|
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
|
12 Months Ended |
|---|---|
|
Dec. 31, 2011
|
|
| Accounting Policies [Abstract] | |
| Significant Accounting Policies [Text Block] |
Note 2 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Stock Based Compensation
The Company follows the requirements of FASB ASC 718-10-10, Share Based Payments with regard to stock-based compensation issued to employees. The Company has various employment agreements and consulting arrangements that call for stock to be awarded to the employees and consultants at various times as compensation and periodic bonuses. The expense for this stock based compensation is equal to the fair value of the stock that was determined by using the most recent private placement price on the day the stock was awarded multiplied by the number of shares awarded. The Company records its options at fair value using the Black-Scholes valuation model.
Recently Issued and Newly Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2011-11, “Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities” (“ASU 2011-11”). ASU 2011-11 enhances current disclosures about financial instruments and derivative instruments that are either offset on the statement of financial position or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement, irrespective of whether they are offset on the statement of financial position. Entities are required to provide both net and gross information for these assets and liabilities in order to facilitate comparability between financial statements prepared on the basis of U.S. GAAP and financial statements prepared on the basis of IFRS. ASU 2011-11 is effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. ASU 2011-11 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.
In September 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-08 (“ASU 2011-08”), which updates the guidance in ASC Topic 350, Intangibles – Goodwill & Other. The amendments in ASU 2011-08 permit an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than the carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test described in ASC Topic 350. The more-likely-than-not threshold is defined as having a likelihood of more than fifty percent. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, an entity determines that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary. The amendments in ASU 2011-08 include examples of events and circumstances that an entity should consider in evaluating whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. However, the examples are not intended to be all-inclusive and an entity may identify other relevant events and circumstances to consider in making the determination. The examples in this ASU 2011-08 supersede the previous examples under ASC Topic 350 of events and circumstances an entity should consider in determining whether it should test for impairment between annual tests, and also supersede the examples of events and circumstances that an entity having a reporting unit with a zero or negative carrying amount should consider in determining whether to perform the second step of the impairment test. Under the amendments in ASU 2011-08, an entity is no longer permitted to carry forward its detailed calculation of a reporting unit’s fair value from a prior year as previously permitted under ASC Topic 350. ASU 2011-08 is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. ASU 2011-08 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.
In May 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2011-04 (“ASU 2011-04”), which updated the guidance in ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement. The amendments in ASU 2011-04 generally represent clarifications of Topic 820, but also include some instances where a
particular principle or requirement for measuring fair value or disclosing information about fair value measurements has changed. ASU 2011-04 results in common principles and requirements for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements in accordance with U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards. The amendments in ASU 2011-04 are to be applied prospectively. For public entities, the amendments are effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011, and early application is not permitted. ASU 2011-04 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.
In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-29, “Business Combinations (ASC Topic 805): Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations” (“ASU 2010-29”). The amendments in ASU 2010-29 affect any public entity as defined by ASC Topic 805 that enters into business combinations that are material on an individual or aggregate basis. The amendments in ASU 2010-29 specify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. The amendments also expand the supplemental pro forma disclosures to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The amendments in ASU 2010-29 are effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The adoption of ASU 2010-29 did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial condition.
In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-28, “Intangibles — Goodwill and Other (ASC Topic 350): When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts” (“ASU 2010-28”). The amendments in ASU 2010-28 modify Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those reporting units, an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. In determining whether it is more likely than not that goodwill impairment exists, an entity should consider whether there are any adverse qualitative factors indicating that an impairment may exist. The qualitative factors are consistent with the existing guidance and examples, which require that goodwill of a reporting unit be tested for impairment between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. For public entities, the amendments in ASU 2010-28 are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2010. The adoption of ASU 2010-28 did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial condition.
In April 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-17, “Revenue Recognition — Milestone Method” (“ASU 2010-17”). ASU 2010-17 provides guidance on the criteria that should be met for determining whether the milestone method of revenue recognition is appropriate. A vendor can recognize consideration that is contingent upon achievement of a milestone in its entirety as revenue in the period in which the milestone is achieved only if the milestone meets all criteria to be considered substantive. The following criteria must be met for a milestone to be considered substantive: the consideration earned by achieving the milestone should (i) be commensurate with either the level of effort required to achieve the milestone or the enhancement of the value of the item delivered as a result of a specific outcome resulting from the vendor’s performance to achieve the milestone; (ii) be related solely to past performance; and (iii) be reasonable relative to all deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement. No bifurcation of an individual milestone is allowed and there can be more than one milestone in an arrangement. Accordingly, an arrangement may contain both substantive and non-substantive milestones. ASU 2010-17 is effective on a prospective basis for milestones achieved in fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning on or after June 15, 2010. The adoption of ASU 2010-17 did not have a material effect on the Company’s results of operations or financial condition.
In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-13, “Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements” (“ASU 2009-13”). ASU 2009-13 requires entities to allocate revenue in an arrangement using estimated selling prices of the delivered goods and services based on a selling price hierarchy. The amendments in ASU 2009-13 eliminate the residual method of revenue allocation and require revenue to be allocated using the relative selling price method. ASU 2009-13 should be applied on a prospective basis for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June
15, 2010, with early adoption permitted. The adoption of ASU 2009-13 did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial condition.
Management does not believe there would have been a material effect on the accompanying financial statements had any other recently issued, but not yet effective, accounting standards been adopted in the current period.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its subsidiary, Data Storage Corporation, a Delaware Corporation. All significant inter-company transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
The Company considers all highly liquid investments with an original maturity or remaining maturity at the time of purchase, of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
Concentration of credit risk and other risks and uncertainties
Financial instruments and assets subjecting the Company to concentration of credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments and trade accounts receivable. The Company's cash and cash equivalents are maintained at major U.S. financial institutions. Deposits in these institutions may exceed the amount of insurance provided on such deposits.
The Company's customers are primarily concentrated in the United States.
The Company provides credit in the normal course of business. The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers and maintains allowances for doubtful accounts on factors surrounding the credit risk of specific customers, historical trends, and other information.
For the year ended December 31, 2010 the company had one customer that represented 11% of sales.
Accounts Receivable/Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
The Company sells its services to customers on an open credit basis. Accounts receivable are uncollateralized, non-interest-bearing customer obligations. Accounts receivables are due within 30 days. The allowance for doubtful accounts reflects the estimated accounts receivable that will not be collected due to credit losses and allowances. Provisions for estimated uncollectible accounts receivable are made for individual accounts based upon specific facts and circumstances including criteria such as their age, amount, and customer standing. Provisions are also made for other accounts receivable not specifically reviewed based upon historical experience. Clients are invoiced in advance for services as reflected in deferred revenue on the company’s balance sheet.
Property and Equipment
Property and equipment is recorded at cost and depreciated over their estimated useful lives or the term of the lease using the straight-line method for financial statement purposes. Estimated useful lives in years for depreciation are 5 to 7 years for property and equipment. Additions, betterments and replacements are capitalized, while expenditures for repairs and maintenance are charged to operations when incurred. As units of property are sold or retired, the related cost and accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts, and any resulting gain or loss is recognized in income.
Income Taxes
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carry forwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. At December 31, 2011, the Company had a full valuation allowance against its deferred tax assets.
Estimated Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The Company's financial instruments include cash, accounts receivable and accounts payable, line of credit and due to related parties. Management believes the estimated fair value of these accounts at December 31, 2011 approximate their carrying value as reflected in the balance sheets due to the short-term nature of these instruments or the use of market interest rates for debt instruments. The carrying values of the company’s long-term debt approximates their fair values based upon a comparison of the interest rate and terms of such debt to the rates and terms of debt currently available to the company.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles 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 the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.
Revenue Recognition
The Company’s revenues consist principally of cloud storage and cloud computing revenues, SaaS and IaaS. Storage revenues consist
of monthly charges related to the storage of materials or data (generally on a per unit basis). Sales are generally recorded in the month the service is provided. For customers who are billed on an annual basis, deferred revenue is recorded and amortized over the life of the contract. Set up fees charged in connection with storage contracts are deferred and recognized on a straight line basis over the life of the contract.
Advertising Costs
The Company expenses the costs associated with advertising as they are incurred. The Company incurred $187,463 and $70,211 for advertising costs for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Net Income (Loss) per Common Share
In accordance with FASB ASC 260-10-5 Earnings Per Share, basic income (loss) per share is computed by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share is computed by dividing net income (loss) adjusted for income or loss that would result from the assumed conversion of potential common shares from contracts that may be settled in stock or cash by the weighted average number of shares of common stock, common stock equivalents and potentially dilutive securities outstanding during each period. The inclusion of the potential common shares to be issued have an anti-dilutive effect on diluted loss per share and therefore they are not included in the calculation. Potentially dilutive securities at December 31, 2011 include 2,563,115 options and 173,427 warrants.
|