e10vq
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark one)
| |
|
|
| þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007
OR
| |
|
|
| o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission file number: 000-51002
ZIPREALTY, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
| |
|
|
DELAWARE
(State of incorporation)
|
|
94-3319956
(IRS employer identification number) |
| |
|
|
| 2000 POWELL STREET, SUITE 300 |
|
|
| EMERYVILLE, CA
|
|
94608 |
| (Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(510) 735-2600
(Registrants telephone number)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated
filer in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large Accelerated Filer o Accelerated Filer þ Non-Accelerated Filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
We had 22,529,634 shares of common stock outstanding at August 1, 2007.
Statement regarding forward-looking statements
This report includes forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of
historical facts contained in this report, including statements regarding our future financial
position, business strategy and plans and objectives of management for future operations, are
forward-looking statements. The words believe, may, will, should, could, estimate,
continue, anticipate, intend, expect, plan, potential, predict and similar
expressions, as they relate to us, are intended to identify forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements contained in this report include, but are not limited to, statements
relating to:
| |
|
|
our future financial results; |
| |
| |
|
|
our future growth and expansion into new markets; |
| |
| |
|
|
our future advertising and marketing activities; and |
| |
| |
|
|
our future investment in technology. |
We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and
projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our financial
condition, results of operations, business strategy and financial needs. These forward-looking
statements are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those
described in Risk Factors in Item 1A of Part II. No forward-looking statement is a guarantee of
future performance and you should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statement.
In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events and
circumstances discussed in this report may not occur and actual results could differ materially
from those anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements. Except as otherwise required
by law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement contained in
this report.
Trademarks
ZipRealty, ZipAgent, ZipNotify, Real-Estate.com and Your home is where our heart is
are our registered trademarks in the United States. REALTOR and REALTORS are registered
trademarks of the National Association of REALTORS® . All other trademarks, trade names
and service marks appearing in this report are the property of their respective owners.
Internet Site
Our Internet address is www.ziprealty.com. We make publicly available free of charge
on our Internet website our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current
reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as soon as reasonably practicable after we
electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Information contained on our website is not a part of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q.
Where You Can Find Additional Information
You may review a copy of this quarterly report on Form 10-Q, including exhibits and any
schedule filed therewith, and obtain copies of such materials at prescribed rates, at the
Securities and Exchange Commissions Public Reference Room in Room 1580, 100 F Street, NE,
Washington, D.C. 20549-0102. You may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference
Room by calling the Securities and Exchange Commission at 1-800-SEC-0330. The Securities and
Exchange Commission maintains a website (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and
information statements and other information regarding registrants, such as ZipRealty, that file
electronically with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
3
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements:
ZIPREALTY, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(in thousands, except share amounts)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
6,712 |
|
|
$ |
8,575 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
80,005 |
|
|
|
80,233 |
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $19
and $30 at June 30, 2007 and December 31,
2006, respectively |
|
|
3,100 |
|
|
|
1,781 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
3,214 |
|
|
|
3,151 |
|
Current and deferred income taxes |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
93,063 |
|
|
|
93,769 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
4,633 |
|
|
|
4,114 |
|
Investment in non-consolidated companies |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
98,108 |
|
|
$ |
98,357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
2,696 |
|
|
$ |
2,184 |
|
Accrued
expenses and other liabilities |
|
|
8,624 |
|
|
|
7,791 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
11,320 |
|
|
|
9,975 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
11,821 |
|
|
|
10,488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 8) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock: $0.001 par value; 100,000
shares authorized; 22,526 and 21,627 shares
issued and outstanding at June 30, 2007 and
December 31, 2006, respectively |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
139,518 |
|
|
|
134,813 |
|
Common stock warrants |
|
|
3,305 |
|
|
|
5,519 |
|
Deferred stock-based compensation |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(71 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(138 |
) |
|
|
(157 |
) |
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(56,394 |
) |
|
|
(52,257 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
86,287 |
|
|
|
87,869 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
98,108 |
|
|
$ |
98,357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
4
ZIPREALTY, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Net transaction revenues |
|
$ |
30,506 |
|
|
$ |
26,195 |
|
|
$ |
53,181 |
|
|
$ |
44,843 |
|
Referral and other revenues |
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
714 |
|
|
|
1,482 |
|
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
|
31,281 |
|
|
|
26,909 |
|
|
|
54,663 |
|
|
|
46,126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues |
|
|
17,312 |
|
|
|
14,590 |
|
|
|
30,387 |
|
|
|
25,330 |
|
Product development |
|
|
1,813 |
|
|
|
1,351 |
|
|
|
3,494 |
|
|
|
2,752 |
|
Sales and marketing |
|
|
9,829 |
|
|
|
7,596 |
|
|
|
18,676 |
|
|
|
14,679 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
3,030 |
|
|
|
8,425 |
|
|
|
6,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
33,411 |
|
|
|
26,567 |
|
|
|
60,982 |
|
|
|
49,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(2,130 |
) |
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
(6,319 |
) |
|
|
(2,964 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
2,182 |
|
|
|
1,696 |
|
Other income
(expense), net |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net |
|
|
1,098 |
|
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
2,182 |
|
|
|
1,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
(1,032 |
) |
|
|
1,238 |
|
|
|
(4,137 |
) |
|
|
(1,268 |
) |
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,458 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(260 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(1,032 |
) |
|
$ |
(220 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,137 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,008 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.19 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
Diluted |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.19 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
Weighted average common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
22,501 |
|
|
|
20,366 |
|
|
|
22,255 |
|
|
|
20,329 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
22,501 |
|
|
|
20,366 |
|
|
|
22,255 |
|
|
|
20,329 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
5
ZIPREALTY, INC.
UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(4,137 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,008 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax benefit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(261 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1,419 |
|
|
|
1,124 |
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
1,995 |
|
|
|
1,169 |
|
Provision for doubtful accounts |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
23 |
|
Amortization of short-term investment premium (discount) |
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
72 |
|
Loss on disposal of property and equipment |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in net loss of non-consolidated companies |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
(1,308 |
) |
|
|
(895 |
) |
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
348 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
Accounts payable |
|
|
512 |
|
|
|
(302 |
) |
Accrued
expenses and other liabilities |
|
|
833 |
|
|
|
(875 |
) |
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities |
|
|
(930 |
) |
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of short-term investments |
|
|
(35,735 |
) |
|
|
(31,553 |
) |
Proceeds from sale and maturity of short-term investments |
|
|
36,191 |
|
|
|
40,823 |
|
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(1,910 |
) |
|
|
(2,660 |
) |
Investment in non-consolidated companies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
(1,454 |
) |
|
|
6,573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from stock option exercises |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
Proceeds from common stock warrant exercises |
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(1,863 |
) |
|
|
6,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
8,575 |
|
|
|
6,868 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
6,712 |
|
|
$ |
13,728 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.
6
NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. BACKGROUND AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements as of June 30,
2007 and 2006 and for the three and six months then ended have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America for interim financial
information and the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally
accepted accounting principles for annual financial statements. In the opinion of the Companys
management, the unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared on
the same basis as the audited financial statements, and include all adjustments, consisting only of
normal recurring adjustments, necessary for the fair presentation of the Companys financial
position for the periods presented. The results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2007
are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the year ending December 31, 2007,
or any other period. The audited condensed consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2006 has been
derived from the audited consolidated balance sheet at that date but does not include all of the
information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of America for complete financial statements. These financial statements and notes should be read
in conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes thereto included in the Companys
annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.
On June 1, 2006 the Company formed a wholly owned subsidiary, ZipRealty Title Holdings, LLC
and on June 5, 2006 the Company formed a wholly owned subsidiary, Highline Insurance Services, LLC.
These subsidiaries were formed for the purpose of offering services relating to the purchase, sale
and ownership of a home, including services related to title insurance and property and casualty
insurance. On June 16, 2006 ZipRealty Title Holdings, LLC entered into a joint venture with an
independent third party title company. There were no significant operations as of June 30, 2007 for
any of these entities.
The unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the
Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries and reflect the elimination of intercompany accounts and
transactions. Investments in business entities in which the Company does not have control, but has
the ability to exercise significant influence over operating and financial policies, are accounted
for using the equity method.
The Company accounts for interests in variable interest entities (VIEs) in accordance with
Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 46 (FIN 46), as amended. The Company
consolidates all VIEs for which the Company is deemed to be the primary beneficiary.
Reclassifications
Effective January 1, 2007, for income statement presentation purposes, we have reclassified
sales support and marketing expenses from general and administrative to sales and marketing
(previously stated as marketing and customer acquisition). In managements opinion, the
reclassification to sales and marketing more appropriately reflects the nature of these activities
which include sales support and marketing activities of our district offices, regional services,
ZipAgent and customer support services. In conjunction with this reclassification, we have also
allocated headquarter occupancy costs to corporate departments based upon square footage to product
development, sales and marketing and general and administrative; previously all headquarter
occupancy costs were recorded under general and administrative expenses. Comparative periods have
been conformed to this presentation. The following is the change in classification of operating
expenses for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2006:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
| |
|
June 30, 2006 |
|
|
June 30, 2006 |
|
| |
|
Previously |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previously |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Reported |
|
|
Reclassified |
|
|
Reported |
|
|
Reclassified |
|
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
Cost of revenues |
|
$ |
14,590 |
|
|
$ |
14,590 |
|
|
$ |
25,330 |
|
|
$ |
25,330 |
|
Product development |
|
|
1,275 |
|
|
|
1,351 |
|
|
|
2,554 |
|
|
|
2,752 |
|
Sales and marketing |
|
|
3,224 |
|
|
|
7,596 |
|
|
|
6,297 |
|
|
|
14,679 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
7,478 |
|
|
|
3,030 |
|
|
|
14,909 |
|
|
|
6,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
$ |
26,567 |
|
|
$ |
26,567 |
|
|
$ |
49,090 |
|
|
$ |
49,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
Seasonality
The Companys net transaction revenues and income (loss) from operations have historically
varied from quarter to quarter. Such variations are principally attributable to variations in home
sales activity over the course of the calendar year. The Company has historically experienced lower
net transaction revenues during the first quarter because holidays and adverse weather conditions
in certain regions typically reduce the level of sales activity and listings inventories between
the Thanksgiving and Presidents Day holidays. Net transaction revenues during the three months
ended June 30, 2006 and 2005 accounted for approximately 28.3% and 27.7% of annual net transaction
revenues in 2006 and 2005, respectively. Net transaction revenue during the six months ended June
30, 2006 and 2005 accounted for approximately 48.4% and 46.7% of annual net transaction revenues in
2006 and 2005, respectively.
2. RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In
February 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 159
(SFAS 159), Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities, which permits entities to choose to measure many financial
instruments and certain other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at
fair value. SFAS 159 will be effective for the Company on January 1, 2008. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS 159 on its financial position, cash flows and results of
operations.
3. SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS
At June 30, 2007 short-term investments were classified as available-for-sale securities,
except for restricted cash, and are reported at fair value as follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Gross Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Estimated |
|
| |
|
Cost |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
Money market securities |
|
$ |
3,671 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,671 |
|
Asset backed |
|
|
30,620 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
30,568 |
|
Mortgage backed |
|
|
4,936 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,939 |
|
Corporate obligations |
|
|
30,831 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
30,768 |
|
US Government and agency obligations |
|
|
13,756 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
13,730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total short-term investments |
|
$ |
83,814 |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
(150 |
) |
|
$ |
83,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
Recorded as: |
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents |
|
$ |
3,671 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
80,005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
83,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
At June 30, 2007, the fair value of the Companys investments which had been in an unrealized
loss position for over twelve months was $13.4 million and the related unrealized loss was
approximately $23,000.
The estimated fair value of short-term investments classified by date of contractual maturity
at June 30, 2007 were as follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
Due within one year or less |
|
$ |
32,759 |
|
Due after one year through two years |
|
|
22,917 |
|
Due after two years through four years |
|
|
28,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
83,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
8
4. NET LOSS PER SHARE
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and dilutive net loss per share for
the periods indicated:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(1,032 |
) |
|
$ |
(220 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,137 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,008 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
22,501 |
|
|
|
20,366 |
|
|
|
22,255 |
|
|
|
20,329 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
22,501 |
|
|
|
20,366 |
|
|
|
22,255 |
|
|
|
20,329 |
|
Net loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.19 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
Diluted |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.19 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
The following table sets forth potential common shares that are not included in the diluted
net loss per share calculation because to do so would be anti-dilutive for the periods presented:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
Stock options to purchase common stock |
|
|
4,733 |
|
|
|
4,305 |
|
|
|
4,538 |
|
|
|
4,206 |
|
Warrants to purchase common stock |
|
|
2,511 |
|
|
|
4,603 |
|
|
|
2,973 |
|
|
|
4,603 |
|
5. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION EXPENSE
The impact on our results of operations of recording stock-based compensation for the three
and six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006 was as follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
| |
|
(in thousands, except per share data) |
|
Cost of revenues |
|
$ |
122 |
|
|
$ |
127 |
|
|
$ |
261 |
|
|
$ |
247 |
|
Product development |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Sales and marketing |
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
1,388 |
|
|
|
567 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
1,172 |
|
|
|
613 |
|
|
|
1,995 |
|
|
|
1,169 |
|
Tax effect on stock-based compensation |
|
|
(469 |
) |
|
|
(245 |
) |
|
|
(798 |
) |
|
|
(468 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net effect on net income |
|
$ |
703 |
|
|
$ |
368 |
|
|
$ |
1,197 |
|
|
$ |
701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was no impact on cash flows from operating activities or financing activities during the
three and six months ended June 30, 2007 as a result of the adoption of SFAS 123(R). In the
Companys pro forma disclosures prior to the adoption of SFAS 123(R) the Company accounted for
forfeitures upon occurrence. SFAS 123(R) requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant
and revised if necessary in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates.
The Company estimated expected forfeitures based on various factors including employee class and
historical experience. As of June 30, 2007, there was $8.8 million of unrecorded total stock-based
compensation, after estimated forfeitures, related to unvested stock options. That cost is expected
to be recognized over a weighted average remaining recognition period of 2.9 years.
9
Valuation Assumptions
SFAS 123(R) requires companies to estimate the fair value of share-based payment awards on the
date of grant using an option-pricing model. The value of the portion of the award that is
ultimately expected to vest is recognized as expense over the requisite
service period in the Companys financial statements. In connection with the adoption of SFAS
123(R), the Company reassessed its valuation technique and related assumptions.
The Company estimates the fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes option pricing
model, which incorporates various assumptions including volatility, expected life and interest
rates. The expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the Companys common stock
and consideration of other relevant factors such as the volatility assumptions of guideline
companies. The expected life of options granted is estimated by taking the average of the vesting
term and the contractual term of the option as provided by SAB 107.
The assumptions used for the three and six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006 and the
resulting estimates of weighted average fair value per share of options granted during those
periods are as follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Expected volatility |
|
|
48 |
% |
|
|
52 |
% |
|
|
48-51 |
% |
|
|
52 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
4.5-4.8 |
% |
|
|
4.3-5.0 |
% |
Expected life (years) |
|
|
5.5-6.1 |
|
|
|
5.5-6.1 |
|
|
|
5.5-6.1 |
|
|
|
5.5-6.1 |
|
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Weighted-average fair
value of options
granted during the
period |
|
$ |
4.01 |
|
|
$ |
4.78 |
|
|
$ |
4.01 |
|
|
$ |
4.68 |
|
Stock Option Activity
A summary of the Companys stock option activity for the period indicated is as follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
Average |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
Remaining |
|
|
| |
|
Number of |
|
Exercise |
|
Contractual |
|
Aggregate |
| |
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
Life (Years) |
|
Intrinsic Value |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
Outstanding at January 1, 2007 |
|
|
4,235 |
|
|
$ |
7.71 |
|
|
|
8.50 |
|
|
$ |
5,885 |
|
Options granted |
|
|
976 |
|
|
|
7.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercised |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
1.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options forfeited or expired |
|
|
(347 |
) |
|
|
9.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2007 |
|
|
4,850 |
|
|
|
7.51 |
|
|
|
8.56 |
|
|
|
4,929 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options granted |
|
|
425 |
|
|
|
7.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercised |
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
1.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options forfeited or expired |
|
|
(1,084 |
) |
|
|
6.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at June 30, 2007 |
|
|
4,154 |
|
|
|
7.81 |
|
|
|
8.33 |
|
|
|
4,445 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercisable at June 30, 2007 |
|
|
1,865 |
|
|
$ |
7.27 |
|
|
|
7.21 |
|
|
$ |
3,909 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options generally vest over a four-year period with one-fourth (1/4) of the shares vesting one
year after the vesting commencement date, and an additional one-forty eighth (1/48) of the shares
vesting on the first day of each calendar month thereafter until all such shares are exercisable.
Options expire after ten years.
Aggregate intrinsic value represents the difference between the Companys closing stock price
on the last trading day of the fiscal period, which was $7.50 on June 29, 2007, and the exercise
price for the options that were in-the-money at June 30, 2007. The total number of in-the-money
options exercisable as of June 30, 2007 was 903,000. Total intrinsic value of options exercised was
$297,000 and $733,000 for the six month periods ended June 30, 2007 and June 30, 2006,
respectively.
The Company settles employee stock option exercises with newly issued common shares.
10
Stock Option Plans
Following the Companys initial public offering, any shares that were reserved but not issued
under the 1999 Plan were made available under the 2004 Plan, and any shares that would have
otherwise returned to the 1999 Plan will be made available for issuance under the 2004 Plan. The
1999 Plan will continue to govern awards granted there under prior to the Companys initial public
offering.
The number of shares reserved for issuance under the 2004 Plan will be increased by the number
of shares which have been reserved but not issued under the 1999 Plan, any shares returned to the
1999 Plan, and an annual increase to be added on the first day of our fiscal year beginning in 2006
equal to the least of (a) 1,666,666 shares, (b) 4% of the outstanding shares on such date, or (c)
an
amount determined by the BOD. Pursuant to this requirement, on January 1, 2006 and 2007
respectively, an additional 810,932 shares and 864,905 shares respectively, were added to the plan,
reserved for issuance and registered for sale under Form S-8.
6. INCOME TAXES
At the end of each interim period the Company calculates an effective tax rate based on the
Companys best estimate of the tax provision (benefit) that will be provided for the full year,
stated as a percentage of estimated annual pre-tax income (loss). The tax provision (benefit) for
the interim period is determined using this estimated annual effective tax rate.
We have recorded a full valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets at June 30, 2007,
due to uncertainties related to our ability to utilize our deferred tax assets, primarily
consisting of net operating loss carryforwards, before they expire. We regularly review deferred
tax assets for recoverability and establish a valuation allowance based on historical taxable
income, projected future taxable income, and the expected timing of the reversals of existing
temporary differences. If we conclude that it is more likely than not that we will realize the
benefit of all or some of our deferred tax assets, we will reduce or eliminate the valuation
allowance and will record a significant benefit to our results of operations. In the event we were
to determine that we would be able to realize all of our deferred tax assets in the future, an
adjustment to the valuation allowance would increase net income in the period such determination
was made.
Based on the full valuation allowance and the taxable loss for the six months ended June 30,
2007 the Company has not recorded a tax provision or benefit.
In July 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes an Interpretation of FASB Statement 109 (FIN 48). As a result of the implementation of
FIN 48, we recognized no material adjustment in the liability for unrecognized income tax benefits.
We do not have any material accrued interest or penalties associated with any unrecognized tax
benefits. We will account for any interest related to uncertain tax positions as interest expense,
and for penalties as tax expense. Other than as discussed below, we do not believe it is reasonably
possible that our unrecognized tax benefits will significantly change within the next twelve
months. There were no material changes in the amount of unrecognized tax benefits as of June 30,
2007. We are subject to taxation in the US and various state jurisdictions. The tax years 2002-2006
remain open to examination by the federal and most state tax authorities.
7. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
Comprehensive loss includes net loss and unrealized gains (losses) on investments.
Comprehensive income (loss) for the periods indicated is comprised of the following:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(1,032 |
) |
|
$ |
(220 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,137 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,008 |
) |
Other
comprehensive income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in accumulated unrealized gain (loss) on
available-for-sale securities, net of tax |
|
|
(102 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
(1,134 |
) |
|
$ |
(267 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,118 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,032 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
8. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
The Company leases office space under non-cancelable operating leases with various expiration
dates through May 2013.
Future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable operating leases at June 30, 2007 are as
follows, in thousands:
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Operating |
|
| Year ending December 31, |
|
Leases |
|
2007 |
|
$ |
1,093 |
|
2008 |
|
|
1,921 |
|
2009 |
|
|
1,497 |
|
2010 |
|
|
1,389 |
|
2011 |
|
|
1,381 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
373 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments |
|
$ |
7,654 |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal Proceedings
On May 4, 2007, the Company was named in a class action lawsuit filed in United States
District Court for the Central District of California, Lubocki, et al v. ZipRealty, case number CV
07 2959, by four former employee agents of the Company. The complaint alleges, among other things,
that the Companys policies for expense allowances, expense reimbursements and commission payments
to agents for transactions that do not close during the period of employment violate federal and
California state laws. The complaint seeks monetary damages and declaratory and equitable relief
but does not specify the amount of damages sought. The Company has not yet been served with the
complaint and is in its preliminary stages of investigating the allegations. However, at this time,
the Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to the complaint.
The Company is not currently subject to any other material legal proceedings. From time to
time the Company has been, and it currently is, a party to litigation and subject to claims
incident to the ordinary course of the business. The amounts in dispute in these matters are not
material to the Company, and management believes that the resolution of these proceedings will not
have a material adverse effect on the business, financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Indemnifications
The Company has entered into various indemnification agreements in the ordinary course of our
business. Pursuant to these agreements, the Company has agreed to indemnify, hold harmless and
reimburse the indemnified parties, which include certain of the Companys service providers as well
as others, in connection with certain occurrences. In addition, the Companys charter documents
require the Company to provide indemnification rights to our directors and officers to the fullest
extent permitted by the Delaware General Corporation Law, and permit the Company to provide
indemnification rights to the Companys other employees and agents, for certain events that occur
while these persons are serving in these capacities. The Company has also entered into
indemnification agreements with each of the Companys directors and its officers with a title of
Vice President or higher. Further, the underwriting agreement for the Companys initial public
offering requires the Company to indemnify the Companys underwriters and certain of their
affiliates and agents for certain liabilities arising from the Companys offering and the related
registration statement.
The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under
these indemnification agreements is unspecified. The Company is not aware of any material
indemnification liabilities for actions, events or occurrences that have occurred to date. The
Company maintains insurance on some of the liabilities the Company has agreed to indemnify,
including liabilities incurred by the Companys directors and officers while acting in these
capacities, subject to certain exclusions and limitations of coverage.
12
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations:
The following discussion should be read together with our financial statements and related
notes appearing elsewhere in this report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements based
upon current expectations that involve numerous risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could
differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements for many reasons,
including but not limited to those set forth in Risk Factors in Item 1A of Part II of this report
and elsewhere in this report. Except as otherwise required by law, we do not intend to update any
information contained in these forward-looking statements.
OVERVIEW
General
We are a full-service residential real estate brokerage firm, using the Internet, proprietary
technology and efficient business processes to provide home buyers and sellers with high-quality
service and value. Our solution includes a client-centric business approach, a sophisticated
website that empowers home buyers and sellers with relevant information, a proprietary business
management technology platform and significant financial savings for consumers. We share a portion
of our commissions with our buyer clients in the form of a cash rebate, and typically represent our
seller clients at fee levels below those offered by most traditional brokerage companies in our
markets. Generally, our seller clients pay a total brokerage fee of 4.5% to 5.0% of the transaction
value, of which 2.5% to 3.0% is paid to agents representing buyers.
Our net revenues are comprised primarily of commissions earned as agents for buyers and
sellers in residential real estate transactions. We record revenues net of rebate or commission
discount, if any, paid or offered to our clients. Our net revenues are principally driven by the
number of transactions we close and the average net revenue per transaction. Average net revenue
per transaction is a function of the home sales price and percentage commission we receive on each
transaction. We also receive revenues from certain co-marketing arrangements, such as our
relationship with E-LOAN, Inc., which provides the mortgage center on our website and pays us a
flat monthly fee that is established on a periodic basis. Generally, non-commission revenues
represent less than 5% of our net revenues during any period. We are currently exploring our
options for offering other services related to the purchase, sale and ownership of a home and have
begun offering property and casualty insurance (including auto insurance) services through a
subsidiary.
We were founded in 1999, currently have operations in 30 markets, and as of June 30, 2007
employed 2,334 people, of whom 2,070 were ZipAgents. We commenced operations in Tampa in February
2006, Orlando in April 2006, Minneapolis/St. Paul in May 2006, Austin in July 2006, Palm Beach in
September 2006, the Greater Philadelphia area in December 2006, Naples in March 2007, Tucson in
March 2007, Denver in April 2007, Jacksonville in May 2007, Salt Lake City in July 2007, Richmond
in July 2007 and Virginia Beach in August 2007. We have announced plans to enter Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham, Long Island and Westchester County in 2007.
Trends in our business
Although
our business has experienced significant growth since our inception in 1999, primarily as a
result of increased transaction volume and increased average net
revenue per transaction, growth rates in transaction volume have
somewhat decreased recently based on what we perceive to be a
transition period in the housing market. In the
three months ended June 30, 2007, we generated $31.3 million in net revenues, compared to $26.9
million in the three months ended June 30, 2006. In the six months ended June 30, 2007 we generated
$54.7 million in net revenues, compared to $46.1 million in the six months ended June 30, 2006. The
number of our closed transactions increased to approximately 3,988 in the three months ended June
30, 2007 from approximately 3,552 in the three months ended June 30, 2006, and our average net
revenue per transaction increased to approximately $7,649 in the three months ended June 30, 2007
from approximately $7,375 in the three months ended June 30, 2006. The number of our closed
transactions increased to approximately 7,098 in the six months ended June 30, 2007 from
approximately 6,190 in the six months ended June 30, 2006, and our average net revenue per
transaction increased to approximately $7,492 in the six months ended June 30, 2007 from
approximately $7,244 in the six months ended June 30, 2006. Our transaction volume is primarily
driven by the number of ZipAgents we employ, which increased to 2,070 at June 30, 2007 from 1,669
at June 30, 2006. Our average net revenue per transaction increased over this period of time in
existing and new markets and in our California markets and in markets outside of California. As we
add additional ZipAgents, we believe long term we will continue to increase our transaction volume
and grow our business, although this may not be the case if the market continues to soften. In
addition, we believe that customer acquisition is one of our core competencies, and while we
anticipate that the difficulty of acquiring a sufficient number of leads online may increase over
time, we expect that we can mitigate some of that impact with repeat and referral business, as well
as by increasing our visibility and credibility to potential clients
13
over time. Since our market share has averaged less than 1% over the past twelve months in our
existing markets in aggregate, we believe that there is an opportunity to increase our market
share, even if the overall level of sales decline due to changing consumer sentiment, interest rate
increases or other economic or geopolitical factors.
Since early September of 2005 we have experienced a significant increase in the available
inventory of homes for sale in many of our markets, as well as an increase in the amount of time
listings are taking to sell. For example, average inventories in our existing markets increased
approximately 34%, and months of inventory increased approximately 54%, in the quarter ended June
30, 2007 from the quarter ended June 30, 2006. Pricing increases have also slowed, and some markets
have shown declines in median selling prices over this period. According to NAR, nationally sales
of existing homes fell 11.4% year-over-year in June 2007 to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of
5.75 million. In the State of California, the California Association of REALTORS reported that
sales of existing homes declined 24.7% year-over-year during the month of June 2007. In our
opinion, these data points suggest the housing market is in a period of transition, with more power
shifting to buyers from sellers, and that the residential real estate market may continue to soften
in the foreseeable future. While over the long-term we believe a more balanced market will be
beneficial to our model, which relies primarily on representing buyers, during this period of
transition we may continue to experience reduced growth rates and agent productivity versus our
historical levels as buyers react cautiously to perceived changing market conditions.
Over time, we have made significant adjustments to our cost structure and revenue model in
order to improve the financial results of our business. We have modified the compensation and
expense reimbursement structure for ZipAgents over time, and we most recently changed our
commission and/or expense structure in April 2007. Currently, our ZipAgents earn a compensation
package consisting of a percentage of the commissions they generate for us that ranges from 35% to
80% of our net revenues after deducting certain other items. We also provide our ZipAgents with
health, retirement and other benefits, and pay for certain marketing costs and
other business expenses. ZipAgents may also be granted equity incentives based on performance. We
may make further modifications to our compensation structure in the future.
For example, Nevada recently approved legislation that preempts the federal outside sales
exemption from paying minimum wages in that state. That legislation is scheduled to take effect on
November 1, 2007. Depending on the regulations that are ultimately adopted pursuant to that
legislation, we may be required to pay our ZipAgents in Nevada minimum wages and may thereafter
need to change our compensation model accordingly.
We have lowered our buyer rebate percentage several times to improve our revenue model. In
March 2004, we reduced our buyer rebate to 20% of our commission from 25% of our commission, up to
a maximum of 1% of the home sales price. The effect of the buyer rebate reduction was recognized
over a phase-in period of approximately two to four months as the reduction only affected new
clients immediately while existing clients continued under the prior rebate policy for transactions
already in progress and for transactions opened within a short period after the reduction was
announced. We implemented these buyer rebate percentage reductions for several reasons, including
our determination that our growing reputation for superior service allowed us not to compete solely
on price, our efforts to improve our revenue model and agent compensation model, and our desire to
offer a simplified rebate structure to our clients.
In connection with entry into the Greater Philadelphia area, we entered the New Jersey market,
where the payment of cash rebates is currently not permitted by law. Consequently, in New Jersey,
in lieu of offering a cash rebate to our buyers, we make a donation to a local charity through
United Way equal to 20% of our commission in cash upon closing.
We achieved profitability for the first time in the third quarter of 2003 and maintained
profitability for the fourth quarter as well, primarily as a result of increased transaction
volume, higher average net revenue per transaction and improved management of discretionary
expenses. However, as a result of the seasonality to which our business is subject, we again
experienced a net loss in the first quarter of 2004. We returned to profitability in the second,
third and fourth quarters of 2004, primarily as a result of higher average net transaction revenue
and increased transactional volume due to our increased ZipAgent force and seasonal factors. We
achieved profitability in the first quarter of 2005, the first time in our seasonally slow first
quarter, primarily as a result of higher average net transaction revenues and increased
transactional volume due to our increased ZipAgent force. While we experienced a net loss in the
second quarter of 2005 as a result of a one-time charge relating to the settlement of a threatened
class action lawsuit, we would have been profitable excluding the effect of this settlement. We
again achieved profitability in the third and fourth quarters of 2005, but because of seasonality
and new market expansion as well as the current softening in the residential real estate market, we
experienced a net loss in the first and second quarters of 2006. We achieved profitability in the
third quarter of 2006, but experienced a net loss in the fourth quarter of 2006 as a result of
decreased transaction volume due to our seasonally slow fourth quarter and continued market
softness. We also reported a loss in the first and second quarter of 2007 due to seasonality,
accelerated new market expansion and continued market softness.
14
Over the past several years there has been a decline in average commissions charged in the
real estate brokerage industry, in part due to companies such as ours exerting downward pressure on
prices with a lower commission structure, as well as by what, in our view, appears to be an
increase in consumer willingness to negotiate fees with their agents. We believe that many
consumers are focusing on absolute commission dollars paid to sell their home as opposed to
accepting a traditional standard market commission percentage. According to REAL Trends, while the
average commission percentage decreased from 5.44% in 2000 to 5.18% in 2006, total commission
revenues increased from $42.6 billion to $59.7 billion during that same period, influenced by
steadily increasing sales volumes and higher median sales prices. In the event that commissions
continue to decline, we have designed our business model around an attractive cost structure and
operational efficiencies which we believe should allow us to continue to offer our services at
prices less than those charged by the majority of our competitors.
In addition, the competitive landscape in the residential real estate industry is in the midst
of significant changes as new business models enter the marketplace. For example, Redfin
Corporation has introduced a discount brokerage model (currently in five states and the District of
Columbia) that allows clients to make offers to purchase homes and to list homes for sale directly
online, while receiving a two-thirds rebate of their commission. BuySide Realty, another discount
brokerage, employs agents who are paid salaries and bonuses based on customer service, not
commissions, while offering a 75% rebate of their commission. RealEstate.com, which is owned by
LendingTree, LLC, acts as a lead generator for real estate brokers and agents, and has opened a
direct to consumer brokerage service. Trulia, Inc. operates a residential real estate search engine
to connect consumers directly to listings on agent and broker web
sites. These companies have limited operating histories upon which to
evaluate their operations and future prospects, however, in order to continue
growing, our business model must remain attractive to consumers so that we can compete successfully
with these newer models as they expand into our marketplaces. In addition, to remain economically
viable, we will need to be able to compete effectively with these new entrants for the acquisition
of agents and leads.
Market seasonality, cyclicality and interest rate influences
The residential real estate brokerage market is influenced both by annual seasonality factors,
as well as by overall economic cycles. While individual markets vary, transaction volume activity
nationally tends to progressively increase from January through the summer months, then gradually
slows over the last three to four months of the calendar year. Revenues in each quarter are
significantly affected by activity during the prior quarter, given the typical 30- to 45-day time
lag between contract execution and closing. While we believe that, until fairly recently,
seasonality has been somewhat masked by our overall growth, we have been, and believe we will
continue to be, influenced by overall market activity and seasonal forces. We generally experience
the most significant impact in the first and fourth quarters of each year, when our revenues are
typically lower relative to the second and third quarters as a result of traditionally slower home
sales activity and reduced listings inventory between Thanksgiving and Presidents Day.
We believe that the overall macroeconomic environment and periodic business cycles can
influence the general health of the residential real estate market at any given point in time.
Generally, when economic times are fair or good, the housing market tends to perform well. If the
economy is weak, interest rates dramatically increase, or there are market events such as terrorist
attacks or threats, the outbreak of war or geopolitical uncertainties, the housing market could be
negatively impacted.
Over the past several decades, the national residential real estate market has demonstrated
significant growth, with annual existing home sales volume growing from 1.6 million in 1970 to
approximately 7.1 million in 2005 and median existing home sales prices increasing every year
during that period. During that period, the volume of existing home sales has declined for at least
two consecutive years only twice, namely 1979 through 1982 and 1989 through 1990. The declines in
sales volumes in the 1979 through 1982 period occurred while interest rates were at historic highs,
with long-term U.S. Treasury rates exceeding 10%. With rates remaining at similarly high levels,
housing activity expanded during the period from 1983 through 1986. Average interest rates were
lower during the second period of consecutive year declines, 1989 through 1990, than in 1988.
Many factors influence an individuals decision to buy or sell a home, and we believe that no
one factor alone determines the health of the residential real estate market. For example, a rise
in interest rates, tighter lending standards and/or disruptions in
the availability of mortgage funds could lead to lower demand for housing or put downward pressure on prices
because, all else being equal, it should increase monthly housing payments or reduce the amount an
individual can pay for a home. However, it is also our experience that lifestyle influences, such
as job relocation, changes in family dynamics or a desire to change neighborhoods, significantly
impact the demand for residential real estate. In addition, periods of interest rate increases are
often characterized by improving economic fundamentals, which can create jobs, increase incomes and
bolster consumer confidence, all of which are factors that positively influence housing demand. It
is difficult to predict which influences will be strongest, and ultimately whether the housing
market will be affected positively or negatively when faced with numerous influences.
15
While it is difficult to isolate the cause of recent transaction volume declines and pricing
growth slowing in the residential real estate market, such softening has been occurring since Fall
of 2005 as interest rates and inventories have been increasing. Other factors have likely contributed to the
slowdown as well, such as high fuel prices, persistent press coverage about residential real estate
potentially being poised for a correction, and the fact that prices had until that time been
increasing at historically high rates. This rapid price appreciation, which was well ahead of
household income growth, along with increasing interest rates has made housing less affordable,
which has manifested itself in declining home ownership rates, which peaked in 2004. With overall
transaction activity declining and sales price increases slowing, overall commissions generated in
the industry could decline as well, potentially causing the roughly $65.5 billion in annual
commissions generated in 2005 to decline. However, should the addressable market for our services
decline somewhat due to decreasing sales volume or prices, we believe the overall size of the
market on an absolute basis will remain very large, providing ample addressable opportunity for us
to continue to grow our business through increasing our market share.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
Our financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, costs
and expenses and related disclosures. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates and
assumptions. Accordingly, our actual results may differ from these estimates under different
assumptions or conditions.
Our significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 of the notes to our consolidated
financial statements contained in Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, and of those
policies, we believe that the following accounting policies involve the greatest degree of judgment
and complexity. Accordingly, these are the policies we believe are the most critical to understand
and evaluate our financial condition and results of operations.
Income Statement Reclassification
Effective January 1, 2007, for income statement presentation purposes, we have reclassified
sales support and marketing expenses from general and administrative to sales and marketing
(previously stated as marketing and customer acquisitions). In managements opinion, the
reclassification to sales and marketing more appropriately reflects the nature of these activities
which include sales support and marketing activities of our district offices, regional services and
ZipAgent and customer support services. In conjunction with this reclassification, we have also
allocated headquarter occupancy costs to corporate departments based upon square footage to product
development, sales and marketing and general and administrative; previously all headquarter
occupancy costs were recorded under general and administrative expenses. Comparative periods have
been conformed to this presentation.
Revenue recognition
We derive the substantial majority of our revenues from commissions earned as agents for
buyers and sellers in residential real estate transactions. We recognize commission revenues upon
closing of a sale and purchase transaction, net of any rebate or commission discount, or
transaction fee adjustment, as evidenced by the closure of the escrow or similar account and the
transfer of these funds to all appropriate parties. We recognize non-commission revenues from our
other business relationships, such as our E-LOAN marketing relationship, as the fees are earned
from the other party typically on a monthly fee basis. Revenues are recognized when there is
persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the price is fixed or determinable, collectibility is
reasonably assured and the transaction has been completed.
Internal-use software and website development costs
We account for internal-use software and website development costs, including the development
of our ZipAgent Platform, in accordance with the guidance set forth in Statement of Position 98-1,
Accounting for the Cost of Computer Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use and Emerging
Task Force Issue No. 00-02, Accounting for Website Development Costs. We capitalize the payroll and
direct payroll-related costs of employees who devote time to the development of internal-use
software. We amortize these costs over their estimated useful lives, which is generally 15 months.
Our judgment is required in determining the point at which various projects enter the stages at
which costs may be capitalized, in assessing the ongoing value of the capitalized costs, and in
determining the estimated useful lives over which the costs are amortized. The estimated life is
based on managements judgment as to the product life cycle.
16
Income taxes
Deferred tax assets and liabilities arise from the differences between the tax basis of an
asset or liability and its reported amount in the financial statements as well as from net
operating loss and tax credit carry forwards. Deferred tax amounts are determined by using the tax
rates expected to be in effect when the taxes will actually be paid or refunds received, as
provided under current tax law. Valuation allowances are established when necessary to reduce
deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized. Income tax expense or benefit is the tax
payable or refundable, respectively, for the period plus or minus the change during the period in
deferred tax assets and liabilities.
Historically, we have recorded a valuation allowance on our deferred tax assets, the majority
of which relate to net operating loss tax carryforwards generated before we achieved profitability.
During the fourth quarter of 2006, the Company concluded that a full valuation allowance should be
reinstated, which had originally been recognized in 2005, against its net deferred tax assets at
December 31, 2006 as available evidence, including recent historical results and managements
expectations for the future, supported a more likely than not conclusion that the related deferred
tax assets will not be realized.
Stock-Based Compensation
SFAS 123 (Revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (SFAS 123(R)) requires the measurement and
recognition of compensation expense for all stock-based payment awards made to employees and
directors, including employee stock options and employee stock purchases, based on estimated fair
values. Under the fair value recognition provisions for SFAS 123(R), stock-based compensation cost
is estimated at the grant date based on the fair value of the awards expected to vest and
recognized as expense using the straight-line method over the requisite service period of the
award.
The Company estimates the fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes option pricing
model, which incorporates various assumptions including volatility, expected life and interest
rates. The expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the Companys common stock
and consideration of other relevant factors such as the volatility assumptions of peer companies.
The expected life of options is estimated by taking the average of the vesting term and the
contractual term of the option as provided by SAB 107. The Company estimates expected forfeitures
based on various factors including employee class and historical experience.
The Company accounts for equity instruments issued to non-employees in accordance with the
provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) and Emerging Task Force Issue No. 96-18, Accounting for Equity
Instruments That Are Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling,
Goods or Services (EITF 96-18).
The accounting for and disclosure of employee and non-employee equity instruments, primarily
stock options and preferred and common stock warrants, requires judgment by management on a number
of assumptions, including the fair value of the underlying instrument, estimated lives of the
outstanding instruments, and the instruments volatility. Changes in key assumptions will impact
the valuation of such instruments.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncement
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities (SFAS 159) which permits entities to choose to measure many financial
instruments and certain other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at
fair value. SFAS 159 will be effective for the Company on January 1, 2008. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS 159 on its financial position, cash flows and results of
operations.
17
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table summarizes our operating results for the three and six months ended June
30, 2007 compared to the same period in the prior year:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
| Statements of operations data (unaudited) |
|
(in thousands, except per share data) |
|
Net transaction revenues |
|
$ |
30,506 |
|
|
$ |
26,195 |
|
|
$ |
53,181 |
|
|
$ |
44,843 |
|
Referral and other revenues |
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
714 |
|
|
|
1,482 |
|
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
|
31,281 |
|
|
|
26,909 |
|
|
|
54,663 |
|
|
|
46,126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues |
|
|
17,312 |
|
|
|
14,590 |
|
|
|
30,387 |
|
|
|
25,330 |
|
Product development |
|
|
1,813 |
|
|
|
1,351 |
|
|
|
3,494 |
|
|
|
2,752 |
|
Sales and marketing |
|
|
9,829 |
|
|
|
7,596 |
|
|
|
18,676 |
|
|
|
14,679 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
4,457 |
|
|
|
3,030 |
|
|
|
8,425 |
|
|
|
6,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
33,411 |
|
|
|
26,567 |
|
|
|
60,982 |
|
|
|
49,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(2,130 |
) |
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
(6,319 |
) |
|
|
(2,964 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
2,182 |
|
|
|
1,696 |
|
Other expense, net |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net |
|
|
1,098 |
|
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
2,182 |
|
|
|
1,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
(1,032 |
) |
|
|
1,238 |
|
|
|
(4,137 |
) |
|
|
(1,268 |
) |
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,458 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(260 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(1,032 |
) |
|
$ |
(220 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,137 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,008 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.19 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
Diluted |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.19 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
Weighted average common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
22,501 |
|
|
|
20,336 |
|
|
|
22,255 |
|
|
|
20,329 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
22,501 |
|
|
|
20,336 |
|
|
|
22,255 |
|
|
|
20,329 |
|
The following table presents our operating results as a percentage of net revenues for the
periods indicated:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Six Months Ended |
| |
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
| Statements of operations data (unaudited) |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Net transaction revenues |
|
|
97.5 |
% |
|
|
97.3 |
% |
|
|
97.3 |
% |
|
|
97.2 |
% |
Referral and other revenues |
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues |
|
|
55.3 |
|
|
|
54.2 |
|
|
|
55.6 |
|
|
|
54.9 |
|
Product development |
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
Sales and marketing |
|
|
31.4 |
|
|
|
28.2 |
|
|
|
34.2 |
|
|
|
31.8 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
14.2 |
|
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
15.4 |
|
|
|
13.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
106.7 |
|
|
|
98.7 |
|
|
|
111.6 |
|
|
|
106.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations |
|
|
(6.7 |
) |
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
(11.6 |
) |
|
|
(6.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
Other expense, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net |
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
(3.2 |
) |
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
(7.6 |
) |
|
|
(2.7 |
) |
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
(3.2 |
)% |
|
|
(0.8 |
)% |
|
|
(7.6 |
)% |
|
|
(2.1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
Comparison of the three months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006
Net transaction revenues
Net transaction revenues, and statistical data are presented below for comparable existing and
new markets (1):
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
Percent |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
Change |
|
| |
|
(in thousands, except statistical data) |
|
Net transaction revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
$ |
27,617 |
|
|
$ |
25,986 |
|
|
$ |
1,631 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
2,889 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
2,680 |
|
|
|
1,284.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
30,506 |
|
|
$ |
26,195 |
|
|
$ |
4,311 |
|
|
|
16.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statistical Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Markets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
New markets |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of transactions closed during the period (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
|
3,492 |
|
|
|
3,514 |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(0.6 |
)% |
New markets |
|
|
496 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
1,205.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
3,988 |
|
|
|
3,552 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
12.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average net revenue per transaction (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
$ |
7,908 |
|
|
$ |
7,395 |
|
|
$ |
513 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
5,825 |
|
|
|
5,490 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
% |
All markets |
|
$ |
7,649 |
|
|
$ |
7,375 |
|
|
$ |
274 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
% |
|
|
|
| (1) |
|
Comparable existing markets consist of Atlanta GA, Baltimore MD, Boston MA, Chicago IL,
Dallas TX, Fresno/Central Valley CA, Los Angeles CA, Houston TX, Las Vegas NV, Miami FL,
Orange County CA, Phoenix AZ, Sacramento CA, San Diego CA, San Francisco Bay Area CA, Seattle
WA and Washington DC. New markets are transferred to existing markets on January 1st following
the completion of their first full calendar year. The Las Vegas, Houston and Miami markets
opened during 2005 and, therefore, completed their first full calendar year at of the end of
2006. Accordingly, these markets were moved to existing markets as of January 1, 2007 and are
included in comparable existing markets for all periods presented. New markets and the month
opened consist of: |
| |
|
|
Tampa, FL
|
|
February 2006 |
Orlando, FL
|
|
April 2006 |
Minneapolis, MN
|
|
May 2006 |
Austin, TX
|
|
July 2006 |
Palm Beach, FL
|
|
September 2006 |
Greater Philadelphia Area, PA
|
|
December 2006 |
Naples, FL
|
|
March 2007 |
Tucson, AZ
|
|
March 2007 |
Denver, CO
|
|
April 2007 |
Jacksonville, FL
|
|
May 2007 |
Salt
Lake City, UT (4)
|
|
July 2007 |
Richmond,
VA (4)
|
|
July 2007 |
Virginia
Beach, VA (4)
|
|
August 2007 |
| |
|
|
| (2) |
|
The term transaction refers to each representation of a buyer or seller in a real estate
purchase or sale. |
| |
| (3) |
|
Average net revenue per transaction equals net transaction revenues divided by number of
transactions with respect to each period. |
| |
| (4) |
|
Market opened after June 30, 2007; no net transaction
revenues were recorded in the three months ended June 30,
2007. |
19
The increase in our net transaction revenues of $4.3 million for the
three months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the
three months ended June 30, 2006 was primarily due to an increase in average net revenue per transaction in our existing
markets offset by a slight decrease in the number of existing market transactions closed during the period combined with
the incremental impact of transactions closed in our new markets. Our transaction volume increase corresponds to the
addition of more ZipAgents in our existing and new markets. We had 2,070 ZipAgents at June 30, 2007 compared to 1,669
at June 30, 2006.
We expect that our net transaction revenues for 2007 will increase compared to the prior year.
Transaction volume is expected to increase on a year-over-year basis
primarily from transactions in our new markets and
average net revenue per transaction is expected to decline due primarily to a growing percentage of
transactions occurring in less expensive housing markets and possible declines in median house
prices in certain of our markets.
Referral and other revenues
Referral and other revenues consist primarily of certain co-marketing agreements and
transaction referrals.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Referral and other revenues |
|
$ |
775 |
|
|
$ |
714 |
|
|
$ |
61 |
|
|
|
8.7 |
% |
The absolute dollar increase in referral and other revenues was not significant.
We expect that our referral and other revenues for 2007 will increase modestly and remain
relatively consistent as a percentage of net revenues.
Cost of revenues
Our cost of revenues for existing and new markets consists principally
of commissions, related payroll taxes, benefits and expense allowances and reimbursements paid to
our ZipAgents, and the amortization of internal-use software and website development costs which
relate primarily to our ZAP technology.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
Percent |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
Change |
|
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
Cost of revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
$ |
15,731 |
|
|
$ |
14,487 |
|
|
$ |
1,244 |
|
|
|
8.6 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
1,581 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
1,478 |
|
|
|
1,445.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
17,312 |
|
|
$ |
14,590 |
|
|
$ |
2,722 |
|
|
|
18.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
increase in cost of revenues for the three months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2006 was
due primarily to an increase in ZipAgent commissions and related payroll benefits of $2.3 million and expense allowances
and reimbursements of $0.4 million related to the increase in net transaction revenues. As a percentage of net revenues
for the comparable periods, the cost of revenues were 55.3% in the
period compared to 54.2% for the three months ended June 30, 2006
due primarily to the mix of commissions earned by our ZipAgents.
We expect that our cost of revenues for 2007 will increase in absolute dollars and remain
relatively consistent as a percentage of net revenues.
20
Product development
Product
development expenses, net of capitalized costs of internally developed software, include our information technology costs,
primarily compensation and benefits, depreciation of equipment and software, communications expenses and other operating
costs relating to the maintenance of our website, proprietary technology systems and general information technology services.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Product development |
|
$ |
1,813 |
|
|
$ |
1,351 |
|
|
$ |
462 |
|
|
|
34.1 |
% |
The increase in product development expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the three months
ended June 30, 2006 was primarily due to ongoing website development and to support new market expansion and consisted
primarily of increases in salaries and benefits of $0.2 million and general technology expenses (including depreciation)
of $0.3 million. As a percentage of net revenues, product development costs were 5.8% in the period compared to 5.0%
in the three months ending June 30, 2006.
We expect our product development expenses to increase in 2007 in absolute dollars and as a
percentage of net revenues as we continue to grow our business and enhance our proprietary consumer
website and agent platform.
Sales and marketing
Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for personnel
engaged in sales and sales support functions and customer service as well as promotional,
advertising and client acquisition costs. These expenses have been categorized below between
those incurred in the comparable existing and new markets offices and those expenses which are
incurred by the regional and corporate support functions across all markets.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
Percent |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
Change |
|
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
Sales and marketing: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
$ |
5,951 |
|
|
$ |
5,562 |
|
|
$ |
389 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
2,019 |
|
|
|
612 |
|
|
|
1,407 |
|
|
|
230.3 |
% |
Regional sales support and marketing |
|
|
1,859 |
|
|
|
1,422 |
|
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
30.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
9,829 |
|
|
$ |
7,596 |
|
|
$ |
2,233 |
|
|
|
29.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in sales and marketing expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the three months
ended June 30, 2006 was principally due to an increase in salaries and benefits of $1.0 million, customer acquisition
costs of $0.5 million, and occupancy, travel and operating expenses totaling $0.5 million. The remainder of the increase
primarily relates to advertising and marketing related costs. As a percentage of net revenues, sales and marketing
expenses were 31.4% in the period compared to 28.2% in the three months ended June 30, 2006.
We expect our sales and marketing expenses for 2007 to increase in absolute dollars and as a
percentage of net revenues.
General and administrative
General and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for
personnel and facilities related to our executive, finance, human resources, facilities and legal
organizations, and fees for professional services. Professional services are principally comprised
of outside legal, audit and outsourcing services.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
General and administrative |
|
$ |
4,457 |
|
|
$ |
3,030 |
|
|
$ |
1,427 |
|
|
|
47.1 |
% |
21
The increase in general and administrative expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the three
months ended June 30, 2006 was principally due to increased salaries and benefits of $0.6 million, an increase in
consulting and professional fees of $0.3 million and an increase in stock-based compensation expense of $0.5 million.
These general and administrative expenses for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 include costs associated with the
termination of the Companys former CEO of approximately $0.7 million. As a percentage of net revenues, general and
administrative expenses were 14.2% in the period compared to 11.3% in the three months ended June 30, 2006.
We
expect our general and administrative expenses for 2007 to
increase in absolute dollars and remain relatively consistent as a percentage of net revenues.
Interest income
Interest income relates to interest we earn on our money market deposits and short-term
investments.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Interest income |
|
$ |
1,094 |
|
|
$ |
896 |
|
|
$ |
198 |
|
|
|
22.0 |
% |
Interest income will fluctuate as our cash equivalents and short-term investment balances
change and applicable interest rates increase or decrease. The increase in interest income for the
three months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2006 was due primarily
to higher interest rates and modestly higher average balances for our cash equivalents and
short-term investments.
Other income (expense), net
Other income (expense), net consists of non-operating items, which have not been significant
to date.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes
The provision for income taxes relates to our net book profit based on our best estimate of the tax
provision (benefit) that will be provided for the full year.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Provision
for income taxes |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,458 |
|
|
$ |
(1,458 |
) |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
We
have continued to record a full valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets at June 30, 2007,
due to uncertainties related to our ability to utilize our deferred tax assets, primarily
consisting of net operating loss carryforwards, before they expire. Based on the full valuation
allowance and the taxable loss for the three months ended June 30, 2007, the Company has not
recorded a tax provision or benefit.
In July 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes an Interpretation of FASB Statement 109 (FIN 48). FIN 48 is effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2006. FIN 48 prescribes a comprehensive model for how a company should
recognize, measure, present, and disclose in its financial statements uncertain tax positions that
a company has taken or expects to take on a tax return (including a decision whether to file or not
to file a return in a particular jurisdiction). Under FIN 48, the financial statements will reflect
expected future tax consequences of such positions presuming the taxing authorities full knowledge
of the position and all relevant facts, but without considering time values. The Company adopted
Interpretation No. 48 on January 1, 2007. As a result of
the implementation of FIN 48 (updated through June 30, 2007), we
recognized no material adjustment in the liability for unrecognized income tax benefits.
22
Comparison of the six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006
Net revenues
Net transaction revenues and statistical data are presented below for comparable existing and
new markets (1):
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
Percent |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
Change |
|
| |
|
(in thousands, except statistical data) |
|
Net transaction revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
$ |
48,610 |
|
|
$ |
44,634 |
|
|
$ |
3,976 |
|
|
|
8.9 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
4,571 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
4,362 |
|
|
|
2,091.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
53,181 |
|
|
$ |
44,843 |
|
|
$ |
8,338 |
|
|
|
18.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statistical Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Markets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
New markets |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of transactions closed during the period (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
|
6,274 |
|
|
|
6,152 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
786 |
|
|
|
2,068.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
7,098 |
|
|
|
6,190 |
|
|
|
908 |
|
|
|
14.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average net revenue per transaction (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
$ |
7,748 |
|
|
$ |
7,255 |
|
|
$ |
493 |
|
|
|
6.8 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
5,548 |
|
|
|
5,490 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
% |
All markets |
|
$ |
7,492 |
|
|
$ |
7,244 |
|
|
$ |
248 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
% |
|
|
|
| (1) |
|
Comparable existing markets consist of Atlanta GA, Baltimore MD, Boston MA, Chicago IL,
Dallas TX, Fresno/Central Valley CA, Los Angeles CA, Houston TX, Las Vegas NV, Miami FL,
Orange County CA, Phoenix AZ, Sacramento CA, San Diego CA, San Francisco Bay Area CA, Seattle
WA and Washington DC. New markets are transferred to existing markets on January 1st following
the completion of their first full calendar year. The Las Vegas, Houston and Miami markets
opened during 2005 and, therefore, completed their first full calendar year at of the end of
2006. Accordingly, these markets were moved to existing markets as of January 1, 2007 and are
included in comparable existing markets for all periods presented. New markets and the month
opened consist of: |
| |
|
|
Tampa, FL
|
|
February 2006 |
Orlando, FL
|
|
April 2006 |
Minneapolis, MN
|
|
May 2006 |
Austin, TX
|
|
July 2006 |
Palm Beach, FL
|
|
September 2006 |
Greater Philadelphia Area, PA
|
|
December 2006 |
Naples, FL
|
|
March 2007 |
Tucson, AZ
|
|
March 2007 |
Denver, CO
|
|
April 2007 |
Jacksonville, FL
|
|
May 2007 |
Salt
Lake City, UT (4)
|
|
July 2007 |
Richmond,
VA (4)
|
|
July 2007 |
Virginia
Beach, VA (4)
|
|
August 2007 |
| |
|
|
| (2) |
|
The term transaction refers to each representation of a buyer or seller in a real estate
purchase or sale. |
| |
| (3) |
|
Average net revenue per transaction equals net transaction revenues divided by number of
transactions with respect to each period. |
| |
| (4) |
|
Market opened after June 30, 2007; no net transaction
revenues were recorded in the six months ended June 30,
2007. |
23
The increase in our net transaction revenues of $8.3 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the
six months ended June 30, 2006 was primarily due to increased transaction volume and average net revenue per transaction
in our existing markets and the incremental impact of transactions closed in our new markets. Our transaction volume
increase corresponds to the addition of more ZipAgents in our existing markets and new markets. We had 2,070 ZipAgents
at June 30, 2007 compared to 1,669 at June 30, 2006.
Referral and other revenues
Referral and other revenues consist primarily of certain co-marketing agreements and
transaction referrals.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Referral and other revenues |
|
$ |
1,482 |
|
|
$ |
1,283 |
|
|
$ |
199 |
|
|
|
15.5 |
% |
The absolute dollar increase in referral and other revenues was not significant.
Cost of revenues
Our
cost of comparable revenues for existing and new markets consists principally
of commissions, related payroll taxes, benefits and expense allowances and reimbursements paid to
our ZipAgents, and the amortization of internal-use software and website development costs which
relate primarily to our ZAP technology.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
$ |
27,929 |
|
|
$ |
25,227 |
|
|
$ |
2,702 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
2,458 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
2,355 |
|
|
|
2,279.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
30,387 |
|
|
$ |
25,330 |
|
|
$ |
5,057 |
|
|
|
20.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in cost of revenues for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2006
was due primarily to an increase in ZipAgent commissions and related payroll benefits of $4.3 million and expense
allowances and reimbursements of $0.8 million related to the increase in net transaction revenues. As a percentage
of net revenues for the comparable periods, the cost of revenues was
55.6% in the period compared to 54.9% for the six months
ended June 30, 2006 due primarily to the mix of commissions earned by our ZipAgents.
Product development
Product development expenses, net of capitalized costs of internally developed software, include our information
technology costs, primarily compensation and benefits, depreciation of equipment and software, communications expenses
and other operating costs relating to the maintenance of our website, proprietary technology systems and general
information technology services.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Product development |
|
$ |
3,494 |
|
|
$ |
2,752 |
|
|
$ |
742 |
|
|
|
27.0 |
% |
The increase in product development expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the six months ended
June 30, 2006 was primarily due to ongoing website development and to support new market expansion and consisted
primarily of increases in salaries and benefits of $0.2 million and general technology expenses (including depreciation)
of $0.6 million. As a percentage of net revenues, product development costs were 6.4% in the period compared to 6.0%
in the three months ending June 30, 2006.
24
Sales and marketing
Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for personnel
engaged in sales and sales support functions and customer service as well as promotional,
advertising and client acquisition costs. These expenses have been categorized below between
those incurred in the existing and new markets offices and those expenses which are
incurred by the regional and corporate support functions across all markets.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
|
Increase |
|
|
Percent |
|
| |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
(Decrease) |
|
|
Change |
|
| |
|
(in thousands) |
|
Sales and marketing: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets |
|
$ |
11,757 |
|
|
$ |
11,080 |
|
|
$ |
677 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
% |
New markets |
|
|
3,419 |
|
|
|
795 |
|
|
|
2,624 |
|
|
|
329.8 |
% |
Regional sales support and marketing |
|
|
3,500 |
|
|
|
2,804 |
|
|
|
696 |
|
|
|
24.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
18,676 |
|
|
$ |
14,679 |
|
|
$ |
3,997 |
|
|
|
27.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in sales and marketing expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the six months
ended June 30, 2006 was principally due to an increase in salaries and benefits of $1.9 million, customer
acquisition costs of $0.9 million and occupancy, travel and operating expenses totaling $0.7 million. The remainder
of the increase primarily relates to advertising and marketing related costs. As a percentage of net revenues,
sales and marketing expenses were 34.2% in the period compared to 31.8% in the prior year.
General and administrative
General and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for personnel and
facilities related to our executive, finance, human resources, facilities and legal organizations, and fees
for professional services. Professional services are principally comprised of outside legal, audit and outsourcing services.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
General and administrative |
|
$ |
8,425 |
|
|
$ |
6,329 |
|
|
$ |
2,096 |
|
|
|
33.1 |
% |
The increase in general and administrative expenses for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the six
months ended June 30, 2006 was principally due to increased salaries and benefits $0.7 million, an increase in
consulting, professional fees and outside services of $0.5 million, and an increase in stock-based compensation
expense of $0.8 million. Included in the increase in general and administrative expenses during the period were
the expenses associated with the termination of the Companys former CEO which totaled $0.7 million. As a percentage
of net revenues, general and administrative expenses were 15.4% in
the period compared to
13.7% in the six months ended June 30, 2006.
Interest income
Interest income relates to interest we earn on our money market deposits and short-term
investments.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Interest income |
|
$ |
2,182 |
|
|
$ |
1,696 |
|
|
$ |
486 |
|
|
|
28.6 |
% |
Interest income will fluctuate as our cash equivalents and short-term investment balances
change and applicable interest rates increase or decrease. The increase in interest income for the
six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2006 was due primarily to higher
interest rates and modestly higher average balances for our cash
equivalents and short-term investments.
25
Provision
for (benefit from) income taxes
The provision for income taxes relates to our net book profit based on our best estimate of the tax
provision (benefit) that will be provided for the full year.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
June 30, |
|
Increase |
|
Percent |
| |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
Change |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Provision
benefit from income taxes |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(260 |
) |
|
$ |
(260 |
) |
|
|
(100.0 |
)% |
We continue to record a full valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets at June 30, 2007, due to
uncertainties related to our ability to utilize our deferred tax assets, primarily consisting of net operating
loss carryforwards, before they expire. Based on the full valuation allowance and the taxable loss for the six
months ended June 30, 2007, the Company has not recorded a tax provision or benefit.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Prior to our initial public offering in November 2004, we funded our operations primarily
through the sale of preferred stock and convertible notes, which provided us with aggregate net
proceeds of approximately $65.8 million. In November 2004, we completed our initial public
offering, which raised net proceeds, after underwriting discounts, commissions and expenses, of
approximately $61.4 million.
As of June 30, 2007, we had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of $86.7 million
and had no bank debt, line of credit or equipment facilities.
Operating activities
Our operating activities used cash in the amount of $0.9 million and $0.1 million in the six months ended June 30, 2007
and 2006, respectively. Cash used in the six months ended June 30, 2007 resulted from a net loss of $4.1 million and
from changes in other non cash operating assets and liabilities of $0.2 million, which was partially offset by $1.4 million
of depreciation and amortization and $2.0 million of non-cash stock-based compensation expense. Cash used in the six
months ended June 30, 2006 resulted from a net loss of $1.0 million and from changes in other non cash operating assets
and liabilities of $1.4 million, which was partially offset by $1.1 million of depreciation and amortization and
$1.2 million of non-cash stock-based compensation expense.
Our primary source of operating cash flow is the collection of our commission income from
escrow companies or similar intermediaries in the real estate transaction closing process. Due to
the structure of our commission arrangements, our accounts receivable are converted to cash on a
short-term basis and our accounts receivable balances at period end have historically been
significantly less than one months net revenues. Our operating cash flows will be impacted in the
future by the timing of payments to our vendors for accounts payable, which are generally paid
within the invoice terms and conditions. Our cash outflows are also impacted by the timing of the
payment of our accrued liabilities relating to commissions and related compensation costs and
client acquisition costs.
A number of non-cash items have been charged to expense and decreased our net income or
increased our net loss. These items include depreciation and amortization of property and equipment
and non-cash employee stock-based compensation expense and other stock-based compensation charges.
To the extent these non-cash items increase or decrease in amount and increase or decrease our
future operating results, there will be no corresponding impact on our cash flows.
26
Investing activities
Our investing activities used cash in the amount of $1.5 million and generated cash $6.6
million in the six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Sources of cash for the six
months ended June 30, 2007 represent net proceeds from the sales
and purchases of short-term investments of $0.5 million offset by the purchases of property and
equipment, furniture, and leasehold improvements totaling $1.9 million in connection with the
purchase of additional server capacity, capitalization of internal use software and the build out
of new district office space. Cash generated for the six months ended June 30, 2006 was primarily
related to net sales of short-term investments partially offset by purchases of property and equipment.
We primarily maintain a minimum amount of cash and cash equivalents for operational purposes
and invest the remaining amount of our cash in investment grade, highly liquid interest-bearing
securities which allows for flexibility in the event our cash needs change.
Currently, we expect our remaining 2007 capital expenditures to be approximately $5.0 million.
Capital expenditures for the remainder of 2007 are expected to include investing in a second data center,
increased server capacity, the purchase of computer hardware and software to increase our service capacity,
normal replacements of computer related office equipment and the capital cost related to opening offices in
new markets. In the future, our ability to make significant capital investments may depend on our ability to
generate cash flow from operations and to obtain adequate financing, if necessary and available.
Financing activities
Our financing activities provided cash in the amount of $0.5 million and $0.4 million in the
six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Sources of cash from financing activities
primarily represented proceeds from common stock option and warrant exercises.
As
of June 30, 2007, we had warrants outstanding for the purchase
of an aggregate of 2,496,199 shares of our common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $3.93 per share. All of these
warrants are currently exercisable at the option of the holders. If all or a portion of these
warrants were exercised for cash, we could receive significant proceeds at that time.
Future needs
We believe that cash flows from operations and our current cash, cash equivalents and
short-term investments will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months.
Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including our rate of growth into new
geographic markets, our level of investment in technology and advertising initiatives. We are
currently exploring several options for offering services relating to the purchase, sale and
ownership of a home, including services related to title insurance, escrow, mortgage, and home
warranty insurance and have begun offering property and casualty insurance (including auto
insurance) services through a subsidiary. We refer to these services as core services. We expect
that some of our core services will be offered through affiliates (including wholly owned
subsidiaries), while others will be offered through joint ventures or marketing arrangements with
independent third parties, such as title companies, banks and insurance companies. We may enter
into these types of arrangements in the future, which could also require us to seek additional
equity or debt financing. We currently have no bank debt or line of credit facilities. In the event
that additional financing is required, we may not be able to raise it on terms acceptable to us or
at all. If we are unable to raise additional capital when desired, our business, operations and
results will likely suffer.
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND COMMITMENTS
We lease office space under non-cancelable operating leases with various expiration dates
through May 2013. The following table provides summary information concerning our future
contractual obligations and commitments at June 30, 2007.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Payments due by period |
| |
|
Less than |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More than |
|
|
| |
|
1 year |
|
1 to 3 years |
|
3 to 5 years |
|
5 years |
|
Total |
| |
|
(in thousands) |
Minimum lease payments |
|
$ |
2,151 |
|
|
$ |
3,051 |
|
|
$ |
2,376 |
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
7,654 |
|
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
We do not have any off balance-sheet arrangements, investments in special purpose entities or
undisclosed borrowings or debt. Additionally, we are not a party to any derivative contracts or
synthetic leases.
27
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk:
Interest rate sensitivity
We have minimal interest rate exposure on our investments. Our investment policy requires us
to invest funds in excess of current operating requirements. The principal objectives of our
investment activities are to preserve principal, provide liquidity and maximize income consistent
with minimizing risk of material loss.
As of June 30, 2007 and 2006, our cash and cash equivalents consisted primarily of money
market funds and our short-term investments consisted primarily of investment grade, highly liquid
interest-bearing securities. The recorded carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents approximate
fair value due to their short maturities and short-term investments are carried at fair value. The
amount of credit exposure to any one issue, issuer and type of instrument is limited. Our interest
income is sensitive to changes in the general level of interest rates in the United States,
particularly since the majority of our investments are fixed income investments. If market interest
rates were to increase or decrease immediately and uniformly by 10% from levels at June 30, 2007
and 2006, the increase or decline in fair market value of the portfolio would be approximately $0.3
million and $0.3 million, respectively.
Exchange rate sensitivity
We consider our exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations to be minimal, as we
do not have any sales denominated in foreign currencies. We have not engaged in any hedging or
other derivative transactions to date.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures:
(a) Disclosure controls and procedures. Our management, with the participation of our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure
controls and procedures (as such items are defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act)) as of the end of the period covered
by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of
the period covered by this Quarterly Report are effective to ensure that information we are
required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure, and that such information
is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in Securities and
Exchange Commission rules and forms.
(b) Changes in internal control over financial reporting. There were no changes in our
internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended June 30, 2007 that have
materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over
financial reporting.
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Because of the following factors, as well as other variables affecting our operating results
and financial condition, past financial performance may not be a reliable indicator of future
performance, and historical trends should not be used to anticipate results or trends in future
periods.
Item 1. Legal Proceedings:
On May 4, 2007, we were named in a class action lawsuit filed in United States District Court
for the Central District of California, Lubocki, et al v. ZipRealty, case number CV 07 2959, by
four former employee agents of the Company. The complaint alleges, among other things, that our
policies for expense allowances, expense reimbursements and commission payments to agents for
transactions that do not close during the period of employment violate federal and California state
laws. The complaint seeks monetary damages and declaratory and equitable relief but does not
specify the amount of damages sought. We have not yet been served with the
28
complaint and we are in the preliminary stages of investigating the allegations. However, at
this time, we believe that we have meritorious defenses to the complaint.
We are not currently subject to any other material legal proceedings. From time to time we
have been, and we currently are, a party to litigation and subject to claims incident to the
ordinary course of our business. The amounts in dispute in these matters are not material to us,
and we believe that the resolution of these proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on
our business, results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.
Item 1A. Risk Factors:
Because of the following factors, as well as other variables affecting our operating results
and financial condition, past financial performance may not be a reliable indicator of future
performance, and historical trends should not be used to anticipate results or trends in future
periods.
RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY
We
have experienced losses in recent quarters and may incur losses in the future, and our limited
operating history makes our future financial performance difficult to assess.
We were formed in January 1999 and therefore have a limited operating history upon which to
evaluate our operations and future prospects. We have had a history of losses from inception
through the first half of 2003 and at June 30, 2007 had an accumulated deficit of $56.4 million.
While we were profitable in the second half of 2003, and for a total
of seven
quarter during 2004, 2005 and 2006, we experienced net losses in the
three most recent quarters (including and up to the second quarter of
2007). Our outlook is cautious given market and geopolitical uncertainties, and we expect to
experience a loss for calendar year 2007 as we continue to invest in our business during this
period of market softness.
Our business model has evolved, and we have only recently achieved significant revenues. We
may incur additional expenses with the expectation that our revenues will grow in the future, which
may not occur. As a result, we could experience budgeting and cash
flow management problems, unexpected fluctuations in our results of operations and other
difficulties, any of which could harm our ability to achieve or maintain profitability, increase
the volatility of the market price of our common stock or harm our ability to raise additional
capital. Additionally, as a public company we must work towards continued compliance with the
requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Nasdaq and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
and we may incur costs in connection with that effort that are significantly higher than
anticipated, which could negatively impact our profitability.
We expect that we will continue to increase our expenses, including marketing and customer
acquisition expenses and expenses incurred as a result of increasing the number of agents we
employ. As we grow our business in existing markets and expand to new markets, we cannot guarantee
our business strategies will be successful or that our revenues will ever increase sufficiently to
achieve and maintain profitability on a quarterly or annual basis.
Our business model requires access to real estate listing services provided by third parties that
we do not control, and the demand for our services may be reduced if our ability to display
listings on our website is restricted.
A key component of our business model is that through our website we offer clients access to,
and the ability to search, real estate listings posted on the MLSs in the markets we serve. Most
large metropolitan areas in the United States have at least one MLS, though there is no national
MLS. The homes in each MLS are listed voluntarily by its members, who are licensed real estate
brokers. The information distributed in an MLS allows brokers to cooperate in the identification of
buyers for listed properties.
If our access to one or more MLS databases, or our ability to offer our clients the ability to
access and search listings on one or more MLSs, were restricted or terminated, our service could be
adversely affected and our business may be harmed. Because participation in an MLS is voluntary, a
broker or group of brokers may decline to post their listings to the existing MLS and instead
create a new proprietary real estate listing service. If a broker or group of brokers created a
separate real estate listing database, we may be unable to obtain access to that private listing
service on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. As a result, the percentage of available real
estate listings that our clients would be able to search using our website would be reduced,
perhaps significantly, thereby making our services less attractive to potential clients.
29
Additionally, we operate a virtual office website, or VOW, which is a password protected
website that allows us to show comprehensive MLS data directly to consumers without their having to
visit an agent. In late 2002, the National Association of REALTORS®, or NAR, the
dominant trade organization in the residential real estate industry, adopted a mandatory policy for
NAR-affiliated MLSs regarding the use and display of MLS listings data on VOWs. Under the NAR
policy, individual MLSs affiliated with NAR, which includes the vast majority of MLSs in the United
States, were required to implement their own individual VOW policies consistent with the NAR, but
NAR extended the deadline for the implementation of its rules at least three times during an
investigation by the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, or DOJ, into NARs
policy that dictates how brokers can display other brokers property listings on their websites. In
September 2005, NAR replaced its VOW policy with an Internet Listings Display, or ILD, policy
containing some of the same or similar features of its former VOW policy, and the DOJ responded by
immediately filing a lawsuit in federal court against NAR challenging the ILD policy. NAR has
postponed the deadline for the implementation of its ILD rules by its member MLSs pending
resolution of that lawsuit. We presently do not know whether or when the NAR rules will be
implemented in their current form or in a revised form, if at all. Once the individual MLSs
implement the ILD policy, the NAR policy currently provides that member brokerages will have up to
90 days to comply with the policy.
The NAR policy is designed to provide structure to the individual MLS policies concerning the
display of listing information through the Internet, subject to a number of areas in which the
individual MLSs may tailor the policy to meet their local needs. One NAR policy provision with
which the individual MLSs must adhere, once required to be implemented, is known as an opt-out.
This provision creates a mechanism for individual brokers to prevent their listings data from being
displayed by competitors on their websites but not by brick-and-mortar competitors at their offices
by other means, which the DOJ has alleged is a mechanism designed to chill competition by
Internet-based Realtors®.
A few of the MLSs of which we are a member, as well as at least one of the state Association
of REALTORS® of which we are a member, had adopted VOW policies with opt-out
provisions, but, to our knowledge, to date no members or participants of any of those MLSs have
exercised such an opt-out right. We do not know of any MLSs which have adopted the new ILD policy
with its opt- out provisions. Should any such opt-outs right be exercised, it could restrict our
ability to display comprehensive MLS home listings data to our consumers, which is a key part of
our business model. Should our ability to display MLS listings information on our website be
significantly restricted, it may reduce demand for our services and lead to a decrease in the
number of residential real estate transactions completed by our ZipAgents, as well as increase our
costs of ensuring compliance with such restrictions.
Our business could be harmed by transitions in the real estate markets and economic events that
are out of our control and may be difficult to predict.
The success of our business depends in part on the health of the residential real estate
market, which traditionally has been subject to cyclical economic swings as well as other changes
in local regional or national economic conditions. The purchase of residential real estate is a
significant transaction for most consumers, and one which can be delayed or terminated based on the
availability of discretionary income. Economic slowdown or recession, rising interest rates,
adverse tax policies or changes in other regulations, lower availability of credit, increased
unemployment, lower consumer confidence, lower wage and salary levels, war or terrorist attacks,
natural disaster, oil price spikes or the public perception that any of these events may occur,
could adversely affect the demand for residential real estate and would harm our business. Also, if
interest rates increase significantly, homeowners ability to purchase a new home or a higher
priced home may be reduced as higher monthly payments would make housing less affordable. In
addition, these conditions could lead to a decline in transaction volume and sales prices, either
of which would harm our operating results.
Since early September of 2005 we have experienced significant increases in the available
inventories of homes for sale in many of our markets, as well as increases in the amount of time
listings are taking to sell. For example, average monthly inventories in our existing markets
increased approximately 80%, in 2006 compared to 2005 and months of inventory increased
approximately 84%, in December 2006 compared to December 2005. Pricing increases have also slowed,
and some markets have shown declines in median selling prices over this period. According to NAR,
national sales of existing homes fell 8.4% to 6.48 million in
2006 from 7.08 million in 2005. According to NAR, nationally
sales of existing homes fell 11.4% year-over-year in June 2007
to a seasonally adjusted rate of 5.75 million. In
the State of California, the California Association of REALTORS reported that sales of existing
homes declined 23% in 2006 compared to 2005 and declined 24.7% year-over-year
during the month of June 2007. In our opinion, these data points suggest the housing
market is in a period of transition, with more power shifting to buyers from sellers, which may
impair our ability to grow the Company and our agent productivity.
The recent tightening in the availability of credit, particularly with respect to lenders in
the mortgage market, may negatively impact the housing market.
Consumer access to mortgage financing has been affordable and widely available by historic
standards in recent years. The affordability and availability of mortgage financing is influenced
by a number of factors, including interest rates, lender underwriting criteria, loan product
availability, and the performance of mortgage backed securities in the secondary market. Since the
fall of 2005, the residential real estate market has been softening as interest rates have been
increasing. In addition, lender underwriting criteria began to change in 2006 as a result of
tighter lending standards. Underwriting criteria changed further in 2007 as a result of tightening
credit conditions caused by weakness in the housing market and rising foreclosures. Currently, a
disruption in the availability of funds for mortgages may exist as investors, who buy loans and
securities backed by mortgages, are exiting the market for almost any loan that isnt guaranteed by
Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. An entire group of loan products, including subprime and some Alt A
loans, may have become less available from the market and pressures are building on prime,
non-conforming loans (principally loans of more than $417,000, the limit observed by Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac). If these borrowers face higher interest rates, many may postpone or cancel home
buying plans. When interest rates rise and when underwriting criteria becomes more restrictive,
housing may become less affordable, since at a given income level people cannot qualify to borrow
as much principal, or given a fixed principal amount they will be faced with higher monthly
payments. This result may mean that fewer people will be able to afford homes at prevailing prices,
leading to fewer transactions or reduction in home prices, either of which may reduce revenues.
Should we not be able to offset the potential negative market influences on price and volume by
increasing our transaction volume through market share growth, our financial results will be
negatively impacted.
30
Our business model is new and unproven, and we cannot guarantee our future success.
Our Internet-enabled residential real estate brokerage service is a relatively new and
unproven business model. Our business model differs significantly from that of a traditional real
estate brokerage firm in several ways, including our heavy reliance on the Internet and technology
and our employee agent model. The success of our business model depends on its scalability and on
our ability to achieve higher transaction volumes at an overall lower cost per transaction in order
to offset the costs associated with our technology, employee benefits, marketing and advertising
expenses and discounts and rebates. If we are unable to efficiently acquire clients and maintain
agent productivity in excess of industry averages, our ZipAgents may close fewer transactions and
our net revenues could suffer as a result. Also, given that our agent employee model is uncommon in
the real estate industry, our compensation structure could be subject to legal challenge, such as
the litigation commenced against ZipRealty in 2005, which has been resolved. In addition, our
agents generally earn a lower per transaction commission than a traditional independent contractor
agent. If we are unsuccessful in providing our agents with an attractive value proposition, whether
through more opportunities to close transactions or otherwise, when compared to the traditional
model, our ability to hire and retain qualified real estate agents would be harmed, which would in
turn significantly harm our business.
If we fail to recruit, hire and retain qualified agents, we may be unable to service our clients
and our growth could be impaired.
Our business requires us to hire employees who are licensed real estate agents, and our
strategy is based on consistently and rapidly growing our team of ZipAgents. Competition for
qualified agents is intense, particularly in the markets in which we compete, and retention is an
industry-wide issue. While there are many licensed real estate agents in our markets and throughout
the country, historically we have had difficulties in recruiting and retaining properly qualified
licensed agents due particularly to agent discomfort
with using technology and being actively managed by an employer. In addition, our lower per
transaction agent commission model may be unattractive to certain higher performing agents. If we
are unable to recruit, train and retain a sufficient number of qualified licensed real estate
agents, we may be unable to service our clients properly and grow our business.
Historically we have experienced a high degree of agent turnover, most of which occurs in the
first few months after commencing employment. This turnover has required us to expend a substantial
amount of time and money to replace agents who have left as we have been growing our business. If
this situation worsens, our rate of expansion into new markets could be slowed and we will continue
to employ a significantly higher number of new agents with less experience operating in our
business model, which could cause us to be less effective at expanding our market share in our
existing markets and entering new markets.
We may incur additional expenses or liabilities if our current or former compensation or expense
allowance or reimbursement policies are found to violate federal or state wage and hour laws.
Because our ZipAgents are employees and not independent contractors, we are subject to federal
and state regulation of our employment practices, including compensation and expense reimbursement
for our ZipAgents. We rely on federal and state exemptions from minimum wage and fair labor
standards laws for our ZipAgents, who are compensated primarily through commissions and who are
reimbursed for certain business expenses. Such exemptions may not continue to be available, or we
may not qualify for such exemptions, which could subject us to penalties and damages for
non-compliance. For example, Nevada recently approved legislation that preempts the federal
outside sales exemption from paying minimum wages in that state. That legislation is scheduled to
take effect on November 1, 2007. Depending on the regulations that are ultimately adopted pursuant
to that legislation, we may be required to pay our ZipAgents in Nevada minimum wages and may
thereafter need to change our compensation model accordingly. Also, some states, such as
California, have laws requiring the reimbursement of employee expenses, which caused us to change
our compensation practices in 2005. Our current and former compensation and expense allowance and
reimbursement policies are challenged from time to time through litigation and administrative
complaints, including the class action lawsuit described in this Form 10-Q under Part II, Item 1,
Legal Proceedings. If exemptions from paying minimum wages are not available in states where we
desire to expand our operations or if they cease to be available in the states where we currently
operate, or if we are required by federal or state laws to pay additional compensation or to
reimburse additional expenses, we may incur significant expenses, be
31
subject to lawsuits and administrative complaints, and be required to modify our agent
compensation structure in some or all states, which could cause our compensation practices to be
less attractive to agents or more expensive to the Company.
Our failure to effectively manage the growth of our ZipAgents and related technology could
adversely affect our ability to service our clients.
As our operations have expanded, we have experienced rapid growth in our headcount from 1,878
total employees, including 1,699 ZipAgents, at June 30, 2006 to 2,334 total employees, including
2,070 ZipAgents, at June 30, 2007. We expect to continue to increase headcount in the future,
particularly the number of ZipAgents. Our rapid growth has demanded, and will continue to demand,
substantial resources and attention from our management. We will need to continue to hire
additional qualified agents and improve and maintain our related technology to properly manage our
growth. If we do not effectively manage our growth, our client service and responsiveness could
suffer and our costs could increase, which could negatively affect our brand and operating results.
Our failure to effectively manage the growth of our control systems could adversely affect our
ability to maintain legal compliance.
As we grow, our success will depend on our ability to continue to implement and improve our
operational, financial and management information and control systems on a timely basis, together
with maintaining effective cost controls. This ability is particularly critical as we implement new
systems and controls to help us better comply with the stringent requirements of being a public
company, including the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which require management to
evaluate and assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and our
disclosure controls and procedures. Effective internal control over financial reporting is required
by law and is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud.
Effective disclosure controls and procedures are required by law and are necessary for us to file
complete, accurate and timely reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Our ability to
manage the growth of our control systems and maintain legal compliance could be thwarted by many
factors, including turnover in management and the lack of adequate staffing with the requisite
expertise and training. Any inability to provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud or to
file complete, accurate and timely reports under the Securities Exchange Act could harm our
business, harm our reputation or result in a decline in our stock price. We are continuing to
evaluate and, where appropriate, enhance our systems, procedures and internal controls. If our
systems, procedures or controls are not adequate to support our operations and reliable, accurate
and timely financial and other reporting, we may not be able to successfully satisfy regulatory and
investor scrutiny, offer our services and implement our business plan.
If we fail to comply with real estate brokerage laws and regulations, we may incur significant
financial penalties or lose our license to operate.
Due to the geographic scope of our operations and the nature of the real estate services we
perform, we are subject to numerous federal, state and local laws and regulations, and regulatory
authorities have relatively broad discretion to grant, renew and revoke licenses and approvals and
implement regulations. For example, we are required to maintain real estate brokerage licenses in
each state in which we operate and to designate individual licensed brokers of record. In some
states, these licenses are personal to the broker. If we fail to maintain our licenses, lose the
services of our designated broker of record or conduct brokerage activities without a license, we
may be required to pay fines or return commissions received, our licenses may be suspended or
revoked or not renewed or we may be subject to other civil and/or criminal penalties. As we expand
into new markets, we will need to obtain and maintain the required brokerage licenses, which may be
difficult, and comply with the applicable laws and regulations of these markets, which may be
different from those to which we are accustomed, any of which will increase our compliance costs.
In addition, because the size and scope of real estate sales transactions have increased
significantly during the past several years, both the difficulty and cost of compliance with the
numerous state licensing regimes and possible losses resulting from non-compliance have increased.
Our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, the possible loss of real estate
brokerage licenses or litigation by government agencies or affected clients may have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results, and may limit our
ability to expand into new markets.
We may have liabilities in connection with real estate brokerage activities.
As a licensed real estate brokerage, we and our licensed employees are subject to statutory
due diligence, disclosure and standard-of-care obligations. In the ordinary course of business we
and our employees are subject to litigation from parties involved in transactions for alleged
violations of these obligations. We self-insure some of this risk and, as we expand our business to
include larger deals, we may not be able or otherwise determine not to obtain third party insurance
on these larger deals with attractive terms. In addition, we may be required to indemnify our
employees who become subject to litigation or other claims arising out of our
32
business activities, including for claims related to the negligence of those employees. An
adverse outcome in any such litigation could negatively impact our reputation and harm our
business.
We may have liabilities if any of our employees violates laws concerning settlement procedures.
Our business must comply with the provisions of the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures
Act, or RESPA, as well as comparable state statutes where we do business. These statutes, among
other things, restrict payments which real estate brokers, agents and other settlement service
providers may receive for referral of business to other settlement service providers in connection
with the closing of real estate transactions. RESPA and similar state laws also require timely
disclosure of certain relationships or financial interest that a broker has with providers of real
estate settlement services. If any of our employees fails to comply with any of these statutes, a
resulting enforcement proceeding could subject us to substantial financial penalties, be expensive
to defend and materially harm our ability to continue operations.
If any of our core services fails to comply with applicable federal and state law and regulations,
we may incur significant financial penalties or lose licenses require to provide these services.
We are currently exploring and beginning to implement several options for offering services
relating to the purchase, sale and ownership of a home, including services related to title
insurance, escrow, mortgage, home warranty insurance and property and casualty insurance (including
auto insurance), which we refer to as core services. We expect that some of our core services will
be offered through affiliates (including wholly owned subsidiaries), while others will be offered
through joint ventures or marketing arrangements with independent third parties, such as title
companies, banks and insurance companies. For example, as discussed above, we have entered into a
co-marketing arrangement with E-LOAN, Inc. to provide the mortgage center on our website in
exchange for a flat monthly fee established on a periodic basis. Also, we have formed a joint
venture with a title insurance company to explore the offering to our clients title insurance
service in one or more of our markets, and we have formed a subsidiary to offer insurance services
in certain markets.
These core services may be subject to regulation at both the federal and state level,
including, in certain instances, regulation under the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement
Procedures Act, or RESPA, state and local licensing laws and regulations (whether applicable to us
or third parties with whom we have arrangements) and federal and state advertising laws, fair
lending and insurance-related laws and regulations. Some of these laws and regulations, such as
RESPA, do not offer definitive requirements for compliance, making it difficult to determine
conclusively whether these core services will comply. The laws of the states in which we conduct
business often vary considerably regarding the legality of and licensing requirements for
conducting certain business practices, including the payment of compensation, in connection with
offering mortgage, title insurance and other insurance products, and these states often do not
provide definitive guidance concerning when these practices are illegal or require licensure, which
can make it difficult to determine whether our practices are in legal compliance. In addition, to
the extent that these core services are offered through affiliates or arrangements with independent
third parties, we may have little ability to ensure that these parties comply with applicable laws
and regulations. Also, as these core services are expanded into new markets, they will need to
obtain and maintain the required licenses and comply with the applicable laws and regulations of
these markets, which may be different from the laws and regulations to which they were previously
subject, may be difficult to obtain and will increase compliance costs.
If our practices in offering these core services fail to comply with applicable laws and
regulations (including if they fail to maintain any necessary licenses, whether through the loss of
individuals or entities licensed to perform these services or otherwise, or if they are performed
or compensated without required licenses), we and the other parties providing the core services may
be required to pay fines or return commissions received and may be subject to other civil or
criminal penalties under actions by government agencies or clients, and the licenses needed to
provide these core services may be suspended, revoked or denied. Any of these events could also
cause disruption in the relationships between us and the other parties involved in offering these
core services. Consequently, any failure to comply with application laws and regulations may have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results, and may limit
our ability to expand our core services into new markets.
We may have liabilities in connection with our performance of core services.
For some of the core services we anticipate offering, such as insurance and mortgage, we
expect the performance of these core services to be subject to statutory due diligence, disclosure
and standard-of-care obligations. In the ordinary course of business, we and the other parties
involved in providing these core services may be subject to litigation from clients and other
parties involved in transactions for alleged violations of these obligations. We anticipate that
the vehicles providing these core services will self-insure some of this risk. In addition, these
vehicles may be required to indemnify their employees who become subject to litigation or other
claims arising out of their business activities, including for claims related to the negligence of
these employees. An adverse outcome in any such litigation could negatively impact our reputation
and have a material adverse impact on our business, operating results and financial condition.
33
If our arrangements for providing core services become impaired, we may lose sources of revenue
that may be difficult to replace and we may be less likely to engage in related transactions with
our clients.
As mentioned above, we are currently exploring and beginning to implement several options for
offering core services, and we expect that some of these services will be offered through
affiliates (including wholly owned subsidiaries), while others will be offered through joint
ventures or marketing arrangements with independent third parties, such as title companies, banks
and insurance companies. If these relationships are terminated or otherwise become impaired, we
could lose sources of revenues that we may not be able to readily replace, and our clients could
have a more difficult time obtaining services they require in connection with their purchase or
sale of a home, reducing our likelihood of engaging in residential real estate or other
transactions with these clients. For example, we receive revenues from our marketing relationship
with E-LOAN, Inc., which provides the ZipRealty Mortgage Center on our website and pays us a flat
monthly fee that is established on a periodic basis (representing less than 3% of our revenues
during fiscal year 2006). E-LOAN was acquired by Popular, Inc. in late 2005. If our marketing
relationship with E-LOAN became impaired, not only would we lose the marketing revenues from that
relationship, but also our clients could have a more difficult time obtaining the financing needed
to purchase a home through us, which could negatively impact our transaction revenues. In addition,
upon the termination of an arrangement with an independent third party to provide core services, we
or our affiliates may be required to pay certain costs or fees or be precluded from performing such
services for a period of time. Any of these events could negatively impact our business and
financial condition.
If consumers do not continue to use the Internet as a tool in their residential real estate buying
or selling process, we may be unable to attract new clients and our growth and financial results
may suffer.
We rely substantially on our website and web-based marketing for our client lead generation.
As the residential real estate business has traditionally been characterized by personal,
face-to-face relationships between buyers and sellers and their agents, our success will depend to
a certain extent on the willingness of consumers to increase their use of online services in the
real estate sales and purchasing process. In addition, our success will depend on consumers
visiting our website early in their selling or buying process so that we can interface with
potential clients before they have engaged a real estate agent to represent them in their
transactions. If we are unable to convince visitors to our website to transact business with us,
our ZipAgents will have fewer opportunities to represent clients in residential real estate
transactions and our net revenues could suffer.
Our success depends in part on our ability to successfully expand into additional real estate
markets.
We currently operate in 30 markets, including 17 of the 25 most populous U.S. metropolitan
statistical areas. A part of our business strategy is to grow our business by entering into
additional real estate markets and, to this end, we commenced
operations in Las Vegas in April 2005, Houston in
June 2005, Miami in October 2005, Tampa in February 2006,
Orlando in April 2006, Minneapolis/St. Paul in May 2006, Austin in July 2006, Palm Beach in
September 2006, the Greater Philadelphia area in December 2006, Naples in March 2007, Tucson in
March 2007, Denver in April 2007, Jacksonville in May 2007, Salt Lake City in July 2007, Richmond
in July 2007 and Virginia Beach in August 2007. We have announced plans to enter Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham, Long Island and Westchester County in 2007 and may
open additional market(s). Key elements of this expansion include our ability to
identify strategically attractive real estate markets and to successfully establish our brand in
those markets. We consider many factors when selecting a new market to enter, including:
| |
|
|
the economic conditions and demographics of a market; |
| |
| |
|
|
the general prices of real estate in a market; |
| |
| |
|
|
Internet use in a market; |
| |
| |
|
|
competition within a market from local and national brokerage firms; |
| |
| |
|
|
rules and regulations governing a market; |
| |
| |
|
|
the ability and capacity of our organization to manage expansion into additional
geographic areas, additional headcount and increased organizational complexity; |
| |
| |
|
|
the existence of local MLSs; and |
34
| |
|
|
state laws governing cash rebates and other regulatory restrictions. |
Before opening Las Vegas we had not entered a new geographic market since July 2000 and have
limited experience expanding into and operating in multiple markets, managing multiple sales
regions or addressing the factors described above. In addition, this expansion could involve
significant initial start-up costs. We expect that significant revenues from new markets may be
achieved, if ever, only after we have been operating in that market for some time and begun to
build market awareness of our services. As a result, geographic expansion is likely to
significantly increase our expenses and cause fluctuations in our operating results. In addition,
if we are unable to successfully penetrate these new markets, we may continue to incur costs
without achieving the expected revenues, which would harm our financial condition and results of
operations.
Unless we develop, maintain and protect a strong brand identity, our business may not grow and our
financial results may suffer.
We believe a strong brand is a competitive advantage in the residential real estate industry
because of the fragmentation of the market and the large number of agents and brokers available to
the consumer. Because our brand is relatively new, we currently do not have strong brand identity.
We believe that establishing and maintaining brand identity and brand loyalty is critical to
attracting new clients. In order to attract and retain both clients and employees, and respond to
competitive pressures, we expect to increase our marketing and customer acquisition expenditures to
develop, maintain and enhance our brand in the future.
We plan to continue conducting and refining our online advertising and possibly to test and
conduct print, radio, direct mail and outdoor campaigns. We plan to increase our online advertising
expenditures in the near future. While we intend to enhance our marketing and advertising
activities in order to attract and retain both clients and employees, these activities may not have
a material positive impact on our brand identity. In addition, developing our brand will depend on
our ability to provide a high-quality consumer experience and high quality service, which we may
not do successfully. If we are unable to develop, maintain and enhance our brand, our ability to
attract new clients and employees or successfully expand our operations will be harmed.
We have numerous competitors, many of which have valuable industry relationships, innovative
business models and access to greater resources than we do.
The residential real estate market is highly fragmented, and we have numerous competitors,
many of which have greater name recognition, longer operating histories, larger client bases, and
significantly greater financial, technical and marketing resources than we do. Some of those
competitors are large national brokerage firms or franchisors, such as Prudential Financial, Inc.,
RE/MAX International Inc. and Realogy Corporation, which owns the Century 21, Coldwell Banker and
ERA franchise brands, a large corporate relocation business and NRT Incorporated, the largest
brokerage in the United States. NRT owns and operates brokerages
that are typically affiliated with one of the franchise brands owned by Realogy. We are also
subject to competition from local or regional firms, as well as individual real estate agents. Our
technology-focused business model is a relatively new approach to the residential real estate
market and many consumers may be hesitant to choose us over more established brokerage firms
employing traditional techniques.
Some of our competitors are able to undertake more extensive marketing campaigns, make more
attractive offers to potential agents and clients and respond more quickly to new or emerging
technologies. Over the past several years there has been a slow but steady decline in average
commissions charged in the real estate brokerage industry, with the average commission percentage
decreasing from 5.44% in 2000 to 5.18% in 2006 according to REAL Trends. Some of our competitors
with greater resources may be able to better withstand the short- or long-term financial effects of
this trend. In addition, the barriers to entry to providing an Internet-enabled real estate service
are low, making it possible for current or new competitors to adopt certain aspects of our business
model, including offering comprehensive MLS data to clients via the Internet, thereby reducing our
competitive advantage. We may not be able to compete successfully for clients and agents, and
increased competition could result in price reductions, reduced margins or loss of market share,
any of which would harm our business, operating results and financial condition.
We also compete or may in the future compete with various online services, such as
InterActiveCorp and its LendingTree unit, HouseValues, Inc., HomeGain, Inc., Move, Inc. and its
Realtor.com affiliate, Zillow and Yahoo! Inc. that also look to attract and monetize home buyers
and sellers using the Internet. Move is affiliated with NAR, the National Association of Home
Builders, or NAHB, and a number of major MLSs, which may provide Move with preferred access to
listing information and other competitive advantages. In addition, the competitive landscape in the
residential real estate industry is in the midst of significant changes as new
35
business models enter the marketplace. In order to continue growing, our business model must
remain attractive to consumers so that we can compete successfully with these newer models as they
expand into our marketplaces.
In addition, the competitive landscape in the residential real estate industry is in the midst
of significant changes as new business models enter the marketplace. In order to continue growing,
our business model must remain attractive to consumers so that we can compete successfully with
these newer models as they expand into our marketplaces. In addition, to remain economically
viable, we will need to be able to compete effectively with these new entrants for the acquisition
of agents and leads.
Changes in federal and state real estate laws and regulations, and rules of industry organizations
such as the National Association of REALTORS®, could adversely affect our business.
The real estate industry is heavily regulated in the United States, including regulation under
the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, state and local licensing laws and
regulations and federal and state advertising laws. In addition to existing laws and regulations,
states and industry participants and regulatory organizations could enact legislation, regulatory
or other policies in the future, which could restrict our activities or significantly increase our
compliance costs. Moreover, the provision of real estate services over the Internet is a new and
evolving business, and legislators, regulators and industry participants may advocate additional
legislative or regulatory initiatives governing the conduct of our business. If existing laws or
regulations are amended or new laws or regulations are adopted, we may need to comply with
additional legal requirements and incur significant compliance costs, or we could be precluded from
certain activities. Because we operate through our website, state and local governments other than
where the subject property is located may attempt to regulate our activities, which could
significantly increase our compliance costs and limit certain of our activities. In addition,
industry organizations, such as NAR and other state and local organizations, can impose standards
or other rules affecting the manner in which we conduct our business. As mentioned above, NAR has
adopted rules that, if implemented, could result in a reduction in the number of home listings that
could be viewed on our website. NAR has extended the deadline for the implementation of its rules
pending the resolution of a lawsuit filed in federal court by the Antitrust Division of the U.S.
Department of Justice challenging, among other things, NARs proposed ILD policy that dictates how
brokers can display other brokers property listings on their websites. We presently do not know
whether or when the NAR rules will be implemented in their current form or in a revised form, if at
all. The implementation of the rules will not limit our access to listing information, but could
limit the display of listing information to our clients through our website in the manner we
currently utilize, as well as increase our costs of ensuring compliance with such rules. Any
significant lobbying or related activities, either of governmental bodies or industry
organizations, required to respond to current or new initiatives in connection with our business
could substantially increase our operating costs and harm our business.
We derive a significant portion of our leads through third parties, and if any of our significant
lead generation relationships are terminated, impaired or become more expensive, our ability to
attract new clients and grow our business may be adversely affected.
We generate leads for our ZipAgents through many sources, including leads from third parties
with which we have only non-exclusive, short-term agreements that are generally terminable on
little or no notice and with no penalties. Our largest third-party lead source, Homegain, Inc.,
which competes with us for online customer acquisition, generated approximately 27% and 29% of our
leads during 2006 and 2005, respectively. Should our lead replacement strategy upon the loss of a
large lead supplier not be successful, or any of our other lead generation relationships become
materially more expensive such that we could not obtain substitute sources on acceptable terms, our
ability to attract new clients and grow our business may be impaired. Our business may also be
impaired to the extent that state laws or NAR or MLS regulations make it more difficult or
expensive for lead generators to provide us with sufficient leads.
Our ability to expand our business may be limited by state laws governing cash rebates to home
buyers.
A significant component of our value proposition to our home buyer clients is a cash rebate
provided to the buyer at closing. Currently, our clients who are home buyers represent a
substantial majority of our business and revenues. Certain states, such as Alaska, Kansas,
Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Oregon and Tennessee, may presently prohibit sharing
any commissions with, or providing rebates to, clients who are not licensed real estate agents. In
addition, other states may limit or restrict our cash rebate program as currently structured,
including Missouri and New York. However, we have received guidance
from the New York State Attorney Generals office indicating
that the applicable law in New York would not be interpreted and/or enforced in such a way
as to restrict rebates to consumers. In connection with entry into the Greater Philadelphia area, we
entered the New Jersey market, where the payment of cash rebates is currently not permitted by law.
Consequently, in New Jersey, in lieu of offering a cash rebate to our buyers, we make a donation to
a local charity through United Way equal to 20% of our commission in cash upon closing. Should we
decide to expand into any of these other states where the payment of cash rebates are restricted or
prohibited, we may have to adjust our pricing structure or refrain from offering rebates to
36
buyers in these states. Moreover, we cannot predict whether alternative approaches will be
cost effective or easily marketable to prospective clients. The failure to enter into these
markets, or others that adopt similar restrictions, or to successfully attract clients in these
markets, could harm our business.
We may be unable to integrate our technology with each MLS on a cost-effective basis, which may
harm our operating results and adversely affect our ability to service clients.
Each MLS is operated independently and is run on its own technology platform. As a result, we
must constantly modify our technology to successfully interact with each independent MLS in order
to maintain access to that MLSs home listings information. In addition, when a new MLS is created,
we must customize our technology to work with that new system. These activities require constant
attention and significant resources. We may be unable to successfully interoperate with the MLSs
without significantly increasing our engineering costs, which would increase our operating expenses
without a related increase in net revenues and cause our operating results to suffer. We may also
be unable to interoperate with the MLSs at all, which may adversely affect the demand for our
services.
We may be subject to liability for the Internet content that we publish.
As a publisher of online content, we face potential liability for negligence, copyright,
patent or trademark infringement, or other claims based on the nature and content of the material
that we publish or distribute. Such claims may include the posting of confidential data, erroneous
listings or listing information and the erroneous removal of listings. These types of claims have
been brought successfully against the providers of online services in the past and could be brought
against us or others in our industry. In addition, we may face liability if a MLS member or
participant utilizes an opt-out provision, as previously discussed, and we fail to comply with that
requirement. These claims, whether or not successful, could harm our reputation, business and
financial condition. Although we carry general liability insurance, our insurance may not cover
claims of these types or may be inadequate to protect us from all liability that we may incur.
We monitor and evaluate the use of our website by our registered users, which could raise privacy
concerns.
Visitors to our website that register with us receive access to home listing and related
information that we do not make available to unregistered users. As part of the registration
process, our registered users consent to our use of information we gather from their use of our
website, such as the geographic areas in which they search for homes, the price range of homes they
view, their activities while on our website and other similar information. They also provide us
with personal information such as telephone numbers and email addresses and our registered users
consent to our internal use of personal information. Our website includes a copy of our privacy
policy, which sets forth our practices with respect to sharing website use and personal information
when necessary to administer products or services we or our subsidiaries may provide, when we have
users permission, when required by law, or as otherwise described in our privacy policy. If we
were to use this information outside the scope of our privacy policy or otherwise fail to observe
any legal obligation keep this information confidential from third parties, including our former
agents, we may be subject to legal claims or government action and our reputation and business
could be harmed. Also, concern among consumers regarding our use of information gathered from
visitors to our website could cause them not to register with us, which would reduce the number of
leads we derive from our website. Because our website is our primary client acquisition tool, any
resistance by consumers to register on our website would harm our business and results of
operations, and could cause us to alter our business practices or incur significant expenses to
educate consumers regarding the use we make of information.
37
We may need to change the manner in which we conduct our business if government regulation of the
Internet increases.
The adoption or modification of laws or regulations relating to the Internet could adversely
affect the manner in which we currently conduct our business. In addition, the growth and
development of the market for online commerce may lead to more stringent consumer protection laws
that may impose additional burdens on us. Laws and regulations directly applicable to
communications or commerce over the Internet are becoming more prevalent. For example, both the
U.S. government and the State of California have enacted Internet laws regarding privacy and
sharing of customer information with third parties. Laws applicable to the Internet remain largely
unsettled, even in areas where there has been some legislative action. It may take years to
determine whether and how existing laws such as those governing intellectual property, privacy,
libel and taxation apply to the Internet.
In addition, because each state in which we do business requires us to be a licensed real
estate broker, and residents of states in which we do not do business could potentially access our
website, changes in Internet regulation could lead to situations in which we are considered to
operate or do business in such states. This could result in potential claims or regulatory
action.
If we are required to comply with new regulations or new interpretations of existing
regulations, we may not be able to differentiate our services from traditional competitors and may
not attract a sufficient number of clients for our business to be successful.
Our operating results are subject to seasonality and vary significantly among quarters during each
calendar year, making meaningful comparisons of successive quarters difficult.
The residential real estate market traditionally has experienced seasonality, with a peak in
the spring and summer seasons and a decrease in activity during the fall and winter seasons.
Revenues in each quarter are significantly affected by activity during the prior quarter, given the
typical 30- to 45-day time lag between contract execution and closing. Historically, this
seasonality has caused our revenues, operating income, net income and cash flow from operating
activities to be lower in the first and fourth quarters and higher in the second and third quarters
of each year. However, there can be no assurance that the seasonality pattern for fiscal year 2007
or any fiscal year will be consistent.
Factors affecting the timing of real estate transactions that can cause our quarterly results
to fluctuate include:
| |
|
|
timing of widely observed holidays and vacation periods and availability of home buyers
and sellers, real estate agents and related service providers during these periods; |
| |
| |
|
|
a desire to relocate prior to the start of the school year; |
| |
| |
|
|
inclement weather which can influence consumers desire or ability to visit properties; |
| |
| |
|
|
timing of employment compensation changes, such as raises and bonuses; |
| |
| |
|
|
the time between entry into a purchase contract for real estate and closing of the transaction; and |
| |
| |
|
|
the levels of housing inventory available for sale. |
We expect our revenues to continue to be subject to these seasonal fluctuations, which,
combined with our recent growth, make it difficult to compare successive quarters.
Our reputation and client and agent service offerings may be harmed by system failures and
computer viruses.
The performance and reliability of our technology infrastructure is critical to our reputation
and ability to attract and retain clients and agents. Our network infrastructure is currently
co-located at a single facility in Sunnyvale, California and we do not currently operate a back-up
facility. As a result, any system failure or service outage at this primary facility would result
in a loss of service for
the duration of the failure or outage. Any system error or failure, or a sudden and significant
increase in traffic, may significantly delay response times or even cause our system to fail
resulting in the unavailability of our Internet platform. For example, in the summer of 2006 we
experienced unscheduled outages in our website and ZAP system due to our rollout of new software
and in 2005 we experienced an unscheduled outage that lasted approximately 12 hours. During this
period our clients and prospective clients were unable to access our website or receive
notifications of new listings. While we have taken measures to prevent unscheduled outages,
38
outages may occur in the future. In addition, our systems and operations are vulnerable to
interruption or malfunction due to certain events beyond our control, including natural disasters,
such as earthquakes, fire and flood, power loss, telecommunication failures, break-ins, sabotage,
computer viruses, intentional acts of vandalism and similar events. Our network infrastructure is
located in the San Francisco Bay area, which is susceptible to earthquakes and has, in the past,
experienced power shortages and outages, any of which could result in system failures and service
outages. We may not be able to expand our network infrastructure, either on our own or through use
of third party hosting systems or service providers, on a timely basis sufficient to meet demand.
Any interruption, delay or system failure could result in client and financial losses, litigation
or other consumer claims and damage to our reputation.
Our business is geographically concentrated, which makes us more susceptible to business
interruption and financial loss due to natural disasters, inclement weather, economic or market
conditions or other regional events outside of our control.
Presently, our business is conducted principally in a few states in the western United States,
especially California, and along the eastern seaboard. For example, we derived approximately 39% of
our net transaction revenues in the quarter ended June 30, 2007 in the State of California. In
addition, our servers and other technology infrastructure are located principally in the State of
California. Our geographic concentration makes us as a whole more vulnerable to the effects of
regional disasters in these areas, such as earthquakes, harsh weather, economic or market
conditions or other events outside of our control, such as shifts in populations away from markets
that we serve. These events could cause us to sustain a business interruption or other financial
loss that would be greater than if our business were more dispersed geographically.
Our intellectual property rights are valuable and our failure to protect those rights could
adversely affect our business.
Our intellectual property rights, including existing and future patents, trademarks, trade
secrets and copyrights, are and will continue to be valuable and important assets of our business.
We believe that our proprietary ZAP technology and ZipNotify, as well as our ability to
interoperate with multiple MLSs and our other technologies and business practices, are competitive
advantages and that any duplication by competitors would harm our business. We have taken measures
to protect our intellectual property, but these measures may not be sufficient or effective. For
example, we seek to avoid disclosure of our intellectual property by requiring employees and
consultants with access to our proprietary information to execute confidentiality agreements. We
also seek to maintain certain intellectual property as trade secrets. Intellectual property laws
and contractual restrictions may not prevent misappropriation of our intellectual property or deter
others from developing similar technologies. In addition, others may develop technologies that are
similar or superior to our technology, including our patented technology. Any significant
impairment of our intellectual property rights could harm our business.
We may in the future be subject to intellectual property rights disputes, which could divert
management attention, be costly to defend and require us to limit our service offerings.
Our business depends on the protection and utilization of our intellectual property. Other
companies may develop or acquire intellectual property rights that could prevent, limit or
interfere with our ability to provide our products and services. One or more of these companies,
which could include our competitors, could make claims alleging infringement of their intellectual
property rights. Any intellectual property claims, with or without merit, could be time-consuming
and expensive to litigate or settle and could significantly divert management resources and
attention.
Our technologies may not be able to withstand any third-party claims or rights against their
use. If we were unable to defend successfully against such claims, we may have to:
| |
|
|
pay damages; |
| |
| |
|
|
stop using the technology found to be in violation of a third partys rights; |
| |
| |
|
|
seek a license for the infringing technology; or |
| |
| |
|
|
develop alternative non-infringing technology. |
39
If we have to obtain a license for the infringing technology, it may not be available on
reasonable terms, if at all. Developing alternative non-infringing technology could require
significant effort and expense. If we cannot license or develop alternative technology for the
infringing aspects of our business on attractive terms, we may be forced to limit our product and
service offerings. Any of these results could reduce our ability to compete effectively, and harm
our business and results of operations.
We have undergone significant management transitions recently and need to successfully integrate
new members of the management team as well as retain key personnel or our business could be
harmed.
The loss of the services of one or more of our key personnel could seriously harm our
business. For example, Gary M. Beasley, our former President and Chief Financial Officer, departed
on January 5, 2007 and Richard F. Sommer, our fomer Chief Executive Officer, departed on June 4,
2007. Mr. Sommer was succeeded by Mr. Joseph Patrick Lashinsky who assumed the position of
President on January 8, 2007 and the additional position of Chief Executive Officer on June 4, 2007
and Mr. David A. Rector assumed the position of Chief Financial Officer on May 3, 2007. Our success
depends on the contributions of Mr. Lashinsky and other senior level sales, operations, marketing,
technology and financial officers. Our business plan was developed in large part by our senior
level officers and its implementation requires their skills and knowledge. With the exception of
Mr. Lashinsky, none of our officers or key employees has an employment agreement, and their
employment is at will. We do not have key person life insurance policies covering any of our
executives.
We intend to evaluate acquisitions or investments in complementary technologies and businesses and
we may not realize the anticipated benefits from, and may have to pay substantial costs related
to, any acquisitions or investments that we undertake.
As part of our business strategy, we plan to evaluate acquisitions of, or investments in,
complementary technologies and businesses. We may be unable to identify suitable acquisition
candidates in the future or be able to make these acquisitions on a commercially reasonable basis,
or at all. If we complete an acquisition or investment, we may not realize the benefits we expect
to derive from the transaction. Any future acquisitions and investments would have several risks,
including:
| |
|
|
our inability to successfully integrate acquired technologies or operations; |
| |
| |
|
|
diversion of managements attention; |
| |
| |
|
|
problems maintaining uniform standards, procedures, controls and policies; |
| |
| |
|
|
potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities or the incurrence of debt or contingent liabilities; |
| |
| |
|
|
expenses related to amortization of intangible assets; |
| |
| |
|
|
risks associated with operating a business or in a market in which we have little or no prior experience; |
| |
| |
|
|
potential write offs of acquired assets; |
| |
| |
|
|
loss of key employees of acquired businesses; and |
| |
| |
|
|
our inability to recover the costs of acquisitions or investments. |
The value of our services could be diminished if anti-spam software filters out an increasing
portion of the emails we send.
Our ZAP system includes a feature that sends out personalized email messages to our registered
users on behalf of our agents. Given the volume of these messages, anti-spam software used by
Internet service providers and personal computer users sometimes treats these messages incorrectly
as unsolicited email, or spam, and filters them out. If this problem becomes more pervasive, the
value of this aspect of our marketing and communication approach could be diminished, which could
harm our business.
40
As we implement changes in our agent compensation policies, we may incent behaviors that cause a
decrease in our profit margin with the goal of increasing our profits.
From time to time, we implement changes to our agent compensation policies to achieve certain
goals, for example, the improvement of agent productivity and retention. Recently, we implemented a
program to pay higher commission splits to a select number our agents as the cumulative number of
deals they close increases. Our goal for this program is to incent all of our agents to achieve
higher levels of productivity and to thereby increase our profits. However, we anticipate that the
implementation of this program may cause a slight decrease in our gross margin. We may, in the
future, opt to implement additional changes in our agent compensation policies that may decrease
our profit margins with the goal of increasing our profits.
OTHER RISKS RELATED TO OUR STOCK PRICE
Our stock price may be volatile.
The trading price of our common stock may fluctuate widely, depending upon many factors, some
of which are beyond our control. These factors include, among others, the risks identified above
and the following:
| |
|
|
variations in our quarterly results of operations; |
| |
| |
|
|
announcements by us or our competitors or lead source providers; |
| |
| |
|
|
the relatively low level of public float and average daily trading volumes of our common stock; |
| |
| |
|
|
changes in estimates of our performance or recommendations, or termination of coverage by securities analysts; |
| |
| |
|
|
inability to meet quarterly or yearly estimates or targets of our performance; |
| |
| |
|
|
the hiring or departure of key personnel, including agents or groups of agents or key executives; |
| |
| |
|
|
changes in our reputation; |
| |
| |
|
|
acquisitions or strategic alliances involving us or our competitors; |
| |
| |
|
|
changes in the legal and regulatory environment affecting our business; and |
| |
| |
|
|
market conditions in our industry and the economy as a whole. |
In addition, the stock market in general, and the market for technology companies in
particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated
or disproportionate to the operating performance of those companies. These broad market and
industry factors may seriously harm the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual
operating performance. Also, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and
the market price of a companys securities, securities class action litigation has often been
instituted against these companies. This litigation, if instituted against us, could result in
substantial costs and a diversion of our managements attention and resources and could harm the
price of our common stock. Although we carry general liability and errors and omissions insurance,
our insurance may not cover claims of these types or may be inadequate to protect us from all
liability that we may incur.
41
Our share price could decline due to the large number of outstanding shares of our common stock
eligible for future sale.
The market price of our common stock could decline as a result of sales of substantial amounts
of our common stock in the public market, or from the perception that these sales could occur.
These sales could also make it more difficult for us to sell our equity or equity-related
securities in the future at a time and price that we deem appropriate.
As of June 30, 2007, we had 22,526,098 shares of common stock outstanding. All of these shares
are eligible for sale, subject in some cases to the volume and other restrictions of Rule 144 and
Rule 701 under the Securities Act of 1933.
In addition, we have registered approximately 6.0 million shares of common stock that have
been issued or reserved for future issuance under our stock incentive plans. Of those shares,
options for 1,864,873 shares were exercisable as of June 30, 2007 and, if those options are
exercised, those shares are eligible for sale. Also as of June 30, 2007, we had outstanding
warrants for 2,496,199 shares that were fully vested and, if those warrants are exercised, those
shares will be eligible for sale, subject to any Rule 144 waiting periods, volume, and other
restrictions. As of August 1, 2007, warrants for 2,496,199 of those shares remained outstanding.
Nearly all of those warrants (representing 2,492,915 shares) are exercisable at $3.93 per share and
expire on the following dates: October 28, 2007 (582,060 shares), December 17, 2007 (1,346,536
shares), February 18, 2008 (274,365 shares), and June 27, 2008 (289,954 shares). Any sales of those
shares prior to expiration of the warrants could have a dilutive effect on our stock price.
Our principal stockholders, executive officers and directors own a significant percentage of our
stock, and as a result, the trading price for our shares may be depressed and these stockholders
can take actions that may be adverse to your interests.
Our executive officers and directors and entities affiliated with them, in the aggregate,
beneficially own nearly half of our common stock. This significant concentration of share ownership
may adversely affect the trading price for our common stock because investors often perceive
disadvantages in owning stock in companies with controlling stockholders. These stockholders,
acting together, will have the ability to exert control over all matters requiring approval by our
stockholders, including the election and removal of directors and any proposed merger,
consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. In addition, these stockholders
who are executive officers or directors, or who have representatives on our Board of Directors,
could dictate the management of our business and affairs. This concentration of ownership could
have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control, or impeding a merger or
consolidation, takeover or other business combination that could be favorable to our other
stockholders.
Our charter documents and Delaware law could prevent a takeover that stockholders consider
favorable and could also reduce the market price of our stock.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our bylaws contain provisions that
could delay or prevent a change in control of our company. These provisions could also make it more
difficult for stockholders to elect directors and take other corporate actions. These provisions
include:
| |
|
|
providing for a classified board of directors with staggered, three-year terms; |
| |
| |
|
|
not providing for cumulative voting in the election of directors; |
| |
| |
|
|
authorizing the board to issue, without stockholder approval, preferred stock with rights senior to those of common stock; |
| |
| |
|
|
prohibiting stockholder action by written consent; |
| |
| |
|
|
limiting the persons who may call special meetings of stockholders; and |
| |
| |
|
|
requiring advance notification of stockholder nominations and proposals. |
In addition, the provisions of Section 203 of Delaware General Corporate Law govern us. These
provisions may prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our
outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us for a certain period of time.
42
These and other provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, our
bylaws and under Delaware law could discourage potential takeover attempts, reduce the price that
investors might be willing to pay for shares of our common stock in the future and result in the
market price being lower than it would be without these provisions.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds:
On November 9, 2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission declared effective our
Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-115657) for our initial public offering. We
commenced our offering immediately thereafter. We completed our sale of 4,550,000 shares of common
stock on November 15, 2004 at a price of $13.00 per share, and on November 18, 2004 we sold the
remainder of our registered shares of common stock (682,500 shares) at the same price per share
pursuant to the underwriters exercise of the over-allotment option. UBS Securities LLC, Deutsche
Bank Securities Inc., Thomas Weisel Partners LLC and Pacific Growth Equities, LLC acted as the
underwriters for the offering.
The aggregate purchase price of the offering was $68,022,500. The net offering proceeds
received by us after deducting total estimated expenses were $61,402,757. We incurred total
estimated expenses in connection with the offering of $6,619,743, which consisted of $1,795,943 in
legal, accounting and printing fees, $4,761,575 in underwriters discounts, fees and commissions,
and $62,225 in miscellaneous expenses. No payments for such expenses were made directly or
indirectly to (i) any of our directors, officers or their associates, (ii) any person owning 10% or
more of any class of our equity securities or (iii) any of our affiliates.
We have not used any of the net offering proceeds from the offering for operational purposes.
We currently estimate that we will use the net proceeds as described in the prospectus for the
offering: for general corporate purposes, including working capital. We have not assigned specific
portions of the net proceeds for any particular uses, and we will retain broad discretion in the
allocation of the net proceeds. Although we evaluate potential acquisitions of complementary
businesses, technologies or other assets in the ordinary course of business, we have no specific
understandings, commitments or agreements with respect to any acquisition at this time.
Pending such uses, we have invested all of the net proceeds from the offering in short-term,
investment-grade securities. We cannot predict whether the net proceeds invested will yield a
favorable return.
Item 6. Exhibits:
The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index are filed as a part of this report.
43
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
ZIPREALTY, INC.
|
|
| |
By: |
/s/ David A. Rector
|
|
| |
|
David A. Rector |
|
| |
|
Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer |
|
| |
Date: August 9, 2007
44
Exhibit Index
| |
|
|
| Exhibit number |
|
Description |
10.20(1)*
|
|
ZipRealty, Inc. Director Compensation Policy |
|
|
|
10.21(2)*
|
|
Richard F. Sommer Termination and Release Agreement dated June 2, 2007 |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer, as required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule
15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer, as required by Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule
15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 |
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer, as required by Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. 1350) |
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer, as required by Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. 1350) |
|
|
|
| (1) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K
(File No. 000-51002) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 19, 2007. |
| |
| (2) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K
(File No. 000-51002) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 4, 2007. |
| |
| * |
|
Identifies a management contract or compensatory plan or agreement required to be filed as an
exhibit of this report. |
45