related to the Convertible Note were $24,800 which were capitalized as deferred financing costs; were amortized on a straight-line basis over the term of the Convertible Note. In addition, $7,500 was dispersed to cover legal fees. After all costs, the Company received approximately $207,000 in cash from the Convertible Note. Amortization of the deferred financing costs during the quarters ended March 31, 2014 and 2013 was approximately $0 and $38,600, respectively. As of March 31, 2014, there were no remaining deferred financing costs. |
|
This note contained an embedded conversion feature whereby the holder could convert the note at a discount to the fair value of the Company’s common stock price. Based on applicable guidance the embedded conversion feature was considered a derivative instrument and bifurcated. This liability is recorded on the face of the financial statements as “derivative liability”, and must be revalued each reporting period. |
|
The Company discounted the note by the fair market value of the derivative liability upon inception of the note. This discount was accreted back to the face value of the note over the note term. |
|
Using the Black-Scholes pricing model, with the inputs listed below, we calculated the fair market value of the conversion feature to be $161,570 at the notes inception. The Company revalued the conversion feature at March 31, 2014 in the same manner with the inputs listed below and recognized a gain on the change in fair value of the derivative liability on the accompanying statement of operations of $2,600. |
|
| | 31-Mar-14 | | | 31-Dec-13 | | | 28-Mar-12 | |
Annual dividend yield | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | |
Expected life (years) | | | 0 | | | | 0 | | | | 1 | |
Risk-free interest rate | | | 0.03 | % | | | 0.01 | % | | | 0.19 | % |
Expected volatility | | | 234.84 | % | | | 159 | % | | | 119 | % |
|
This note was repaid in full subsequent to March 31, 2014; see Note 10. |
|
Liability Purchase Agreement |
|
On December 9, 2013, The Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit in and for Leon County, Florida (the “Court”), entered an order (the “Order”) approving, among other things, the fairness of the terms and conditions of an exchange pursuant to Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, in accordance with a stipulation of settlement (the “Settlement Agreement”) between the Company, and Tarpon Bay Partners, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (“Tarpon”), in the matter entitled Tarpon Bay Partners, LLC v. BlueFire Renewables, Inc., Case No. 2013-CA-2975 (the “Action”). Tarpon commenced the Action against the Company on November 21, 2013 to recover an aggregate of $583,710 of past-due accounts payable of the Company, which Tarpon had purchased from certain creditors of the Company pursuant to the terms of separate receivable purchase agreements between Tarpon and each of such vendors (the “Assigned Accounts”), plus fees and costs (the “Claim”). The Assigned Accounts relate to certain legal, accounting, financial services, and the repayment of aged debt. The Order provides for the full and final settlement of the Claim and the Action. The Settlement Agreement became effective and binding upon the Company and Tarpon upon execution of the Order by the Court on December 9, 2013. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Stipulation, the number of shares beneficially owned by Tarpon will not exceed 9.99% of the Company’s Common Stock. In connection with the Settlement Agreement, the Company relied on the exemption from registration provided by Section 3(a)(10) under the Securities Act. |
|
Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement approved by the Order, the Company shall issue and deliver to Tarpon shares (the “Settlement Shares”) of the Company’s Common Stock in one or more tranches as necessary, and subject to adjustment and ownership limitations, sufficient to generate proceeds such that the aggregate Remittance Amount (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) equals the Claim. In addition, pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Company issued to Tarpon a convertible promissory note in the principal amount of $25,000 (the “Tarpon Initial Note”). Under the terms of the Tarpon Initial Note, the Company shall pay Tarpon $25,000 on the date of maturity which is January 30, 2014. This Note is convertible by Tarpon into the Company’s Common Shares (See Note 4). |
|
Pursuant to the fairness hearing, the Order, and the Company’s agreement with Tarpon, on December 23, 2013, the Company issued the Tarpon Success Fee Note in the principal amount of $50,000 in favor of Tarpon as a commitment fee. The Tarpon Success Fee Note is due on June 30, 2014. The Tarpon Success Fee Note is convertible into shares of the Company’s common stock (See Note 4). |
|
In connection with the settlement, on December 18, 2013 the Company issued 6,619,835 shares of Common Stock to Tarpon in which gross proceeds of $29,802 were generated from the sale of the Common Stock. In connection with the transaction, Tarpon received fees of $7,450 and providing payments of $22,352 to settle outstanding vendor payables. During the three months ended March 31, 2014, the Company issued Tarpon 48,110,000 shares of Common Stock from which gross proceeds of $130,668 were generated from the sale of the Common Stock. In connection with the transaction, Tarpon received fees of $32,667 and providing payments of $98,001 to settle outstanding vendor payables. Any shares not used by Tarpon are subject to return to the Company. Accordingly, the Company accounts for these shares as issued but not outstanding until the shares have been sold by Tarpon and the proceeds are known. Net proceeds received by Tarpon are included as a reduction to accounts payable or other liability as applicable, as such funds are legally required to be provided to the party Tarpon purchased the debt from. Subsequent to March 31, 2014, the Company issued additional shares of common stock to Tarpon. See Note 10. |
|
Warrants Exercised |
|
Some of our warrants contain a provision in which the exercise price is to be adjusted for future issuances of common stock at prices lower than their current exercise price. |
|
In 2012, certain shareholders’ owning an aggregate of 5,740,741 warrants made claims of the Company that the exercise price of their warrants should have been adjusted due to a certain issuance of common shares by the Company (see Note 6). The Company believed that said issuance would not trigger adjustment based on the terms of the respective agreements. |
|
On December 4, 2012, these shareholders presented exercise forms to the Company to exercise all 5,740,741 warrants for a like amount of common shares. The warrants were exercised at $0.00, which is the amount the shareholders’ believed the new exercise price should be based the ratchet provision and their claims. |
|
On February 26, 2013, the Company received notice that the Court issued an Order in connection with these certain shareholders’ claims of breach of contract and declaratory relief related to 5,740,741 warrants issued by the Company. |
|
Pursuant to the Order, the Court ruled in favor of the shareholders on the two claims, finding that the Warrants contain certain anti-dilution protective provisions which provide for the re-adjustment of the exercise price of such Warrants upon certain events and that such exercise price per share of the Warrants must be decreased to $0.00. |
|
The Company has considered these warrants exercised based on the notice of exercise received from the respective shareholders in December 2012. The Company determined, that based on the Order by the Court a ratchet event had taken place based on the Order and claims made. The Company used December 4, 2012 as the date in which the new terms were considered to be in force based on the Shareholders’ notice to exercise on that date and the Courts subsequent Order that allowed the Shareholders to do so. |
|
As such, the modification of the exercise price was treated as an extinguishment of the warrants under the previous terms, with a revaluation of the warrants with new terms. As such, the warrant liability was valued immediately before extinguishment with the gain/loss recognized through earnings and remaining value reclassified to equity. Because there was only approximately one week of remaining life under the unmodified terms and because the previous exercise price was out of the money ($2.90) compared to the price of our common stock on the day of extinguishment ($0.14), the warrant value upon extinguishment was considered to be near zero based on a Black-Scholes calculation, which also used volatility of 104.2% and risk-free rate of 0.07%. |
|
In addition, the new warrant liability was valued immediately after the modification but prior to the exercise by the Shareholders with the new value being recognized through earnings. The “new” warrants had a fixed price, fixed number of shares, and effectively no ratchet provision based on the Order. There were no circumstances at that time that would require or allow for net cash settlement. As such, the warrants qualified for equity accounting under ASC 815. The Company valued the warrants with new terms at approximately $804,000 based on the fair value of the Company’s common stock on December 4, 2012 ($0.14) as it was considered an immediate exercise and therefore, the value of the shares was known on the date of exercise. Accordingly, the warrants were considered committed shares to be issued in the consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2012. On August 2, 2013, the Company issued these 5,740,741 shares and the value transferred to additional paid-in capital. |