The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
March 31, 2019
(unaudited)
1.
|
Organization and Basis of Financial Reporting
|
Basis of Presentation and Principles of Consolidation
The condensed consolidated
financial statements include the accounts of Otelco Inc. (the “Company”) and its subsidiaries, all of which are either
directly or indirectly wholly owned. These include: Blountsville Telephone LLC; Brindlee Mountain Telephone LLC; CRC Communications
LLC; Granby Telephone LLC; Hopper Telecommunications LLC; Mid-Maine Telecom LLC; Mid-Maine TelPlus LLC; Otelco Mid-Missouri LLC
and its wholly owned subsidiary I-Land Internet Services LLC; Otelco Telecommunications LLC; Otelco Telephone LLC; Pine Tree Telephone
LLC; Saco River Telephone LLC; Shoreham Telephone LLC; and War Telephone LLC.
The accompanying condensed
consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and all of the aforesaid subsidiaries after elimination of
all material intercompany balances and transactions. The unaudited operating results for the three months ended March 31, 2019,
are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2019, or any other period.
The condensed consolidated
financial statements and notes included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated
financial statements and notes thereto in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.
The interim condensed consolidated financial information herein is unaudited, with the condensed consolidated balance sheet as
of December 31, 2018, being derived from the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements. The information reflects
all adjustments which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair presentation of the financial position and results
of operations for the periods included in this report.
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2014, the Financial
Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-09,
Revenue
from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)
(“ASU 2014-09”). This ASU requires that an entity recognize revenue to
depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity
expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. This ASU also provides a more robust framework for revenue issues
and improves comparability of revenue recognition practices across industries. This ASU was the product of a joint project between
the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board to clarify the principles for recognizing revenue and to develop a common
revenue standard. ASU 2014-09 permits the use of either a retrospective or modified retrospective application. This guidance was
to be effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2016, with early
adoption not permitted. In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral
of the Effective Date.
This ASU confirmed a one-year delay in the effective date of ASU 2014-09, making the effective date
for the Company the first quarter of fiscal 2018 instead of the first quarter of fiscal 2017.
In March 2016, the
FASB issued ASU 2016-08,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Consideration (Reporting
Revenues Gross versus Net)
. This ASU is further guidance to ASU 2014-09, and clarifies principal versus agent considerations.
In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations
and Licensing.
This ASU is also further guidance to ASU 2014-09, and clarifies the identification of performance obligations.
In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12,
Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical
Expedients.
This ASU is also further guidance to ASU 2014-09, and clarifies assessing the narrow aspects of recognizing revenue.
In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-20,
Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with
Customers.
This ASU is also further guidance to ASU 2014-09, and clarifies technical corrections and improvements for recognizing
revenue.
In January 2017, the
FASB issued ASU 2017-03,
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections (Topic 250) and Investments-Equity Method and Joint Ventures
(Topic 323)
(“ASU 2017-03”). This ASU requires registrants to evaluate the impact ASU 2014-09 will have on financial
statements and adequately disclose this information to assist the reader in assessing the significance of ASU 2014-09 on the financial
statements when adopted. The Company commenced its assessment of ASU 2014-09 beginning in June 2016. This assessment included analyzing
ASU 2014-09’s impact on the Company’s various revenue streams, comparing the Company’s historical accounting
policies and practices to the requirements of ASU 2014-09, and identifying potential differences from applying the requirements
of ASU 2014-09 to the Company’s contracts. The Company has used a five-step process to identify the contract with the customer,
identify the performance obligations, determine the transaction price, allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations
and recognize revenue when or as the performance obligations are satisfied. The Company has implemented the appropriate changes
to its business processes, systems and controls to support revenue recognition and disclosures under ASU 2014-09.
The Company adopted
ASU 2014-09 at the beginning of its 2018 fiscal year using the modified retrospective method applied to those contracts which were
not completed as of January 1, 2018. Prior period amounts have not been adjusted and continue to be reported in accordance with
historic accounting standards in effect during those periods. The adoption of ASU 2014-09 and related amendments did not have a
material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.
In January 2016, the
FASB issued ASU 2016-01,
Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10)
(“ASU 2016-01”). This ASU addresses
certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments. ASU 2016-01 requires separate
presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset (that is, securities
or loans and receivables) on the balance sheet or in the accompanying notes to the financial statements. That presentation provides
financial statement users with more decision-useful information about an entity’s involvement in financial instruments. The
provisions of this ASU were to be effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those
years, with early adoption permitted. In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-03,
Technical Corrections and Improvements
to Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10),
which made targeted improvements to address certain aspects of recognition,
measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments. This ASU also confirmed a six-month delay in the effective
date of ASU 2016-01, making the effective date for the Company the second quarter of fiscal 2018 instead of the first quarter of
fiscal 2018, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2016-01 as of March 31, 2018, and that adoption did not have
a material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.
In February 2016, the
FASB issued ASU 2016-02,
Leases (Topic 842)
(“ASU 2016-02”)
.
This ASU requires lessees to recognize most
leases on the balance sheet. The provisions of this guidance are effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018,
and interim periods within those years, with early adoption permitted. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-03, which requires
registrants to evaluate the impact ASU 2016-02 will have on financial statements and adequately disclose this information to assist
the reader in assessing the significance of ASU 2016-02 on the financial statements when adopted. In January 2018, the FASB issued
ASU 2018-01,
Leases (Topic 842): Land Easement Practical Expedient for Transition to Topic 842
. This ASU provides an optional
transition practical expedient to not evaluate under ASU 2016-02 existing or expired land easements that were not previously accounted
for as leases under ASC Topic 840,
Leases
. An entity that elects this practical expedient should evaluate new or modified
land easements under ASU 2016-02 beginning at the date that the entity adopts ASU 2016-02. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-10,
Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases,
which provides improvements and clarifications for ASU 2016-02. In July
2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-11,
Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements
. This ASU provides an additional transition
method by allowing entities to initially apply the new lease standard at the date of adoption with a cumulative effect adjustment
to the opening balances of retained earnings in the period of adoption. This ASU also gives lessors the option of electing, as
a practical expedient by class of underlying asset, not to separate the lease and nonlease components of a contract when those
lease contracts meet certain criteria. In December 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-20,
Narrow-Scope Improvements for Lessors.
This ASU clarifies lessor treatment for sales taxes and other similar taxes collected from lessees, certain lessor costs, and recognition
of variable payments for contracts with lease and nonlease components. In March 2019, the FASB issued ASU 2019-01,
Codification
Improvements.
This ASU clarifies determining the fair value of the underlying asset by lessors that are not manufacturers or
dealers, presentation on the statement of cash flows for sales-type and direct financing leases, and transition disclosures related
to Topic 250, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections. The Company has completed its evaluation of the requirements of this guidance
and implemented the processes necessary to adopt ASU 2016-02, as amended.
The
Company has elected certain practical expedients available at adoption. The Company elected the package of practical expedients
upon transition not to reassess whether expired or existing contracts contain leases under the new definition of a lease; not to
reassess the lease classification for expired or existing leases; and not to reassess whether previously capitalized initial direct
costs would qualify for capitalization under ASU 2016-02. In evaluating certain equipment rental arrangements such as cable, internet
and security service contracts, the Company considered the practical expedient that allows lessors to elect, by class of underlying
asset, to not separate non-lease components from the associated lease components if the non-lease components otherwise would be
accounted for in accordance with the new revenue recognition standard. The Company elected this practical expedient as the following
two criteria are met; the lease component and the associated non-lease components have the same timing and pattern of transfer;
and the lease component, if accounted for separately, would be classified as an operating lease. The Company elected to adopt the
new standard using the transition method provided by ASU 2018-11; therefore, prior periods will not be restated. The Company has
determined that the impact of adoption is limited to real property leases and is consistent with industry practices. Adoption of
the new standard resulted in the Company recognizing an aggregate of $1,073,919 in lease liabilities and corresponding right of
use (“ROU”) assets and no impact on the opening retained earnings balances. The adoption of ASU 2016-02 had an immaterial
impact on the condensed consolidated statements of operations and condensed consolidated statements of cash flows for the three
months ended March 31, 2019.
In August 2016, the
FASB issued ASU 2016-15
, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments
.
This ASU addresses how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows under
Topic 230, Statement of Cash Flows, and other Topics. This ASU is effective for annual reporting periods, and interim periods therein,
beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted this ASU and that adoption did not have a
material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.
In May 2017, the FASB
issued ASU 2017-09,
Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718)
(“ASU 2017-09”). ASU 2017-09 provides guidance
about which changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award require an entity to apply modification accounting
in Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 718,
Stock Compensation
. ASU 2017-09 is effective for fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted for any interim
period for which financial statements have not been issued. ASU 2017-09 should be applied prospectively to an award modified on
or after the adoption date. The Company adopted this ASU and that adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s
condensed consolidated financial statements.
In May 2017, the FASB
issued ASU 2017-10,
Service Concession Arrangements (Topic 853)
(“ASU 2017-10”). The objective of this ASU is
to specify that an operating entity should not account for a service concession arrangement that meets certain criteria as a lease
in accordance with ASC Topic 840,
Leases
. ASU 2017-10 further states that the infrastructure used in a service concession
arrangement should not be recognized as property, plant, and equipment of the operating entity. The provisions of this ASU are
effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those years, with early adoption permitted.
The Company adopted this ASU and that adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial
statements.
In March 2018, the
FASB issued ASU 2018-05,
Income Taxes (Topic 740)
. The objective of this ASU is to amend ASC 740, Income Taxes to reflect
Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 118, issued by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SAB 118”), which
addresses the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”). SAB 118 outlines the approach companies may take
if they determine that the necessary information is not available (in reasonable detail) to evaluate, compute, and prepare accounting
entries to recognize the effects of the Tax Act by the time the financial statements are required to be filed. Companies may use
this approach when the timely determination of some or all of the income tax effects from the Tax Act are incomplete by the due
date of the financial statements. A reporting entity must act in good faith and update provisional amounts as soon as more
information becomes available, evaluated and prepared, during a measurement period that cannot exceed one year from the enactment
date. Initial reasonable estimates and subsequent changes to provisional amounts should be reported in income tax expense or benefit
from continuing operations in the period in which they are determined. As of December 31, 2017, the provisional amount recorded
related to the remeasurement of the Company’s deferred tax liability balance was $9.3 million and reflected a one-time reduction
in the Company’s income tax provision. As of December 31, 2017, the Company finalized its accounting estimates for income
tax effects related to the Tax Act. The Company elected to not utilize the measurement window provided under SAB 118 that ended
in 2018. The Company did not record any adjustments to its 2017 income tax effects resulting from the Tax Act.
In June 2018, the FASB
issued ASU 2018-07,
Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718).
This ASU expands the scope of ASU 2017-09,
which currently only includes share-based payments issued to employees, to also include share-based payments issued to nonemployees
for goods and services. The amendments in this ASU are effective for public companies for fiscal years beginning after December
15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted, but no earlier than the Company’s
adoption date of ASU 2014-09. The Company adopted this ASU and that adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s
condensed consolidated financial statements.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
During 2018, the FASB
issued ASUs 2018-01 through 2018-15 and, during 2019, the FASB has issued ASUs 2019-01 through 2019-03. Except for the ASUs discussed
above and below, these ASUs provide technical corrections or simplifications to existing guidance and to specialized industries
or entities and therefore have minimal, if any, impact on the Company.
In August 2018, the
FASB issued ASU 2018-13,
Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820)
(“ASU 2018-13”)
.
This ASU modifies the disclosure
requirements on fair value measurements in ASU 2018-13, based on the concepts in the Concepts Statement, including the consideration
of costs and benefits. This ASU eliminates, adds and modifies certain disclosure requirements for fair value measurements as part
of its disclosure framework project. ASU 2018-13 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods
within those fiscal years. An entity is permitted to early adopt any removed or modified disclosures upon issuance of this ASU
and delay adoption of the additional disclosures until their effective date. The Company does not expect this ASU to have a material
impact on its condensed consolidated financial statements.
In November 2018, the
FASB issued ASU 2018-19,
Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses
(“ASU
2018-19”)
.
This ASU improves the disclosure requirements in ASU 2016-13,
Financial Instruments - Credit Losses
(Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments
(“ASU 2016-13”) issued in June 2016, to make
a cumulative-effect adjustment to opening retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the amendments
are effective. The effective date and transition requirements for the amendments in this update are the same as the effective dates
and transition requirements in ASU 2016-13, as amended by ASU 2018-19. ASU 2016-13 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years. An entity is permitted to early adopt as of the fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not expect this ASU to
have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.
Notes payable consists
of the following (in thousands, except percentages) as of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Long-term
|
|
|
2019
|
|
|
2018
|
|
Loan with CoBank, ACB (the “Credit Facility”); variable interest rate of 6.75% at March 31, 2019, interest is monthly, paid in arrears on the last business day of each month. The Credit Facility is secured by the total assets of the subsidiary guarantors. The unpaid balance is due November 3, 2022.
|
|
$
|
4,350
|
|
|
$
|
69,125
|
|
|
$
|
73,475
|
|
|
$
|
74,562
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt issuance cost
|
|
|
(441
|
)
|
|
|
(1,003
|
)
|
|
|
(1,444
|
)
|
|
|
(1,551
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable, net of debt issuance cost
|
|
$
|
3,909
|
|
|
$
|
68,122
|
|
|
$
|
72,031
|
|
|
$
|
73,011
|
|
Associated with the
Credit Facility, the Company has $2.1 million in deferred financing cost. Amortization expense for the deferred financing cost
associated with the Credit Facility was $117 thousand and $121 thousand for the three months ended March 31, 2019, and 2018, respectively,
which is included in interest expense.
The revolving credit
facility associated with the Company’s Credit Facility had a maximum borrowing capacity of $5.0 million on March 31, 2019.
The revolving credit facility is available until November 3, 2022. There was no balance outstanding as of March 31, 2019. The Company
pays a commitment fee of 0.50% per annum, payable quarterly in arrears, on the unused portion of the revolver loan under the Credit
Facility. The rate declined from 0.50% per annum to 0.38% per annum on October 22, 2018. The commitment fee expense was $5 thousand
and $6 thousand for the three months ended March 31, 2019, and 2018, respectively.
Maturities of notes
payable for the next five years, assuming no future annual excess cash flow payments, are as follows (in thousands):
2019 (remaining)
|
|
$
|
3,263
|
|
2020
|
|
|
4,350
|
|
2021
|
|
|
4,350
|
|
2022
|
|
|
61,512
|
|
2023
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
73,475
|
|
A total of $2.1 million
of debt issuance cost is amortized over the life of the loan and is recorded net of the notes payable on the condensed consolidated
balance sheets.
The Company’s
notes payable agreements are subject to certain financial covenants and restrictions on indebtedness, financial guarantees, business
combinations and other related items. As of March 31, 2019, the Company was in compliance with all such covenants and restrictions.
As of March 31, 2019,
and December 31, 2018, the Company had U.S. federal and state net operating loss carryforwards of $0 and $43 thousand, respectively.
The Company had no alternative minimum tax credit carryforwards as of March 31, 2019, or December 31, 2018. The Company establishes
valuation allowances when necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to amounts expected to be realized. As of March 31, 2019,
the Company had no valuation allowance recorded.
The effective income tax rate as of March
31, 2019, and December 31, 2018, was 23.7% and 22.5%, respectively.
4.
|
Net Income per Common Share
|
Basic net income per
common share is computed by dividing net income by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted
net income per common share reflects the potential dilution that would occur should all of the shares of Class A common stock underlying
restricted stock units (“RSUs”) be issued.
A reconciliation of
the common shares for purposes of the calculation of the Company’s basic and diluted net income per common share is as follows
(weighted average number of common shares outstanding in whole numbers and net income in thousands):
|
|
Three Months
Ended March 31,
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding - basic
|
|
|
3,410,936
|
|
|
|
3,388,624
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities
|
|
|
20,293
|
|
|
|
31,557
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares and potential common shares - diluted
|
|
|
3,431,229
|
|
|
|
3,420,181
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
2,281
|
|
|
$
|
1,996
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per common share - basic
|
|
$
|
0.67
|
|
|
$
|
0.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per common share - diluted
|
|
$
|
0.66
|
|
|
$
|
0.58
|
|
5.
|
Revenue Streams and Concentrations
|
Revenue Streams
The Company identifies its revenue streams
with similar characteristics as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2019
|
|
|
March 31, 2018
|
|
Local services
|
|
$
|
5,135
|
|
|
$
|
5,489
|
|
Network access
|
|
|
5,163
|
|
|
|
5,234
|
|
Internet
|
|
|
3,657
|
|
|
|
3,896
|
|
Transport services
|
|
|
996
|
|
|
|
1,191
|
|
Video and security
|
|
|
649
|
|
|
|
740
|
|
Managed services
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
15,755
|
|
|
$
|
16,726
|
|
ASU 2014-09 requires
that an entity recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the
consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. As stated above in Note 1,
Organization
and Basis of Financial Reporting – Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
, the Company has used a five-step process
to identify the contract with the customer, identify the performance obligations, determine the transaction price, allocate the
transaction price to the performance obligations and recognize revenue when or as the performance obligations are satisfied. The
majority of the Company’s revenue is recognized at the point in time control of the service is transferred to the customer.
For certain other services, such as unlimited long distance, revenue is recognized over the period of time the service is provided.
The Company has implemented the appropriate changes to its business processes, systems and controls to support revenue recognition
and disclosures under ASU 2014-09.
The following table
identifies revenue generated from customers (in thousands):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2019
|
|
|
March 31, 2018
|
|
Local services
|
|
$
|
5,135
|
|
|
$
|
5,489
|
|
Network access
|
|
|
1,112
|
|
|
|
1,234
|
|
Internet
|
|
|
3,657
|
|
|
|
3,896
|
|
Transport services
|
|
|
958
|
|
|
|
1,153
|
|
Video and security
|
|
|
649
|
|
|
|
740
|
|
Managed services
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
Total revenues generated from customers
|
|
$
|
11,666
|
|
|
$
|
12,688
|
|
The following table
summarizes the revenue generated from contracts with customers among each revenue stream as of March 31, 2019 (in thousands, except
percentages):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2019
|
|
|
% In-Scope
|
|
|
% Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Month to month (“MTM”) customers
|
|
$
|
7,139
|
|
|
|
62.0
|
%
|
|
|
45.3
|
%
|
Competitive local exchange carrier (“CLEC”) business customers
|
|
|
3,260
|
|
|
|
28.4
|
|
|
|
20.7
|
|
Network access
|
|
|
649
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Total revenue streams
|
|
|
11,048
|
|
|
|
96.0
|
|
|
|
70.1
|
|
Global access*
|
|
|
463
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
Total revenue from contracts with customers
|
|
|
11,511
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
73.0
|
|
Managed services**
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Total revenue generated from customers
|
|
|
11,666
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
74.0
|
|
Indefeasible rights-of-use agreements**
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Network access**
|
|
|
4,051
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
25.7
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
15,755
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
*Fixed fees charged to MTM customers and CLEC business customers.
** Revenue generated from sources not within the scope of ASU
2014-09.
The following table
summarizes the revenue generated from contracts with customers among each revenue stream as of March 31, 2018 (in thousands, except
percentages):
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2018
|
|
|
% In-Scope
|
|
|
% Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MTM customers
|
|
$
|
7,682
|
|
|
|
61.4
|
%
|
|
|
45.9
|
%
|
CLEC business customers
|
|
|
3,596
|
|
|
|
28.7
|
|
|
|
21.5
|
|
Network access
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Total revenue streams
|
|
|
12,002
|
|
|
|
95.9
|
|
|
|
71.8
|
|
Global access*
|
|
|
510
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
Total revenue from contracts with customers
|
|
|
12,512
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
74.8
|
|
Managed services**
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
Total revenue generated from customers
|
|
|
12,688
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
75.9
|
|
Indefeasible rights-of-use agreements**
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Network access**
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
23.9
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
16,726
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
*Fixed fees charged to MTM customers and CLEC business customers.
** Revenue generated from sources not within the scope of ASU
2014-09.
Payment terms vary
by customer. The Company typically invoices customers in the month following when the service was provided. The term between invoicing
and when payment is due is less than a year and is not considered significant. Certain customers are invoiced in advance of the
service being provided. Revenue is deferred until the point in time control of the service is transferred to the customer or over
the term the service is provided.
Revenue is recognized
net of taxes collected on behalf of third parties.
As of March 31, 2019,
the Company had approximately $8.2 million of unsatisfied performance obligations. As of March 31, 2019, the Company expected to
recognize approximately $1.3 million of revenue within the next year and $6.8 million in the next 2 to 5 years related to such
unsatisfied performance obligations. The Company does not disclose the value of unsatisfied performance obligations for contracts
with an original expected life of one year or less or for contracts for which the Company has a right to invoice for services performed.
The deferred revenue
balance as of December 31, 2018, was $3.8 million. Approximately $1.4 million of revenue from that balance was recognized as revenue
during the three months ended March 31, 2019, offset by payments received as of March 31, 2019, in advance of control of the service
being transferred to the customer.
Revenue Concentrations
Revenues for interstate
access services are based on reimbursement of costs and allowed rate of return. Revenues of this nature are received from the National
Exchange Carrier Association in the form of monthly settlements. Such revenues amounted to 23.4% and 21.7% of the Company’s
total revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2019, and 2018, respectively.
6.
|
Commitments and Contingencies
|
From time to time,
the Company may be involved in various claims, legal actions and regulatory proceedings incidental to and in the ordinary course
of business, including administrative hearings of the Alabama Public Service Commission, the Maine Public Utilities Commission,
the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Cable, the Missouri Public Service Commission, the New Hampshire Public
Utilities Commission, the Vermont Public Utility Commission and the West Virginia Public Service Commission, relating primarily
to rate making and customer service requirements. In addition, the Company may be involved in similar proceedings with interconnection
carriers and the Federal Communications Commission (the “FCC”). Currently, none of the Company’s legal proceedings
are expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business.
ASU 2016-02 requires
lessees to recognize most leases on the balance sheet. As stated above in Note 1,
Organization and Basis of Financial Reporting
– Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
, the Company has
elected
certain practical expedients available at adoption. The Company elected the package of practical expedients upon transition not
to reassess whether expired or existing contracts contain leases under the new definition of a lease; not to reassess the lease
classification for expired or existing leases; and not to reassess whether previously capitalized initial direct costs would qualify
for capitalization under ASU 2016-02. In evaluating certain equipment rental arrangements such as cable, internet and security
service contracts, the Company considered the practical expedient that allows lessors to elect, by class of underlying asset, to
not separate non-lease components from the associated lease components if the non-lease components otherwise would be accounted
for in accordance with the new revenue recognition standard. The Company elected this practical expedient as the following two
criteria are met; the lease component and the associated non-lease components have the same timing and pattern of transfer; and
the lease component, if accounted for separately, would be classified as an operating lease. The Company elected to adopt the new
standard using the transition method provided by ASU 2018-11; therefore, prior periods will not be restated. The Company has determined
that the impact of adoption is limited to real property leases and is consistent with industry practices. This ASU was effective
January 1, 2019, the Company recognized an aggregate of $1,073,919 in lease liabilities and corresponding ROU assets and no impact
on the opening retained earnings balances.
In consideration of
whether an agreement contains a lease as defined under ASU 2016-02, the Company answered these three questions; has an asset been
identified, is the asset physically distinct, and does the customer have the right to control the asset. The Company determined
based on the three step questions above, the arrangements pertaining to real property building and office facilities in Alabama,
Maine and Massachusetts are within the scope of ASU 2016-02.
In calculating the
lease liability, the Company considered the lease term, in which the Company would include any periods covered by an option to
extend the lease if the lessee is reasonably certain to exercise that option. The Company evaluated factors that might create an
economic incentive to exercise options to extend, including contract, asset, entity and market-based factors. The Company determined
that there would be no significant relocation and interruption costs associated with moving to alternative space that would disincentivize
a move at renewal; therefore, renewals to extend the lease term are not included in the ROU asset and lease liabilities.
A lessee may recognize
the lease payments in profit or loss on a straight-line basis over the lease term and variable lease payments in the period in
which the obligation for those payments is incurred. The accounting policy election for short-term leases shall be made by class
of underlying asset to which the right of use relates. A short-term lease is defined as a lease that, at the commencement date,
has a lease term of 12 months or less and does not include an option to purchase the underlying asset that the lessee is reasonably
certain to exercise. The Company elected to exclude short-term leases from the recognition requirements.
In discounting the
liability, ASU 2016-02 indicates that the incremental rate used must be comparable to a rate attributable to a similar amount,
for a similar term, and with similar collateral as the assets in the lease. The Company observed that published commercial borrowing
rates were generally between 5% to 7% for loans collateralized by the real estate for terms ranging from 5-10 years. The Company
has elected to use a discount rate of 6.5% for all leases.
Maturities of lease
liabilities as of March 31, 2019 are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Leased Real Property and
Office Facilities
|
|
2019 (remaining)
|
|
$
|
293
|
|
2020
|
|
|
267
|
|
2021
|
|
|
170
|
|
2022
|
|
|
174
|
|
2023
|
|
|
166
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
43
|
|
Total lease payments
|
|
$
|
1,113
|
|
Less: Interest
|
|
|
(132
|
)
|
Present value of lease liabilities
|
|
$
|
981
|
|
Supplemental cash flow
information related to operating leases was as follows (in thousands, except years and percentages):
|
|
Three Months Ended
March 31, 2019
|
|
Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Operating cash outflow from operating leases
|
|
$
|
(109
|
)
|
Weighted-average remaining lease term – operating leases (in years)
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
Weighted-average discount rate – operating leases
|
|
|
6.5
|
%
|
The Company has previously
granted RSUs underlying 401,111 shares of Class A common stock. These RSUs (or a portion thereof) vest with respect to each recipient
over a one to three year period from the date of grant, provided the recipient remains in the employment or service of the Company
as of the vesting date and, in selected instances, certain performance criteria are attained. Additionally, these RSUs (or a portion
thereof) could vest earlier in the event of a change in control of the Company, or upon involuntary termination without cause.
Of the 401,111 previously granted RSUs, RSUs underlying 334,799 shares of Class A common stock have vested or were cancelled as
of December 31, 2018. During the three months ended March 31, 2019, no RSUs were granted by the Company. The previous RSU grants
were made primarily to executive-level personnel at the Company and, as a result, no compensation costs have been capitalized.
The following
table summarizes RSU activity as of March 31, 2019:
|
|
RSUs
|
|
|
Weighted Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2018
|
|
|
66,312
|
|
|
$
|
9.06
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(34,202
|
)
|
|
$
|
5.09
|
|
Forfeited or cancelled
|
|
|
(11,817
|
)
|
|
$
|
13.30
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2019
|
|
|
20,293
|
|
|
$
|
13.30
|
|
Stock-based compensation
expense related to RSUs was $50 thousand and $71 thousand for the three months ended March 31, 2019, and 2018, respectively. Accounting
standards require that the Company estimate forfeitures for RSUs and reduce compensation expense accordingly. The Company has reduced
its expense by the assumed forfeiture rate and will evaluate actual experience against the assumed forfeiture rate going forward.
The forfeiture rate has been developed using historical performance metrics which could impact the size of the final issuance of
Class A common stock. The Company has no history before 2014 with RSU forfeiture.
As of March 31, 2019,
the unrecognized total compensation cost related to unvested RSUs was $216 thousand. That cost is expected to be recognized by
the end of 2021.
On October 15, 2018,
the Company granted 29,460 incentive stock options (“ISOs”) and 20,540 non-qualified (“NQ”) stock options
to purchase shares of Class A common stock. These options vest with respect to the recipient thereof over a five year period with
20% becoming exercisable on each anniversary of the vesting commencement date of October 15, 2019, provided the recipient remains
in the employment or service of the Company as of the vesting date. Additionally, these options (or a portion thereof) could vest
earlier in the event of a change in control of the Company. These option grants were made to one executive-level employee of the
Company and, as a result, no compensation costs have been capitalized.
The following
table summarizes ISO and NQ stock option activity as of March 31, 2019:
|
|
ISOs and NQ
Stock Options
|
|
|
Weighted Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2018
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
$
|
16.97
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Forfeited or cancelled
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2019
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
$
|
16.97
|
|
Stock-based compensation
expense related to ISOs and NQ stock options was $21 thousand for the three months ended March 31, 2019.
As of March 31, 2019,
the unrecognized total compensation cost related to unvested ISOs and NQ stock options was $394 thousand. That cost is expected
to be recognized by the end of 2023.