Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

Nature of Business and Basis of Presentation (Policies)

v3.8.0.1
Nature of Business and Basis of Presentation (Policies)
9 Months Ended
Oct. 31, 2017
Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
Basis of Presentation

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements include the accounts of SeaChange International, Inc. and its subsidiaries (“SeaChange” or the “Company”) and are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) for interim financial reports as well as rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared under U.S. GAAP have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such regulations. However, we believe that the disclosures are adequate to make the information presented not misleading. In the opinion of management, the accompanying financial statements include all adjustments, consisting of only normal recurring items, necessary to present a fair presentation of the consolidated financial statements for the periods shown. These consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with our most recently audited financial statements and related footnotes included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K (“Form 10-K”) as filed with the SEC. The balance sheet data as of January 31, 2017 that is included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (“Form 10-Q”) was derived from our audited financial statements. We have reclassified certain amounts previously reported in our financial statements to conform to current presentation.

Effective February 1, 2017, the Company changed how it classifies costs associated with its solution architect employees. In fiscal 2017, all solution architect costs were classified as cost of revenues. However, beginning in fiscal 2018, the Company began reflecting in cost of revenues only those costs associated with revenue-generating projects, based on the hours worked by solutions architect employees. Solutions architect costs that are not associated with revenue-generating projects are recognized as selling and marketing expenses since these employees are involved in pre-sales and other customer-facing activities.

 

We have adjusted prior fiscal year amounts to conform to the current fiscal year presentation. The effect of this change in methodology, which is a decrease to cost of revenues and an increase to selling and marketing expenses, is reflected in our current statements of operations and comprehensive loss for the three and nine months ended October 31, 2016 as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjustment to

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As Filed Fiscal 2017

 

 

Conform to

 

 

Adjusted

 

 

 

Three Months Ended

 

 

Current Year

 

 

Three Months Ended

 

 

 

October 31, 2016

 

 

Presentation

 

 

October 31, 2016

 

 

 

(Amounts in thousands)

 

Cost of revenues - service

 

$

8,036

 

 

$

(566

)

 

$

7,470

 

Selling and marketing expenses

 

$

3,422

 

 

$

566

 

 

$

3,988

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjustment to

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As Filed Fiscal 2017

 

 

Conform to

 

 

Adjusted

 

 

 

Nine Months Ended

 

 

Current Year

 

 

Nine Months Ended

 

 

 

October 31, 2016

 

 

Presentation

 

 

October 31, 2016

 

 

 

(Amounts in thousands)

 

Cost of revenues - service

 

$

27,982

 

 

$

(1,646

)

 

$

26,336

 

Selling and marketing expenses

 

$

10,841

 

 

$

1,646

 

 

$

12,487

 

 

The preparation of these financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP, requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. Interim results are not necessarily indicative of the operating results for the full fiscal year or any future periods and actual results may differ from our estimates. During the three and nine months ended October 31, 2017, there have been no material changes to our significant accounting policies that were described in our fiscal 2017 Form 10-K, as filed with the SEC.

The Company believes that existing funds and cash provided by future operating activities are adequate to satisfy our working capital, potential acquisitions and capital expenditure requirements and other contractual obligations for the foreseeable future, including at least the next 12 months. However, if our expectations are incorrect, we may need to raise additional funds to fund our operations, to take advantage of unanticipated strategic opportunities or to strengthen our financial position. In the future, we may enter into other arrangements for potential investments in, or acquisitions of, complementary businesses, services or technologies, which could require us to seek additional equity or debt financing. If adequate funds are not available, or are not available on acceptable terms, we may not be able to take advantage of market opportunities, to develop new products or to otherwise respond to competitive pressures.

In the second quarter of fiscal 2017, following a review of our operations, liquidity and funding, and investment in our product roadmap, we determined that the ability to access cash resulting from earnings in prior fiscal years that had previously been deemed permanently restricted for foreign investment would provide greater flexibility to meet the Company’s working capital needs. Accordingly, in the second quarter of fiscal 2017, we changed our permanent reinvestment assertion on $58.6 million of earnings generated by our Irish operations through July 2016.  We recorded a deferred tax liability of $14.7 million related to the foreign income taxes on $58.6 million of undistributed earnings. The balance of the deferred tax liability is $16.3 million as of October 31, 2017.

Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash

Cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash

 

Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand and on deposit and highly liquid investments in money market mutual funds, government sponsored enterprise obligations, treasury bills, commercial paper and other money market securities with remaining maturities at date of purchase of 90 days or less. All cash equivalents are carried at cost, which approximates fair value. Restricted cash represents cash that is restricted as to withdrawal or usage and consists primarily of cash held as collateral for performance obligations with our customers.

 

We early adopted the new Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) guidance on August 1, 2017, which changed the presentation of our consolidated statements of cash flows and related disclosures for all periods presented (see Note 14, “Recent Accounting Standard Updates,” for more information on the adoption of this guidance). Accordingly, the following is a summary of our cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash total as presented in our consolidated statements of cash flows for the nine months ended October 31, 2017 and 2016:

 

 

 

Nine Months Ended

 

 

 

October 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

 

2016

 

 

 

(Amounts in thousands)

 

Cash and cash equivalents

 

$

27,155

 

 

$

27,484

 

Restricted cash

 

 

8

 

 

 

108

 

Total cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash

 

$

27,163

 

 

$

27,592

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Revenue Recognition

Revenue Recognition

Our transactions frequently involve the sales of hardware, software, systems and services in multiple-element arrangements. Revenues from sales of hardware, software and systems that do not require significant modification or customization of the underlying software are recognized when:

 

persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists;

 

delivery has occurred, and title and risk of loss have passed to the customer;

 

fees are fixed or determinable; and

 

collection of the related receivable is considered probable.

Customers are billed for installation, training, project management and at least one year of product maintenance and technical support at the time of the product sale. Revenue from these activities is deferred at the time of the product sale and recognized ratably over the period these services are performed. Revenue from ongoing product maintenance and technical support agreements is recognized ratably over the period of the related agreements. Revenue from software development contracts that include significant modification or customization, including software product enhancements, is recognized based on the percentage of completion contract accounting method using labor efforts expended in relation to estimates of total labor efforts to complete the contract. The percentage of completion method requires that adjustments or re-evaluations to estimated project revenues and costs be recognized on a project-to-date cumulative basis, as changes to the estimates are identified. Revisions to project estimates are made as additional information becomes known, including information that becomes available after the date of the consolidated financial statements up through the date such consolidated financial statements are filed with the SEC. If the final estimated profit to complete a long-term contract indicates a loss, a provision is recorded immediately for the total loss anticipated.  Accounting for contract amendments and customer change orders are included in contract accounting when executed. Revenue from shipping and handling costs and other out-of-pocket expenses reimbursed by customers are included in revenues and cost of revenues. Our share of intercompany profits associated with sales and services provided to affiliated companies are eliminated in consolidation in proportion to our equity ownership.

Contract accounting requires judgment relative to assessing risks, estimating revenues and costs and making assumptions including, in the case of our professional services contracts, the total amount of labor required to complete a project and the complexity of the development and other technical work to be completed. Due to the size and nature of many of our contracts, the estimation of total revenues and cost at completion is complicated and subject to many variables. Assumptions must be made regarding the length of time to complete the contract because costs also include estimated third-party vendor and contract labor costs. Penalties related to performance on contracts are considered in estimating sales and profit, and are recorded when there is sufficient information for us to assess anticipated performance. Third-party vendors’ assertions are also assessed and considered in estimating costs and margin.

Revenue from the sale of software-only products remains within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules. Maintenance and support, training, consulting, and installation services no longer fall within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules, except when they are sold with and relate to a software-only product. Revenue recognition for products that no longer fall under the scope of the software revenue recognition rules is like that for other tangible products and Accounting Standard Update No. (“ASU”) 2009-13, “Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements,” amended ASC 605 and is applicable for multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements. ASU 2009-13 allows companies to allocate revenue in a multiple-deliverable arrangement in a manner that better reflects the transaction’s economics.

Under the software revenue recognition rules, the fee is allocated to the various elements based on vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) of fair value. Under this method, the total arrangement value is allocated first to undelivered elements based on their fair values, with the remainder being allocated to the delivered elements. Where fair value of undelivered service elements has not been established, the total arrangement value is recognized over the period during which the services are performed. The amounts allocated to undelivered elements, which may include project management, training, installation, maintenance and technical support and certain hardware and software components, are based upon the price charged when these elements are sold separately and unaccompanied by the other elements. The amount allocated to installation, training and project management revenue is based upon standard hourly billing rates and the estimated time necessary to complete the service. These services are not essential to the functionality of systems as these services do not alter the equipment’s capabilities, are available from other vendors and the systems are standard products. For multiple-element arrangements that include software development with significant modification or customization and systems sales where VSOE of the fair value does not exist for the undelivered elements of the arrangement (other than maintenance and technical support), percentage of completion accounting is applied for revenue recognition purposes to the entire arrangement except for maintenance and technical support.

Under the revenue recognition rules for tangible products as amended by ASU 2009-13, the fee from a multiple-deliverable arrangement is allocated to each of the deliverables based upon their relative selling prices as determined by a selling-price hierarchy. A deliverable in an arrangement qualifies as a separate unit of accounting if the delivered item has value to the customer on a stand-alone basis. A delivered item that does not qualify as a separate unit of accounting is combined with the other undelivered items in the arrangement and revenue is recognized for those combined deliverables as a single unit of accounting. The selling price used for each deliverable is based upon VSOE if available, third-party evidence (“TPE”) if VSOE is not available, and best estimate of selling price (“BESP”) if neither VSOE nor TPE are available. TPE is the price of the Company’s, or any competitor’s, largely interchangeable products or services in stand-alone sales to similarly situated customers. BESP is the price at which we would sell the deliverable if it were sold regularly on a stand-alone basis, considering market conditions and entity-specific factors.

The selling prices used in the relative selling price allocation method for certain of our services are based upon VSOE. The selling prices used in the relative selling price allocation method for third-party products from other vendors are based upon TPE. The selling prices used in the relative selling price allocation method for our hardware products, software, subscriptions, and customized services for which VSOE does not exist are based upon BESP. We do not believe TPE exists for these products and services because they are differentiated from competing products and services in terms of functionality and performance and there are no competing products or services that are largely interchangeable. Management establishes BESP with consideration for market conditions, such as the impact of competition and geographic considerations, and entity-specific factors, such as the cost of the product, discounts provided and profit objectives. Management believes that BESP is reflective of reasonable pricing of that deliverable as if priced on a stand-alone basis.

For our cloud and managed service revenues, we generate revenue from two sources: (1) subscription and support services; and (2) professional services and other. Subscription and support revenue includes subscription fees from customers accessing our cloud-based software platform and support fees. Our arrangements with customers do not provide the customer with the right to take possession of the software supporting the cloud-based software platform at any time. Professional services and other revenue include fees from implementation and customization to support customer requirements. Amounts that have been invoiced are recorded in accounts receivable and in deferred revenue or revenue, depending on whether the revenue recognition criteria have been met. For the most part, subscription and support agreements are entered into for 12 to 36 months. Generally, most of the professional services components of the arrangements with customers are performed within a year of entering a contract with the customer.

In most instances, revenue from a new customer acquisition is generated under sales agreements with multiple elements, comprised of subscription and support and other professional services. We evaluate each element in a multiple-element arrangement to determine whether it represents a separate unit of accounting. An element constitutes a separate unit of accounting when the delivered item has standalone value and delivery of the undelivered element is probable and within our control.

In determining when to recognize revenue from a customer arrangement, we are often required to exercise judgment regarding the application of our accounting policies to an arrangement. The primary judgments used in evaluating revenue recognized in each period involve: determining whether collection is probable, assessing whether the fee is fixed or determinable, and determining the fair value of the maintenance and service elements included in multiple-element software arrangements. Such judgments can materially impact the amount of revenue that we record in a given period. While we follow specific and detailed rules and guidelines related to revenue recognition, we make and use significant management judgments and estimates about the revenue recognized in any reporting period, particularly in the areas described above. If management made different estimates or judgments, material differences in the timing of the recognition of revenue could occur.

Impairment of Assets

Impairment of Assets

Indefinite-lived intangible assets, such as goodwill, are not amortized but are evaluated for impairment at the reporting unit level annually, in our third quarter beginning August 1st. Indefinite-lived intangible assets may be tested for impairment on an interim basis in addition to the annual evaluation if an event occurs or circumstances change such as declines in sales, earnings or cash flows, sustained decline in the Company’s stock price, or material adverse changes in the business climate, which would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount.  See Note 6, “Goodwill and Intangible Assets,” to our consolidated financial statements for more information.

 

We also evaluate property and equipment, intangible assets with finite useful lives and other long-lived assets on a regular basis for the existence of facts or circumstances, both internal and external that may suggest an asset is not recoverable. If such circumstances exist, we evaluate the carrying value of long-lived assets to determine if impairment exists based upon estimated undiscounted future cash flows over the remaining useful life of the primary asset in the asset group and compare that value to the carrying value of the assets. In August 2017, we placed our corporate headquarters and the adjacent land (the “Corporate Headquarters”), located in Acton, Massachusetts, on the market for sale. We assessed whether the Corporate Headquarters would qualify as an asset held for sale and determined that it would not since it did not meet all six of the criteria of an asset held for sale under current accounting guidance. During the assessment, we received information from a third-party real estate broker which led management to believe that there was a significant decrease in the fair value of the Corporate Headquarters. We considered this to be a triggering event and were required to test the Corporate Headquarters for recoverability. We evaluated the undiscounted future cash flows over the remaining useful life of the primary asset of the asset group and determined that an impairment did not exist as of the date of the triggering event. Our cash flow estimates contain management’s best estimates, using appropriate and customary assumptions and projections at the time.

 

In addition, since we considered the significant decrease in fair value of the Corporate Headquarters a triggering event, we were required to complete an additional goodwill impairment test as of the date of the triggering event. We completed the additional goodwill impairment test and determined that the implied fair value of the reporting unit exceeds its carrying value as of the date of the triggering event. Accordingly, no impairment charge was recognized as of October 31, 2017.

Liquidity

Liquidity

We continue to realize the savings related to our restructuring activities. During fiscal 2018, we made significant reductions to our headcount as part of our ongoing restructuring effort from which we expect to generate annualized savings of approximately $18 million. These measures are important steps in restoring SeaChange to profitability and positive cash flow. The Company believes that existing funds and cash expected to be provided by future operating activities, augmented by the plans highlighted above, are adequate to satisfy our working capital, potential acquisitions and capital expenditure requirements and other contractual obligations for the foreseeable future, including at least the next 12 months.

Fair Value Measurements

3.

Fair Value Measurements

Definition and Hierarchy

The applicable accounting guidance defines fair value as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The guidance establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands required disclosure about the fair value measurements of assets and liabilities. This guidance requires us to classify and disclose assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, as well as fair value measurements of assets and liabilities measured on a non-recurring basis in periods subsequent to initial measurement, in a fair value hierarchy.

The fair value hierarchy is broken down into three levels based on the reliability of inputs and requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs, where available. The following summarizes the three levels of inputs required, as well as the assets and liabilities that we value using those levels of inputs:

 

Level 1 – Observable inputs that reflect quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets.

 

Level 2 – Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not very active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.

 

Level 3 – Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.

Valuation Techniques

Inputs to valuation techniques are observable and unobservable. Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect our market assumptions. When developing fair value estimates for certain financial assets and liabilities, we maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. When available, we use quoted market prices, market comparables and discounted cash flow projections. Financial assets include money market funds, U.S. treasury notes or bonds, U.S. government agency bonds and corporate bonds.

In general, and where applicable, we use quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities to determine fair value. If quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities are not available to determine fair value, then we use quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities or inputs that are observable either directly or indirectly. In periods of market inactivity, the observability of prices and inputs may be reduced for certain instruments. This condition could cause an instrument to be reclassified from Level 1 to Level 2 or from Level 2 to Level 3.

Recent Accounting Standard Updates

Recent Accounting Standard Updates

We consider the applicability and impact of all ASUs on our consolidated financial statements. Updates not listed below were assessed and determined to be either not applicable or are expected to have minimal impact on our consolidated financial position or results of operations. Recently issued ASUs which we feel may be applicable to us are as follows:

Recently Issued Accounting Standard Updates – Not Yet Adopted

Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606).” ASU 2014-09 provides enhancements to the quality and consistency of how revenue is reported while also improving comparability in the financial statements of companies using International Financial Reporting Standards and U.S. GAAP. The core principle requires entities to recognize revenue in a manner that depicts the transfer of goods or services to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration an entity expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. In July 2015, the FASB voted to approve a one year deferral, making the standard effective for public entities for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017.

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net).” The purpose of ASU 2016-08 is to clarify the guidance on principal versus agent considerations. It includes indicators that help to determine whether an entity controls the specified good or service before it is transferred to the customer and to assist in determining when the entity satisfied the performance obligation and as such, whether to recognize a gross or a net amount of consideration in their consolidated statement of operations.

In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing.” ASU 2016-10 clarifies that entities are not required to assess whether promised goods or services are performance obligations if they are immaterial in the context of the contract. ASU 2016-10 also addresses how to determine whether promised goods or services are separately identifiable and permits entities to make a policy election to treat shipping and handling costs as fulfillment activities. In addition, it clarifies key provisions in Topic 606 related to licensing.

In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-11, “Revenue Recognition (Topic 605) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815).” ASU 2016-11 rescinds previous SEC comments that were codified in Topic 605, Topic 932 and Topic 815. Upon adoption of Topic 606, certain SEC comments including guidance on accounting for shipping and handling fees and costs and consideration given by a vendor to a customer should not be relied upon.

In May 2016, the FASB also issued ASU 2016-12, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients.” ASU 2016-12 provides clarity around collectability, presentation of sales taxes, non-cash consideration, contract modifications at transition and completed contracts at transition. ASU 2016-12 also includes a technical correction within Topic 606 related to required disclosures if the guidance is applied retrospectively upon adoption.

In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-20, “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” ASU 2016-20 allows entities not to make quantitative disclosures about remaining performance obligations in certain cases and requires entities that use any of the optional exemptions to expand their qualitative disclosures. ASU 2016-20 also clarifies other areas of the new revenue standard, including disclosure requirements for prior period performance obligations, impairment guidance for contract costs and the interaction of impairment guidance in ASC 340-40 with other guidance elsewhere in the Codification.

The Company will adopt Topic 606 effective February 1, 2018 under the modified retrospective method and will only apply this method to contracts that are not completed as of the date of adoption. The modified retrospective method will result in a cumulative effect of initially applying the standard as an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings at the date of initial application for any open contracts as of the adoption date. The Company has established an implementation team to assist with its assessment of the impact of the new revenue guidance on its operations, consolidated financial statements and related disclosures. In addition, the Company has made investments in systems to enable timely and accurate reporting under the new standard. To date, the Company’s assessment has included (1) utilizing questionnaires to assist with the identification of revenue streams, (2) performing sample contract analyses for each revenue stream identified, (3) assessing the noted differences in recognition and measurement that may result from adopting this new standard, (4) performing detailed analyses of contracts with larger customers, (5) testing transactions for consistency with contract provisions that affect revenue recognition, and (6) developing a standalone selling price for all performance obligations. Based on the results of the assessment, the Company currently believes the most significant potential changes to be in the identification of performance obligations, the timing of revenue recognition and the allocation of transaction price to the performance obligations. As part of the procedures completed by the Company, incremental costs to obtain a contract and costs incurred in fulfilling a contract have also been assessed. Based on preliminary results of the assessment, which is still in process, the Company currently believes that the most significant potential changes to be accounting for commissions associated with the initial year of contract, as incremental costs are expected to be capitalized as a contract asset and they will be amortized over the estimated customer life, which could extend beyond the contract life.  The Company also anticipates changes to the consolidated balance sheet related to accounts receivable, contract assets, and contract liabilities, as well as, significant changes to its disclosures, to comply with the new disclosure requirements under Topic 606. The Company is continuing to design the necessary changes to its business processes, systems and controls to support recognition and disclosure under the new standard. Further, the Company is continuing to assess what incremental disaggregated revenue and other disclosures will be required in its consolidated financial statements, which the Company believes will be significant.  

 

Based on the procedures performed, the Company expects the following impacts:

 

 

Currently, the Company recognizes revenue from perpetual licenses with extended payment terms over the term of the agreement as payments are received, provided all other criteria for revenue recognition have been met, and any corresponding maintenance over the term of the agreement. The adoption of ASC 606 will result in revenue for performance obligations being recognized as they are satisfied. Therefore, revenue from perpetual license performance obligations with extended payment terms will be recognized when control is transferred to the customer. Any unrecognized license revenue from the arrangement, included in deferred revenue at January 31, 2018, will not be recognized in revenue in future periods but as a cumulative adjustment to retained earnings. Further, revenue from the maintenance performance obligations is expected to be recognized on a straight-line basis over the contractual term. Due to the revenue from perpetual licenses with extended payment terms being recognized prior to amounts being billed to the customer, the Company expects to recognize a net contract asset on the balance sheet.

 

 

Currently, the Company allocates revenue to licenses under the residual method when it has Vendor Specific Objective Evidence (“VSOE”) for the remaining undelivered elements, which allocates any future credits or significant discounts entirely to the license. The adoption of ASC 606 will result in future credits, significant discounts, and material rights under ASC 606, being allocated to all performance obligations based upon their relative selling price. Under ASC 606, additional license revenue from the reallocation of such arrangement considerations will be recognized when control is transferred to the customer, which is generally upon delivery of the license.

 

 

Currently, the Company does not have VSOE for professional services and maintenance in certain geographical areas, which results in revenue being deferred in such instances until such time as VSOE exists for all undelivered elements or recognized ratably over the longest performance period. The adoption of ASC 606 eliminates the requirement for VSOE and replaces it with the concept of a standalone selling price. Once the transaction price is allocated to each of the performance obligations, the Company can recognize revenue as the performance obligations are delivered, either at a point in time or over time. Under ASC 606, license revenue will be recognized when control is transferred to the customer and professional services revenue will be recognized over time based on labor hours expended. This will result in the acceleration of professional services revenue when compared to the current practice of ratable recognition for professional services when there is a lack of VSOE.

 

 

Sales commissions and other third-party acquisition costs resulting directly from securing contracts with customers are currently expensed when incurred. ASC 606 will require these costs to be recognized as an asset when incurred and to be expensed over the associated contract term. However, because the sales commission paid on the maintenance renewals is not commensurate with the original deal, ASC 606 requires that these acquisition costs be expensed over the customer life. The Company expects this change to impact all arrangements that included implicit or explicit maintenance contracts.

 

 

ASC 606 provides additional accounting guidance for contract modifications whereby changes must be accounted for either as a retrospective change (creating either a catch up or deferral of past revenues), prospectively with a reallocation of revenues amongst identified performance obligations, or prospectively as separate contracts which will not require any reallocation. This may result in a difference in the timing of the recognition of revenue as compared to how contract modifications are recognized currently.

 

 

There will be a corresponding effect on tax liabilities in relation to all of the above impacts.

 

Leases

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842).” ASU 2016-02 requires a lessee to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for operating leases with terms over twelve months, initially measured at the present value of the lease payments, in its balance sheet.  The standard also requires a lessee to recognize a single lease cost, calculated so that the cost of the lease is allocated over the lease term, on a generally straight-line basis. It also requires lessees to classify leases as either finance or operating leases based on the principle of whether or not the lease is effectively a financed purchase of the leased asset by the lessee.  This classification will determine whether the lease expense is recognized based on an effective interest method or on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. ASU 2016-02 is effective for us in the first quarter of fiscal 2020. Early adoption is permitted. We are currently evaluating what impact the adoption of this update will have on our consolidated financial statements.

Recently Issued Accounting Standard Updates – Adopted During the Period

Cash Flow Statement

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments,” ASU 2016-15 provides guidance on the classification of certain cash receipts and payments in the statement of cash flows where diversity in practice exists. The guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning in our first quarter of fiscal 2019, and early adoption is permitted. The Company early adopted this standard on August 1, 2017. The adoption of this standard did not have any effect on our consolidated financial statements because the cash receipts and cash payments described in ASU 2016-15 are not applicable to the Company currently or retrospectively.

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash.” ASU 2016-18 requires that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Therefore, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning and ending balances shown on the statement of cash flows. The guidance is effective for us in the first quarter of fiscal 2019 and early adoption is permitted. The Company early adopted the standard on August 1, 2017 and retrospectively applied the amendment. Other than the change in presentation of restricted cash within the consolidated statements of cash flows, the adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Intangibles-Goodwill and Other

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, “Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment,” which simplifies the subsequent measurement of goodwill by removing “Step 2” of the two-step impairment test. The amendment requires an entity to perform its annual, or interim goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. A goodwill impairment will be the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill. The guidance is effective for us beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2021. Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after January 1, 2017. The Company early adopted ASU 2017-04 effective August 1, 2017 in conjunction with its annual goodwill impairment testing. Because the results of “Step 1” of the impairment test indicated that the fair value of the Company’s goodwill exceeded its carrying amount, the adoption of ASU 2017-04 did not change the impairment testing process for the fiscal 2018 annual goodwill impairment test. See Note 6, “Goodwill and Intangible Assets,” for more information on our annual goodwill impairment test.

Stock Compensation

In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting, which provides guidance about which changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment awards require an entity to apply modification accounting under ASC 718. The guidance is effective for us beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2019 and early adoption is permitted. The Company early adopted ASU 2017-09 in the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2017. The implementation of this standard had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.