e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
| |
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 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
|
|
94-3319956
|
|
(State of
incorporation)
|
|
(IRS employer identification
number)
|
|
|
|
|
|
2000 POWELL STREET, SUITE 300
|
|
94608
|
|
EMERYVILLE, CA
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
|
(Address of principal executive
offices)
|
|
|
(510) 735-2600
(Registrants
telephone number)
Securities
registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:
| |
|
|
|
Title of Each Class:
|
|
Name of Each Exchanged on Which Registered:
|
|
|
|
Shares of Common Stock, $0.001 par value
|
|
The NASDAQ Stock Market
|
Securities
registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
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 if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated
filer o Accelerated
filer þ Non-accelerated
filer o Smaller
reporting
company o
(Do
not check if a smaller reporting Company)
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
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common
equity held by non-affiliates (meaning all shares not
beneficially owned by directors or executive officers of the
registrant or their known affiliates) was approximately
$97.7 million (based on a price of $7.50 per share, which
was the closing price of the registrants common stock on
The NASDAQ Stock Market) on the last business day of the
registrants most recently completed second fiscal quarter.
We had 23,649,160 shares of common stock outstanding at
March 3, 2008.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Pursuant to General Instruction G(3), Part III,
Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 incorporate by reference
information from the Proxy Statement for the Registrants
2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which will be filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days of
the end of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007.
Statement
regarding forward-looking statements
This report includes forward-looking statements. Forward-looking
statements provide current expectations of future events based
on certain assumptions and include any statement that does not
directly relate to any historical or current fact. All
statements other than statements of historical facts contained
in this report, including statements regarding our future
financial position, business strategy and operations, and plans
and objectives of management are forward-looking statements. The
words believe, may, will,
should, could, estimate,
continue, anticipate,
intend, expect, plan,
potential, predict, project,
designed, provides,
facilitates, assists, helps
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:
|
|
|
| |
|
trends in the residential real estate market, the market for
mortgages, and the general economy;
|
| |
| |
|
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. No forward-looking statement is a guarantee of
future performance and you should not place undue reliance on
any forward-looking statement. 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 I. Readers should carefully review
such cautionary statements as they identify certain important
factors that could cause actual results to differ materially
from those in the forward-looking statements and from historical
trends. Those cautionary statements are not exclusive and are in
addition to other factors discussed elsewhere in this
Form 10-K
or in materials incorporated herein by reference.
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 do not
intend to update or revise any forward-looking statement
contained in this report.
Trademarks
ZipRealty, ZipAgent,
ZipNotify, Your home is where our heart
is and Real Estate Redefined are our
registered trademarks in the United States. We also own the
rights to the domain name www.Real-Estate.com.
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 annual report on
Form 10-K.
Where you
can find additional information
You may review a copy of this annual report on
Form 10-K,
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. 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
OVERVIEW
We are a full-service residential real estate brokerage firm,
using our user-friendly website and employee real estate agents
to provide home buyers and sellers with high-quality service and
value. Our website provides users with access to comprehensive
local Multiple Listing Services home listings data, as well as
other relevant market and neighborhood information. Our
proprietary business management system and technology platform
helps to reduce costs, allowing us to pass on significant
savings to consumers. With operations in 33 markets, we
employ over 2,000 sales agents, known as ZipAgents, all of whom
are licensed in their local markets, are members of the National
Association of
REALTORS®,
or NAR, and work for us on an exclusive, full-time basis. We
believe that this unique employee-based model in an industry
characterized almost exclusively by independent contractors
provides us with a distinct competitive advantage in being able
to consistently deliver outstanding service to our clients.
Through our website, registered users can access a broad range
of current information and powerful tools to research and
commence the process of buying or selling a home, including
direct access to comprehensive local Multiple Listing
Service(s), or MLS(s), home listings data, such as asking
prices, home layouts and other features. Each MLS is a database
of available homes listed for sale by participating member
agents to facilitate broker cooperation. We also provide
information in addition to MLS data, including neighborhood
attributes, new home listings, school district information,
comparable home sales data, maps and driving directions. We
attract users to our website through a variety of marketing
channels, including online advertising, word of mouth and
advertisements in traditional media.
Our proprietary ZipAgent Platform, or ZAP, automatically matches
registered users with our local ZipAgents who market and assist
in providing our real estate brokerage services, including
showing properties to our buyers and listing and marketing
properties on behalf of our sellers, as well as assisting in
negotiating, advisory, transaction processing and closing
activities. We also offer our buyers the option of choosing
their ZipAgents after reviewing the agent profiles we post on
our website. Our ZAP technology also includes a customer
relationship management system that identifies and analyzes user
behavior on our website allowing us to provide more relevant
information and service to clients and a business management
system that allows our managers to monitor the activities of our
ZipAgents to verify a high level of client service. According to
a 2007 survey by the California Association of
REALTORS®,
93% of home buyers who used the Internet as an important part of
their overall home buying and selection process were satisfied
or very satisfied, compared to only 61% for traditional home
buyers who did not use the Internet as an important part of
their process.
Our business was incorporated under the laws of the state of
California in 1999, and was reincorporated as a Delaware
corporation in May 2004. We have grown significantly since
inception and we generate revenues principally from earning
brokerage commissions in connection with representing buyers and
sellers of residential real estate. As of March 1, 2008, we
had approximately 1.7 million active registered users who
had accessed our website within the last year. From our
inception through December 31, 2007 we have closed over
57,000 real estate transactions with an aggregate transaction
value of approximately $19.3 billion. We currently have
operations in Atlanta, Baltimore, Washington D.C., Boston,
Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Orange County, Phoenix,
Sacramento, San Diego, the San Francisco Bay Area,
Seattle, Las Vegas, Houston, Miami, Orlando, Palm Beach, Tampa,
Minneapolis/St Paul, Austin, the Greater Philadelphia area,
Fresno/Central Valley, Naples, Tucson, Denver, Jacksonville,
Richmond, Salt Lake City, Virginia Beach, Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham, and Westchester County. We operate in one
reportable segment; financial information is included in the
consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
4
INDUSTRY
BACKGROUND
The
U.S. residential real estate market
The residential real estate industry is one of the largest
industries in the United States. According to REAL
Trends, an industry research firm, residential real
estate sales totaled over $1.86 trillion in 2006. Also according
to REAL Trends, sales of existing homes comprise the vast
majority of the residential real estate market, accounting for
$1.60 trillion of 2006 total home sales. Additionally, REAL
Trends reported that total residential real estate
brokerage commissions and fees, which are primarily derived from
existing home sales, were approximately $59.7 billion in
2006. We believe that favorable demographic, cultural and
economic trends have contributed to consistent long-term growth
in the residential real estate industry. From 1983 to 2006, the
residential real estate industry grew at a compound annual
growth rate of 9% in terms of aggregate sales volume.
The residential real estate brokerage market is highly
fragmented. According to REAL Trends, the 10 largest
brokerage firms accounted for less than 9% of all brokered
residential real estate transaction volume in 2006, and the
single largest firm accounted for less than 5% of total
transaction volume. According to NAR, there were approximately
1.3 million members of NAR in the United States and its
territories as of January 31, 2008.
Some brokerage firms are affiliated with national franchise
brands, such as Century 21, Coldwell Banker, Prudential and
RE/MAX. The franchise brands typically do not directly own and
operate brokerage firms, but rather license their brand names
and trademarks and provide other marketing support to franchisee
brokerage firms. These brokerage firms typically engage agents
to work for them as independent contractors and as a result
franchisors and franchisees have limited direct influence over
the client relationship or the quality of client service.
Traditional
real estate transaction process
The traditional real estate transaction process centers on real
estate agents, who act as the principal intermediary between
home buyers and sellers and control the flow of information to
both. Prior to the increased influence of the Internet,
prospective home buyers and sellers would typically rely on
their agents, word of mouth, newspapers and local publications
for information regarding homes available for sale. Information
presented in traditional media has historically been limited,
often consisting of only a single photo and a brief description.
In order to gain access to a broader range of information,
prospective home buyers have typically engaged an agent. One of
the primary benefits traditionally offered by an agent has been
access to MLS home listings data and the ability to search and
filter that data based upon specified criteria. Because
consumers have not traditionally had direct access to this data,
the agent has exercised primary control over the process of
searching and filtering the MLS data under this system.
Consequently, consumers have not been assured of access to
comprehensive and relevant information. Prospective home buyers
have relied on the agent to identify and show them relevant
properties and typically have spent a great deal of time
physically viewing these properties. Therefore, consumers have
spent unnecessary time visiting homes that they would have
decided not to visit, and may have failed to visit homes that
would have been of interest, than if they had access to more
comprehensive information.
Traditionally, prospective home sellers have had similarly
limited opportunities to investigate the current market or to
efficiently and effectively market and sell their homes. Sellers
typically have called a local agent to list their home for sale
and relied on that agent to give them guidance on the market
value of the home and the most effective manner to successfully
market and sell the home. The agent has then entered into an
exclusive listing agreement with the seller and posted the
property for sale in the local MLS. Commissions have varied from
market to market, but generally have ranged from 5% to 6% of the
total sales price of the home. Many agents and brokerages have
been reluctant to compete on price and instead have relied on
historical market commission percentages to set their rates. The
commission is paid by the seller at the closing and is typically
split between the buyers agent and the sellers agent.
Increasing
use of the Internet in the residential real estate transaction
process
Consumers are increasingly using the Internet as a key source of
information in buying or selling a home. The 2007 National
Association of
REALTORS®
Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers cites that buyers use
of the Internet to search for homes has increased, rising from
71% in 2003 to 84% in 2007. The Internet provides a highly
effective
5
means for consumers to research information about homes in an
industry that is data intensive yet historically has suffered
from a lack of broad access to comprehensive and timely property
listings information for consumers. The interactivity of the
Internet also allows consumers to better conduct targeted
searches and research relevant data about desired homes or
areas. The ability to provide multiple images and rich media
makes the Internet a highly effective means for brokerage firms
to market and consumers to research homes.
Challenges
and limitations of the traditional residential real estate
process
We believe that the traditional residential real estate industry
is characterized by a number of challenges and limitations,
including:
Challenges for home buyers and sellers. We
believe that the traditional residential real estate industry is
characterized by low levels of client satisfaction. Some
contributing factors include:
|
|
|
| |
|
limited access to, and transparency of, information;
|
| |
| |
|
high commissions;
|
| |
| |
|
lack of client control over the process; and
|
| |
| |
|
low levels of agent responsiveness and accountability.
|
Challenges for agents. Agents often have
difficulty generating consistent transaction volume, resulting
in inconsistent earnings. Some contributing factors include:
|
|
|
| |
|
need to spend considerable personal time and money generating
business;
|
| |
| |
|
limited resources to properly manage client relationships and
transaction processes; and
|
| |
| |
|
responsibility for other business expenses and access to
personal benefits, such as health insurance.
|
Challenges for brokerage firms. Traditional
brokerage firms have difficulty differentiating their services
and effectively managing agents and ensuring client
satisfaction. Some contributing factors include:
|
|
|
| |
|
independent contractor nature of agent relationship limits
accountability and managerial effectiveness;
|
| |
| |
|
ownership and management of client relationships resides with
the agents, limiting broker relationships with clients; and
|
| |
| |
|
low levels of client and agent loyalty.
|
OUR
BUSINESS MODEL
We are a full-service residential real estate brokerage firm,
using our user-friendly website and employee real estate agents
to provide homebuyers and sellers with high-quality service and
value. Our website provides users with access to comprehensive
local Multiple Listing Services home listings data, as well as
other relevant market and neighborhood information. Our
proprietary business management system and technology platform
helps to reduce costs, allowing us to pass on significant
savings to consumers. The key attributes of our solution include:
Addressing
challenges for home buyers and sellers
We use the Internet to empower
consumers. Through our website, we provide our
registered users with comprehensive, free and unrestricted
access to all currently available home listings posted on the
MLSs in our markets and the ability to research and compare
homes. Our MLS data is updated at least once per day in each of
our markets. In certain markets, we also provide free access to
new home listings posted by our builder partners. We also
provide valuable information and services to potential home
buyers through our website, such as home and neighborhood
content, automated screenings and notifications of available
homes that meet specified criteria, the ability to schedule home
viewing appointments or make offers online and financing
pre-approval. We offer home sellers online comparative marketing
tools and virtual tours, as well as broad marketing distribution
through the MLS, Internet and traditional media.
6
We focus on delivering high-quality service with a
client-centric approach. Our solution is built
around the client, not the agent. We acquire a majority of our
client leads and provide ongoing value-added services through
the Internet, allowing us, rather than exclusively our agent, to
control the client relationship. With our employee model, we
hold our agents accountable for consistently delivering a high
level of client service and satisfaction. We monitor each of our
ZipAgents through our ZAP technology to verify a high level of
responsiveness and to assist us to address quickly any potential
issues. To back up our commitment to client service, we offer
our closed clients a $250 cash refund if they are unsatisfied
with our services. In addition, our clients can influence the
compensation paid to their ZipAgent based upon the results of a
client satisfaction survey.
Our business model is designed to offer a compelling consumer
value proposition. Our use of the Internet,
proprietary technologies and business processes allow us to
offer significant cash rebates to our buyers and reduced
commissions to our sellers, where permitted by law. Our business
model assumes we will pay each of our home buyers an amount
equal to 20% of our commission in cash upon closing (except in
New Jersey, where such payments are currently not permitted by
law) and offer our home sellers up to a 25% discount off of
standard commissions in their particular market. In New Jersey,
in lieu of offering a cash rebate to our buyers, our business
model assumes we will make a donation to a local charity through
United Way equal to 20% of our commission in cash upon closing.
Addressing
challenges for agents and brokerage firms
We use proprietary business management technologies and
processes to increase operational efficiency and provide
excellent client service. Our proprietary ZAP
technology utilizes the interactivity, broad availability and
efficiencies of the Internet to allow us to increase ZipAgent
productivity. After a new client completes the registration
process, our ZAP technology automatically monitors the
clients searching behavior from the initial search session
and assigns that client to a ZipAgent who specializes in the
specific territories most frequently searched by that client
during that initial session, or in the territory where the
property to be sold is located. We also offer our buyers the
option of choosing their ZipAgents after reviewing the agent
profiles we post on our website. Only leads that are qualified,
meaning that the client has completed the registration process
and has conducted at least one home search or owns a property to
be sold in an area in which we do business, are assigned to our
ZipAgents, allowing our agents a steady flow of clients who are
searching in the territories in which they specialize. Our ZAP
technology also provides a system for organizing and
prioritizing these leads, valuable customer relationship
management, or CRM, tools and visibility into client website
behavior. Our ZAP technology also allows our managers to observe
and manage how our ZipAgents are servicing our clients. We also
have proprietary transaction support tools and a dedicated group
of service professionals to help our ZipAgents close
transactions more efficiently. We believe our integrated
consumer website and ZAP technology are difficult to replicate
and allow us to manage employees effectively, significantly
scale our business to meet client needs, and provide outstanding
client service.
Our business model is designed to offer a compelling value
proposition to agents. We believe our
employee-based model and ZAP technology offer a unique and
attractive proposition to agents compared with that found at
traditional brokerages, including the ability to work more
efficiently and close more transactions. We design, implement
and bear the cost of all marketing programs for our ZipAgents,
including the delivery of a steady flow of client leads,
allowing them to focus on serving clients rather than generating
new business. Additionally, all of our ZipAgents receive
comprehensive initial training and participate in various
ongoing training activities. All of our ZipAgents are full-time
ZipRealty employees and after completing six months of
employment are eligible for employee benefits including
company-sponsored health, welfare, retirement and equity
incentive plans. We believe that a number of factors contribute
to our ZipAgents ability to close more transactions than
are typically closed in the industry, in particular:
|
|
|
| |
|
our ZipAgents receive a steady flow of qualified leads without
individual marketing efforts, allowing them to rapidly develop a
good pipeline of clients;
|
| |
| |
|
our ZAP technology, with its proprietary CRM tools, allows our
ZipAgents to remain organized and communicate and sell
effectively with numerous clients at the same time; and
|
7
|
|
|
| |
|
our system includes closing support infrastructure that allows
our ZipAgents to spend less time on closing tasks and more time
on new clients than would otherwise be possible without this
support in place.
|
The average monthly productivity of our total agent population
was approximately 0.6 transactions per ZipAgent in 2007. For
full years 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007, the average monthly
productivity of our ZipAgents ranged from 0.6 to 1.3
transactions per ZipAgent. We calculate the average monthly
productivity of our ZipAgents for a full year by dividing the
average monthly number of transactions closed during the year by
the average number of ZipAgents employed at the beginning of
each month during the year. We do not adjust the denominator for
ZipAgents hired, or who leave us during the month. The
productivity level of our ZipAgents who have been with us in
excess of six full months is considerably higher than the
average level achieved by all our ZipAgents.
OUR
STRATEGY
Our objective is to become one of the most recognized, respected
and successful companies in the residential real estate
industry. Key elements of our strategy include:
Broaden
and deepen our presence in existing markets
We plan to increase our presence and market share in existing
markets by expanding our number of ZipAgents and growing our
home listings business. While our focus historically has been on
buyers, we intend to grow our home listings business in a number
of ways, such as by developing more website tools for sellers
and implementing a referral system that encourages ZipAgents and
clients to refer home listings. We also intend to increase our
penetration into the higher-priced home segment.
Enhance
the ZipRealty brand
We believe that enhancing the ZipRealty brand will heighten
awareness of our company and increase the number of home buyers
and sellers who use our services and ultimately increase the
number of transactions that we close. We plan to increase our
brand awareness by increasing our word of mouth marketing
through such initiatives as increased use of our refer a
friend feature, marketing our services through our large
and growing base of past clients, and continued strong press
coverage and media attention. In addition, we believe that we
can enhance our brand by continuing to focus on client service,
with the objective of creating lifelong relationships with our
clients and increasing repeat and referral business.
Continue
to invest in technology and our people to increase operational
efficiency
We plan to continue improving our proprietary technology
platform to increase ZipAgent productivity and provide
consistently high levels of client service and satisfaction. We
intend to continue to design tools that help our ZipAgents
better qualify and prioritize leads and identify levels of
client responsiveness, and to implement communication services
that allow our ZipAgents to be more responsive and productive.
In addition to enhancing our technology, we intend to continue
to refine our recruiting and training programs and provide our
ZipAgents with additional field support in an effort to continue
increasing ZipAgent productivity. Our centralized infrastructure
is designed to enable us to rapidly expand our business and take
advantage of economies of scale.
Expand
operations into new geographic markets
We believe that there is a significant opportunity to continue
to expand our services into new geographic markets represented
by over 250 U.S. metropolitan statistical areas, or MSAs.
We currently operate in 33 markets, including 18 of the 25 most
populous U.S. MSAs. In 2007, we commenced operations in
Naples and Tucson in March, Denver in April, Jacksonville in
May, Salt Lake City and Richmond in July, Virginia Beach and
Charlotte in August, Raleigh-Durham in September, and
Westchester County in December. To date in 2008, we have
announced we will commence operations in Long Island and have
plans to enter one to three additional markets depending on
market conditions. We are currently evaluating the relative
attractiveness of other markets and developing entry strategies
and timelines. In determining which markets we intend to expand
into and in what order, we consider a variety of criteria,
including demographics, business climate, housing market,
competition, technology fit,
8
robustness of MLS information and regulatory environment.
Currently, several states 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. Should we
decide to expand into any of these states, we may have to adjust
our pricing structure or refrain from offering rebates to buyers
in these states.
Continue
to improve the client experience
We believe that ongoing client satisfaction is critical to our
continued success and future growth. As a result, we continually
focus on improving the client experience on our website and with
our ZipAgents. In addition to enhancing the functionality of our
website, we plan to provide additional information to home
buyers and sellers, improved personalization and search features
such as comparison and market analysis tools, additional seller
tools to improve our listings business and enhanced image
capabilities.
OUR
CONSUMER WEBSITE AND SERVICES
Our real estate services enable consumers to exercise more
control over the home buying or selling process from the comfort
of their home or office. We believe consumers enjoy an
Internet-enabled, easy-to-use approach to the real estate
process and have access to a team of local ZipAgents. Our
ZipAgents typically have extensive market knowledge of the
metropolitan areas they serve and are required to be active
members of their local, state and national real estate and MLS
associations. In addition, our website, www.ziprealty.com,
provides a
step-by-step
approach to guide clients through the home buying and selling
process. Our website and agent platform software is proprietary
to us. We enhance our website by including information such as
home listings, neighborhoods and recent home sales that we
obtain from local MLSs and other third party providers.
Comprehensive
MLS access for home listings data
We offer individuals who register on our website access to
comprehensive available home listings data, including pictures,
from the local MLSs in the markets in which we operate. As
active members of the MLSs in the markets we serve, we organize
the data from each MLS database and provide it directly to
consumers on our website. Unlike many real estate websites, we
show listings from all broker participants in the MLSs, not just
our own listings. We update this data frequently, at least once
a day and often multiple times daily. Our website is password
protected, so only individuals who provide basic registration
information, agree to our terms of use and then return to our
site to input a code which we email to them at the time of their
registration are able to access comprehensive home listings
data. Consumers can search for homes based upon numerous
criteria, including location, price, square footage, number of
bedrooms and bathrooms, map geography, distance from a specified
address, and other characteristics and amenities such as lot
size, whether a home has a fireplace or central air
conditioning, and numerous other features. We do not show
information from the MLS databases that is marked as
confidential, such as information relating to home security.
ZipNotify
One of our most popular consumer website tools is called
ZipNotify, which allows consumers to receive an automatic email
notification each time a property that meets their desired
search criteria is listed on the local MLSs. Since we update our
listings information at least once per day in each market, our
registered users are able to learn about new listings in a
timely manner. In markets that are characterized by short
supply, this tool provides our clients a competitive advantage
over other consumers who might have to wait for their agent to
learn about the listing and then contact them with the
information. The ZipNotify tool is also interactive, so with one
click the consumer can login to see more detailed information on
the home, schedule a visit with one of our ZipAgents to see the
home, or send an email to one of our ZipAgents requesting more
information about the property. Our number of ZipNotify messages
has grown steadily, and averaged over 20.8 million per
month in 2007 compared to over 16.1 million per month in
2006 and over 12.2 million per month in 2005.
9
Neighborhood
data and related information
Our system is designed to provide consumers with access to a
broad range of information, in addition to the MLS data, about
their potential home without having to rely on an agent or other
party to provide that information for them. Consequently, our
website includes several tools to help our clients educate
themselves during the process, including relevant neighborhood
data such as population, comparable home sales, average income,
education level, occupation mix, cost of living, crime
statistics, weather, school district information, maps and
driving directions.
Online
images and virtual tours
We believe that one of the principal attractions of the Internet
for consumers researching homes is the ability for consumers to
view images of available homes. For our seller clients, we offer
virtual home tours and photos of our home listings at no
additional cost. For our buyer clients, in addition to the
customary single photo, in select markets we have the ability to
post multiple property photos from the local MLSs, giving
clients a more robust search experience. This enables home
buyers to better research homes before deciding whether to visit
them.
Schedule
visits
We try to make it as easy and convenient as possible for our
buyer clients to schedule visits of properties they would like
to see. All a client has to do is click on a button when viewing
information about a home on our website and enter in their phone
number and what day(s) and time(s) they would prefer to see the
home. We then contact the listing agent and organize the visit
for our client. Alternatively, our clients can contact their
ZipAgent by telephone or email to schedule a visit.
Home
offers
While the vast majority of clients prefer to make offers through
their ZipAgent, some clients like the convenience and speed of
submitting their offers online. We provide this capability
through our website by allowing clients to input all of the
relevant information into our offer form. We then fill out the
appropriate paperwork and obtain signatures from, and submit the
offer on behalf of, our client.
Financing
pre-approval
Obtaining pre-approval for a home purchase prior to submitting
an offer can greatly strengthen the quality of an offer for our
buyers. Therefore, we offer our clients a pre-approval option on
our website through the ZipRealty Mortgage Center, which is
provided by one or more independently owned and operated
mortgage companies such as
E-LOAN, Inc.
Clients input all of the required data into the online form, and
the pre-approval process can be completed in a matter of
minutes. Clients can conveniently print out their own
pre-approval letters from the mortgage company to submit with
offers. Clients can also call the mortgage company through our
mortgage center for additional assistance.
ZIPAGENT
PLATFORM
Our ZipAgent Platform, or ZAP, is our proprietary web-based
system that systematically integrates and records consumer
contact information and website behavior, ZipAgent behavior and
transaction information into a common Oracle-based platform. ZAP
records relevant consumer behavior such as logon frequency and
times, specific homes viewed and printed, searches made by
clients, requested visits to view a home and online offers. The
system also records and organizes all relevant ZipAgent
activities, such as frequency and length of ZipAgent logins,
automatically captures and stores all email communications,
organized by client, and requires ZipAgents to input summary
information about all client phone calls, visits conducted and
offers submitted and accepted.
We use the data collected by ZAP to manage more effectively our
ZipAgents to verify each is working diligently, productively and
in our clients best interests. The system also
incorporates proprietary CRM tools that allow ZipAgents to
manage their databases of clients. For example, one tool uses
predictive behavior to help our ZipAgents identify those clients
who are likely to need their services in the near term. ZAP also
has an array of real-time management reports, which gives our
management detailed visibility into daily business activity.
Finally, ZAP
10
includes automated closing checklists and tools that allow our
ZipAgents and closing service managers who assist our ZipAgents
in the closing process to efficiently handle the closing of
multiple transactions. We believe that ZAP enables our ZipAgents
to be more productive and enhances the level of service we
provide our clients.
ZIPAGENTS
We believe that we are one of the few residential real estate
brokerages that engages its agents as full-time employees rather
than as independent contractors. Independent contractors work
for themselves, not a brokerage, and consequently have a
tremendous degree of independence in how they spend their time,
when they work and how well they service clients. In contrast,
our employee-based model allows us to actively manage and train
our ZipAgents and hold them accountable for their activities and
client service levels. We believe that by actively managing and
training our employee ZipAgents, we can both enhance the client
experience and increase ZipAgent productivity.
Compensation
structure
We offer our ZipAgents a compensation package that we believe is
attractive compared to that offered by traditional brokerage
firms. We believe that our compensation package leads to a
higher degree of ZipAgent loyalty and a consistently high level
of client service. Our compensation package includes:
|
|
|
| |
|
Commissions. As is customary in the real
estate brokerage industry, ZipAgents earn a portion of the
commissions they generate for us, which is known as their split.
Currently, our commission splits to ZipAgents typically vary
from as low as 35% to as high as 80% or more of our net
revenues, after deducting certain other items.
|
| |
| |
|
Expense reimbursement. All California and
other eligible ZipAgents (including, where applicable, ZipAgents
who have met certain levels of productivity) receive expense
reimbursement. This reimbursement covers many expenses typically
related to their business, such as automobile usage, cell phone
usage and Internet connectivity.
|
| |
| |
|
Company-paid marketing expenses. In the
traditional independent contractor model, agents are typically
responsible for covering all of their own marketing expenses,
including the cost of lead generation, advertising and marketing
costs associated with selling homes, and production of
collateral materials. In our model, we cover these costs for all
of our ZipAgents.
|
| |
| |
|
Benefits. One of the advantages of our
employee-based model for our ZipAgents is that we provide them
with a broad array of benefits that are uncommon in the real
estate brokerage industry, including company-sponsored health,
welfare and 401(k) plans, subject to meeting certain tenure
requirements. In addition, ZipAgents have the ability to earn
stock options in connection with certain performance levels.
|
Recruiting
and training
At December 31, 2007, we employed a staff of
27 full-time recruiters solely dedicated to identifying and
qualifying prospective ZipAgents. We offer comprehensive
training programs both for new ZipAgents as they join us, as
well as for existing ZipAgents on an on-going basis. During
2005, we moved our training facilities from regional to local
offices. New ZipAgents currently receive a week of orientation
and initial training on how to use ZAP in their local market
office. ZipAgents then complete a series of training modules
with their manager and other local resources during their first
several weeks. On an on-going basis, ZipAgents are presented
with training content through multiple channels, including
webcasts, and live presentations during their weekly sales
meetings. New ZipAgents are also frequently paired with seasoned
ZipAgents.
CLIENT
ACQUISITION
Lead
generation
We want our ZipAgents to focus on providing high-quality client
service, rather than finding their next client. Accordingly, we
provide ZipAgents with leads of clients who are actively
searching on our website for properties in
11
their sales territories. We attract these clients principally by
using two types of paid lead sources. First, we retain hosts of
other websites to provide links to our website. Those hosts are
typically businesses that are lead generators or that are
involved in the real estate or financial services industries.
Second, we actively advertise in key locations on the Internet
where consumers gather or conduct searches for real estate
information. We currently have contractual relationships with
over 60 lead sources of either type. In 2007, only two
independent lead sources generated in excess of 10% of our
leads. HomeGain, Inc. generated approximately 21% of our leads
and Google represented approximately 16% of our leads during the
year. HomeGain competes with us for online customer acquisition.
In addition to paid lead sources, in 2007 we attracted
approximately 37% of our leads directly to our website, which
involved no direct acquisition costs.
The majority of our lead source agreements are in the form of
non-exclusive, short-term agreements (six months or less) that
are generally terminable on little or no notice (60 days or
less) and with no penalties. These agreements typically are
priced on a
cost-per-click,
or CPC,
cost-per-lead,
or CPL, or
cost-per-impression,
or CPM, basis, with a majority being on a CPC and CPL basis.
Under our CPC agreements, we pay a fixed amount each time a
potential client clicks on one of our advertisements and is
directed to our website. Under our CPL agreements, we pay a fee
for each lead we generate from that source. We define a lead as
a client who has registered on our website, confirmed an email
address, searched for homes or owns a home to be sold in an area
where we have operations, and has been assigned to one of our
ZipAgents. Under our CPM agreements, we are charged a fee each
time a potential client views one of our advertisements.
We have found that localized content is a key to driving
qualified leads to our site. Once a client visits our website,
we are able to track significant information about the client,
including how they came to our website (through an
advertisement, word of mouth, etc.), how frequently the client
visits our website, what activities the client performs while on
our website and whether the client ultimately transacts with us.
By using this data, we believe we can optimize our lead
generation expenses based on the most productive sources and
continually refine the ways in which we advertise our services.
PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING
At December 31, 2007, our technology team was comprised of
38 employees, including a product development team,
software engineers, database and data center engineers and a
data acquisition team. Our technology team focuses on enhancing
and improving our existing technology as well as developing new
proprietary tools.
Our technology team is responsible for maintaining property
listings data through our over 58 MLS memberships. In order to
provide the most comprehensive and timely data available, we
download MLS data seven days a week, and for most MLSs, multiple
times per day. Currently, we provide information on
approximately 1.3 million homes in our searchable database
in the markets we serve. To provide our consumers with a more
complete understanding of homes and neighborhoods, we combine
data from the MLSs with additional local information from other
data sources, which we license on a non-exclusive basis.
Our product development team is responsible for fulfilling all
product requirements on both our consumer website and the
ZipAgent Platform. This team generally internally releases
software updates approximately once per quarter. As part of our
development process, the product development team works with
users to identify feature enhancements that will provide a
better consumer experience, increase ZipAgent productivity and
enhance management oversight capabilities. Our system is not
dependent on a clients computer configuration, working
with all principal Internet service providers and Internet
browsers. Our system is Java-based and uses commercially
available hardware and proprietary database technology based on
an Oracle platform, making it highly scalable. Our application
server is compliant with relevant industry standards.
We serve our clients from a third party co-location facility
located in Sunnyvale, California, operated by Qwest
Communications. The facility is secured by
around-the-clock
guards and biometric access screening and is equipped with
back-up
generators, redundant HVAC and Internet connectivity. We employ
a
dish-to-dish
backup process between our co-location facility and our
corporate headquarters for safekeeping of information.
12
REGULATORY
MATTERS
The real estate industry is highly regulated. In the conduct of
our business, we must monitor and comply with a wide variety of
applicable laws and regulations of both the government and
private organizations.
Government
regulation
The most extensive regulations applicable to our business are at
the state level and are typically overseen by state agencies
dedicated to real estate matters. However, the residential real
estate industry is also regulated by federal and local
authorities.
State regulation. Real estate licensing laws
vary from state to state, but generally all individuals and
entities acting as real estate brokers or salespersons must be
licensed in the state in which they conduct business. A person
licensed as a broker may either work independently or may work
for another broker in the role of an associate broker,
conducting business on behalf of the sponsoring broker. A person
licensed as a salesperson must be affiliated with a broker in
order to engage in licensed real estate brokerage activities.
Generally, a corporation engaged in the real estate brokerage
business must obtain a corporate real estate broker license
(although in some states the licenses are personal to individual
brokers). In order to obtain this license, most jurisdictions
require that an officer of the corporation be licensed
individually as a real estate broker in that jurisdiction. If
applicable, this officer-broker is responsible for supervising
the licensees and the corporations real estate brokerage
activities within the state. Real estate licensees, whether they
are brokers, salespersons, individuals or entities, must follow
the states real estate licensing laws and regulations.
These laws and regulations generally prescribe minimum duties
and obligations of these licensees to their clients and the
public, as well as standards for the conduct of business,
including contract and disclosure requirements, record keeping
requirements, requirements for local offices, trust fund
handling, agency representation, advertising regulations and
fair housing requirements. Although payment of rebates or
credits to real estate purchasers of the type we offer are
permitted in most states, some states either do not permit these
rebates or credits, or do not permit them in the form that we
currently provide them. In each of the 19 states and the
District of Columbia where we currently have operations, we have
designated one of our officers as the individually licensed
broker and, where applicable, we hold a corporate real estate
brokers license. In addition, some states have enacted
legislation similar to (and in some cases more restrictive than)
the federal legislation discussed below.
Federal regulation. In addition to state
regulations, several federal laws and regulations govern the
real estate brokerage business. The applicable federal
regulations include the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of
1974, as amended, or RESPA, and federal fair housing laws.
RESPA, as applicable to us, is intended to provide for more
effective advance disclosures to home buyers and sellers of
settlement costs and the elimination of kickbacks or referral
fees that tend to increase unnecessarily the costs of certain
settlement services. While RESPA has broad-reaching impact on a
variety of services associated with the purchase or sale of real
estate, including lending, title insurance and settlement
services, its principal application to the real estate brokerage
business is to limit payment of referral fees or the
inappropriate splitting of fees, and to require additional
consumer disclosures. Generally, it is illegal under RESPA to
pay or receive a referral fee or other fee, kickback or anything
of value in a real estate transaction involving a federally
related mortgage loan for the referral of business. RESPA limits
the type of business relationships that we can enter into for
acquiring client leads or otherwise, as well as the referral of
clients to other service providers. RESPA also limits the manner
in which we can provide other services to our customers. Federal
fair housing laws generally make it illegal to discriminate
against protected classes of individuals in housing or brokerage
services. Other federal regulations protect the privacy rights
of consumers, and affect our opportunities to solicit new
clients.
Local regulation. Local regulations also
govern the conduct of the real estate brokerage business. Local
regulations generally require additional disclosures by the
parties to a real estate transaction or their agents, or the
receipt of reports or certifications, often from the local
governmental authority, prior to the closing or settlement of a
real estate transaction.
Federal and state labor regulation. In
addition to the real estate regulations discussed above, we are
also subject to federal and state regulation of our employment
practices, including the compensation of ZipAgents. We classify
ZipAgents as exempt from the overtime and minimum wage
provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act because their
duties consist of working in the field selling residential real
estate and are designed to qualify for
13
the outside sales exemption under the terms of the
Fair Labor Standards Act and the U.S. Department of
Labors regulations. The outside sales
exemption is applied on a
case-by-case
basis and is considered in light of the specific duties
performed by an individual ZipAgent. Accordingly, as to any
individual ZipAgent, in the event his or her duties become
different than those currently assigned and contemplated, it
might be determined that the exemption is inapplicable. In that
event, we could be subject to penalties and damages, including
back pay and attorneys fees for the failure to pay the
individual in accordance with his or her actual duties.
Further, the Department of Labors regulations are subject
to interpretation by the Department of Labor and the courts and
are subject to change. New regulations were promulgated in final
form on April 23, 2004 and went into effect August 23,
2004. Accordingly, there is little precedent or guidance
regarding the interpretation and application of the new
regulations with respect to the outside sales
exemption nor any assurance how long these regulations
will remain in place. In the event it appears the legal standard
for the outside sales exemption changes, it may be
necessary to modify the ZipAgent compensation structure.
Individual states also sometimes elect to adopt overtime and
minimum wage laws providing greater benefits to employees than
the Fair Labor Standards Act. The ZipAgent job is designed to
qualify for exemption from such laws, to the extent applicable,
in the states in which we currently employ ZipAgents. Like the
federal law, these state laws are applied on a
case-by-case
basis considering the duties of specific individuals and are
subject to judicial and agency interpretation and legislative
change. New interpretations or changes in state law, or
expansion of operations to states that do not recognize an
outside sales exemption comparable to the federal
exemption, may require modification of the ZipAgent compensation
structure. For example, in 2007, Nevada approved legislation
that preempts the federal outside sales exemption
from paying minimum wage and overtime in that state. That
legislation took effect on November 1, 2007. Accordingly,
we pay our ZipAgents in Nevada minimum wage offset against
future commissions, and overtime subject to prior manager
approval. In addition, some states, such as California and New
York, have enacted laws concerning the reimbursement of employee
expenses regardless of the terms of any employment contract,
which caused us to adopt different compensation practices in
these states than elsewhere. If we are so required by other
state laws, we may need to modify our compensation structure in
such states.
Third-party
regulation
In addition to governmental regulations, we are subject to rules
and regulations established by private real estate trade
organizations, including, among others, local MLSs, NAR, state
Associations of
REALTORS®,
and local Associations of
REALTORS®.
The rules and regulations of the various MLSs to which we belong
vary, and specify, among other things, how we as a broker member
can use MLS listing data, including specifying, in some cases,
the use and display of this data on our website.
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, 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
those of 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. That lawsuit is currently set for trial in July
2008. 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
14
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®.
Some 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, have adopted VOW policies with opt-out
provisions. To our knowledge, to date the exercise of such
opt-out rights has been limited. We do not know of any MLSs
which have adopted the new ILD policy with its opt-out
provisions. Should a material number of participants exercise
such opt-outs rights, it would 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.
NAR, as well as the state and local Associations of
REALTORS®,
also have codes of ethics, rules and regulations governing the
actions of members in dealings with other members, clients and
the public. We are bound to abide by these codes of ethics,
rules and regulations by virtue of our membership in these
organizations.
COMPETITION
The market for residential real estate brokerage services is
highly fragmented at the national level, with no individual
brokerage holding more than a 5% share, and the ten largest
brokerages holding less than 9% collectively in 2006, according
to REAL Trends. However, the ten largest national brands
that brokerages work under franchise affiliations accounted for
a significant percentage of total brokered transaction volume,
providing the potential for significant national and local
influence. We compete with these brokerages at the local level
to represent home buyers or sellers. 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 Incorporated owns and operates brokerages that are
typically affiliated with one of the franchise brands owned by
Realogy. Many of these large brokerages are better known than us
and have access to greater resources and larger client bases
than available to us. We are also subject to competition from
local or regional firms, as well as individual real estate
agents. We also compete or may in the future compete with
various online services, such as InterActiveCorp/IAC and its
LendingTree unit (which owns RealEstate.com), HouseValues, Inc.,
HomeGain, Inc., Move, Inc. (formerly Homestore, Inc.) and its
Realtor.com affiliate, Zillow and Yahoo! Inc. that also look to
attract and service home buyers and sellers using the Internet.
Move is affiliated with NAR, 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. While these online services companies
are intermediaries providing lead referrals and are not
full-service brokerages like us, we compete with these companies
to attract consumers to our website. There are also a growing
number of discount firms that cater exclusively to clients who
are looking for reduced service levels as well as for sale by
owner services.
We believe that the key competitive factors in the residential
real estate segment include the following:
|
|
|
| |
|
quality of the home data available to clients;
|
| |
| |
|
quality of the agents, including ability to attract, retain and
manage quality agents;
|
| |
| |
|
level of client responsiveness;
|
| |
| |
|
level of commissions charged to sellers or incentives provided
to buyers;
|
| |
| |
|
clients ability to control the home purchase and home sale
process;
|
| |
| |
|
local knowledge;
|
| |
| |
|
ease of product usability; and
|
| |
| |
|
overall client service.
|
15
We believe that our Internet-enabled, employee-based model, our
use of rebates (where permitted) and reduced commissions, our
proprietary ZAP technology and ZipNotify, our ability to
inter-operate with multiple MLSs, and our other technologies
position us well relative to our competition to address these
competitive factors in our industry.
INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY
We rely on a combination of trademark, copyright, trade secret
and patent laws in the United States as well as confidentiality
procedures and contractual provisions to protect our proprietary
technology and our brand. We currently have trademarks
registered or pending in the United States for our name and
certain words and phrases that we use in our business. We also
rely on copyright laws to protect computer programs relating to
our website, our proprietary database and ZAP. We have
registered numerous Internet domain names related to our
business in order to protect our proprietary interests, and we
hold a patent issued in the United States that covers certain
processes and methodologies related to transacting residential
real estate on the Internet. We also enter into confidentiality
and invention assignment agreements with our employees and
consultants and confidentiality agreements with other third
parties, and we strictly control access to our proprietary
technology.
From time to time, we may encounter disputes over rights and
obligations concerning intellectual property. Also, the efforts
we have taken to protect our proprietary rights may not be
sufficient or effective. Any significant impairment of our
intellectual property rights could harm our business, our brand
and reputation, or our ability to compete. Also, protecting our
intellectual property rights could be costly and time consuming.
SEASONALITY
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, the seasonality pattern may not
remain consistent and may be masked by other factors, such as
macroeconomic changes in the residential real estate market or
the U.S. economy or growth in our business.
EMPLOYEES
At December 31, 2007, we had 2,426 employees. Of this
total, 2,180 were licensed ZipAgents, 117 were district
directors or field support personnel and 129 were corporate
employees. We consider our employee relations to be good.
EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS
The following table sets forth certain information about our
executive officers as of March 10, 2008:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
|
|
Joseph Patrick Lashinsky
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer, President and Director
|
|
David A. Rector
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
William C. Sinclair
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Operations and Business Development
|
|
Genevieve C. Combes
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Planning and Operations
|
|
Robert J. Yakominich
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Sales
|
|
Larry S. Bercovich
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
Joseph Patrick Lashinsky has served as our Chief
Executive Officer and a member of our Board of Directors since
June 2007. Mr. Lashinsky has also served as our President
since January 2007. From September 2006 to January 2007,
Mr. Lashinsky served as our Executive Vice President of
Product Strategy and Development. From April 2005 to September
2006, Mr. Lashinsky served as our Senior Vice President of
Product Strategy and
16
Development. From February 2000 to April 2005,
Mr. Lashinsky served as our Vice President in a number of
marketing, business development and sales positions. Prior to
joining us, from March 1999 to February 2000, Mr. Lashinsky
served as Group Marketing Manager at Del Monte Foods Company.
Mr. Lashinsky holds a Masters of Business Administration
degree from the University of California at Los Angeles and a
Bachelor of Arts degree in political economies of industrialized
societies from the University of California at Berkeley.
David A. Rector has served as our Senior Vice President
since May 2006, as our Chief Financial Officer since May 2007,
and as our de facto Controller and Chief Accounting Officer
since September 2007. Mr. Rector served as our Interim
Chief Financial Officer from January 2007 until May 2007, as our
Chief Accounting Officer from May 2004 to May 2007, as our
Controller from April 2002 to May 2007, and as our Vice
President from October 2002 to May 2006. Prior to joining us,
from June 1999 to January 2002, Mr. Rector worked in
various financial positions for several companies as a
consultant for Resources Connection Inc., a consulting firm.
Prior to that, he held senior financial positions at various
companies, including commercial real estate companies Allegiance
Realty Group and Fox & Carskadon Financial Corporation
and served as an audit manager at Price Waterhouse.
Mr. Rector is a Certified Public Accountant and holds a
Bachelor of Science degree in business administration from the
University of California at Los Angeles.
William C. Sinclair has served as our Executive Vice
President of Operations and Business Development since August
2005. From September 2002 to August 2005, Mr. Sinclair
served as our Senior Vice President of Sales and Operations.
Prior to joining us, from October 1998 to September 2002,
Mr. Sinclair served as Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer for the Asia Pacific division of Radisson
Hotels and Resorts Worldwide. From December 1997 to October
1998, Mr. Sinclair served as Vice President of New Business
Development for Promus Hotel Corporation. Mr. Sinclair
holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in business from Washington
State University.
Genevieve C. Combes has served as our Senior Vice
President of Planning and Operations since December 2006. From
May 2005 to December 2006, Ms. Combes served as our Vice
President of Business Planning and Strategy. From August 2004 to
May 2005, Ms. Combes served as our Director of Strategic
Analysis. Prior to joining us, Ms. Combes spent over ten
years in various capacities at JP Morgan H&Qs
(previously Hambrecht & Quist) Equity Research
Department. Most recently Ms. Combes served as Managing
Director of JP Morgan H&Qs Consumer Research Group.
Ms. Combes holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics
cum laude from the University of California at Santa Cruz.
Robert J. Yakominich has served as our Senior Vice
President of Sales since August 2007. From September 2003 to
August 2007, Mr. Yakominich served as Vice President of
Sales for The Reiser Group, a sales and marketing agency to
residential property developers. From December 1997 to May 2003,
Mr. Yakominich served as Executive Vice President of Sales
for Citysearch.com (a division of Ticketmaster Corporation), an
online lifestyle guide that advertises businesses within
communities. Mr. Yakominich holds a Masters of Business
Administration degree from the University of San Francisco
and a Bachelor of Business Administration degree from Bernard
Baruch College.
Larry S. Bercovich has served as our Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary since August 2007. From March 2004
to September 2006, Mr. Bercovich served as Senior Vice
President, General Counsel, Secretary and Chief Compliance
Officer for Portal Software, Inc. (acquired by Oracle
Corporation), a provider of billing and revenue management
solutions for the communications and media industries. During
March 2000 to March 2004, Mr. Bercovich served in several
roles, including from June 2002 to March 2004 as Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary, for Yipes Enterprise Services,
Inc., and a predecessor, a provider of managed Ethernet and
application delivery services. Mr. Bercovich holds an LL.M.
Taxation degree from New York University School of Law, a Juris
Doctor degree from the University of San Francisco School
of Law and a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science from
the University of California, San Diego.
17
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 expect to 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 December 31, 2007 had
an accumulated deficit of $67.1 million. While we were
profitable in the second half of 2003, and for a total of seven
quarters during 2004, 2005 and 2006, we experienced net losses
in the four quarters of 2007. Our outlook is cautious given
market and geopolitical uncertainties, and we expect to
experience a loss for calendar year 2008 as we continue to
invest in our business during this period of market softness.
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
incur significant costs to comply with the requirements of the
Securities and Exchange Commission, NASDAQ and the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and we may incur additional 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 seek to 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 we expect
that the demand for our services would be reduced if our ability
to display listings on our website, or to communicate to our
clients that our website displays MLS listings, 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.
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
18
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. That lawsuit is currently set for trial in July
2008. 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®.
We believe NARs policy and the DOJ action reflects a high
degree of uncertainty regarding the real estate industrys
incorporation of and willingness to work with VOWs. Our success
may be significantly affected by the outcome of the DOJs
action. It may also be affected by the willingness of individual
MLS to work cooperatively with VOW businesses such as ours.
Moreover, we have seen an increase in complaints from local MLSs
regarding our use of phrases such as search MLS listed
homes, search the MLS or other phrases
including the term MLS, and we have received
corresponding demands from several MLSs that we refrain from
using such phrases on our website and in our marketing
materials. We believe that, as a VOW and a member of these MLSs,
we have the right to use phrases such as search MLS listed
homes on our website. We expect to continue to receive
such complaints and demands until the DOJ action described above
is resolved, and possibly longer. Any restriction on our ability
to use such phrases could impair our ability to communicate to
our clients that our website displays MLS listings, which could
impair our ability to attract customers directly to our website.
In addition, from time to time several state or local MLSs may
choose to combine into one larger MLS. For example, in the State
of California, some real estate professionals have discussed
combining all MLSs in the state into one state-wide consolidated
MLS. If any consolidated MLS were to adopt restrictions on our
display of MLS listings, or on our ability to communicate to our
clients that our website displays MLS information, we may lose
demand for our services.
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 not only be delayed or terminated
based on the availability of discretionary income, but also can
be delayed or terminated based on macroeconomic factors.
Economic slowdown or recession, changes in the availability of
mortgages or extension of credit, rising interest rates, adverse
tax policies or changes in other regulations, 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 harm our business. Also, if the availability of
mortgages or other financing options decline, or if interest
rates increase significantly, homeowners ability to
purchase a new home or
19
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 29%,
in 2007 compared to 2006 and months of inventory increased
approximately 88%, in December 2007 compared to December 2006.
Pricing increases have also slowed, and some markets have shown
declines in median selling prices over this period. In some
markets, home prices have remained relatively stable, but we
believe that buyer expectation that prices will decline has
resulted in fewer transactions, as buyers postpone transactions
until such declines materialize. According to NAR, nationally
sales of existing homes fell 22.0%
year-over-year
in December 2007 to a seasonally adjusted rate of
4.89 million. In the State of California, the California
Association of
REALTORS®
reported that sales of existing homes declined 33.4% and the
median price of existing homes fell 16.5%
year-over-year
during the month of December 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. Any continuation in, or worsening of, these
conditions could harm our results of operations.
We may
not be able to continue to grow market share to offset the
impact of the current contraction in the residential real estate
market.
During 2007, we were able to grow market share in our existing
markets to help offset the contraction in the residential real
estate market: our net transaction revenues in existing markets
(markets opened before January 1, 2006), decreased only
slightly to $89.6 million in 2007 from $90.1 million
in 2006. Net transaction revenues for new markets (markets
opened after December 31, 2005) increased by
$9.0 million resulting in a overall increase in net
revenues of $8.4 million. We may not be able to sustain
this effort at this same rate if the softening in the
residential real estate market continues.
If the
percentage of our business that is composed of representing home
sellers, as opposed to home buyers, increases, we may incur
additional costs and achieve lower profit margins, particularly
in a softened market.
Historically, most of our business has been derived from
representing buyers in their home purchases. One of our growth
strategies is to increase the portion of our business that is
composed of representing sellers in their home listings. In
addition, a general softening in the residential real estate
market, as well as other factors, may cause an increase in the
percentage of our business that is composed of representing home
sellers rather than home buyers. As the portion of our listings
business increases, and as listings take longer to sell in a
market with higher inventory levels, marketing costs generally
increase, and commissions can decrease as buyers demand more
last-minute concessions in price before closing. If the softened
market persists, we may incur greater listing marketing costs
and achieve lower commissions and lower profit margins.
The
recent tightening in the availability of credit, particularly
with respect to lenders in the mortgage market, has and may
continue to 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 generally have
increased (subject to some recent fluctuation). In addition,
lender underwriting criteria began to change in 2006 as a result
of unexpectedly high mortgage defaults. Underwriting criteria
tightened further in 2007 as a result of lender and investor
losses on mortgages and mortgage-backed securities as loan
defaults and property foreclosures continued to rise. More
lenders currently require homebuyers to have higher credit
scores and to provide greater down payments than in recent
years. Currently, we perceive there is a disruption in the
availability of funds for mortgages as investors, who buy loans
and securities backed by mortgages, are tightening credit
standards and/ or exiting the market for loans that arent
guaranteed by Fannie Mae
20
or Freddie Mac. We also believe an entire group of loan
products, including subprime and some Alt A loans, have become
less available while pressures have built on prime,
non-conforming loans (principally loans of more than $417,000,
the limit observed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac although this
limit will increase as a result of recently enacted federal
legislation), making them significantly more costly than in
previous years relative to conforming loans. Although we have
recently seen some improvement in the availability of
non-conforming loans, and Congress recently enacted legislation
to this end, there can be no assurance that such improvement
will continue. We have also perceived an increase in
lenders request that homebuyers obtain mortgage insurance,
particularly as second mortgages and home equity loans become
harder to obtain. Further, in regions such as South Florida and
Las Vegas that have experienced particularly sharp declines in
home prices, we have learned that some lenders have ruled out
the extension of any home loans to some or all property types in
those markets, a practice sometimes referred to as blacklisting.
If these borrowers face higher interest rates, or are unable to
obtain financing at all, 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 greater odds that transactions will not close, longer
closing processes, fewer transactions or reduction in home
prices, any 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.
Softness
in the residential real estate market may reduce the
availability of home loans, which may further negatively impact
the housing market.
We believe that the prolonged softening of the residential real
estate market has also negatively impacted the market for home
loans. As home prices decline, and homeowners find themselves
with less equity in their homes, lenders generally become less
willing to refinance existing mortgages or to extend home equity
loans. Consequently, as home prices and home equity leverage
decrease, homeowners are more likely to default on their home
loans. These defaults can fuel a spiral of further credit
tightening and even less availability of credit, causing a
banking crisis. In addition, as more distressed properties are
offered for sale, the resulting increase in inventory of homes
for sale could put further downward pressure on home prices. We
believe that a significant number of adjustable rate mortgages
are scheduled to adjust during 2008. As the rates in many
adjustable rate mortgages reset at higher rates, causing
additional defaults, the number of distressed properties
entering the residential real estate market should increase,
further harming the health of the residential real estate market
and our results.
Foreclosures
and short sales may cause significant disruption in our
business.
There has been a significant increase in the number of homes
which are now in foreclosure and have involved short sales. A
short sale includes a sale where the sale price is less than the
loans or debt secured by the home listed for sale. This may
cause further softening in the real estate industry, which tends
to decrease home prices, and delays the sales process as short
sales can be complicated to complete.
Recently
adopted federal legislation designed to bolster the market for
nonconforming mortgage loans may result in short or long-term
fluctuations in the number of residential real estate
transactions, which could negatively impact our operating
results.
Federal legislation has recently been enacted that, among other
objectives seeks to bolster the market for home loans by raising
the loan amount that qualifies as a conforming loan
to a maximum of $729,000. There can be no assurance that this
legislation will accomplish its desired objectives, or that it
will have a positive impact on the residential real estate
market. The legislation with respect to conforming loans is
expected to expire in December 2008, and there is no guarantee
that this legislation will be extended to cover future time
periods. In addition, this legislation is expected to take up to
several months to implement while required regulations and
guidelines are drafted and adopted to implement the features of
the new legislation, including the raised loan amount. As this
legislation is implemented, a variety of factors could cause
unintended and possibly negative fluctuations in the number of
completed residential real estate transactions. For example,
homebuyers may decide to postpone home
21
purchases from early 2008 into later in the year to await the
implementation of the legislation, or homebuyers may decide to
accelerate home purchases from early 2009 into late 2008 to take
advantage of the legislation before its current expiration date.
Any of these events could significantly and negatively impact
our operating results.
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. Each has adopted its own rules and
regulations. 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 or work with the MLSs
effectively, or at all, which would likely adversely affect the
demand for our services.
Our
business model is relatively 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, and it has
evolved, and may continue to evolve, over time. 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
would likely 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, and
has been challenged as discussed under Legal
Proceedings in Part I, Item 3 of this report. 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 other agent
opportunities, our ability to hire and retain qualified real
estate agents would be harmed, which would significantly harm
our business.
If we
fail to recruit, hire and retain qualified agents, we would be
less able to service our clients and our growth would most
likely be impaired.
Our business requires us to hire employees who are licensed real
estate agents, and our strategy is based on consistently 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 challenges 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
would be less able 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 cause us 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.
Also, if the current softness of the residential real estate
market continues or worsens, we expect to see a reduction in the
number of licensed
REALTORS®
nationwide. The overall decline in the number of real estate
agents could make it more difficult for us to employ qualified
agents and grow our business.
22
We
would likely incur additional expenses or liabilities if our
current or former compensation plans, including 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 regulations applicable to
our compensation plans, including our expense reimbursement
policies 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, in 2007, Nevada
approved legislation that preempts the federal outside
sales exemption from paying minimum wage and overtime in
that state. That legislation took effect on November 1,
2007. Accordingly, we pay ZipAgents in Nevada minimum wage
offset against future commissions, and overtime subject to prior
manager approval. Also, some states, such as California and New
York, have laws requiring the reimbursement of employee
expenses, regardless of the terms of any employment contract,
which caused us to adopt different compensation practices in
these states than elsewhere. 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 lawsuits described in
this
Form 10-K
under Part I, Item 3, 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 would
likely incur significant expenses, be subject to lawsuits and
administrative complaints, and be required to modify our agent
compensation structure in some or all states, which could cause
us to suffer significant financial harm, and 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 and harm operating results.
As our operations have expanded, we have experienced rapid
growth in our headcount from 2,014 total employees, including
1,794 ZipAgents, at December 31, 2006 to 2,426 total
employees, including 2,180 ZipAgents, at December 31, 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 of
1934 could harm our business, harm our reputation and 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
23
support our operations and reliable, accurate and timely
financial and other reporting, we may not be able to satisfy
successfully 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
licenses 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 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, prohibit payments that 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, as well
as restrict other payments that may be received by settlement
service providers for their services. RESPA and similar state
laws also require timely disclosure of certain relationships or
financial interests that a broker has with providers of real
estate settlement services. If we or any of our employees fail
to comply with any of these statutes, a resulting enforcement
proceeding could subject us to substantial financial penalties,
suspension or loss of our licenses, 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 required 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, we have entered into a co-marketing
24
arrangements with one or more lenders such as
E-LOAN, Inc.
to provide mortgage services through the mortgage center on our
website in exchange for a flat monthly fee established on a
periodic basis. Also, 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 verify 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, which may be difficult to obtain, 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, all of which will increase compliance costs.
If our practices in offering these core services fail to comply
with applicable laws and regulations (including if we fail to
maintain any necessary licenses, whether through the loss of
individuals or entities licensed to perform these services or
otherwise, or if our practices 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, we expect the performance of these core services to
be subject to significant government regulation, 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.
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
and/or
marketing 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
marketing arrangements with independent third parties, such as
title, mortgage 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 brand name and client relationships could suffer. For
example, we receive revenues from our marketing relationship
with E-LOAN,
Inc., which provides mortgage services through 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 2007).
E-LOAN was
acquired by Popular, Inc. in late 2005 and has recently been
written down in its
25
portfolio. If our marketing relationship with
E-LOAN
became impaired or if
E-LOAN were
to suspend operations, not only would we lose the marketing
revenues from that relationship (which have relatively little
associated expenses), 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 expand successfully
into additional real estate markets.
We currently operate in 33 markets, including 19 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, in 2005 we
commenced operations in Las Vegas in April, Houston in June and
Miami in October. During 2006, we commenced operations in Tampa
in February, Orlando in April, Minneapolis/St. Paul in May,
Austin in July, Palm Beach in September, and the Greater
Philadelphia area in December. In 2007, we commenced operations
in Naples and Tucson in March, Denver in April, Jacksonville in
May, Salt Lake City and Richmond in July, Virginia Beach and
Charlotte in August, Raleigh-Durham in September and Westchester
County in December. To date in 2008 we have announced we will
commence operations in Long Island and have plans to enter one
to three additional markets depending on market conditions. Key
elements of this expansion include our ability to identify
strategically attractive real estate markets and to establish
successfully 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, and ease of access to information from, local
MLSs; and
|
| |
| |
|
state laws governing cash rebates and other regulatory
restrictions.
|
Before opening Las Vegas in 2005, we had not entered a new
geographic market since July 2000, and we have limited
experience expanding into and operating in multiple markets,
managing multiple sales regions and addressing the factors
described above. In addition, this expansion could involve
significant initial
start-up
costs. We expect that significant revenues from any new market
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
increase significantly our expenses and cause fluctuations in
our operating results. In addition,
26
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 would
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. 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 and 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. Conversely, as customers become comfortable using
the Internet for their real estate services needs, many more
real estate companies, brokers, and agents, as well as companies
such as the National Association of
REALTORS®,
operate competing websites, and are increasingly using the
Internet to market to potential customers. As a result, we must
continue to innovate to compete, and, even with new innovation,
customers may not distinguish or value the benefits of our
website and technology offerings. Consequently, any
technology-based benefits we may have may dissipate
significantly, or erode entirely, over time.
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, allowing 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
(which owns RealEstate.com), HouseValues, Inc., HomeGain, Inc.,
Move, Inc. and its
REALTOR.com®
affiliate, Zillow and Yahoo! Inc. that also look to attract and
monetize their relationships with
27
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 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. For instance, 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
21%, 27% and 29% of our leads during 2007, 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. For example, as discussed above, we have seen an increase
in complaints from local MLSs regarding our use of phrases such
as search MLS listed homes, or other phrases
28
including the term MLS, and we have received
corresponding demands from several MLSs that we refrain from
using such phrase. If these MLSs are successful in restricting
our ability to use these terms on our website or in our
marketing materials, our ability to attract clients directly to
our website could be impaired, which could increase our need
for, and cost of, obtaining leads from other sources.
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. Further, legislation is
currently pending in Illinois that, if enacted, would prohibit
such rebates. In addition, other states may limit or restrict
our cash rebate program as currently structured, including
Missouri and New York, although 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 need to adjust our pricing
structure or refrain from offering rebates to 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
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, Mr. Joseph
Patrick Lashinsky 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, Mr. Rector 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.
As we
implement changes in our agent compensation policies, we may
incent behaviors that cause an increase in our expenses and
potentially a decrease in our profit margin with the goal of
increasing our sales and overall profitability.
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. In 2007, we
implemented a program to pay higher commission splits to a
select number of 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
increase our compensation expenses, and possibly decrease our
profit margins, with the goal of increasing our sales and
overall profitability.
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,
29
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 companies with which we
are affiliated 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
(including our offering of, or entry into joint marketing
arrangements for, core services such as insurance and mortgage)
or incur significant expenses to educate consumers regarding the
use we make of information.
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.
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 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. Any such change could result in
potential claims or regulatory action (including with respect to
our offering of, or entry into joint marketing arrangements for,
core services such as insurance and mortgage).
30
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, and macroeconomic changes in the market
could mask the impact of seasonality.
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
and macroeconomic market changes, 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, 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.
31
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 37%
of our net transaction revenues in the year ended
December 31, 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 forces and events beyond our reasonable control, such as
regional disasters including 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, or terrorist attacks. 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.
|
If we need 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 any 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.
32
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, including acquisitions of our own stock. 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;
|
| |
| |
|
our inability to recover the costs of acquisitions or
investments; and
|
| |
| |
|
our inability to increase earnings per share.
|
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;
|
| |
| |
|
changes in our financial guidance for future periods;
|
| |
| |
|
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, as well as the
rules of trade associations, 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.
Such 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.
33
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 December 31, 2007, we had 23,640,746 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.
The
relatively small average daily trading volume of our stock could
result in volatility in our trading prices, particularly if a
large block of our stock is traded.
The average daily trading volume of our common stock on The
NASDAQ Stock Market is relatively small, averaging approximately
38,000 shares per trading day during our fourth quarter of
2007. Consequently, the trading price of our stock on any given
day could be volatile, particularly if a relatively large block
of stock is traded on that day. For example, several of our
earliest investors, including Benchmark Capital Partners,
Pyramid Technology Ventures, Vanguard Ventures, and each of
their affiliates, still own a significant number of shares of
our common stock, and Pyramid has indicated in public filings
that it is selling at least some of its holdings. If these
investors, or any other holders of our common stock, determined
to sell all or a part of their holdings, those sales could
depress the trading price of our common stock.
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, may 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.
|
34
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.
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 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments:
|
None.
Our principal executive offices are located in a leased facility
in Emeryville, California, consisting of approximately
23,803 square feet of office space, under a lease that
expires in January 2012. This facility accommodates our
principal administrative and finance operations. We typically
occupy a leased facility in each of our operating districts to
accommodate offices for our district director and support staff.
We generally do not provide office space for our ZipAgent force.
We do not own any real property. We believe that our leased
facilities are adequate to meet our current needs and that
additional facilities will be available for lease to meet our
future needs.
|
|
|
Item 3.
|
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 on behalf of themselves and others
similarly situated. The complaint alleged, among other things,
that the Companys policies for expense allowances and
expense reimbursement in place prior to October 2005, and its
policy for commission payments to agents for transactions that
do not close during the period of employment, violate applicable
law. The Company reached a settlement agreement, subject to
court approval, which called for a payment of $3,550,000 and, as
a result, recorded a charge in that amount during the quarter
ended September 30, 2007. The settlement agreement included
a full release from any further liability on the matters raised
in the complaint. The settlement agreement received court
approval on March 10, 2008.
On May 18, 2007, the Company was named in a class action
lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of California, County of
Alameda, Crystal Alexander, et al. v. ZipRealty,
case number RG 07326622, by one former employee agent of the
Company. The complaint seeks monetary relief and alleges, among
other things, that the Companys practices for compensating
agents and reimbursing expenses violate applicable law regarding
the payment for minimum wages and overtime. The Company is in
the initial stages of discovery in this matter. However, at this
time, the Company believes that its sales agents are properly
classified as outside salespersons exempt from minimum wage and
overtime payments and, therefore intends to vigorously defend
this lawsuit.
On March 29, 2006, the Company filed a claim in the
Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, for
malpractice against the law firm that provided counseling in
connection with certain employment matters, including wage and
expense issues, in California Superior Court, County of
San Francisco, ZipRealty Inc., v. Squire,
Sanders & Dempsey, LLP, Michael W. Kelly Esq., et.
al., Case No. CGC 06450765. While the Company believes
it has a good case, it is too early to determine the likelihood
of a recovery, or to estimate the amount of recovery, if any.
On March 12, 2008, a putative class action, entitled
Simon et al. v. ZipRealty, Inc., was filed against
the Company in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. The
complaint seeks to represent a class of all California sales
agents and a nationwide class of sales agents under the federal
Fair Labor Standards Act, claims that those sales agents are not
exempt from minimum wage and overtime laws, and brings claims
for failure to pay minimum wage and overtime, failure to
maintain and provide accurate payroll records, failure to
provide meal and rest breaks, and failure to reimburse expenses,
as well as a claim under California Business and Professions
Code Section 17200, all related to the same conduct. The
complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages, interest,
penalties, injunctive relief, and attorneys fees and
costs. The Company has not been served with this complaint and
has not had the
35
opportunity to analyze the allegations in detail. However, the
Company believes that its sales agents are properly classified
as outside salespeople exempt from applicable state and federal
minimum wage and overtime requirements. Accordingly, the Company
intends to vigorously defend this lawsuit.
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 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders:
|
None.
PART II
|
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Our Common Stock, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities:
|
Market
information
Our common stock began trading on The NASDAQ Stock Market under
the symbol ZIPR on November 10, 2004. We have
not listed our stock on any other markets or exchanges. The
following table shows the high and low closing prices for our
common stock as reported by The NASDAQ Stock Market:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
|
|
2006 Calendar year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
10.26
|
|
|
$
|
8.16
|
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
$
|
9.71
|
|
|
$
|
7.11
|
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.39
|
|
|
$
|
5.89
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$
|
8.16
|
|
|
$
|
7.08
|
|
|
2007 Calendar year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.83
|
|
|
$
|
7.07
|
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.69
|
|
|
$
|
7.00
|
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
$
|
7.51
|
|
|
$
|
6.01
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$
|
6.63
|
|
|
$
|
4.59
|
|
As of March 4, 2008, we had approximately 76 common
stockholders of record and a substantially greater number of
beneficial owners.
36
Stock
Performance Graph
The following performance graph compares the percentage change
in the cumulative total stockholder return on shares or our
common stock with the cumulative total return for:
|
|
|
| |
|
the AmEx Interactive Week Internet Index (our Peer Group Index),
and
|
| |
| |
|
the Total Return Index for The NASDAQ Stock Market
(U.S. and Foreign).
|
This comparison covers the period from November 10, 2004
(the first day of trading after the effectiveness of the
registration statement for our initial public offering) to
December 31, 2007 (the last trading day in our fiscal year
2007). It assumes $100 was invested on November 10, 2004 in
shares of our common stock, our peer corporations and The NASDAQ
Stock Market, and assumes reinvestment of dividends, if any.
The Interactive Week Internet Index is a modified-capitalization
weighed index designed to measure a cross section of companies
involved in providing internet infrastructure and access,
developing and marketing internet content and software, and
conducting business over the internet. The Interactive Week
internet Index was developed by The American Stock Exchange and
Ziff-Davis Publishing. We previously used the Goldman Sachs
Internet Index for our peer group comparative return. However,
Standard & Poors acquired the index from Goldman
Sachs Group in February, 2007 and the index is no longer
available. The Total Return Index for The NASDAQ Stock Market
(U.S. and Foreign) comprises all ADRs, domestic shares, and
foreign common shares traded on The NASDAQ Global Market and The
NASDAQ Capital Market, excluding preferred shares, rights and
warrants.
Comparative
Returns
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NASDAQ
|
|
Date
|
|
|
ZipRealty
|
|
|
Peer Group
|
|
|
Returns
|
|
November 10, 2004
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
109.63
|
|
|
|
|
108.70
|
|
|
|
|
106.92
|
|
|
December 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
51.66
|
|
|
|
|
110.09
|
|
|
|
|
108.39
|
|
|
December 29, 2006
|
|
|
|
45.95
|
|
|
|
|
125.80
|
|
|
|
|
118.71
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
34.36
|
|
|
|
|
143.80
|
|
|
|
|
130.36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37
The stock price performance shown on the graph is not
necessarily indicative of future price performance. Our closing
stock price on March 7, 2008 was $5.07.
Dividend
policy
We have never declared or paid dividends on our common stock. We
intend to retain our earnings for use in our business and
therefore we do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash
dividends in the foreseeable future.
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. From time to
time, we evaluate potential acquisitions of complementary
businesses, technologies and other assets, including the
acquisition of our own stock, in the ordinary course of business.
38
|
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data:
|
The following selected financial data should be read in
conjunction with Item 7. Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations and Item 8. Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Statements of Operations Data
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
Net transaction revenues
|
|
$
|
101,100
|
|
|
$
|
92,659
|
|
|
$
|
91,082
|
|
|
$
|
60,749
|
|
|
$
|
32,679
|
|
|
Referral and other revenues
|
|
|
2,762
|
|
|
|
2,728
|
|
|
|
2,323
|
|
|
|
1,539
|
|
|
|
1,128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
103,862
|
|
|
|
95,387
|
|
|
|
93,405
|
|
|
|
62,288
|
|
|
|
33,807
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
58,613
|
|
|
|
52,166
|
|
|
|
51,122
|
|
|
|
33,903
|
|
|
|
19,937
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
7,320
|
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
3,034
|
|
|
|
2,257
|
|
|
|
1,740
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
38,256
|
|
|
|
30,910
|
|
|
|
24,855
|
|
|
|
16,896
|
|
|
|
9,808
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
15,409
|
|
|
|
13,461
|
|
|
|
9,204
|
|
|
|
6,369
|
|
|
|
4,713
|
|
|
Litigation
|
|
|
3,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,164
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
123,148
|
|
|
|
102,312
|
|
|
|
92,379
|
|
|
|
59,425
|
|
|
|
36,198
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(19,286
|
)
|
|
|
(6,925
|
)
|
|
|
1,026
|
|
|
|
2,863
|
|
|
|
(2,391
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,273
|
)
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
4,401
|
|
|
|
3,907
|
|
|
|
2,741
|
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net
|
|
|
4,402
|
|
|
|
3,891
|
|
|
|
2,727
|
|
|
|
410
|
|
|
|
(2,192
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
|
(3,034
|
)
|
|
|
3,753
|
|
|
|
3,273
|
|
|
|
(4,583
|
)
|
|
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,560
|
|
|
|
(16,714
|
)
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
20,467
|
|
|
$
|
3,184
|
|
|
$
|
(4,583
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative preferred stock dividends
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
552
|
|
|
|
631
|
|
|
Amount allocated to participating preferred shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,632
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
20,467
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(5,214
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.66
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.00
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.02
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(3.57
|
)
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.66
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.00
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(3.57
|
)
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
22,586
|
|
|
|
20,542
|
|
|
|
20,089
|
|
|
|
3,798
|
|
|
|
1,459
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
22,586
|
|
|
|
20,542
|
|
|
|
25,080
|
|
|
|
3,798
|
|
|
|
1,459
|
|
Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted the provisions of
SFAS 123 (Revised 2004), Share-Based Payment
(SFAS 123(R)).
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
39
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. See Note 1 titled The Company
and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies of our
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$
|
80,467
|
|
|
$
|
88,808
|
|
|
$
|
88,909
|
|
|
$
|
83,497
|
|
|
$
|
10,357
|
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
72,314
|
|
|
|
83,794
|
|
|
|
84,047
|
|
|
|
80,923
|
|
|
|
8,183
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
90,819
|
|
|
|
98,357
|
|
|
|
113,953
|
|
|
|
88,126
|
|
|
|
12,430
|
|
|
Total long-term liabilities
|
|
|
503
|
|
|
|
513
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
13,093
|
|
|
|
10,488
|
|
|
|
10,172
|
|
|
|
5,855
|
|
|
|
3,535
|
|
|
Redeemable convertible preferred stock and warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
63,556
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
$
|
77,726
|
|
|
$
|
87,869
|
|
|
$
|
103,781
|
|
|
$
|
82,271
|
|
|
$
|
(54,660
|
)
|
|
|
|
Item 7.
|
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 I 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 our user-friendly website and employee real estate agents
to provide homebuyers and sellers with high-quality service and
value. Our website provides users with access to comprehensive
local Multiple Listing Services home listings data, as well as
other relevant market and neighborhood information. Our
proprietary business management system and technology platform
helps to reduce costs, allowing us to pass on significant
savings to 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, in New
Jersey, net of charitable donation) 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 and varies
significantly by market. We also receive revenues from certain
co-marketing arrangements, such as our relationship with
E-LOAN,
Inc., which provides mortgage services through 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 routinely explore our options for entering into
additional co-marketing arrangements or 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 33
markets, and as of December 31, 2007 employed
2,426 people, of whom 2,180 were ZipAgents. During 2006, we
commenced operations in Tampa in February, Orlando in April,
Minneapolis/St. Paul in May, Austin in July, Palm Beach in
September, and the Greater
40
Philadelphia area in December. During 2007 we commenced
operations in Naples and Tucson in March, Denver in April,
Jacksonville in May, Salt Lake City and Richmond in July,
Virginia Beach and Charlotte in August, Raleigh-Durham in
September, and Westchester County in December. To date in 2008
we have announced we will commence operations in Long Island and
have plans to enter one to three additional markets depending on
market conditions.
Trends
in our business and financial and real estate
markets
Softness in the residential real estate
market. Although our business has experienced
increasing revenue growth on an annual basis since our inception
in 1999, primarily as a result of increased transaction volume
and increased average net revenue per transaction, recently
revenue growth has slowed based on what we believe to be a
transition period in the housing market and the effects of the
recent changes in the mortgage lending business. In 2007 we
generated $103.9 million in net revenues, compared to
$95.4 million in 2006. The number of our closed
transactions increased to approximately 13,962 in 2007 from
approximately 12,683 in 2006, and our average net revenue per
transaction decreased slightly to approximately $7,241 in 2007
from approximately $7,306 in 2006 a decrease of approximately
1%. Our average net revenue per transaction decreased over this
period of time in both existing and new markets, as well as in
California markets and in markets outside of California.
Our transaction volume is primarily driven by the number of
ZipAgents we employ, their productivity, and market conditions.
The number of ZipAgents we employ has increased to 2,180 at
December 31, 2007 from 1,794 at December 31, 2006. As
we introduce new initiatives to improve agent productivity, we
may experience temporary declines in the total number of agents
although, overall, we expect to continue to increase the number
of agents. 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. If the current softness of the residential
real estate market continues or worsens, we expect to see a
reduction in the number of licensed
REALTORS®
nationwide and in our largest markets. For example, the National
Association of
REALTORS®
has reported that its total membership of
REALTORS®
fell approximately 5.9% from August 31, 2007 to
January 31, 2008. Further, according to the California
Department of Real Estate, in December 2007, the total number of
real estate licensees in California dropped by 0.1%
month-over-month,
the first decline in its agent rolls in over five years, and
salesperson examinations in that state decreased by 85% from
December 2006 to December 2007. We expect that overall declines
in agent ranks will be comprised disproportionately of less
skilled real estate agents, with the better agents continuing in
the business. We also expect that the prolonged softening may
deal a critical blow to some of our competitors. It is our hope
that these events, if they occur, will increase the percentage
of highly skilled real estate agents on the market, and reduce
the competition for such agents, but we cannot know whether this
result will occur, or whether the overall decline in the number
of real estate agents will make it more difficult for us to
employ qualified agents and grow our business.
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 an increase in the amount of time
listings are taking to sell. For example, average monthly
inventories in our existing markets increased approximately 29%
in 2007 compared to 2006. Pricing increases have also slowed,
and some markets have shown declines in median selling prices
over this period. In some markets, home prices have remained
relatively stable, but we believe that buyer expectation that
prices will decline has resulted in fewer transactions, as
buyers postpone transactions until such declines materialize.
For example, according to NAR, nationally sales of existing
homes fell 22.0%
year-over-year
in December 2007 to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of
4.89 million. In the State of California, the California
Association of
REALTORS®
reported that sales of existing homes declined 33.4% and the
median price of existing homes fell 16.5%
year-over-year
during the month of December 2007. In our opinion, these data
points support the notion that 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. During this period of
transition we may continue to experience reduced growth rates
and decreased agent productivity versus our historical levels as
buyers react cautiously to perceived changing market conditions
and as we currently intend to open significantly fewer number of
new markets in 2008 compared to 2007.
As a result of this contraction in the residential real estate
market, our net transaction revenues in existing markets
(markets opened before January 1, 2006), decreased to
$89.6 million in 2007 from $90.1 million in 2006.
41
Although we have increased our market share in existing markets,
our net transaction revenues have decreased in these markets due
to a slight decline in transaction volumes. New market net
transaction revenues increased by $9.0 million resulting in
an overall increase in net revenues of $8.4 million. We may
not be able to sustain this effort at this rate in new markets,
if the softening in the residential real estate market continues.
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 over time. Since
our market share has averaged less than 1% over the past year in
our existing markets in aggregate, we believe that there is an
opportunity to further increase our market share, even if the
overall level of sales decline due to changing consumer
sentiment, interest rate increases, credit tightening, or other
economic or geopolitical factors.
As we implement our business plan for 2008, a key area of focus
will be on our existing markets, with a goal of driving their
efficiency, productivity and profits. Nevertheless, our losses
are likely to continue into 2008, albeit we expect they will be
reduced from that which we experienced in 2007.
Impact of softened residential real estate market on
availability of mortgages. We also believe that
the prolonged softening of the residential real estate market
has negatively impacted, and has been negatively impacted by,
the market for home loans, which is a critical market to our
business. As home prices decline, and homeowners find themselves
with less equity in their homes, lenders generally become less
willing to refinance existing mortgages or to extend home equity
loans. We believe several effects could result, including
homeowners being less willing to spend, which would have a
dampening effect on the overall economy, and, in turn, dampen
the demand for real estate. Also, as home equity leverage
decreases, homeowners are more likely to default on their home
loans. As reported by the Wall Street Journal, we believe we
have seen some evidence of this occurrence, as the number of
short sales (which are sales typically involving distressed
properties) increase during the calendar year 2007. These
defaults can fuel a spiral of further credit tightening and even
less availability of credit, causing a banking crisis. In
addition, as more distressed properties are offered for sale,
the resulting increase in inventory of homes for sale could put
further downward pressure on home prices. As the rates in many
adjustable rate mortgages reset at higher rates, the number of
distressed properties entering the residential real estate
market should increase. We believe we have already seen signs of
this phenomenon in early 2008, although we expect significant
variation from market to market.
Federal legislation has recently been enacted that, among other
objectives, seeks to bolster the market for home loans by
raising the loan amount that qualifies as a conforming
loan to a maximum of $729,000. There can be no assurance
that this legislation will accomplish its desired objectives, or
that it will have a positive impact on the residential real
estate market. The legislation with respect to conforming loans
is expected to expire in December 2008, and there is no
guarantee that this legislation will be extended to cover future
time periods. In addition, this legislation is expected to take
up to several months to implement while required regulations and
guidelines are drafted and adopted to implement the features of
the new legislation, including the raised loan amount. As this
legislation is implemented, a variety of factors could cause
unintended and possibly negative fluctuations in the number of
completed residential real estate transactions. For example,
homebuyers may decide to postpone home purchases from early 2008
into later in the year to await the implementation of the
legislation, or homebuyers may decide to accelerate home
purchases from early 2009 into late 2008 to take advantage of
the legislation before its current expiration date. Any of these
events could significantly and negatively impact our operating
results.
Changes to our business model. 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% or
more, based on their productivity, 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 choose
or be required to make further modifications to our compensation
structure in the future. For example, Nevada recently approved
legislation that preempts the federal outside sales
42
exemption from paying minimum wages in that state. That
legislation took effect on November 1, 2007. Accordingly,
on November 1, 2007 we began paying ZipAgents minimum wage
and, where required, overtime, to our ZipAgents in Nevada. The
minimum wage payments will be offset against future commissions
earned, if any.
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.
Historically, most of our business has been derived from
representing buyers in their home purchases. One of our growth
strategies is to increase the portion of our business that is
composed of representing sellers in their home listings. In
addition, a general softening in the residential real estate
market, as well as other factors, may cause an increase in the
percentage of our business that is composed of representing home
sellers rather than home buyers. As the portion of our listings
business increases, and as listings take longer to sell in a
market with higher inventory levels, marketing costs generally
increase, and commissions can decrease as buyers demand more
last-minute concessions in price before closing. If the softened
market persists, we may incur greater listing marketing costs
and achieve lower commissions and lower profit margins.
Fluctuations in quarterly profitability. 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. 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 class action lawsuit; we would have been
profitable excluding the effect of this settlement. We achieved
profitability in the third and fourth quarters of 2005, but
because of seasonality (seasonal fluctuations in our business)
and new market expansion as well as 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. In 2007, we reported losses in each quarter due to
various factors including seasonality, new market expansion and
ongoing market softness. The third and fourth quarter losses
were additionally impacted by tightening in the availability of
home mortgage credit and the proposed litigation settlement
described in Part I, Item 3, Legal
Proceedings.
Industry declines in commission
percentages. 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.
Changes in competitive landscape. 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
43
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 websites. These companies have limited
operating histories upon which to evaluate their operations and
future prospects. However, in order to be successful, 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.
Industry seasonality and cyclicality. 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
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 market activity, macroeconomic
environment, and periodic business cycles can significantly
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 likely would be negatively impacted.
Recently, changes in the mortgage market, including the subprime
market, have negatively effected the buying and selling of real
estate, as financing and credit standards have tightened. These
factors have tended to depress the real estate activity. Also,
there have been numerous reports about the effects of subprime
mortgages on the general real estate market. These reports also
tend to have a dampening effect on the general real estate
market.
Historical variations in U.S. interest
rates. 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. While the volume of
existing home sales has declined for at least two consecutive
years only twice since 1970, namely 1979 through 1982 and 1989
through 1990, sales did fall from their 2005 peak to
approximately 6.5 million in 2006 and fell again in 2007 to
approximately 5.7 million, and there are forecasts that
predict sales will continue their decline in 2008. Sales volume
changes are sensitive to, but do not always follow interest rate
changes. 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%. However,
with rates remaining at similarly high levels, sales increased
during the period from 1983 through 1986. Average interest rates
were lower during the second period of consecutive year
declines, 1989 through 1990, than they had been in the expansion
period ending 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.
44
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 the
Fall of 2005 as interest rates have generally increased (subject
to some recent fluctuations), inventories have generally
increased (but with significant variations in inventory market
to market), and credit standards and financing have tightened,
as discussed in more detail above. 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
$59.7 billion in annual commissions generated in 2006 to
decline. However, should the addressable market for our services
decline somewhat in the near term 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 consolidated 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 Consolidated Financial Statements, 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.
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, in New Jersey, charitable donation) 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
ranges between 15 to 24 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.
Stock-based
compensation
Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted the provisions of
SFAS 123 (Revised 2004), Share-Based Payment
(SFAS 123(R)) which requires the
measurement and recognition of compensation expense for all
stock-based
45
payment awards made to employees and directors, including
employee stock options and employee stock purchases, based on
estimated fair values. Prior to adopting SFAS 123(R), we
accounted for employee stock-based compensation arrangements in
accordance with provisions of Accounting Principles Board
Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees
(APB 25). 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. We elected to adopt the modified prospective transition
method as provided by SFAS 123(R), except for options
granted prior to our initial filing in May 2004 of the
registration statement for our initial public offering, for
which the fair value was determined for disclosure purposes
using the minimum value method. Under this transition method,
stock-based compensation cost recognized in the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006 includes:
|
|
|
| |
|
compensation cost for all unvested stock-based awards as of
January 1, 2006 that were granted subsequent to our initial
filing in May 2004 of the registration statement for our initial
public offering, and prior to January 1, 2006, based on the
grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the original
provisions of SFAS 123;
|
| |
| |
|
compensation cost for stock-based awards granted subsequent, to
January 1, 2006, based on the grant date fair value
estimated in accordance with the provisions of
SFAS 123(R); and
|
| |
| |
|
compensation cost for options granted prior to our initial
filing in May 2004 of the registration statement for our initial
public offering, based on the intrinsic value method.
|
In accordance with the modified prospective transition method,
the financial statements for prior periods have not been
restated to reflect the impact of SFAS 123(R). We estimate
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 our common
stock and consideration of other relevant factors such as the
volatility assumptions of guideline 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 Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 107
(SAB 107). We estimate expected forfeitures
based on various factors including employee class and historical
experience.
We account 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, restricted stock
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.
For option and restricted stock awards, the fair value of our
common stock is the closing price of our stock on The NASDAQ
Stock Market on the date the award was granted.
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. During the fourth quarter
2005, we concluded that it is more likely than not that we will
be able to realize the benefit of a significant portion of these
deferred tax assets in the future. Consequently, we recognized a
net tax benefit of $16.7 million resulting primarily from
the release of a significant portion of the net deferred tax
valuation allowance.
46
During the fourth quarter of 2006, we concluded that a full
valuation allowance should be reinstated against our 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. As a result, the tax expense for the year
ended December 31, 2006 includes a non-cash expense of
$17.7 million related to the recording of a full valuation
allowance.
The Company maintains that a full valuation allowance should be
accounted for against its net deferred tax assets at
December 31, 2007. The Company supports the need for a
valuation allowance against the deferred tax assets due to
negative evidence including recent historical results and
managements expectations for the future.
At December 31, 2007, we had federal and state net
operating loss carryforwards of approximately $55.4 million
and $36.9 million, respectively, available to offset future
taxable income. If not utilized, the federal and state net
operating losses will begin to expire in 2019 for federal and
2009 for state tax purposes, respectively.
The Tax Reform Act of 1986 limits the use of net operating loss
and tax credit carryforwards in certain situations where changes
occur in the stock ownership. The Company has federal and state
net operating losses of approximately $1.0 million at
July 7, 1999 that are subject to annual limitations of
$20,000, net operating losses of approximately $1.0 million
at November 30, 1999 that are subject to annual limitations
of $200,000, and net operating losses of approximately
$5.7 million at May 31, 2005 that are subject to
annual limitations of $12 million.
The difference between our effective income tax rate and the
federal statutory rate is primarily a function of the release of
the valuation allowance provided against the net deferred tax
assets and permanent differences. Our future effective income
tax rate will depend on various factors, such as changes in our
valuation allowance, pending or future tax law changes including
rate changes, potential limitations on the use of federal and
state net operating losses, and state taxes.
47
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
The following table summarizes certain financial data related to
our operations for the periods indicated:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Statements of Operations Data
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
Net transaction revenues
|
|
$
|
101,100
|
|
|
$
|
92,659
|
|
|
$
|
91,082
|
|
|
Referral and other revenues
|
|
|
2,762
|
|
|
|
2,728
|
|
|
|
2,323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
103,862
|
|
|
|
95,387
|
|
|
|
93,405
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
58,613
|
|
|
|
52,166
|
|
|
|
51,122
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
7,320
|
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
3,034
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
38,256
|
|
|
|
30,910
|
|
|
|
24,855
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
15,409
|
|
|
|
13,461
|
|
|
|
9,204
|
|
|
Litigation
|
|
|
3,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,164
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
123,148
|
|
|
|
102,312
|
|
|
|
92,379
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(19,286
|
)
|
|
|
(6,925
|
)
|
|
|
1,026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
4,401
|
|
|
|
3,907
|
|
|
|
2,741
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net
|
|
|
4,402
|
|
|
|
3,891
|
|
|
|
2,727
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
|
(3,034
|
)
|
|
|
3,753
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,560
|
|
|
|
(16,714
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
20,467
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.66
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.00
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.02
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.66
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.00
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
22,586
|
|
|
|
20,542
|
|
|
|
20,089
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
22,586
|
|
|
|
20,542
|
|
|
|
25,080
|
|
48
The following table presents our operating results as a
percentage of net revenues for the periods indicated:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Statements of Operations Data
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
Net transaction revenues
|
|
|
97.3
|
%
|
|
|
97.1
|
%
|
|
|
97.5
|
%
|
|
Referral and other revenues
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
56.4
|
|
|
|
54.7
|
|
|
|
54.7
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
36.8
|
|
|
|
32.4
|
|
|
|
26.6
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
|
|
14.1
|
|
|
|
9.9
|
|
|
Litigation
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
118.4
|
|
|
|
107.2
|
|
|
|
98.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(18.4
|
)
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
Other income (expense)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(14.2
|
)
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.4
|
|
|
|
(17.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
(14.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(21.5
|
)%
|
|
|
21.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
Comparison
of the years ended December 31, 2007 and December 31,
2006
Other
operating data
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
Number of markets (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of transactions closed during the period (2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
|
11,813
|
|
|
|
12,207
|
|
|
|
(394
|
)
|
|
|
(3.2
|
)%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
2,149
|
|
|
|
476
|
|
|
|
1,673
|
|
|
|
351.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
13,962
|
|
|
|
12,683
|
|
|
|
1,279
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average net revenue per transaction (3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
$
|
7,585
|
|
|
$
|
7,384
|
|
|
$
|
201
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
5,350
|
|
|
|
5,300
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
|
All markets
|
|
$
|
7,241
|
|
|
$
|
7,306
|
|
|
$
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of ZipAgents at end of the period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
|
1,627
|
|
|
|
1,591
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
553
|
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
|
172.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All markets
|
|
|
2,180
|
|
|
|
1,794
|
|
|
|
386
|
|
|
|
21.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
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. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets:
|
|
New markets and the month opened:
|
Atlanta, GA
Baltimore, MD
Boston, MD
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
Washington, DC
|
|
Tampa, FL
Orlando, FL
Minneapolis, MN
Austin, TX
Palm Beach, FL
Greater Philadelphia Area, PA
Naples, FL
Tucson, AZ
Denver, CO
Jacksonville, FL
Salt Lake City, UT
Richmond, VA
Virginia Beach, VA
Charlotte, NC
Raleigh-Durham, NC
Westchester County, NY
|
|
February 2006
April 2006
May 2006
July 2006
September 2006
December 2006
March 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
July 2007
July 2007
August 2007
August 2007
September 2007
December 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. |
50
Net
transaction revenues
Net transaction revenues consist of commissions earned as agents
to buyers and sellers on the purchase or sale of real estate
transactions, net of any rebate, commission discount or
transaction fee adjustment.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Net transaction revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
$
|
89,604
|
|
|
$
|
90,136
|
|
|
$
|
(532
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
11,496
|
|
|
|
2,523
|
|
|
|
8,973
|
|
|
|
355.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
101,100
|
|
|
$
|
92,659
|
|
|
$
|
8,441
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in our net transaction revenues of
$8.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2007
compared to the year ended December 31, 2006 was primarily
due to an increase in net transaction revenues of
$9.0 million in our new markets offset by a decrease in net
transaction revenues of $0.5 million from our existing
markets.
The decrease in net transaction revenues in our existing markets
of $0.5 million or 0.6% was driven primarily by a decrease
in the number of transactions closed during the period of 394
closed transactions or 3.2% partially offset by an increase in
average net revenue per transaction of $201 or 2.7%.
The increase in net transaction revenues in our new markets of
$9.0 million was driven by an increase of
1,673 transactions closed during the period as we opened
ten new markets in the 2007 in addition to the six markets
opened in 2006 and added new ZipAgents. The increase was also
attributable to an increase in the average net revenue per
transaction of $50 or 3.0%.
We expect that our net revenues for 2008 will increase primarily
as a result of additional transactions in our new markets as
they add new ZipAgents.
Referral
and other revenues
Referral and other revenues consist primarily of certain
co-marketing agreements and transaction referrals.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Referral and other revenues
|
|
$
|
2,762
|
|
|
$
|
2,728
|
|
|
$
|
34
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
%
|
The absolute dollar increase in referral and other revenues was
not significant.
Cost
of revenues
Our cost of revenues 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.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
$
|
52,378
|
|
|
$
|
50,875
|
|
|
$
|
1,503
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
6,235
|
|
|
|
1,291
|
|
|
|
4,944
|
|
|
|
382.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
58,613
|
|
|
$
|
52,166
|
|
|
$
|
6,447
|
|
|
|
12.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51
The increase in cost of revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2007 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2006 was primarily related to the overall
increase in transaction revenue on which we pay agent
commissions.
Cost of revenues increased in our existing markets by
approximately $1.5 million or 3.0% for the year ended
December 31, 2007 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2006. The cost of revenues as a percentage of
existing markets net transaction revenues increased by about
2.0% primarily due to the mix of agent commissions paid as well
as increased agent expense reimbursements. Additionally we made
certain adjustments to our agent compensation plan to better
motivate and retain our agents under the current market
conditions.
Cost of revenues increased in our new markets by approximately
$4.9 million related to the increase in net transaction
revenue during the period. The cost of revenues as a percentage
of new market net transaction revenues increased by 3.0%
primarily due to the mix of agent commissions paid. This
increase in the cost of revenues percentage in new markets is
expected as increasing numbers of ZipAgents achieve higher
commission splits as the new markets mature.
We expect that our cost of revenues for 2008 will increase in
absolute dollars but remain relatively consistent as a
percentage of net transaction revenues.
Product
development
Product development expenses include our information technology
costs, primarily compensation and benefits for our product
development and infrastructure personnel, depreciation of
equipment, communications expenses and other operating costs
relating to the maintenance of our website and proprietary
technology platforms and infrastructure.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
$
|
7,320
|
|
|
$
|
5,775
|
|
|
$
|
1,545
|
|
|
|
26.8
|
%
|
The increase in product development expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2007 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2006 was due to growth in our business and
consisted of increases in salaries and benefits of approximately
$0.4 million, technology infrastructure costs of
$0.7 million, depreciation of $0.4 million and
consulting costs of $0.1 million. These costs were
partially offset by an increase in the amount of salaries and
benefits capitalized as internal-use software of
$0.1 million. As a percentage of net revenues, product
development expenses increased by 1.0 percentage point in
the period due primarily to the growth of our product
development staff headcount to enhance our website, proprietary
agent platform and overall system infrastructure.
We expect our product development expenses to increase in 2008
in absolute dollars and as a percentage of net revenues as we
continue to grow our business and enhance our technology systems
to improve our ZipAgents efficiency and enhance features on our
website for consumers.
We expect that our product development expenses to increase in
2008 in absolute dollars and remain relatively flat as a
percentage of net revenues as we continue to grow our business
and enhance our technology systems to improve our ZipAgents
efficiency and enhance features on our website for consumers.
Sales and
marketing
Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation
and related costs for personnel engaged in sales, sales support
and customer service as well as promotional, advertising and
client acquisition costs. These
52
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.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and marketing:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
$
|
22,289
|
|
|
$
|
21,679
|
|
|
$
|
610
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
8,591
|
|
|
|
2,854
|
|
|
|
5,737
|
|
|
|
201.1
|
%
|
|
Regional/corporate sales support and marketing
|
|
|
7,376
|
|
|
|
6,377
|
|
|
|
999
|
|
|
|
15.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
38,256
|
|
|
$
|
30,910
|
|
|
$
|
7,346
|
|
|
|
23.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in sales and marketing expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2007 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2006 was primarily related to the overall
growth in our business principally the expansion into new
markets.
Sales and marketing expenses increased in our existing markets
by approximately $0.6 million principally attributable to
salaries and benefits of $0.4 million, customer acquisition
costs of $0.4 million, facilities related expenses of
$0.1 million, offset by a reduction in recruiting costs of
$0.2 million. As a percentage of existing market net
transactions revenues, existing market sales and marketing
expenses were 24.9% in the current period compared to 24.1% in
the prior year.
Sales and marketing expenses increased in our new markets by
approximately $5.7 million principally attributable to
opening ten new market offices since December 31, 2006. The
increased expenses consisted primarily of salaries and benefits
of $1.9 million, travel of $0.2 million, customer
acquisition/marketing costs of $1.9 million, facilities
related expenses of $1.1 million and recruiting/training
expenses of $0.5 million. As a percentage of new market net
transactions revenues, new market sales and marketing expenses
were 74.7% in the current year compared to 113.1% in the prior
year.
Regional/corporate sales support and marketing expenses
increased by approximately $0.9 million principally
attributable to the costs of our new market expansion. The
increased expenses consisted primarily of salaries and benefits
of $0.5 million, travel of $0.2 million, advertising
and marketing of $0.2 million, consulting of
$0.1 million and $0.1 million of stock-based
compensation partially offset by decreased depreciation expenses
of $0.2 million. As a percentage of total net transactions
revenues, regional sales support and marketing expenses were
7.3% in the current period compared to 6.9% in the prior year.
We expect that our sales and marketing expenses for 2008 will
increase in absolute dollars but decrease 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.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
$
|
15,409
|
|
|
$
|
13,461
|
|
|
$
|
1,948
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
%
|
The increase in general and administrative expenses for the year
ended December 31, 2007 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2006 was principally due to increased salaries
and benefits of $0.8 million, professional fees of
$0.4 million, recruiting and training of $0.2 million,
facilities related expenses of $0.1 million, stock-based
compensation expense of $0.7 partially offset by decreased
travel and entertainment of $0.1 million. Included in the
increase in general and administrative expenses during the year
were the expenses associated with the termination
53
of our former CEO which totaled approximately $0.7 million.
As a percentage of net revenues, general and administrative
expenses were 14.8% in the period compared to 14.1% in the year
ended December 31, 2006.
As we grow our business and expand into additional new markets,
we expect our general and administrative expenses to decrease in
absolute dollars and as a percentage of net revenues.
Litigation
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation
|
|
$
|
3,550
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,550
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
Litigation relates to a class action lawsuit filed by four
former ZipAgents. The plaintiffs allege, among other things,
that our expense allowance policies violate applicable law.
There is a proposed settlement involving a payment of
approximately $3.55 million, and a full release from any
further liability on the matters raised in the lawsuit. See the
description under Legal Proceedings in Part I,
Item 3 of this report.
Interest
income
Interest income relates to interest we earn on our money market
deposits and short-term investments.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
$
|
4,401
|
|
|
$
|
3,907
|
|
|
$
|
494
|
|
|
|
12.6
|
%
|
Interest income relates to interest we earn on our money market
deposits and short-term investments. 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 year ended
December 31, 2007 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2006 was due primarily to higher interest
rates earned on lower average balances.
Other
income (expense), net
Other income (expense), net consists of non-operating items,
which have not been significant to date.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
|
|
105.0
|
%
|
Provision
for 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.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
17,560
|
|
|
$
|
(17,560
|
)
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
We continue to record a full valuation allowance against our
deferred tax assets at December 31, 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 year ended
December 31, 2007, we have not recorded a tax provision or
benefit.
54
Comparison
of the years ended December 31, 2006 and December 31,
2005
Other
operating data
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
Number of markets (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of transactions closed during the period (2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
|
11,072
|
|
|
|
11,957
|
|
|
|
(885
|
)
|
|
|
(7.4
|
)%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
1,611
|
|
|
|
360
|
|
|
|
1,251
|
|
|
|
347.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
12,683
|
|
|
|
12,317
|
|
|
|
366
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average net revenue per transaction (3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
$
|
7,555
|
|
|
$
|
7,454
|
|
|
$
|
101
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
5,591
|
|
|
|
5,431
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
|
All markets
|
|
$
|
7,306
|
|
|
$
|
7,395
|
|
|
$
|
(89
|
)
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of ZipAgents at end of the period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
|
1,428
|
|
|
|
1,254
|
|
|
|
172
|
|
|
|
13.7
|
%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
366
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
254
|
|
|
|
226.8
|
%
|
|
All markets
|
|
|
1,794
|
|
|
|
1,366
|
|
|
|
426
|
|
|
|
31.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
New markets are transferred to existing markets on
January 1st following the completion of their first full
calendar year. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets:
|
|
New markets and the month opened:
|
Atlanta, GA
Baltimore, MD
Boston, MD
Chicago, IL
Dallas, TX
Fresno/Central Valley, CA
Los Angeles, CA
Orange County, CA
Phoenix, AZ
Sacramento, CA
San Diego, CA
San Francisco Bay Area, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
|
|
Las Vegas, NV
Houston, TX
Miami, FL
Tampa, FL
Orlando, FL
Minneapolis, MN
Austin, TX
Palm Beach, FL
Greater Philadelphia Area, PA
|
|
April 2005
June 2005
October 2005
February 2006
April 2006
May 2006
July 2006
September 2006
December 2006
|
|
|
|
|
(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. |
55
Net
transaction revenues
Net transaction revenues consist of commissions earned as agents
to buyers and sellers on the purchase or sale of real estate
transactions, net of any rebate, commission discount or
transaction fee adjustment.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Net transaction revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
$
|
83,652
|
|
|
$
|
89,127
|
|
|
$
|
(5,475
|
)
|
|
|
(6.1
|
)%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
9,007
|
|
|
|
1,955
|
|
|
|
7,052
|
|
|
|
360.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
92,659
|
|
|
$
|
91,082
|
|
|
$
|
1,577
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in our net transaction revenues of
$1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2006
compared to the year ended December 31, 2005 was primarily
due to an increase in net transaction revenues of
$7.1 million in our new markets offset by a decrease in net
transaction revenues of $5.5 million from our existing
markets.
The increase in our new markets of $7.1 million was driven
by an increase of 1,251 transactions closed during the period as
we opened six new markets in the year 2006 in addition to the
three markets opened in 2005 and added new ZipAgents. The
increase was also attributable to an increase in the average net
revenue per transaction of $160 or 2.9%.
The decrease in net transaction revenues in our existing markets
of $5.5 million or 6.1% was driven primarily by a decrease
in the number of transactions closed during the period of 885
closed transactions or 7.4% offset by a modest increase in
average net revenue per transaction of $101 or 1.4%.
Referral
and other revenues
Referral and other revenues consist primarily of certain
co-marketing agreements and transaction referrals.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Referral and other revenues
|
|
$
|
2,728
|
|
|
$
|
2,323
|
|
|
$
|
405
|
|
|
|
17.4
|
%
|
The absolute dollar increase in referral and other revenues was
not significant.
Cost
of revenues
Our cost of revenues 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.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
$
|
47,519
|
|
|
$
|
50,028
|
|
|
$
|
(2,509
|
)
|
|
|
(5.0
|
)%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
4,647
|
|
|
|
1,094
|
|
|
|
3,553
|
|
|
|
324.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
52,166
|
|
|
$
|
51,122
|
|
|
$
|
1,044
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The overall increase in cost of revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2005 was primarily related to the overall
increase in transaction revenue on which we pay agent
commissions.
56
Cost of revenues decreased in our existing markets by
approximately $2.5 million or 5.0% for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2005. The cost of revenues as a percentage of
existing markets net transaction revenues increased by about 0.7
percentage point primarily due to the mix of agent commissions
paid as well as increased agent expense reimbursements.
Cost of revenues increased in our new markets by approximately
$3.6 million related to the increase in net transaction
revenue during the period. The cost of revenues as a percentage
of new market net transaction revenues decreased by 4.4%
primarily due to the mix of agent commissions paid. This
decrease was primarily attributable to the impact of the new
markets opened year over year. The cost of revenues percentage
in new markets fluctuates but is expected to increase as new
markets mature and increasing numbers of ZipAgents achieve
higher commission splits.
Product
development
Product development expenses include our information technology
costs, primarily compensation and benefits for our product
development and infrastructure personnel, depreciation of
equipment, communications expenses and other operating costs
relating to the maintenance of our website and proprietary
technology platforms and infrastructure.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
$
|
5,775
|
|
|
$
|
3,034
|
|
|
$
|
2,741
|
|
|
|
90.4
|
%
|
The increase in product development expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2005 was due to growth in our business and
consisted of increases in salaries and benefits of approximately
$1.5 million, technology infrastructure costs of
$0.8 million, depreciation of $0.3 million partially
offset by an increase in the amount of salaries and benefits
capitalized as internal-use software of $0.1 million.
Additionally, stock-based compensation increased
$0.2 million resulting from the adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R). As a percentage of net revenues,
product development expenses increased by 2.8 percentage
points in the period due primarily to the growth of our product
development staff headcount to enhance our website, proprietary
agent platform and overall system infrastructure.
Sales
and marketing
Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation
and related costs for personnel engaged in sales, sales support
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.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and marketing:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparable existing markets
|
|
$
|
18,861
|
|
|
$
|
18,899
|
|
|
$
|
(38
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)%
|
|
New markets
|
|
|
5,671
|
|
|
|
1,677
|
|
|
|
3,994
|
|
|
|
238.2
|
%
|
|
Regional/corporate sales support and marketing
|
|
|
6,378
|
|
|
|
4,279
|
|
|
|
2,099
|
|
|
|
49.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
30,910
|
|
|
$
|
24,855
|
|
|
$
|
6,055
|
|
|
|
24.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The overall increase in sales and marketing expenses for the
year ended December 31, 2006 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2005 was primarily related to the overall
growth in our business principally the expansion into six new
markets in 2006 and three new markets in 2005.
57
Sales and marketing expenses remained virtually unchanged in our
existing markets attributable to increases in salaries and
benefits of $0.2 million, facilities related expenses of
$0.2 million, advertising expenses of $0.1 million,
depreciation expense of $0.1 million and stock based
compensation expense of $0.1 million, offset by a reduction
in recruiting and training costs of $0.2 million and
customer acquisition costs of $0.5 million. As a percentage
of existing market net transactions revenues, existing market
sales and marketing expenses were 22.5% for 2006 compared to
21.2% for 2005.
Sales and marketing expenses increased in our new markets by
approximately $4.0 million principally attributable to
opening six new market offices in the year 2006. The increased
expenses consisted primarily of salaries and benefits of
$1.5 million, travel of $0.1 million, customer
acquisition/marketing costs of $1.3 million, facilities
related expenses of $0.7 million and recruiting/training
expenses of $0.3 million. As a percentage of new market net
transactions revenues, new market sales and marketing expenses
were 63.0% for 2006 compared to 85.8% for 2005.
Regional/corporate sales support and marketing expenses
increased by approximately $2.1 million principally
attributable to salaries and benefits of $0.5 million,
travel of $0.1 million, facilities related operating
expenses of $0.8 million and consulting expenses of
$0.2 million. Additionally, stock-based compensation
increased $0.4 million resulting from the adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R). As a percentage of total net
transactions revenues, regional sales support and marketing
expenses were 6.9% in 2006 compared to 4.7% in 2005.
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.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
$
|
13,461
|
|
|
$
|
9,204
|
|
|
$
|
4,257
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
%
|
The increase in general and administrative expenses in the year
ended December 31, 2006 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2005 was due to increases of $1.7 million
of salaries and benefits and approximately $1.1 million of
outside accounting and other professional costs relating
primarily to operating as a public company including
Sarbanes-Oxley section 404 compliance costs. Additionally,
stock-based compensation increased $1.5 million in general
and administrative expense resulting from the adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R). As a percentage of net revenues,
general and administrative expenses increased 4.3 percentage
points for the same period.
Litigation
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,164
|
|
|
$
|
(4,164
|
)
|
|
|
(100.0
|
)%
|
Litigation expense in 2005 is related to a class action lawsuit.
We settled this claim in exchange for our payment of
$4.164 million.
58
Interest
income
Interest income relates to interest we earn on our money market
deposits and short-term investments.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
$
|
3,907
|
|
|
$
|
2,741
|
|
|
$
|
1,166
|
|
|
|
42.6
|
%
|
Interest income relates to interest we earn on our money market
deposits and short-term investments. 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 year ended
December 31, 2006 compared to the year ended
December 31, 2005 was due primarily to higher interest
rates earned on marginally lower average balances.
Other
income (expense), net
Other income (expense), net consists of non-operating items,
which have not been significant to date.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
(14
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(18.2
|
)%
|
Provision
for income taxes
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
$
|
17,560
|
|
|
$
|
(16,714
|
)
|
|
$
|
34,274
|
|
|
|
205.1
|
%
|
During the fourth quarter 2006, we concluded that it was more
likely than not that we would not be able to realize the benefit
of a significant portion of our deferred tax assets in the
future. Consequently, we recognized a net tax expense of
$17.6 million resulting primarily from reestablishing a
full valuation allowance on our deferred tax assets. During the
year ended December 31, 2005, we concluded that it was more
likely than not that we would be able to realize the benefit of
a significant portion of our deferred tax assets in the future.
Consequently, we recognized a net tax benefit of
$16.7 million resulting primarily from the release of a
significant portion of the net deferred tax valuation allowance.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, we had cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments of $80.5 million and
$88.8 million, respectively. We had no bank debt, line of
credit or equipment facilities at December 31, 2007 and
2006.
Operating
activities
Our operating activities used cash in the amount of
$5.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 and
generated cash in the amount of $2.0 million and
$8.6 million in the years ended December 31, 2006 and
2005, respectively. Cash used in the year ended
December 31, 2007 resulted from a net loss of
$14.9 million partially offset by $2.8 million of
depreciation and amortization, and $3.8 million of non-cash
stock-based compensation expense. Cash generated in the years
ended December 31, 2006 resulted from $17.5 million of
deferred tax income tax expense, $2.4 million of
depreciation and amortization, $2.8 million on non-cash
stock-based compensation expense which was partially offset by a
net loss of $20.6 million. Cash generated in 2005 was
primarily due to a growth in our business and the accrual of
$3.2 million for a litigation settlement.
59
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 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.
Investing
activities
Our investing activities provided cash of $4.3 million and
used cash in the amount of $1.9 million and
$13.8 million in the years ended December 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005, respectively. Cash provided for the year ended
December 31, 2007 represents the net proceeds from the sale
and purchase of short-term investments less the purchase of
property and equipment. Uses of cash for the year ended
December 31, 2006 represent the purchase of property and
equipment, furniture, and leasehold improvements in connection
with the relocation and build-out of the corporate and new
district office spaces offset by the net proceeds from the sales
and purchase of short-term investments. Uses of cash for the
years ended December 31, 2005 were primarily related to
purchases of short-term investments and 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 2008 capital expenditures to be
approximately $2.9 million primarily attributable to
amounts capitalized for internal-use software and website
development as well as expenditures for increased server
capacity and new market expansion leasehold improvements,
furniture and computer equipment. 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
$0.6 million, $1.6 million and $0.6 million in
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Sources of cash for 2007
primarily represented the proceeds from the exercise of common
stock warrants and stock options. Sources of cash from financing
activities in both 2006 and 2005 primarily represented the
proceeds from stock option exercises.
As of December 31, 2007, we had warrants outstanding for
the purchase of an aggregate of 158,215 shares of our
common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $4.23 per
share; all of these warrants are currently exercisable at the
option of the holders.
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.
In addition, if the current softness in the residential real
estate market continues or worsens, as further discussed under
Item 1A. Risk Factors, resulting in fewer transactions, reduced
commissions or higher costs, we may have greater need to fund
our business by using our cash reserves, which could not
continue indefinitely without our raising additional capital.
60
We routinely explore our 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. 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 December 31, 2007.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than
|
|
|
1 to 3
|
|
|
3 to 5
|
|
|
More Than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Operating lease commitments
|
|
$
|
2,248
|
|
|
$
|
3,575
|
|
|
$
|
2,431
|
|
|
$
|
34
|
|
|
$
|
8,288
|
|
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.
EFFECT OF
RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
See Note 1 titled The Company and Summary of
Significant Accounting Policies of our Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements for a full description of
recent accounting pronouncements including the respective
expected dates of adoption.
|
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk:
|
Interest
rate sensitivity
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. We believe this investment policy is prudent, and
helps to reduce, but does not prevent, loss of principal, and
results in minimal interest rate exposure on our investments.
As of December 31, 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 December 31, 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. There have not been any material changes in the
past year to our primary market risk exposures, or how these
exposures are managed.
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.
61
|
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data:
|
Financial
Statements Table of Contents
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
62
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and
Stockholders of ZipRealty, Inc.:
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in
the accompanying index present fairly, in all material respects,
the financial position of ZipRealty, Inc. and its subsidiaries
at December 31, 2007 and December, 31, 2006, and the
results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the
three years in the period ended December 31, 2007 in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the
financial statement schedule listed in the accompanying index
presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set
forth therein when read in conjunction with the related
consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the
Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007,
based on criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The
Companys management is responsible for these financial
statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining
effective internal control over financial reporting and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting, included in Managements Report on
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing under
Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these
financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and
on the Companys internal control over financial reporting
based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in
accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about
whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement and whether effective internal control over
financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our
audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used
and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the
overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal
control over financial reporting included obtaining an
understanding of internal control over financial reporting,
assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing
and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of
internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also
included performing such other procedures as we considered
necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits
provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial
statements, the Company changed the manner in which it accounts
for stock-based compensation in 2006. As discussed in
Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements, the
Company changed the manner in which it accounts for uncertainty
in income taxes in 2007.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that
transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of
financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the
company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
San Jose, California
March 17, 2008
63
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
7,818
|
|
|
$
|
8,575
|
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
72,649
|
|
|
|
80,233
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $29 and $30 at
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively
|
|
|
1,170
|
|
|
|
1,781
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
3,267
|
|
|
|
3,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
84,904
|
|
|
|
93,769
|
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
5,366
|
|
|
|
4,114
|
|
|
Investment in non-consolidated companies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
Intangible assets, net
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
149
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
340
|
|
|
|
218
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
90,819
|
|
|
$
|
98,357
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
2,095
|
|
|
$
|
2,184
|
|
|
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities
|
|
|
10,495
|
|
|
|
7,791
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
12,590
|
|
|
|
9,975
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
503
|
|
|
|
513
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
13,093
|
|
|
|
10,488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock: $0.001 par value; 100,000 shares
authorized; 23,651 and 21,627 shares issued and 23,641 and
21,627 shares outstanding at December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
144,499
|
|
|
|
134,813
|
|
|
Common stock warrants
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
5,519
|
|
|
Deferred stock-based compensation
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(71
|
)
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
(157
|
)
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(67,141
|
)
|
|
|
(52,257
|
)
|
|
Treasury stock, at cost
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
77,726
|
|
|
|
87,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
90,819
|
|
|
$
|
98,357
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
64
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
Net transaction revenues
|
|
$
|
101,100
|
|
|
$
|
92,659
|
|
|
$
|
91,082
|
|
|
Referral and other revenues
|
|
|
2,762
|
|
|
|
2,728
|
|
|
|
2,323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
103,862
|
|
|
|
95,387
|
|
|
|
93,405
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
58,613
|
|
|
|
52,166
|
|
|
|
51,122
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
7,320
|
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
3,034
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
38,256
|
|
|
|
30,910
|
|
|
|
24,855
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
15,409
|
|
|
|
13,461
|
|
|
|
9,204
|
|
|
Litigation
|
|
|
3,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,164
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
123,148
|
|
|
|
102,312
|
|
|
|
92,379
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
(19,286
|
)
|
|
|
(6,925
|
)
|
|
|
1,026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
4,401
|
|
|
|
3,907
|
|
|
|
2,741
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net
|
|
|
4,402
|
|
|
|
3,891
|
|
|
|
2,727
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
|
(3,034
|
)
|
|
|
3,753
|
|
|
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,560
|
|
|
|
(16,714
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
20,467
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.66
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.00
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.02
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.66
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.00
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
22,586
|
|
|
|
20,542
|
|
|
|
20,089
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
22,586
|
|
|
|
20,542
|
|
|
|
25,080
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
65
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Stock-
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Based
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
19,880
|
|
|
$
|
20
|
|
|
$
|
128,555
|
|
|
$
|
6,369
|
|
|
$
|
(438
|
)
|
|
$
|
(105
|
)
|
|
$
|
(52,130
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
82,271
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options
|
|
|
239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
571
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
571
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of common stock warrants
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
285
|
|
|
|
(275
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reversal of deferred stock-based compensation upon employee
terminations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax benefit from employee stock plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
707
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
707
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,467
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,467
|
|
|
$
|
20,467
|
|
|
Unrealized loss on
available-for-sale
securities, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(385
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(385
|
)
|
|
|
(385
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
20,082
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
20,273
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
130,077
|
|
|
|
6,094
|
|
|
|
(257
|
)
|
|
|
(490
|
)
|
|
|
(31,663
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103,781
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1,562
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,564
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of common stock warrants
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
575
|
|
|
|
(575
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reversal of deferred stock-based compensation upon employee
terminations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(86
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,594
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,594
|
)
|
|
Unrealized gain on
available-for-sale
securities, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333
|
|
|
|
333
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(20,261
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
21,627
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
134,813
|
|
|
|
5,519
|
|
|
|
(71
|
)
|
|
|
(157
|
)
|
|
|
(52,257
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of stock options
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of restricted common stock
|
|
|
225
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock upon exercise of common stock warrants
|
|
|
1,626
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
5,758
|
|
|
|
(5,310
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reversal of deferred stock-based compensation upon employee
terminations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,520
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,520
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense, restricted stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of treasury stock
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
$
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
Unrealized gain on
available-for-sale
securities, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(14,539
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
23,641
|
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
144,499
|
|
|
$
|
209
|
|
|
$
|
(3
|
)
|
|
$
|
188
|
|
|
$
|
(67,141
|
)
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
(50
|
)
|
|
$
|
77,726
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
66
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(14,884
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
20,467
|
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided
by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax expense (benefit)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,496
|
|
|
|
(17,496
|
)
|
|
Tax benefit from employee stock plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
707
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
2,828
|
|
|
|
2,384
|
|
|
|
1,518
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
3,751
|
|
|
|
2,785
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
Amortization of short-term investment premium (discount)
|
|
|
(420
|
)
|
|
|
(115
|
)
|
|
|
630
|
|
|
Amortization of intangible assets
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on disposal of property and equipment
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in net loss of non-consolidated companies
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
612
|
|
|
|
(135
|
)
|
|
|
(564
|
)
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
(87
|
)
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
(1,093
|
)
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
(122
|
)
|
|
|
(133
|
)
|
|
|
(79
|
)
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(89
|
)
|
|
|
553
|
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities
|
|
|
2,704
|
|
|
|
(712
|
)
|
|
|
4,216
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
475
|
|
|
|
(52
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
(5,674
|
)
|
|
|
2,049
|
|
|
|
8,566
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Purchases of short-term investments
|
|
|
(48,830
|
)
|
|
|
(58,537
|
)
|
|
|
(37,550
|
)
|
|
Proceeds from sale and maturity of short-term investments
|
|
|
57,179
|
|
|
|
60,793
|
|
|
|
26,465
|
|
|
Purchases of property and equipment
|
|
|
(4,048
|
)
|
|
|
(3,975
|
)
|
|
|
(2,820
|
)
|
|
Purchase of intangible asset
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(150
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in non-consolidated companies
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
(37
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
4,314
|
|
|
|
(1,906
|
)
|
|
|
(13,805
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from stock option exercises
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
1,564
|
|
|
|
571
|
|
|
Proceeds from common stock warrant exercises
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
Acquisition of treasury stock
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
603
|
|
|
|
1,564
|
|
|
|
582
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(757
|
)
|
|
|
1,707
|
|
|
|
(4,657
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
8,575
|
|
|
|
6,868
|
|
|
|
11,525
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
7,818
|
|
|
$
|
8,575
|
|
|
$
|
6,868
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental cash flow information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash investing and financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reversal of deferred stock-based compensation upon employee
terminations
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
86
|
|
|
$
|
41
|
|
|
Recognition of additional paid-in capital from common stock
warrants due to exercise of common stock warrants
|
|
$
|
5,310
|
|
|
$
|
575
|
|
|
$
|
275
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation capitalized in internal-use software
costs
|
|
$
|
42
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
67
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
|
|
|
1.
|
THE
COMPANY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
|
Nature
of operations
ZipRealty, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries (the
Company), previously known as ZipRealty.com, is a
full-service real estate brokerage firm incorporated in the
State of California on January 25, 1999 and reincorporated
in Delaware on August 9, 2004. Headquartered in the
San Francisco Bay Area, the Company provides brokerage
services to buyers and sellers through its employee-agents in
Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia,
Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New
Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah,
Virginia, Washington, and Washington, D.C. The Company
provides consumers the opportunity to access Multiple Listing
Services, or MLS, data through its website, and offers a lower
commission structure than is typical in the industry. Buyers are
offered a commission rebate at the close of a transaction, while
sellers are charged a reduced commission.
Principles
of consolidation
The 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.
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 through
December 31, 2007 for any of the entities.
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
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to
the current periods presentation including, 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
68
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
presentation. The following is the change in classification of
operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
$
|
52,166
|
|
|
$
|
51,122
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
5,380
|
|
|
|
2,754
|
|
|
Marketing and customer acquisition
|
|
|
12,589
|
|
|
|
12,306
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
32,177
|
|
|
|
22,033
|
|
|
Litigation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,164
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
$
|
102,312
|
|
|
$
|
92,379
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
As reclassified
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
$
|
52,166
|
|
|
$
|
51,122
|
|
|
Product development
|
|
|
5,775
|
|
|
|
3,034
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
30,910
|
|
|
|
24,855
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
13,461
|
|
|
|
9,204
|
|
|
Litigation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,164
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
$
|
102,312
|
|
|
$
|
92,379
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risks
and uncertainties
The Company is subject to certain risks and uncertainties.
Changes in any of the following areas, for example, could have a
negative effect on the Company in terms of its future financial
position, results of operations or cash flows:
|
|
|
| |
|
regulatory changes;
|
| |
| |
|
the continued use and adoption of the Internet by consumers,
which allows the Company to compete with established real estate
firms, many of which have long operating histories and
substantial client bases; and
|
| |
| |
|
entry into market of companies attempting to replicate the
Companys business model.
|
Net
income (loss) per share
Basic net income (loss) per share is computed by dividing the
net income (loss) for the period by the weighted average number
of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted
income (loss) per share is computed by dividing net income
(loss) for the period by the weighted average number of shares
of common stock outstanding plus, if dilutive, potential common
shares outstanding during the period. Potential common shares
are composed of incremental shares of common stock issuable upon
the exercise of potentially dilutive stock options, warrants and
unvested restricted stock.
69
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Use of
estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America requires management to make estimates and assumptions
that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and reported amounts of revenues and
expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could
differ from those estimates.
Revenue
recognition
The Company derives the majority of its revenue from commissions
earned as agents to buyers and sellers on purchase or sale
transactions.
Commission revenue is recognized 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 funds to all
appropriate parties. Non-commission revenue is recognized from
its other business relationships, such as its
E-LOAN
marketing relationship, as the fees are earned from the other
party, typically on a monthly fee basis. Revenue is recognized
provided there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the
price is fixed or determinable, collectibility is reasonably
assured and the transaction has been completed.
Expense
recognition
Commission expenses to agents are recognized concurrently with
the related revenues. All other costs and expenses are
recognized when incurred.
Cost
of revenues
Cost of revenues consists of commissions, related payroll taxes,
benefits and expense allowances paid to the Companys
ZipAgents, and the amortization of internal-use software and
website development costs which relate primarily to the
Companys ZipAgent Platform.
Cash
and cash equivalents
The Company considers all highly liquid investments purchased
with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash
equivalents. At December 31, 2007 and 2006, $4,554,000 and
$5,754,000, respectively, of money market funds and repurchase
agreements, the fair value of which approximates cost, is
included in cash and cash equivalents.
Short-term
investments
The Company classifies fixed income securities with a maturity
of over twelve months from the balance sheet date as short-term
investments based on the funds being available for use in
current operations, if needed. To date all fixed income
securities have been classified as
available-for-sale
and carried at fair value, which is determined based on quoted
market prices, with unrealized gains or losses, net of tax
effects, included in accumulated other comprehensive income
(loss) in the consolidated accompanying financial statements.
Interest and amortization of premiums and discounts for fixed
income securities are included in other income (expense), net,
in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Realized
gains and losses are calculated using the specific
identification method.
70
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Restricted
cash
The Companys restricted cash balances at December 31,
2007 and 2006 includes $90,000, which serves as collateral to a
letter of credit that was issued to the Companys landlord
as a security deposit in connection with a facility lease
agreement. The letter of credit expires in November 2008.
Fair
value of financial instruments
The carrying amounts of the Companys financial
instruments, which include cash and cash equivalents, accounts
receivable, restricted cash and accounts payable, approximate
their fair values due to their short maturities.
Concentration
of credit risk, significant customers and significant
suppliers
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to a
concentration of credit risk consist of cash, cash equivalents,
short-term investments, accounts receivable and restricted cash.
The Company deposits its cash, cash equivalents and short-term
investments with financial institutions that management believes
to be of high credit quality, and these deposits may on occasion
exceed federally insured limits. At December 31, 2007,
substantially all of the Companys cash, cash equivalents
and short-term investments were managed by one financial
institution. The fair value of these short-term investments are
subject to fluctuations based on market prices.
Substantially all of the Companys accounts receivable are
derived from commissions earned and are due from escrow and
other residential real estate transfer agents. These accounts
receivable are typically unsecured. Allowances for credit losses
and expected transaction price adjustments are provided for in
the financial statements and have been within managements
expectations. No escrow or other transfer agent accounted for
10% or more of the accounts receivable at December 31, 2007
or 2006.
The Company derived 37%, 41% and 51% a of its net transaction
revenues during the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively, from the State of California. No customers
accounted for more than 10% of net revenues in 2007, 2006 or
2005.
The Company generates leads for ZipAgents through many sources,
including leads from third parties with which the Company has
only non-exclusive, short-term agreements that are generally
terminable on little or no notice and with no penalties. The
cost of these leads are included in sales and marketing
expenses. The Companys largest third-party lead source,
HomeGain, Inc., which is a competitor for online customer
acquisition, generated approximately 21%, 27% and 29% of the
Companys leads during 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Google generated approximately 16%, 15% and 12% of the
Companys leads in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Property
and equipment
Property and equipment are stated at cost. Leasehold
improvements are amortized on the straight-line basis over the
shorter of the lease period or their estimated useful lives.
Depreciation and amortization is computed using the
straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the
property and equipment as follows:
| |
|
|
|
Computer hardware and software
|
|
1-3 years
|
|
Furniture, fixtures and equipment
|
|
4-5 years
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
Shorter of the lease period or estimated useful life
|
When assets are sold or retired, the cost and accumulated
depreciation and amortization are eliminated from the accounts,
and any resulting gains or losses are recorded in operations in
the period realized. Maintenance and
71
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
repairs are expensed as incurred. Expenditures that
substantially increase an assets useful life or improve an
assets functionality, are capitalized.
Leasehold improvements made by the Company and reimbursable by
the landlord as tenant incentives are recorded by the Company as
leasehold improvement assets and amortized over the shorter of
the lease period or estimated useful life. The incentives from
the landlord are recorded as deferred rent and amortized as
reductions to rent expense over the lease term. For 2006,
leasehold improvement allowances totaled $524,000, of which
$86,000 was amortized as a reduction of rent expense in both
2006 and 2007. At December 31, 2007 the deferred rent
balance attributable to these incentives totaled $352,000.
Future amortization of the balance of these tenant incentives is
estimated to be $86,000 per year from 2008 through 2011, and
$8,000 for 2012.
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of
Long-Lived Assets (SFAS No. 144), the
Company periodically evaluates the carrying value of long-lived
assets to be held and used when events and circumstances warrant
such a review. The carrying value of a long-lived asset is
considered impaired when the anticipated undiscounted cash flow
from such asset is less than its carrying value. In that event,
a loss is recognized based on the amount by which the carrying
value exceeds the fair value of the long-lived asset. Fair value
is determined primarily using the anticipated cash flows
discounted at a rate commensurate with the risk involved. Losses
on long-lived assets to be disposed of are determined in a
similar manner, except that fair values are reduced for the cost
of disposal.
Stock-Based
Compensation
Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted the
provisions of SFAS 123 (Revised 2004), Share-Based
Payment (SFAS 123(R)), which 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. Prior to adopting
SFAS 123(R), we accounted for employee stock-based
compensation arrangements in accordance with provisions of
Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting
for Stock Issued to Employees (APB 25). 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 elected to
adopt the modified prospective transition method as provided by
SFAS 123(R) except for options granted prior to our initial
filing in May 2004 of the registration statement for our initial
public offering, for which the fair value was determined for
disclosure purposes using the minimum value method. Under this
transition method, stock-based compensation cost recognized in
the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 includes:
|
|
|
| |
|
compensation cost for all unvested stock-based awards as of
January 1, 2006 that were granted subsequent to our initial
filing in May 2004 of the registration statement for our initial
public offering, and prior to January 1, 2006, based on the
grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the original
provisions of SFAS 123;
|
| |
| |
|
compensation cost for stock-based awards granted subsequent, to
January 1, 2006, based on the grant date fair value
estimated in accordance with the provisions of
SFAS 123(R); and
|
| |
| |
|
compensation cost for options granted prior to our initial
filing in May 2004 of the registration statement for our initial
public offering, based on the intrinsic value method.
|
In accordance with the modified prospective transition method,
the financial statements for prior periods have not been
restated to reflect the impact of SFAS 123(R). 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
72
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
consideration of other relevant factors such as the volatility
assumptions of guideline 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, restricted stock
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.
For option and restricted stock awards, the fair value of our
common stock is the closing price of our stock on The NASDAQ
Stock Market on the date the award was granted.
Software
and Website Development Costs
The Company follows the guidance of Emerging Issues Task Force
No. 00-02,
Accounting for Website Development Costs (EITF
No. 00-02).
EITF
No. 00-02
sets forth the accounting for website development costs based on
the website development activity. The Company follows the
guidance set forth in Statement of Position
98-1,
Accounting for the Cost of Computer Software Developed or
Obtained for Internal Use
(SOP 98-1),
in accounting for the development of the ZipAgent Platform.
Costs incurred in the planning stage are expensed as incurred
while costs incurred in the application and infrastructure stage
are capitalized, assuming such costs are deemed to be
recoverable. Costs incurred in the operating stage are expensed
as incurred except for the costs of fees paid for cancelable
maintenance contracts for internal use software purchased from
third-party vendors. The cost of these fees incurred during the
operating phase are recognized on a ratable basis over the
period of expected economic benefit, which generally coincides
with the contractual service period. The planning stage ends
when the functional specifications for a release are complete.
Costs incurred relating to architecture design and coding that
result in additional functionality are capitalized in the
application and infrastructure stage. These costs principally
relate to payroll costs for employees directly involved in the
development process. Capitalized internal-use software costs,
included in property and equipment, are amortized over the
softwares useful life, which ranges between 15 and
24 months. Capitalized internal-use software costs are
amortized to cost of revenues. Costs incurred in connection with
the research and development of the Companys product and
technology, other than those accounted for under
SOP 98-1,
are expensed as incurred to product development.
The Company capitalized $871,000 and $733,000 in internal-use
software costs during the years ended December 31, 2007 and
2006, respectively. Amortization expense totaled $792,000,
$769,000 and $662,000 during the years ended December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and is included in cost of
revenues. The amount of unamortized internal-use software costs
at December 31, 2007 and 2006 was $567,000 and $505,000
respectively, and is included in property and equipment.
Advertising
Costs
The costs of advertising are expensed as incurred. Advertising
expense was $646,000, $511,000, and $759,000 for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Such
expense is included in Sales and marketing expense.
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.
73
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 enacted 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.
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Comprehensive income (loss) is the sum of net income (loss) and
unrealized gains (losses) on
available-for-sale
securities. Unrealized gains (losses) on investments are
excluded from net income (loss) and are reported in accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss) in the accompanying
consolidated financial statements.
Segment
Reporting
The Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 131,
Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related
Information, establishes standards for reporting information
about operating segments in a companys financial
statements. Operating segments are defined as components of an
enterprise about which separate financial information is
available that is evaluated regularly by the chief operating
decision maker (the Companys Executive Committee), or
decision making group, in deciding how to allocate resources and
in assessing performance. The Company operates in one segment.
All net revenues were derived from transactions in the United
States. All long-lived assets are located in the United States.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 157, Fair Value
Measurements (SFAS 157).
SFAS 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for
measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting
principles, and expands disclosures about fair value
measurements. SFAS 157 does not require any new fair value
measurements, but provides guidance on how to measure fair value
by providing a fair value hierarchy used to classify the source
of the information. This statement is effective for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007. The Company is currently
evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS 157 on its financial
position, cash flows and results of operations
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
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 141 (revised),
Business Combinations (SFAS 141(R)). The
standard changes the accounting for business combinations
including the measurement of acquirer shares issued in
consideration for a business combination, the recognition of
contingent consideration, the accounting for preacquisition gain
and loss contingencies, the recognition of capitalized
in-process research and development, the accounting for
acquisition-related restructuring cost accruals, the treatment
of acquisition related transaction costs and the recognition of
changes in the acquirers income tax valuation allowance.
SFAS 141(R) is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2008, with early adoption prohibited. The
Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting
SFAS 141(R) on its financial position, cash flows and
results of operations.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements, an amendment of ARB No. 51
(SFAS 160). The standard changes the
accounting for noncontrolling (minority) interests in
consolidated financial statements including the requirements to
classify noncontrolling interests as a component of consolidated
stockholders equity, and the elimination of minority
interest accounting
74
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
in results of operations with earnings attributable to
noncontrolling interests reported as part of consolidated
earnings. Additionally, SFAS 160 revises the accounting for
both increases and decreases in a parents controlling
ownership interest. SFAS 160 is effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2008, with early adoption
prohibited. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of
adopting SFAS 160 on its financial position, cash flows and
results of operations.
|
|
|
2.
|
BALANCE
SHEET COMPONENTS
|
Short-term
investments
At December 31, 2007 and 2006, short-term investments were
classified as
available-for-sale
securities, except for restricted cash, and are reported at fair
value as follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Money market securities
|
|
$
|
4,554
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,554
|
|
|
$
|
5,604
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,604
|
|
|
Repurchase agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
Asset backed
|
|
|
26,544
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
|
|
26,586
|
|
|
|
24,314
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
24,286
|
|
|
Mortgage backed
|
|
|
10,817
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,907
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate obligations
|
|
|
22,345
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
22,353
|
|
|
|
35,575
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
34,512
|
|
|
US Government and agency obligations
|
|
|
12,755
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,803
|
|
|
|
21,501
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
(69
|
)
|
|
|
21,435
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total short-term investments
|
|
$
|
77,015
|
|
|
$
|
255
|
|
|
$
|
(67
|
)
|
|
$
|
77,203
|
|
|
$
|
86,144
|
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
(187
|
)
|
|
$
|
85,987
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Recorded as:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
4,554
|
|
|
$
|
5,754
|
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
72,649
|
|
|
|
80,233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
77,203
|
|
|
$
|
85,987
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2007 and 2006, the fair value of the
Companys investments that had been in an unrealized loss
position for over twelve months was $4.6 million and
$28.7 million and the related unrealized loss was
approximately $10,000 and $138,000, respectively.
The estimated fair value of short-term investments classified by
date of contractual maturity at December 31, 2007 is as
follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Due within one year or less
|
|
$
|
34,482
|
|
|
Due after one year through two years
|
|
|
16,811
|
|
|
Due after two years through four years
|
|
|
25,910
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
77,203
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75
ZIPREALTY,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
Prepaid expenses and other current assets consist of the
following:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
$
|
2,283
|
|
|
$
|
1,935
|
|
|
Interest receivable
|
|
|
638
|
|
|
|
809
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
346
|
|
|
|
436
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
$
|
3,267
|
|
|
$
|
3,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|