[ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Indicate by check mark if the registrant
is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes [ ] No [X]
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 [ ] No [X]
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 requirement for the past 90 days. Yes [X] No [ ]
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted
and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such
shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes [X] No [ ]
Indicate by check mark if disclosure
of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will
not be contained, to the best of registrant’s 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. [X]
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:
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12(b)-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes [ ] No [X]
The aggregate market value of the registrant’s
common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant on August 15th, 2016 (based on the closing sale price of $0.0013 per share
of the registrant’s common stock, as reported on the OTCQB operated by The OTC Markets Group, Inc. on that date) was approximately
$115,493. Common stock held by each officer and director and by each person known to the registrant to own five percent or more
of the outstanding common stock has been excluded in that those persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of
affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.
Indicate the number of shares outstanding
of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date. At August 15, 2016, the registrant
had outstanding 88,841,082 shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share.
In light of the risks and uncertainties
inherent in all projected operational matters, the inclusion of forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K, should not be regarded
as a representation by us or any other person that any of our objectives or plans will be achieved or that any of our operating
expectations will be realized. Our revenues and results of operations are difficult to forecast and could differ materially from
those projected in the forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-K, as a result of certain risks and uncertainties
including, but not limited to, our business reliance on third parties to provide us with technology, our ability to integrate
and manage acquired technology, assets, companies and personnel, changes in market condition, the volatile and intensely competitive
environment in the business sectors in which we operate, rapid technological change, and our dependence on key and scarce employees
in a competitive market for skilled personnel. These factors should not be considered exhaustive; we undertake no obligation to
release publicly the results of any future revisions we may make to forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances
after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
PART I
Except for historical information, this
report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
(the “Exchange Act”). Such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including, among other things,
statements regarding our business strategy, future revenues and anticipated costs and expenses. Such forward-looking statements
include, among others, those statements including the words “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,”
“believes” and similar language. Our actual results may differ significantly from those projected in the forward-looking
statements. Factors that might cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in the
section “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” You
are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this report. We
undertake no obligation to publicly release any revisions to the forward-looking statements or reflect events or circumstances
taking place after the date of this document.
Item 1. Business
MedStrong International Corporation
was incorporated in the State of Delaware on May 19, 2000, as Medical Records by Net, Inc. On October 17, 2000, its name was changed
to Lifelink Online, Inc. In January 2001, its name was changed to MedStrong Corporation. On March 9, 2001, the corporate name
was changed to MedStrong International Corporation. On January 31, 2007, our name was changed to VOIS, Inc.
On February 12, 2007, we announced a
change in our “shell company” status. We had been classified for reporting purposes as a “shell company”
(as such term is defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act). Commencing in the first quarter of 2007, we had developed a new
line of business in connection with an Internet social networking site, incurred expenses developing this site, brought in senior
experienced management, and purchased certain assets in furtherance of this line of business.
On March 18, 2008, VOIS, Inc. changed
its domicile from the State of Delaware to the State of Florida. There was no change in our capital structure as a result of this
corporate event.
On October 19, 2012, VOIS, Inc. entered
into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) with Mind Solutions, Inc., a Nevada corporation (“MSI”),
Mind Solutions, Inc., an Ontario corporation (“MSIC”) and Mind Solutions Acquisition Corp., a Nevada corporation (“MSAC”)
which was a wholly-owned subsidiary of our company formed for this transaction. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, MSAC
was merged into MSI and MSI became a wholly-owned subsidiary of VOIS (the “Merger”). The stockholders of MSI were
issued a total of 196,000,000 shares of our common stock in exchange for 100 percent of the outstanding shares of MSI.
Upon the closing of the Merger, our
sole officer and director resigned and simultaneously with the Merger, Kerry Driscoll was appointed our sole officer and director.
Our business and operations became the business and operations of Mind Solutions, Inc., a Nevada corporation.
On October 28, 2013, VOIS, Inc. changed
the state of incorporation of VOIS, Inc. from Florida to Nevada by means of a reverse merger with our wholly-owned subsidiary,
Mind Solutions, Inc., a Nevada corporation. As a result, we also adopted new articles of incorporation and new bylaws which will
govern our corporate operations under Nevada law. Along with the change of domicile, we changed our name to “Mind Solutions,
Inc.”
On May 31, 2016, we entered into a Stock
Purchase Agreement with GELI Holdings, Inc., (hereinafter "GELI"), and Kerry Driscoll and Brent Fouch (collectively
"Sellers") wherein Sellers conveyed certain shares of our preferred stock and we issued certain shares of our common
along with two Promissory Notes to GELI and/or its designees in consideration of $50,000.The foregoing agreement contained additional
covenants and warranties by the parties thereto to perform certain acts, including but not limited to causing us to become current
in our reporting with the SEC. After completion of the foregoing, GELI now owns voting control of us. On May 31, 2016, Ziyad
Osachi was appointed to our board of directors. Thereafter, Kerry Driscoll resigned all of the positions he held with us
as an officer and director s a director. On the same date, Ziyad Osachi was appointed by our board of directors to replace
Kerry Driscoll as our president, principal executive officer, secretary, treasurer, principal financial officer and principal
accounting officer. At the time of Mr. Driscoll's resignation as a director and when he was replaced as an officer, Mr.
Driscoll did not have any disagreements with us relating to our operations, policies or practices. The new management plans to
carry on the existing operations of the Company with plans to introduce additional business models and revenue streams in the
near future.
Business Overview
The registrant has developed three software
applications which are compatible with the Emotiv EEG headsets currently on the market. The registrant has recently developed
and brought to market a Brain-Computer-Interface (BCI) called "NeuroSync", which allows the user to operate thought-controlled
applications on their mobile smart phone devices as well as on traditional PC computers. This BCI receives electrical impulses
from the brain and allows the user to control actions on their smart phones and PC computers through the power of thought. The
technology involves the use of a wireless headset, which detects brainwaves on both the conscious and non-conscious level. This
revolutionary neural processing technology makes it possible for computers to interact directly with the human brain. The Company
sells their recently developed BCI device and software online through the Company's website as well as other online platforms
such as Amazon.com.
If market conditions and our financial
circumstances allow, we anticipate that we may develop thought-controlled applications to communicate with our developed EEG headset
and, if we are successful in these efforts, we may add additional software applications thereafter. If these efforts are successful,
we may initiate one or more mobile device applications, or APP store, which will be designed to allow outside developers to participate
in a revenue sharing program for the thought-controlled applications they develop.
Our products fall under two categories:
software and hardware.
Software.
Currently we have developed
three thought-controlled software applications,
Mind Mouse
,
Master Mind
, and
Think Tac Toe
, which are currently
available to consumers. The three completed applications are sold online, direct to consumers and delivered via email as a download
for their PC.
Mind Mouse
and
Master Mind
are currently sold at $99, while the basic application of
Think Tac
Toe
is sold for $49. These applications are available for purchase as a software download through our Internet website at
www.mindsolutionscorp.com.
Our current software products are as
follows:
|
|
Mind Mouse.
This thought-controlled software application is designed to allow the user to navigate the computer, click and double click
to open programs, compose email and send with the power of his mind.
The application can be used by anyone, but we believe it is especially beneficial to people
with disabilities who have communication problems.
|
|
|
Master Mind.
This thought-controlled
software application is designed to allow the user to play existing PC games which are on the market with the power of his
mind. Rather than using a traditional keyboard, mouse or hand-held controller, the player controls the characters with his
thoughts through the use of a wireless headset that reads the player’s brainwaves. The user maps specific thoughts to
create commands, which are received via a Bluetooth wireless USB. Those commands cause the characters to run, shoot, jump
or any other action used in the game.
|
|
|
Think-Tac-Toe.
The
thought-controlled version of tic-tac-toe, allows the user to play against the computer using the power of his mind. The game
provides the use of a gyroscope to move right, left, up or down. Once the desired square is selected, the user concentrates
to place an “X” or “O” in the respective box. The game can be played entirely by cognitive thought,
by thinking Right or Left or can utilize the gyroscope to move from square to square.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hardware.
Currently we have developed
and brought to market a Brain-Computer-Interface (BCI) called "NeuroSync", which allows the user to operate thought-controlled
applications on their mobile smart phone devices as well as on traditional PC computers.
|
Intellectual Property
Trademarks.
The Company has trademarked the name
“NeuroSync” for its EEG BCI device.
Rapid Technological Change Could Render Our Products Obsolete
Our markets are characterized by rapid
technological changes, frequent new product introductions and enhancements, uncertain product life cycles, changes in customer
requirements, and evolving industry standards. The introduction of new products embodying new technologies and the emergence of
new industry standards could render our existing products obsolete. Our future success will depend upon our ability to continue
to develop and introduce a variety of new products and product enhancements to address the increasingly sophisticated needs of
our customers. We may experience delays in releasing new products and product enhancements in the future. Material delays in introducing
new products or product enhancements may cause customers to forego purchases of our products and purchase those of our competitors.
We May Be Unable to Enforce or Defend Our Ownership and Use
of Proprietary Technology
Our success depends to a significant
degree upon our proprietary technology. Companies in the software industry have experienced substantial litigation regarding intellectual
property. We rely on a combination of patents, trade secrets, copyright law, contractual restrictions, and passwords to protect
our proprietary technology. However, these measures provide only limited protection, and we may not be able to detect unauthorized
use or take appropriate steps to enforce our intellectual property rights, particularly in foreign countries where the laws may
not protect our proprietary rights as fully as in the United States. Any litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights
would be expensive and time consuming, would divert management resources, and may not be adequate to protect our business.
We could be subject to claims that we
have infringed the intellectual property rights of others. In addition, we may be required to indemnify our customers for similar
claims made against them. Any claims against us could require us to spend significant time and money in litigation, pay damages,
develop new intellectual property or acquire licenses to intellectual properties that are the subject of the infringement claims.
These licenses, if required, may not be available on acceptable terms. As a result, intellectual property claims against us could
have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, and financial condition.
Seasonality of Our Business
We do not anticipate that our business
will be affected by seasonal factors. The only expected impact would be increased retail sales of our software applications during
the Christmas season.
Impact of Inflation
We are affected by inflation along with
the rest of the economy. Specifically, our costs to complete the EEG headset (currently under development) could rise if specific
components needed see a rise in cost.
Suppliers
Our three software applications are
already complete and for sale online, therefore there are no supplier issues. Our EEG headset has been produced by a company based
in Southern California with manufacturing plants in Hong Kong. We intend to continue with them due to the cost savings with manufacturing
overseas. In the event of a supply problem, we have several back up companies in the U.S. such as Raytheon and others that could
easily supply our needs.
Competition
Currently, there are two large companies
of any significance in the BCI market. They are Emotiv and Neurosky. Emotiv provides the more complex EEG headset on the market,
which has 12 wet sensors and provides the most capabilities. In our discussions with Emotiv, its management have stated that it
has sold in excess of 200,000 headsets. Neurosky is another leader in the field and has a simplified EEG headset on the market
with only one to two sensors. It has been used to create popular toys such as “Star Wars Force Trainer,” whereby the
user concentrates to elevate a ping pong ball through a maze using only his mind.
Both Emotiv and Neurosky are larger,
better financed and have greater market exposure than we do. Consequently, in order for Mind Solutions to be successful in its
intended operations, it must be able to compete effectively against its competitors. If Mind Solutions cannot effectively compete
for whatever reason, we will not be successful.
Sales and Marketing
Mind Solutions currently sells its three
thought-controlled software applications and NeuroSync BCI device via the Internet through our website at www.mindsolutionscorp.com
and www.theneurosync.com. Consumers can also purchase the Emotiv EEG headset through a link on our website direct to the manufacturer,
which is required to operate our software. Currently all marketing has been by social mediaor through our websites. A possible
planned marketing campaign will take place in the future.
Regulations
The only government regulations that
we are aware of are the shipping and customs regulations for our products coming from Hong Kong. Once the final product is complete
and we place the initial order for shipment, we will need to adhere to normal customs and shipping regulations.
Key Personnel of Mind Solutions This section needs to
be update to include new management
Our future financial success depends
to a large degree upon the personal efforts of our key personnel. ZiyadOsachi our chief executive officer, president, and chief
financial officer, and his intended designees will play the major roles in securing the services of those persons deemed capable
to develop and execute upon our business strategy. While we intend to employ additional executive, development, and technical
personnel in order to minimize the critical dependency upon any one person, we may not be successful in attracting and retaining
the persons needed.
Adequacy of Working Capital for Mind Solutions
We will apply great efforts to raise
though equity or debt offerings what we feel is sufficient working capital for our intended business plan by various means. If
we are not able to raise additional capital, we would not be able to continue operations and our business may fail.
The Financial Results for Mind Solutions May Be Affected
by Factors Outside of Our Control
Our future operating results may vary
significantly from quarter to quarter due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside our control. Our anticipated expense
levels are based, in part, on our estimates of future revenues and may vary from projections. We may be unable to adjust spending
rapidly enough to compensate for any unexpected revenues shortfall. Accordingly, any significant shortfall in revenues in relation
to our planned expenditures would materially and adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition. Further,
we believe that period-to-period comparisons of our operating results are not necessarily a meaningful indication of future performance.
Employees
As of the date of this report, we
do not have any employees. On May 31, 2016, ZiyadOsachi became the new chief executive officer, president, and chief
financial officer and is working for the company as an independent consultant, pursuant to a consulting agreement. See “Item 13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence – Consulting Agreements.” All other
persons working for Mind Solutions are also independent contractors. We plan to save costs by keeping the software
development and EEG hardware development with our independent contractors. We anticipate adding up to two additional
employees in the next 12 months. We do not feel that we would have any difficulty in locating needed staff.
From time-to-time, we anticipate that
we will use the services of additional independent contractors and consultants to support our business development. We believe
our future success depends in large part upon the continued service of our senior management personnel and our ability to attract
and retain highly qualified managerial personnel.
Company Contact Information
Our principal executive offices are
located at 3755 Avocado Blvd Suite 108, La Mesa, California 91941, telephone (858) 880-7787. Our email address is contact@mindsolutionscorp.com.
The Mind Solutions Internet website is located at www.mindsolutionscorp.com. The information contained in our website shall not
constitute part of this report.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Not applicable.
|
Item1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments.
|
None.
Item 2. Properties.
The principal executive offices of Mind Solutions are located
at 3755 Avocado Blvd Suite 108, La Mesa, California 91941. We have been provided office space by our chief executive officer,
ZiyadOsachi, at no cost. Management has determined that such cost is nominal and did not recognize the rent expense in its financial
statements.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
On April 30, 2008, we filed a complaint
against two former members of our board of directors alleging breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment.
The complaint, styled
VOIS Inc., Plaintiff, vs. Edward Spindel and Michael Spindel, Defendants
, Case No. CA012201XXXXMB,
in the Circuit Court for the 15th Judicial District in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, alleges that during 2002 and 2003 while
Mind Solutions, which at that time was known as Medstrong International, was under significant financial distress the defendants
caused us to issue demand promissory notes charging excessive and/or usurious interest rates with the knowledge that we would
be unable to repay the notes upon any demand. The defendants, who are brothers, were members of the Medstrong International board
of directors until their resignations in April 2006.
The complaint further alleges that
the defendants engaged in a repeated systematic scheme to defraud our company by continuing to restructure the promissory notes
while they were members of the prior board of directors at such excessive and usurious interest rates that the defendants violated
their fiduciary duties and responsibilities and approved debt obligations that benefited them and not Mind Solutions and that
their wrongful actions and omissions resulted in their unjust enrichment. We sought damages in excess of $968,000.
On June 18, 2009, the defendants removed
the lawsuit from Palm Beach Circuit Court (State) to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Federal).
Thereafter, the defendants sought to have the case transferred to the United States District Court in New York. On October 27,
2009, the judge denied the defendant’s Motion to Transfer. On October 28, 2009 the defendants filed their Answer and Defenses
to the Complaint.
The defendants did not file a counterclaim at that time.
On November 12, 2009, the Court entered a Scheduling Order and a Notice of Trial for December 2009. On December 4, 2009, the Court
selected a mediator. In February 2010, the defendants changed law firms and sought leave from the Court to file a counterclaim.
At that time, the defendants also served discovery in the form of interrogatories, request for production and request for admission.
The defendant’s counterclaim was filed on February 17, 2010, and we filed our Answer on March 13, 2010. Over the course
of the next several months we responded to the discovery requests.
On November 13, 2009, the parties attended
a pretrial hearing to address legal issues related to our complaint and the defendants’ counterclaim. Based upon questions
posed by the Court and the argument of counsel, the Court struck the defense of usury and additionally dismissed our complaint
without prejudice, providing us 10 days to file an amended complaint. The defendants were also provided 10 days to file an Amended
counterclaim. Based upon the rulings, the matter was then removed from the Court’s December 2009 trial docket. We have decided
that it is not cost effective or beneficial to pursue our affirmative claims in this matter and have, accordingly, elected not
to file an amended complaint.
On July 19, 2010, the counter–plaintiffs,
Edward and Michael Spindel filed a motion for summary judgment. We filed a response in opposition on August 5, 2010. The Spindels
filed a reply on September 9, 2010. The court held a hearing on September 16, 2010, and at the hearing granted summary judgment
in favor of the Spindels. Final judgment was ordered on November 16, 2010, in the amount of $287,266 plus post judgment interest.
Attorney’s fees of $172,304 were also awarded.
On December 6, 2010, we filed an appeal
to the judgment.
On July 13, 2011, the United States
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued an opinion in favor of VOIS, Inc. This Opinion was made final when the Court
issued the mandate on August15th, 2011. This ruling effectively reversed the Summary Judgment previously granted to the Spindels
by the District Court on November 4, 2010, in the amount of $287,266. At the present time, this lawsuit is still pending in the
State Circuit Court of Florida. Mind Solutions intends to mount a vigorous defense.
Mind Solutions had two outstanding notes
due to Edward Spindel and Michael Spindel in the aggregate amount of $145,000. The notes were unsecured and accrue interest and
penalty of 15% inasmuch as they are past due. Messrs. Spindels filed a lawsuit styled
Edward Spindel and Michael Spindel, Counter-Plaintiffs,
vs. VOIS, Inc. F/K/AMedstrong International Corp., Counter-Defendant
, in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida, West Palm Beach Division, Case No. 08-80689-CIV-Ryskamp/Hopkins. On November 16, 2012, judgment was entered
against VOIS in favor of Edward Spindel against VOIS in the amount of $188,942.47 and in favor of Michael Spindel against VOIS
in the amount of $99,527.41, together with post-judgment interest as provided by law. Messrs. Spindels have sought to garnish
the bank accounts of Mind Solutions to recover on the judgment and as of the date of this report, the two garnishments have netted
$30,771 in favor of Messrs. Spindels. At March 31, 2015, total principal, accrued interest and penalty pertaining to the outstanding
$145,000 in notes payable is $432,274.
We were a defendant in two actions,
each entitled
951 Yamato Acquisition Company, LLC vs. VOIS, Inc.
both as filed in December 2009 the Circuit Court of the
15th Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida under case numbers 502010CA040121XXXXMB and 502010CC19027XXXXBBRS,
which are related to the lease agreements for our former office space. A combined summary judgment was entered in April 2010 against
VOIS in the amount of $106,231. At December 31, 2015, our liabilities as reported in our financial statements contained elsewhere
in this report reflect the principal amount of the judgment together with $138,103 in accrued interest.
Mind Solutions is not engaged in any
other litigation at the present time, and management is unaware of any claims or complaints that could result in future litigation.
Management will seek to minimize disputes with its customers but recognizes the inevitability of legal action in today’s
business environment as an unfortunate price of conducting business.
Item 4. Risk Factors
Not applicable.
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s
Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
Our common stock was traded on the OTCQB
from November 22, 2010, until April 30, 2014, under the symbol “VOIS.” Due to the trading price of our shares being
below $0.01 per share, beginning on May 1, 2014, our common stock has been traded on the OTC Pink. Our symbol remained the same.
The following table sets forth the high
and low bid prices for our common stock on the OTCQB as reported by various market makers. The quotations do not reflect adjustments
for retail mark-ups, mark-downs, or commissions and may not necessarily reflect actual transactions.
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
|
Fiscal 2014 Quarter Ended:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2014
|
|
|
$
|
0.008
|
|
|
$
|
0.0015
|
|
|
June 30, 2014
|
|
|
$
|
0.004
|
|
|
$
|
0.0016
|
|
|
September 30, 2014
|
|
|
$
|
0.008
|
|
|
$
|
0.0001
|
|
|
December 31, 2014
|
|
|
$
|
0.0042
|
|
|
$
|
0.0015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2015 Quarter Ended:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2015
|
|
|
$
|
0.0015
|
|
|
$
|
0.0055
|
|
|
June 30, 2015
|
|
|
$
|
0.001
|
|
|
$
|
0.0022
|
|
|
September 30, 2015
|
|
|
$
|
0.001
|
|
|
$
|
0.0014
|
|
|
December 31, 2015
|
|
|
$
|
0.001
|
|
|
$
|
0.0001
|
|
As of August 15, 2016, we had 88,841,082
shares of our common stock outstanding. Our shares of common stock are held by approximately 538 stockholders of record. The number
of record holders was determined from the records of our transfer agent and does not include beneficial owners of our common stock
whose shares are held in the names of various securities brokers, dealers, and registered clearing agencies. In addition to our
authorized common stock, Mind Solutions is authorized to issue 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share,
of which 10,000,000 shares are issued or outstanding. Consequently, there is no trading market for the shares of our preferred
stock.
Dividends
We have not paid or declared any dividends
on our common stock, nor do we anticipate paying any cash dividends or other distributions on our common stock in the foreseeable
future. Any future dividends will be declared at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend, among other things,
on our earnings, if any, our financial requirements for future operations and growth, and other facts as our board of directors
may then deem appropriate.
Securities Authorized for Issuance
under Equity Compensation Plans
Authorized Equity Compensation Plan Shares
Since January 1, 2014, we have taken
the following actions:
|
|
On January 28, 2014,
we filed with the SEC a Registration Statement on Form S-8 which covers 25,000,000 shares of our common stock available for
issuance pursuant to awards under our 2014 Equity Compensation Plan.
|
Issuance of Equity Compensation Plan Shares
Since January 1, 2014, we have issued
the following shares for services rendered
|
|
Pursuant to a Consulting
Agreement dated January 2, 2014, on January 31, 2014, we issued 10,000,000 post reverse-split shares of our common stock to
Brent Fouch, which shares had been registered pursuant to our Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the SEC on January
28, 2014.
|
|
|
On March 31, 2014,
we issued 5,000 post reverse-split shares to Noah Fouch for consulting services, which shares had been registered pursuant
to our Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed January 28, 2014.
|
|
|
Pursuant to a Consulting
Agreement dated May 2, 2014, on May 14, 2014, we issued 2,500 post reverse-split shares of our common stock to Brent Fouch,
which shares had been registered pursuant to our Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed January 28, 2014, with the SEC.
|
|
|
Pursuant to a Consulting
Agreement dated August 20, 2014, on August 28, 2014, we issued 30,000,000 post reverse-split shares of our common stock to
Brent Fouch, which shares had been registered pursuant to our Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed January 28, 2014, with
the SEC.
|
|
|
Pursuant to a Consulting
Agreement dated September 2, 2014, on September 30, 2014, we issued 30,000,000 post reverse-split shares of our common stock
to Noah Fouch, which shares had been registered pursuant to our Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed January 28, 2014,
with the SEC.
|
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
On the dates specified below, we have
issued shares of our common stock to various creditors, IBC Funds, LLC, Magna Group, LLC, Hanover Holdings I, LLC, Asher Enterprises,
Inc., JMJ Financial, Gel Properties, LLC, LG Capital Funding, LLC, WHC Capital, AARG Corp, KBM Worldwide, Inc., Cicero Consulting
Group, LLC and other parties.
|
|
On January 10, 2014,
we issued 1,400,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $980 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 14, 2014,
we issued 1,500,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $1,050 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 23, 2014,
we issued 7,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $3,850 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 28, 2014,
we issued 7,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $3,850 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 29, 2014,
we issued 7,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $3,850 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 31, 2014,
we issued 7,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $3,850 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 6, 2014,
we issued 7,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $4,200 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 7, 2014,
we issued 7,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $5,250 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 8, 2014,
we issued 7,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $8,750 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 10, 2014,
we issued 12,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $15,000 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 12, 2014,
we issued 9,976,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IBC Funds, LLC for the reduction of $12,470 in convertible
debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions as permitted by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.
|
Magna Group, LLC.
Beginning
in 2010 and continuing into 2014, there were several agreements executed between Mind Solutions, Inc. and its predecessors with
Brent Fouch, one of the officers of a predecessor. Mr. Fouch had loaned the sum of $347,292 to the predecessor of Mind Solutions
for working capital purposes. Mr. Fouch subsequently assigned some of the notes to Magna Group, LLC. See “Item 13. Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence – Transactions with Former Officer.” Upon conversion
of the notes, Magna Group, LLC received 52,803,315 post reverse split shares of our common stock as follows:
|
|
On January 9, 2014,
we issued 2,181,818 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Magna Group, LLC for the reduction of $3,000 in outstanding
convertible debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 10, 2014,
we issued 7,272,727 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Magna Group, LLC for the reduction of $8,000 in outstanding
convertible debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 21, 2014,
we issued 8,264,462 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Magna Group, LLC for the reduction of $5,000 in outstanding
convertible debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 27, 2014,
we issued 13,223,140 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Magna Group, LLC for the reduction of $8,000 in outstanding
convertible debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 29, 2014,
we issued 16,568,145 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Magna Group, LLC for the reduction of $13,000 in outstanding
convertible debt. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 31, 2014,
we issued 18,181,818 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Hanover Holdings I, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $11,000 of their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 6, 2014,
we issued 22,934,315 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Hanover Holdings I, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $16,500 of principle and $2,421 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares
were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 14, 2014,
we issued 7,438,017 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Hanover Holdings I, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $13,500 of their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 20, 2014,
we issued 9,646,465 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Hanover Holdings I, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $13,000 of principle and $1,325 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares
were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On May 2, 2014, we
issued 31,619,318 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Hanover Holdings I, LLC, as a result of their notice to
convert $26,500 of principle and $1,325 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were
issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 9, 2014,
we issued 2,419,355 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $2,250 of their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 14, 2014,
we issued 2,428,571 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $2,210 of their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 19, 2014,
we issued 2,457,831 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $740 of principle and $1,300 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were
issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On May 19, 2014,
we issued 15,463,918 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $15,000 on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On May 27, 2014,
we issued 15,789,474 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $15,000 on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On May 28, 2014,
we issued 14,947,368 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $12,500 together with $1,700 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were
issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On August 14, 2014,
we issued 18,072,289 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $15,000 on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On August 18, 2014,
we issued 18,518,519 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $15,000 on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On August 21, 2014,
we issued 14,516,129 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Asher Enterprises, Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $7,500 together with $1,500 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were
issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 29, 2014,
we issued 7,900,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$5,214 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 5, 2014,
we issued 11,200,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$7,392 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 10, 2014,
we issued 16,200,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$10,692 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 24, 2014,
we issued 18,900,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$12,474 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 27, 2014,
we issued 20,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$12,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On April 3, 2014,
we issued 14,363,704 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$8,618 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On June 20, 2014,
we issued 16,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$15,360 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On July 15, 2014,
we issued 16,407,407 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$15,751 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On October 16, 2014,
we issued 20,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$21,600 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On November 10, 2014,
we issued 18,062,673 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$28,178 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On December 29, 2014,
we issued 66,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to JMJ Financial, as a result of their notice to convert
$19,800 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
Gel Properties, LLC.
In 2014, we executed various Securities Purchase Agreements with Gel Properties, LLC, whereby we issued convertible promissory
notes to Gel Properties, LLC bearing interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 10 percent. We issued 104,836,148 post reverse
split shares of our common stock to Gel Properties, LLC, in connection with the conversions of the convertible promissory notes
as follows:
|
|
On August 18, 2014,
we issued 7,575,758 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Gel Properties, LLC, as a result of their notice to convert
$5,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On August 20, 2014,
we issued 13,223,140 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Gel Properties, LLC, as a result of their notice to
convert $8,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On August 25, 2014,
we issued 12,727,273 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Gel Properties, LLC, as a result of their notice to
convert $7,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On September 1, 2014,
we issued 14,491,795 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Gel Properties, LLC, as a result of their notice to
convert $5,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On September 3, 2014,
we issued 23,863,636 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Gel Properties, LLC, as a result of their notice to
convert $10,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On September 8, 2014,
we issued 22,727,273 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Gel Properties, LLC, as a result of their notice to
convert $10,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On September 11,
2014, we issued 10,227,273 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Gel Properties, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $5,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
LG Capital Funding, LLC.
In 2014, we executed various Securities Purchase Agreements with LG Capital Funding, LLC, whereby we issued convertible promissory
notes to with LG Capital Funding, LLC bearing interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 10 percent. We issued 145,117,267
post reverse split shares of our common stock to with LG Capital Funding, LLC, in connection with the conversions of the convertible
promissory notes as follows:
|
|
On August 3, 2014,
we issued 23,872,976 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with LG Capital Funding, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $15,000 of principle and $756 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares
were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On August 27, 2014,
we issued 23,991,282 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with LG Capital Funding, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $10,000 of principle and $556 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares
were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On September 11,
2014, we issued 20,404,607 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with LG Capital Funding, LLC, as a result of their
notice to convert $8,900 of principle and $78 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares
were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On September 29,
2014, we issued 20,018,266 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with LG Capital Funding, LLC, as a result of their
notice to convert $20,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any
restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On October 1, 2014,
we issued 20,028,704 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with LG Capital Funding, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $20,000 of principle and $1,030 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares
were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
WHC Capital, LLC.
In 2014,
we executed various Securities Purchase Agreements with WHC Capital, LLC, whereby we issued convertible promissory notes to with
WHC Capital, LLC bearing interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 12 percent. We issued 32,000,000 post reverse split shares
of our common stock to with WHC Capital, LLC, in connection with the conversions of the convertible promissory notes as follows:
|
|
On December 9, 2014,
we issued 32,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with WHC Capital, LLC, as a result of their notice to
convert $24,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
ARRG Corp.
In 2014, we
executed various Securities Purchase Agreements with ARRG Corp., whereby we issued convertible promissory notes to with ARRG Corp.
bearing interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 8 percent. We issued 37,142,857 post reverse split shares of our common
stock to with ARRG Corp., in connection with the conversions of the convertible promissory notes as follows:
|
|
On November 27, 2014,
we issued 37,142,857 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with ARRG Corp., as a result of their notice to convert
$50,000 of principle and $2,000 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued
free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
Caesar Capital Group, LLC.
In 2014, we executed various Securities Purchase Agreements with Caesar Capital Group, LLC, whereby we issued convertible promissory
notes to with Caesar Capital Group, LLC bearing interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 8 percent. We issued 37,166,878
post reverse split shares of our common stock to with Caesar Capital Group, LLC, in connection with the conversions of the convertible
promissory notes as follows:
|
|
On October 17, 2014,
we issued 37,166,878 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with Caesar Capital Group, LLC, as a result of their
notice to convert $50,000 of principle and $2,034 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The
shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
KBM Worldwide, Inc.
In
2014, we executed various Securities Purchase Agreements with KBM Worldwide Inc., whereby we issued convertible promissory notes
to with KBM Worldwide Inc. bearing interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 8 percent. We issued 45,948,276 post reverse
split shares of our common stock to with KBM Worldwide Inc., in connection with the conversions of the convertible promissory
notes as follows:
|
|
On November 8, 2014,
we issued 15,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with KBM Worldwide Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $15,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
On November 17, 2014, we issued
17,500,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with KBM Worldwide Inc., as a result of their notice to convert
$17,500 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions pursuant
to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On November 19, 2014,
we issued 13,448,276 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with KBM Worldwide Inc., as a result of their notice
to convert $10,000 of principle and $1,700 of accrued interest on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares
were issued free of any restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
Cicero Consulting Group, LLC.
In 2014, we executed various Securities Purchase Agreements with Cicero Consulting Group, LLC, whereby we issued convertible
promissory notes to with Cicero Consulting Group, LLC bearing interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 8 percent. We issued
131,078,431 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with Cicero Consulting Group, LLC, in connection with the conversions
of the convertible promissory notes as follows:
|
|
On November 17, 2014,
we issued 29,411,764 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with Cicero Consulting Group, LLC, as a result of their
notice to convert $50,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any
restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On December 16, 2014,
we issued 41,666,667 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with Cicero Consulting Group, LLC, as a result of their
notice to convert $50,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any
restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On February 11, 2015,
we issued 50,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with Cicero Consulting Group, LLC, as a result of their
notice to convert $50,000 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any
restrictions pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
Iconic Holdings, LLC.
In 2014, we executed various Securities Purchase Agreements with Iconic Holdings, LLC, whereby we issued convertible promissory
notes to with Iconic Holdings, LLC, bearing interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 8 percent. We issued 68,750,000 post
reverse split shares of our common stock to with Iconic Holdings, LLC, in connection with the conversions of the convertible promissory
notes as follows:
|
|
On December 27, 2014,
we issued 68,750,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to with Iconic Holdings, LLC, as a result of their notice
to convert $27,500 of principle on their outstanding convertible promissory note. The shares were issued free of any restrictions
pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On December 25, 2013,
we issued 20,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Kerry Driscoll pursuant to a Consulting Agreement dated
December 25, 2013. The shares issued to Mr. Driscoll were restricted in their transfer as required by the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On January 6, 2014,
we issued 100,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Kerry Driscoll pursuant to a Consulting Agreement dated
December 25, 2013. The shares issued to Mr, Driscoll were restricted in their transfer as required by the Securities Act.
|
|
|
Pursuant to a Consulting
Agreement dated November 11, 2013, on January 15, 2014, we issued 6,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock
to Mirador Consulting LLC for consulting services to be rendered in the year ended December 31, 2014. The shares issued to
Mirador Consulting LLC were restricted in their transfer as required by the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On March 14, 2014,
we issued 11,627,907 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Monster Arts, Inc. for consulting services pursuant
to a Consulting Agreement dated February 12, 2014. The shares issued to Monster Arts, Inc. were restricted in their transfer
as required by the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On March 18, 2014,
we issued 5,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to Brett Cusick pursuant to a Consulting Agreement dated
March 18, 2014. The shares issued to Mr. Cusick were restricted in their transfer as required by the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On March 19, 2014,
we issued to Premier Venture Partners, LLC, a California limited liability company, 12,765,957 shares of our common stock
as Initial Commitment Shares in connection with an Equity Purchase Agreement dated March 11, 2014. The shares issued to Premier
Venture Partners were restricted in their transfer as required by the Securities Act. See “Item 7. Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Subsequent Events.”
|
|
|
On May 11, 2014,
we issued 5,000,000 post reverse split shares of our common stock to IN2NE Corp. pursuant to a Consulting Agreement dated
May 11, 2014. The shares issued to IN2NE Corp. were restricted in their transfer as required by the Securities Act.
|
|
|
On June 2, 2014,
we issued 15,000,000 post reverse-split shares of our common stock to Dr. Gordon Chiu. The shares issued to Dr. Chiu were
restricted in their transfer as required by the Securities Act.
|
In 2015 the following chart illustrates conversion of shares for
debt:
|
Date
|
|
|
Name
|
|
|
Shares Converted
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
1/5/2015
|
|
|
WHC Capital
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
26,000.00
|
|
|
1/9/2015
|
|
|
JMJ Financial
|
|
|
71,200
|
|
|
$
|
21,360.00
|
|
|
1/20/2015
|
|
|
WHC Capital
|
|
|
31,829
|
|
|
$
|
14,005.16
|
|
|
1/22/2015
|
|
|
Premier Ventures
|
|
|
15,149
|
|
|
$
|
10,604.93
|
|
|
1/30/2015
|
|
|
KBM Worldwide
|
|
|
37,500
|
|
|
$
|
15,000.00
|
|
|
2/2/2015
|
|
|
KBM Worldwide
|
|
|
34,000
|
|
|
$
|
13,600.00
|
|
|
2/3/2015
|
|
|
JMJ Financial
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
16,800.00
|
|
|
2/12/2015
|
|
|
JMJ Financial
|
|
|
39,777
|
|
|
$
|
16,706.67
|
|
|
2/13/2015
|
|
|
Cicero Consulting
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
$
|
50,000.00
|
|
|
3/10/2015
|
|
|
Cicero Consulting
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
$
|
50,000.00
|
|
|
3/13/2015
|
|
|
LG Capital Funding LLC
|
|
|
33,689
|
|
|
$
|
31,500.00
|
|
|
3/16/2015
|
|
|
LG Capital Funding LLC
|
|
|
35,397
|
|
|
$
|
33,097.00
|
|
|
3/25/2015
|
|
|
JSJ Investments
|
|
|
76,923
|
|
|
$
|
40,000.00
|
|
|
3/27/2015
|
|
|
JSJ Investments
|
|
|
81,155
|
|
|
$
|
66,115.07
|
|
|
3/31/2015
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings LLC
|
|
|
33,333
|
|
|
$
|
27,500.00
|
|
|
5/1/2015
|
|
|
KBM Worldwide
|
|
|
24,691
|
|
|
$
|
12,500.00
|
|
|
5/1/2015
|
|
|
KBM Worldwide
|
|
|
15,682
|
|
|
$
|
13,800.00
|
|
|
5/11/2015
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings LLC
|
|
|
34,375
|
|
|
$
|
27,500.00
|
|
|
6/17/2015
|
|
|
JMJ Financial
|
|
|
17,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,200.00
|
|
|
6/25/2015
|
|
|
JMJ Financial
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,800.00
|
|
|
7/7/2015
|
|
|
JMJ Financial
|
|
|
18,724
|
|
|
$
|
30,111.11
|
|
|
8/12/2015
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings LLC
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
20,000.00
|
|
|
11/9/2015
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings LLC
|
|
|
66,667
|
|
|
$
|
20,000.00
|
|
|
11/5/2015
|
|
|
LG Capital Funding LLC
|
|
|
9,753
|
|
|
$
|
4,828.00
|
|
|
11/12/2015
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings LLC
|
|
|
260,000
|
|
|
$
|
52,000.00
|
|
|
11/25/2015
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings LLC
|
|
|
296,700
|
|
|
$
|
14,835.00
|
|
|
12/2/2015
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings LLC
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000.00
|
|
|
12/3/2015
|
|
|
JSJ Investments
|
|
|
166,420
|
|
|
$
|
8,653.86
|
|
|
12/7/2015
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings LLC
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000.00
|
|
|
12/10/2015
|
|
|
JSJ Investments
|
|
|
187,805
|
|
|
$
|
9,765.86
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
2,227,774
|
|
|
$
|
688,283
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our unregistered securities were
issued in reliance upon an exemption from registration pursuant to Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act or Rule 506 of Regulation
D promulgated under the Securities Act. Each investor took his securities for investment purposes without a view to distribution
and had access to information concerning us and our business prospects, as required by the Securities Act. In addition, there
was no general solicitation or advertising for the purchase of our securities. Our securities were sold only to an accredited
investor, as defined in the Securities Act with whom we had a direct personal preexisting relationship, and after a thorough discussion.
Finally, our stock transfer agent has been instructed not to transfer any of such securities, unless such securities are registered
for resale or there is an exemption with respect to their transfer.
All of the above described investors
who received shares of our common stock were provided with access to our filings with the SEC, including the following:
|
|
The information contained
in our annual report on Form 10-K under the Exchange Act.
|
|
|
The information contained
in any reports or documents required to be filed by Mind Solutions under sections 13(a), 14(a), 14(c), and 15(d) of the Exchange
Act since the distribution or filing of the reports specified above.
|
|
|
A brief description
of the securities being offered, and any material changes in our affairs that were not disclosed in the documents furnished.
|
Purchases of Equity Securities by
the Registrant and Affiliated Purchasers
There were no purchases of our equity
securities by Mind Solutions or any affiliated purchasers during any month within the fiscal year covered by this report.
Item 6. Selected Financial
Data.
Not applicable.
Item 7. Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION SHOULD BE READ
TOGETHER WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELATED NOTES INCLUDED ELSEWHERE IN THIS ANNUAL REPORT
ON FORM 10-K.
The following discussion reflects our
plan of operation. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the financial statements which are attached to this report.
This discussion contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding our expected financial position, business
and financing plans. These statements involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from the results
described in or implied by these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including those discussed below and
elsewhere in this report, particularly under the headings “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”
Unless the context otherwise suggests,
“we,” “our,” “us,” and similar terms, as well as references to “VOIS” and “Mind
Solutions,” all refer to Mind Solutions as of the date of this report.
The registrant has developed three software
applications which are compatible with the Emotiv EEG headsets currently on the market. The registrant has recently developed
and brought to market a Brain-Computer-Interface (BCI) called "NeuroSync", which allows the user to operate thought-controlled
applications on their mobile smart phone devices as well as on traditional PC computers. This BCI receives electrical impulses
from the brain and allows the user to control actions on their smart phones and PC computers through the power of thought. The
technology involves the use of a wireless headset, which detects brainwaves on both the conscious and non-conscious level. This
revolutionary neural processing technology makes it possible for computers to interact directly with the human brain. The Company
sells their recently developed BCI device and software online through the Company's website as well as other online platforms
such as Amazon.com.
Going Concern
As of December 31, 2015, Mind Solutions
had an accumulated deficit of $26,952,305. Also, during the year ended December 31, 2015, we used net cash of $596,203 for operating
activities. These factors raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
While we are attempting to commence
operations and generate revenues, our cash position may not be significant enough to support our daily operations. Management
intends to raise additional funds by way of an offering of our securities. Management believes that the actions presently being
taken to further implement our business plan and generate revenues provide the opportunity for Mind Solutions to continue as a
going concern. While we believe in the viability of our strategy to generate revenues and in our ability to raise additional funds,
we may not be successful. Our ability to continue as a going concern is dependent upon our capability to further implement our
business plan and generate revenues.
Results of Operations
Year Ended December 31, 2015 Compared
to Year Ended December 31, 2014.
Revenues
During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 we had
little revenue. In the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we had revenues from the sale of our software products in the amounts
of $19,838 and $534 which was an increase of $19,304. In the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we had services revenues
of $0 and $100,000 which was a decrease of $100,000. The service revenues prior were from a consulting agreement in which the
Company was paid in stock of the client. Therefore, we classified the stock as a Marketable Securities: Available for Sale asset
in which we revalued at each reporting date based on the closing stock price. The client’s stock price has greatly decreased
since receiving the stock, so we have recorded an impairment loss of $99,080.
During the years ended December 31,
2015 and 2014 we had cost of sales of $0 and $174 which was a increase of $174. Our cost of sales is primarily made up of the
cost to produce and distribute our software applications.
Operating Expenses.
Consulting Fees
. For the year
ended December 31, 2015, consulting expense increased to $2,845,143 as compared to $2,197,952 from the prior year ended December
31, 2014 which was a increase of $647,191. The increase was primarily the result of more stock being issued to consultants for
services rendered to the Company.
Officer Compensation
. For the year ended December 31, 2015,
officer compensation increased to $1,006,130 as compared to $155,000 from the prior year ended December 31, 2014 which was an
increase of $851,130. Officer compensation increased due to additional stock being issued to our sole officers as compensation
for services. In the year ended December 31, 2014, our sole officer received $155,000 cash as compensation.
Professional Fees
. For the year
ended December 31, 2015, professional fees decreased to $177,509 as compared to $201,595 from the prior year ended December 31,
2014 which was a decrease of $27,825. Professional fee expense decreased slightly due to decrease in accounting and legal fees
due to decreased reliance and need on the legal front.
Research and Development.
For
the year ended December 31, 2015 we incurred costs of $151,773 as we refined our head set. There were no costs in 2014.
General and Administrative Expense
.
For the year ended December 31, 2015, general and administrative expenses increased to $79,031 as compared to $54,012 from the
prior year ended December 31, 2013 which was an increase of $5,449. For the years ended December 31, 2014, and 2013, general and
administrative expenses consisted of the following:
|
|
2015
|
|
2014
|
|
Advertising
|
|
|
$
|
30,384
|
|
|
$
|
11,815
|
|
|
Edgarizing& XBRL
|
|
|
|
27,771
|
|
|
|
17,353
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
|
769
|
|
|
|
2,577
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
20,107
|
|
|
|
22,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
79,031
|
|
|
$
|
54,012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertising
. For the year ended
December 31, 2015, advertising expense amounted to $30,384 as compared to $11,815 for the year ended December 31, 2014. The increase
was due to additional funds being spent on web development.
Edgarizing&XBRL
. For the
year ended December 31, 2015, edgarizing and XBRL expense amounted to $27,771 as compared to $17,353 for the year ended December
31, 2014. We incurred more costs as a result of additional issuance of convertible debt satisfaction shares.
Depreciation
. For the year ended
December 31, 2015, depreciation expense amounted to $769 as compared to $2,577 for the year ended December 31, 2014.
Other Expense
. For the year ended
December 31, 2015, other expenses which includes repairs and maintenance, postage, dues and subscriptions, supplies, etc. amounted
to $20,107 as compared to $22,441 for the year ended December 31, 2014.
Net Loss.
Our net loss from operations
increased to $6,001,554 for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to a profit in 2014 of $2,338,997. The profit in 2014 was
mainly due to a derivative adjustment of income of $5,000,377 in that year as opposed to a loss on derivative of $1,146,684 in
2015.
Interest Expense
. For the year
ended December 31, 2015, interest expense increased to $611,243 as compared to $57,139 for the year ended December 31, 2014. The
increase was due to additional original issue discount and market to market adjustments interest expense incurred on the convertible
notes payable funded in 2015.
Gain/(Loss) on Derivative
Adjustment
. For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company had a gain on derivative adjustment of $5,000,377 as
compared with a loss on derivative adjustment of $1,146,684 for the year ended December 31, 2015. The decrease in the fair
value of the derivative liability calculated using the Multi-Nomial Lattice Model pertaining to our
outstanding convertible notes payable caused the gain/(loss) on derivative adjustment.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our future operating results may vary
significantly from quarter to quarter due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside our control. Our anticipated expense
levels are based, in part, on our estimates of future revenues and may vary from projections. We may be unable to adjust spending
rapidly enough to compensate for any unexpected revenues shortfall. Accordingly, any significant shortfall in revenues in relation
to our planned expenditures would materially and adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition. Further,
we believe that period-to-period comparisons of our operating results are not necessarily a meaningful indication of future performance.
Liquidity is the ability of a company
to generate adequate amounts of cash to meet its needs for cash. The following table provides certain selected balance sheet comparisons
between December 31, 2015, and 2014.
|
|
December 31, 2015
|
|
December 31,
2014
|
|
$
Change
|
|
Percent Change
|
Working Capital
|
|
$
|
(2,050,101
|
)
|
|
$
|
817,271
|
|
|
$
|
(2,867,372
|
)
|
|
|
Over 100%
|
|
Cash
|
|
|
5,107
|
|
|
|
113,199
|
|
|
|
(108,092
|
)
|
|
|
95.5%
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
62,026
|
|
|
|
2,481,556
|
|
|
|
(2,419,530
|
)
|
|
|
97.5%
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
64,054
|
|
|
|
2,488,291
|
|
|
|
(2,424,237
|
)
|
|
|
97.4%
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
438,189
|
|
|
|
389,166
|
|
|
|
49,023
|
|
|
|
12.6%
|
|
Notes payable and accrued interest
|
|
|
1,069,836
|
|
|
|
560,486
|
|
|
|
509,350
|
|
|
|
90.9%
|
|
Derivative Liability
|
|
|
604,102
|
|
|
|
714,633
|
|
|
|
(110,531
|
)
|
|
|
15.5%
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
2,112,127
|
|
|
|
1,664,285
|
|
|
|
447,842
|
|
|
|
26.9%
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
$
|
2,112,127
|
|
|
$
|
1,664,285
|
|
|
$
|
447,842
|
|
|
|
26.9%
|
|
At December 31, 2015, our working capital
deficit decreased as compared to December 31, 2014, primarily as a result of a decrease in prepaid expenses
Operating Activities
Net cash used for continuing operating
activities during fiscal 2015 was $618,075 as compared to $959,099 for fiscal 2014. Non-cash items totaling approximately $1,409,011
contributing to the net cash used in continuing operating activities for fiscal 2015 include:
|
|
$320,220 representing
the value of shares issued to consultants and officers;
|
|
|
|
$1,146,684 of loss
on derivative adjustment;
|
|
|
$(3,938) of available-for-sale
securities received for service revenues;
|
|
|
$585,065 of original
issue discount;
|
|
|
$769 of depreciation;
and
|
|
|
$2,324,267 decrease in prepaid expense and inventory
|
|
|
$60,528 increase
in accounts payable.
|
Net cash used for continuing operating
activities during fiscal 2014 was $705,293. Non-cash items totaling approximately $3,037,868 contributing to the net cash used
in continuing operating activities for fiscal 2014 include:
|
|
$805,096 representing the value
of shares issued to consultants and officers;
|
|
|
$1,823,156 of derivative
gain;
|
|
|
$50,000 of available-for-sale
securities compensation;
|
|
|
$2,078,807 increase
in prepaid expenses
|
|
|
$2,577 of depreciation;
and
|
|
|
$5,695 increase in
accounts payable.
|
Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities
was $0 and $2,936 in fiscal 2015 and 2014.
Financing Activities
For the
year ended December 31, 2015, net cash provided by financing activities was $488,111 which consisted of $463,111 in proceeds from
convertible notes and $25,000 in proceeds from a promissory note. For the year ended December 31, 2014, net cash provided by financing
activities was $774,000 which consisted of proceeds from convertible notes.
Critical Accounting Estimates and
Policies
Our financial statements and accompanying
notes are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. Preparing financial statements
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that impact the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenses.
These estimates and assumptions are affected by management’s application of accounting policies. Critical accounting policies
include revenue recognition and impairment of long-lived assets.
We recognize revenue in accordance with
Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 101, “Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements.” Sales are recorded when products
are shipped to customers. Provisions for discounts and rebates to customers, estimated returns and allowances and other adjustments
are provided for in the same period the related sales are recorded.
ot required to provide the information
required by this Item as it is a "smaller reporting company," as defined by Rule 229.10(f)(1).
Stock-Based Compensation
We recognize compensation cost for stock-based
awards based on the estimated fair value of the award on date of grant. We measure compensation cost at the grant date based on
the fair value of the award and recognize compensation cost upon the probable attainment of a specified performance condition
or over a service period.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
There are none that have an impact on the financial statements.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any off-balance sheet
arrangements.
Item 7A. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Not applicable.
Item 8. Financial Statements
and Supplementary Data.
The financial statements and related
notes are included as part of this report as indexed in the appendix on page F-1,
et seq
.
Item 9. Changes in and
Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.
During the last two fiscal years, we
have had no disagreements with our accountants on accounting and financial disclosure.
Resignation of Certifying Accountants.
In 2015 we accepted the resignation of Terry l Johnson (Johnson) from his engagement to be the independent certifying accountant
for Mind Solutions.
In 2015, the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) revoked the registration of Johnson due to its violations of PCAOB rules and auditing standards
in auditing the financial statements and PCAOB rules and quality control standards with respect to Johnsons’ clients; Mind
Solutions was not one of the clients for which Johnson was sanctioned.
Engagement of Certifying Accountants.
In 2015 we engaged
Patrick Heyn (Heyn) as our independent accountants to report on our balance sheet as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related
combined statements of income, stockholders’
equity and cash
flows for the years then ended. The decision to appoint Heyn was approved by our board of directors.
During our two most recent fiscal years
and any subsequent interim period prior to the engagement of Heyn, neither we nor anyone on our behalf consulted with Heyn regarding
either (i) the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed; or the type of audit
opinion that might be rendered on our financial statements, and either a written report was provided to us or oral advice was
provided that the new accountant concluded was an important factor considered by us in reaching a decision as to the accounting,
auditing or financial reporting issue; or (ii) any matter that was either the subject of a disagreement (as defined in paragraph
304(a)(1)(iv) and the related instructions to Regulation S-K) or a reportable event (as described in paragraph 304(a)(1)(v) of
Regulation S-K).
Item 9A. Controls and
Procedures.
See Item 9A(T) below.
Item 9A(T). Controls
and Procedures.
Evaluation of Disclosure and Controls
and Procedures.
We carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including
our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined) in Exchange Act Rules 13a – 15(c) and 15d – 15(e)). Based upon that evaluation, our chief executive officer
and chief financial officer concluded that, as of the end of the period ended December 31, 2015, our disclosure controls and procedures
were not effective (1) to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange
Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and
(2) to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is
accumulated and communicated to us, including our chief executive and chief financial officers, as appropriate to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosure.
The term disclosure controls and procedures
means controls and other procedures of an issuer that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the
issuer in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78a,
et seq.
) is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the Commission’s rules and forms. Disclosure controls and
procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by
an issuer in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the issuer’s
management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate
to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Our management, including our chief
executive officer and chief financial officer, does not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal controls
over financial reporting will prevent all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can
provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Further, the design of a control
system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to
their costs. Because of inherent limitations in all control systems, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent
or detect misstatements, and no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of
fraud, if any, within the registrant have been detected. 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.
Management’s Annual Report
on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal
control over financial reporting as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Our 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 accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
The term internal control over financial
reporting is defined as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the issuer’s principal executive and principal
financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the issuer’s board of directors, management
and other personnel, 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 and includes those policies and procedures
that:
|
|
Pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets;
|
|
|
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 issuer are being made only in accordance with authorizations
of management and directors of the issuer; and
|
|
|
Provide reasonable
assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the issuer’s assets
that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
|
Our management assessed the effectiveness
of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria
set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework.
Changes in Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting.
There have been no changes in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting through
the date of this report or during the period ended December 31, 2015, that materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Independent Registered Accountant’s
Internal Control Attestation.
This report does not include an attestation report of the registrant’s registered public
accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation
by the registrant’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission
that permit the registrant to provide only management’s report in this report.
Remediation plans for material
weaknesses over internal controls.
Our plans to mitigate material weaknesses in disclosure controls and procedures for
future filings will be dependent on our ability to obtain adequate financing to fund development of our financial reporting
infrastructure. At this time it is not cost beneficial for us to utilize capital to focus on mitigating financial reporting
weaknesses; however, we expect to implement a plan for remediation of these deficiencies when sufficient funding to implement
such a plan is available.
Item 9B. Other Information.
None.
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive
Officers and Corporate Governance.
The following table sets forth information
concerning the directors and executive officers of Mind Solutions as of the date of this report:
Name
|
Age
|
Position
|
Officer and Director
Since
|
Ziyad
Osachi
|
30
|
Chairman, Chief Executive
Officer, President, Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer, and Secretary
|
May 31, 2016
|
The members of our board of directors
are subject to change from time to time by the vote of the stockholders at special or annual meetings to elect directors. Our
current board of directors consists of one director, who has expertise in the proposed business of Mind Solutions. Upon receipt
of sufficient funds to pay for consultants as described elsewhere in this report either from revenues or through receipt of funds
from debt or sales of our common stock, we intend to seek directors and officers who would be able to properly execute our proposed
business plan.
The foregoing notwithstanding, except
as otherwise provided in any resolution or resolutions of the board, directors who are elected at an annual meeting of stockholders,
and directors elected in the interim to fill vacancies and newly created directorships, will hold office for the term for which
elected and until their successors are elected and qualified or until their earlier death, resignation or removal.
Whenever the holders of any class or
classes of stock or any series thereof are entitled to elect one or more directors pursuant to any resolution or resolutions of
the board, vacancies and newly created directorships of such class or classes or series thereof may generally be filled by a majority
of the directors elected by such class or classes or series then in office, by a sole remaining director so elected or by the
unanimous written consent or the affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of such class or classes or series entitled
to elect such director or directors. Officers are elected annually by the directors. There are no family relationships among our
directors and officers.
We may employ additional management
personnel, as our board of directors deems necessary. Mind Solutions has not identified or reached an agreement or understanding
with any other individuals to serve in management positions, but does not anticipate any problem in employing qualified staff.
A description of the business experience
for each of the directors and executive officers of Mind Solutions is set forth below.
Since May 31, 2016, Mr. Osachi has been our president,
principal executive officer, secretary, treasurer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer and sole
member of our board of directors. Since May 31, 2016, Mr. Osachi has been president, principal executive officer, secretary,
treasurer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and sole member of the board of directors of Rapid Fire
Marketing, Inc. From June 21, 2011 until December 31, 2013, Mr. Osachi was unemployed. Since December 1, 2013, Mr. Osachi has
been employed by L&Z Wireless Enterprises, Inc. in Chula Vista, California as its store manager. L&Z Wireless
Enterprises, Inc. is a cell phone provider for Cricket Wireless.
Committees of the Board
We do not currently have an Audit, Executive,
Finance, Compensation, or Nominating Committee, or any other committee of the board of directors. However, we have adopted charters
for these committees, in the event that we elect to implement them. Copies of the charters for each proposed committee have been
previously filed with the SEC.
The responsibilities of these committees
are fulfilled by our board of directors and all of our directors participate in such responsibilities, none of whom is “independent”
as defined under Rule 4200(a)(15) of the NASD’s listing standards described below, as our financial constraints have made
it extremely difficult to attract and retain qualified independent board members. Since we do not have any of the subject committees,
our entire board of directors participates in all of the considerations with respect to our audit, compensation and nomination
deliberations.
Rule 4200(a)(15) of the NASD’s
listing standards defines an “independent director” as a person other than an executive officer or employee of the
company or any other individual having a relationship which, in the opinion of the issuer’s board of directors, would interfere
with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director. The following persons shall not
be considered independent:
|
|
A director who is,
or at any time during the past three years was, employed by the company;
|
|
|
A director who accepted
or who has a Family Member who accepted any compensation from the company in excess of $120,000 during any period of twelve
consecutive months within the three years preceding the determination of independence, other than the following: (i) compensation
for board or board committee service; (ii) compensation paid to a Family Member who is an employee (other than as an executive
officer) of the company; or (iii) benefits under a tax-qualified retirement plan, or non-discretionary compensation. Provided,
however, that in addition to the requirements contained in this paragraph, audit committee members are also subject to additional,
more stringent requirements under Rule 4350(d).
|
|
|
A director who is
a Family Member of an individual who is, or at any time during the past three years was, employed by the company as an executive
officer;
|
|
|
A director who is,
or has a Family Member who is, a partner in, or a controlling stockholder or an executive officer of, any organization to
which the company made, or from which the company received, payments for property or services in the current or any of the
past three fiscal years that exceed five percent of the recipient’s consolidated gross revenues for that year, or $200,000,
whichever is more, other than the following: (i) payments arising solely from investments in the company’s securities;
or (ii) payments under non-discretionary charitable contribution matching programs.
|
|
|
A director of the
issuer who is, or has a Family Member who is, employed as an executive officer of another entity where at any time during
the past three years any of the executive officers of the issuer serve on the compensation committee of such other entity;
or
|
|
|
A director who is,
or has a Family Member who is, a current partner of the company’s outside auditor, or was a partner or employee of the
company’s outside auditor who worked on the company’s audit at any time during any of the past three years.
|
We hope to add qualified independent
members of our board of directors at a later date, depending upon our ability to reach and maintain financial stability.
Audit Committee
The entire board of directors performs
the functions of an audit committee, but no written charter governs the actions of the board when performing the functions of
what would generally be performed by an audit committee. The board approves the selection of our independent accountants and meets
and interacts with the independent accountants to discuss issues related to financial reporting. In addition, the board reviews
the scope and results of the audit with the independent accountants, reviews with management and the independent accountants our
annual operating results, considers the adequacy of our internal accounting procedures and considers other auditing and accounting
matters including fees to be paid to the independent auditor and the performance of the independent auditor. At the present time,
Kerry Driscoll, our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, is considered to be our expert in financial and accounting
matters.
Nomination Committee
Our size and the
size of our board, at this time, do not require a separate nominating committee. When evaluating director nominees, our directors
consider the following factors:
|
|
The appropriate size
of our board of directors;
|
|
|
Our needs with respect
to the particular talents and experience of our directors;
|
|
|
The knowledge, skills
and experience of nominees, including experience in finance, administration or public service, in light of prevailing business
conditions and the knowledge, skills and experience already possessed by other members of the board;
|
|
|
Experience in political
affairs;
|
|
|
Experience with accounting
rules and practices; and
|
|
|
The desire to balance
the benefit of continuity with the periodic injection of the fresh perspective provided by new board members.
|
Our goal is to assemble a board that
brings together a variety of perspectives and skills derived from high quality business and professional experience. In doing
so, the board will also consider candidates with appropriate non-business backgrounds.
Other than the foregoing, there are
no stated minimum criteria for director nominees, although the board may also consider such other factors as it may deem are in
our best interests as well as our stockholders. In addition, the board identifies nominees by first evaluating the current members
of the board willing to continue in service. Current members of the board with skills and experience that are relevant to our
business and who are willing to continue in service are considered for re-nomination. If any member of the board does not wish
to continue in service or if the board decides not to re-nominate a member for re-election, the board then identifies the desired
skills and experience of a new nominee in light of the criteria above. Current members of the board are polled for suggestions
as to individuals meeting the criteria described above. The board may also engage in research to identify qualified individuals.
To date, we have not engaged third parties to identify or evaluate or assist in identifying potential nominees, although we reserve
the right in the future to retain a third party search firm, if necessary. The board does not typically consider stockholder nominees
because it believes that its current nomination process is sufficient to identify directors who serve our best interests.
Scientific & Business Advisory Board
We have a Scientific Advisory Board
that provides expert advice on product development and other matters. This board has been composed of two members, Sam Irvantchi
and Joe Abrams.
Sam Iravantchi is a seasoned executive visionary with over 28 years
of successful engineering and product development experience. Sam has strong strategic and operational management skills and the
knowledge and wisdom gained from bringing over 500 different products to market from concept to production. Sam is the owner and
operator of designCATAPULT, Inc.
Joe Abrams co-founded in 1999 Intermix,
the parent company of social networking leader MySpace. In 2005, MySpace was sold to News Corp. for $580 million. In addition,
Mr. Abrams was a founder of The Software Toolworks, a software company that released several hit titles in the 1980’s, which
ultimately led to the company’s sale in 1994 to Pearson, PLC for $462 million. He has deep experience in helping early-stage,
publicly held technology companies reach the next phase of growth. Joe Abrams contract has now expired and the Company will only
be able to re-engage him if adequate capital becomes available.
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Under Section 16(a) of the Exchange
Act, our directors and certain of our officers, and persons holding more than 10 percent of our common stock are required to file
forms reporting their beneficial ownership of our common stock and subsequent changes in that ownership with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission. Such persons are also required to furnish Mind Solutions with copies of all forms so filed.
Based solely upon a review of copies
of such forms filed on Forms 3, 4, and 5, and amendments thereto furnished to us, we believe that as of the date of this report,
our executive officers, directors and greater than 10 percent beneficial owners have not complied on a timely basis with all Section
16(a) filing requirements.
Communication with Directors
Stockholders and other interested parties
may contact any of our directors by writing to them at Mind Solutions, Inc., at 3755 Avocado Blvd Suite 108, La Mesa, California
91941, Attention: Corporate Secretary.
Our board has approved a process for
handling letters received by us and addressed to any of our directors. Under that process, the Secretary reviews all such correspondence
and regularly forwards to the directors a summary of all such correspondence, together with copies of all such correspondence
that, in the opinion of the Secretary, deal with functions of the board or committees thereof or that he otherwise determines
requires their attention. Directors may at any time review a log of all correspondence received by us that are addressed to members
of the board and request copies of such correspondence.
Conflicts of Interest
With respect to transactions involving
real or apparent conflicts of interest, we have adopted written policies and procedures which require that:
|
|
The fact of the relationship
or interest giving rise to the potential conflict be disclosed or known to the directors who authorize or approve the transaction
prior to such authorization or approval;
|
|
|
The transaction be approved by
a majority of our disinterested outside directors.
|
Code of Ethics for Senior
Executive Officers and Senior Financial Officers
We have adopted an amended Code of Ethics
for Senior Executive Officers and Senior Financial Officers that applies to our president, chief executive officer, chief operating
officer, chief financial officer, and all financial officers, including the principal accounting officer. The code provides as
follows:
|
|
Each officer is responsible
for full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure in all periodic reports and financial disclosures required
to be filed by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission or disclosed to our stockholders and/or the public.
|
|
|
Each officer shall
immediately bring to the attention of the audit committee, or disclosure compliance officer, any material information of which
the officer becomes aware that affects the disclosures made by us in our public filings and assist the audit committee or
disclosure compliance officer in fulfilling its responsibilities for full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure
in all periodic reports required to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
|
|
|
Each officer shall
promptly notify our general counsel, if any, or the president or chief executive officer as well as the audit committee of
any information he may have concerning any violation of our Code of Business Conduct or our Code of Ethics, including any
actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships, involving any management or other
employees who have a significant role in our financial reporting, disclosures or internal controls.
|
|
|
Each officer shall
immediately bring to the attention of our general counsel, if any, the president or the chief executive officer and the audit
committee any information he may have concerning evidence of a material violation of the securities or other laws, rules or
regulations applicable to us and the operation of our business, by us or any of our agents.
|
|
|
Any waiver of this
Code of Ethics for any officer must be approved, if at all, in advance by a majority of the independent directors serving
on our board of directors. Any such waivers granted will be publicly disclosed in accordance with applicable rules, regulations
and listing standards.
|
We have posted a copy of our Code of
Ethics on our website. We will provide to any person without charge, upon request, a copy of our Code of Ethics. Any such request
should be directed to our corporate secretary at the address listed below in the next paragraph. The information contained in
our website shall not constitute part of this report.
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
Summary of Cash and Certain Other Compensation
At present, Mind Solutions has one executive
officer. The compensation program for future executives will consist of three key elements which will be considered by a compensation
committee to be appointed:
|
·
|
A performance bonus; and
|
|
·
|
Periodic grants and/or options of our common stock.
|
Base Salary
. Our chief executive
officer and all other senior executive officers receive compensation based on such factors as competitive industry salaries, a
subjective assessment of the contribution and experience of the officer, and the specific recommendation by our chief executive
officer.
Performance Bonus
. A portion
of each officer’s total annual compensation is in the form of a bonus. All bonus payments to officers must be approved by
our compensation committee based on the individual officer’s performance and company performance.
Stock Incentive
.
Stock grants and options are awarded to executive officers based on their positions and individual performance. Stock grants and
options provide incentive for the creation of stockholder value over the long term and aid significantly in the recruitment and
retention of executive officers. The compensation committee considers the recommendations of the chief executive officer for stock
grants and options to executive officers (other than the chief executive officer) and approves, disapproves or modifies such recommendation.
Stock grants and options for the chief executive officer will be recommended and approved by our board of directors. See “Market
Price of and Dividends on our Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters - Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity
Compensation Plans.”
It is uncertain when, if ever, we will
be in a position to compensate any of our officers or directors. Before we can expect to provide for officer salaries, we will
have to obtain revenues from the sales of our products or raise funds through a debt or equity offering of our securities. See
“Item 1. Business.”
Mind Solutions Summary Compensation
Table
The following table sets forth, for
our named executive officers for the two completed fiscal years ended December 31, 2015, and 2014:
Name and
Principal Position
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
Salary
($)
|
|
|
|
Bonus
($)
|
|
|
|
Stock Awards
($)
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
($)
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation
($)
|
|
|
|
Nonqualified
deferred
compensation
earnings
($)
|
|
|
|
All Other Compensation
($)
|
|
|
|
Total
($)
|
|
Kerry Driscoll (1)
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
946,130
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
1,006,130
|
|
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
155,000
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
160,000
|
|
________
(1) Mr. Driscoll is our former chairman of the board, president,
chief financial officer, principal accounting officer, and secretary. Mr. Driscollresigned from all positions on May 31, 2016.
Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal
Year-End
The following table provides information
for each of our named executive officers as of the end of our last completed fiscal year, December 31, 2015:
|
Option
Awards
|
Stock
Awards
|
Name
|
Number
of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
Exercisable
|
Number
of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#)
Unexercisable
|
Equity
Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned
Options (#)
|
Option
Exercise
Price ($)
|
Option
Expiration
Date
|
Number
of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not
Vested
|
Market
Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not
Vested
|
Equity
Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not
Vested
|
Equity
Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not
Vested ($)
|
Kerry
Driscoll (1)
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
-0-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________
(1)
Mr. Driscoll is our former chairman of the board, president, chief
financial officer,principal accounting officer, and secretary. Mr. Driscoll resigned from all positions on May 31, 2016.
Mind Solutions Employment Agreements
As of the date of this report, Mind
Solutions does not have any employment agreement with Kerry Driscoll, our chairman of the board, president, chief financial officer,
principal accounting officer, and secretary, although we do have a Consulting Agreement executed on December 25, 2013. Pursuant
to the Consulting Agreement, Mr. Driscoll is charged with creating operating plans for the strategic direction of Mind Solutions
correlated with annual operating budgets, and will provide such services as managing the business of sales, marketing, production
and general business services.
Mind Solutions Director Compensation
Our directors do not receive compensation
for their services as directors.
Item 12. Security Ownership
of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
The following table presents information
regarding the beneficial ownership of all shares of our common stock and preferred stock as of the date of this report by:
|
|
Each person who owns
beneficially more than five percent of the outstanding shares of our common stock;
|
|
|
Each person who owns beneficially
more than five percent of the outstanding shares of our preferred stock;
|
|
|
Each director;
|
|
|
Each named executive officer;
and
|
|
|
All directors and officers as
a group.
|
Name of Beneficial Owner
(1)
|
|
Shares of Preferred Stock
Beneficially Owned
(2)
|
|
Shares of Common Stock
Beneficially Owned
(2)
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
ZiyadOsachi
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer, and Secretary
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
All officers and directors as a group (one person)
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
GELI Holdings, Inc.
|
|
|
5,000,000
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Jeff Dashefsky
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
50,000,000
|
|
|
|
56%
|
|
________
|
(1)
|
Unless otherwise indicated,
the address for each of these stockholders is c/o Mind Solutions, Inc., at 3755 Avocado Blvd Suite 108, La Mesa, California
91941. Also, unless otherwise indicated, each person named in the table above has the sole voting and investment power with
respect to our shares of common stock or preferred stock which he beneficially owns.
|
|
(2)
|
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission. As of the date
of this report, there were outstanding 88,841,082 shares of our common stock. As of the date of this report, we have 4,000,000
shares of the Series A Preferred Stock and 1,000,000 shares of the Series B Preferred Stock issued and outstanding. The Series
A Preferred Stock does not have any voting rights. However, subject to adjustment as provided in the Certificate of Designation,
each share of the Series A Preferred Stock shall be convertible into 100 fully paid and nonassessable share of our common
stock. The Preferred B Stock provides super voting rights of 5,000 : 1.
|
Other than as stated herein, there are
no arrangements or understandings, known to us, including any pledge by any person of our securities:
|
|
The operation of which may at a subsequent date result in a change in control of Mind Solutions; or
With respect to the election
of directors or other matters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 13. Certain Relationships
and Related Transactions and Director Independence.
Consulting Agreements
Consulting Agreements with Kerry
Driscoll.
Mind Solutions executed a Consulting Agreement on December 25, 2013, with Kerry Driscoll, our current chief executive
officer and chief financial officer, whereby we issued 120,000,000 post reverse-split shares of our common stock for one year
of executive services. The 120,000,000 shares were valued at the closing price of $0.0022 on the date of the agreement which resulted
in Mind Solutions recording officer compensation of $264,000 over the life of the agreement. The portion of the agreement not
yet completed as of December 31, 2013, was recorded as prepaid expense in the amount of $263,397.
On September 30, 2013, we issued 17,812
post reverse-split shares of our common stock to Kerry Driscoll for consulting services rendered to Mind Solutions by September
30, 2013, which shares had been registered pursuant to our Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed March 31, 2013, with the SEC
and a subsequent Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Form S-8 filed with the SEC on September 9, 2013.
The registrant executed a service agreement
on September 12, 2014, with its current Chief Executive Officer, Kerry Driscoll, whereby the registrant issued 5,000,000 shares
of Series A Preferred Stock for one year of services such as compliance, guidance, infrastructure and business strategy. The 5,000,000
shares were valued at par $0.001which resulted in the registrant recording officer compensation of $5,000 over the life of the
contract.
In addition to the above issuance
of shares of our common stock to Mr. Driscoll, with respect to various Consulting Agreements with Mr. Driscoll, please see “Market
for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities – Securities
Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans.”
License Agreement
In December 2012, we executed a license
agreement with Mind Technologies, Inc. for the right to use, develop, improve, manufacture, and sale the licensed software application
which uses wireless headsets to read brain waves and allow interaction with a computer. We issued 3,500 post reverse-split shares
of our common stock as consideration for the license agreement. Mind Technologies, Inc. was a related party to Mind Solutions
because its chief executive officer, Brent Fouch, was also the former chief executive officer of Mind Solutions, Inc. See Note
9 to our attached financial statements for more details on licensed products.
Service Agreement with Former Officer
The company executed a service agreement on
September 12, 2014, with Brent Fouch, a former officer of the registrant, whereby the registrant issued 5,000,000 shares of Series
A Preferred Stock for one year services to facilitate the development of BCI software compatibility with the registrant’s
micro BCI headset. The 5,000,000 shares were valued at market value on the day of issuance, which resulted in the registrant recording
a consulting expense of $1,700,000 over the life of the contract.
Asset Purchase Agreement
On April 30, 2013, we executed an asset
purchase agreement with Mind Technologies, Inc. whereby we purchased all the assets of Mind Technologies, Inc. for 15,000 post
reverse-split shares of our common stock. The assets purchased include those previously licensed from Mind Technologies, Inc.,
described in Note 9 to our attached financial statements.
Free Office Space Provided by Chief
Executive Officer
Mind Solutions has been provided office
space by its chief executive officer Kerry Driscoll at no cost. Management has determined that such cost is nominal and did not
recognize the rent expense in its financial statements.
Transactions With
Former
Officer
Beginning in 2010 and continuing into
2014, there were several agreements executed between Mind Solutions, Inc. and its predecessors with Brent Fouch, one of the officers
of a predecessor who loaned $347,292 to Mind Solutions for working capital purposes. In payment of the amount owed to Mr. Fouch,
we issued various convertible promissory notes. Mr. Fouch subsequently converted or assigned the notes to Magna Group, LLC.
Item 14. Principal Accounting
Fees and Services.
Audit Fees
The aggregate fees billed by Patrick
D. Heyn. CPA, P. A. for professional services rendered for the audit of our annual financial statements for fiscal year ended
December 31, 2015 and 2014, were $20,000.
Audit Related Fees
None.
Tax Fees
None.
All Other Fees
None.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2015 AND 2014
NOTE 1 - ORGANIZATION AND DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS
Mind Solutions, Inc. (the “registrant”) was initially
incorporated in the state of Delaware on May 19, 2000 as Medical Records by Net, Inc. On October 17, 2000, the registrant
changed its name to Lifelink Online, Inc. In January 2001, its name was changed to MedStrong Corporation, and on March 9, 2001,
the registrant name was changed to MedStrong International Corporation. On March 30, 2007, the registrant’s name was changed
to VOIS, Inc. and the domicile was changed to the State of Florida. On October 19, 2012, the registrant executed a merger agreement
with Mind Solutions, Inc. whereas Mind Solutions, Inc. became a wholly owned subsidiary of the registrant. Mind Solutions, Inc.
was incorporated under the laws of Nevada on May 24, 2002, under the name Red Meteor Media, Inc. The registrant changed its name
to Prize Entertainment, Inc. in November 2003, and then again to Mind Solutions, Inc. in January 2011. On October 28, 2013, the
registrant changed its name from VOIS, Inc. to Mind Solutions, Inc. as well as changing its domicile from Florida to Nevada.
On October 28, 2013, the registrant closed an Agreement and Plan
of Merger with Mind Solutions, Inc. For accounting purposes this agreement was treated as a reverse merger. The operations of
the registrant became those solely of Mind Solutions, Inc. In connection with the merger agreement, the registrant changed its
fiscal year end to coincide with that of Mind Solutions, Inc., which is December 31. Pursuant to the Plan of Merger with Mind
Solutions, Inc., the holders of stock in VOIS, Inc. received one share of common stock, $0.001 par value per share, in Mind Solutions,
Inc. for every 2,000 shares of common stock in VOIS, Inc. (in effect, a one for 2,000 reverse split). As a result, the then current
common stockholders of VOIS, Inc. held all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock in the surviving corporation Mind
Solutions, Inc.
The registrant has developed three software applications which
are compatible with the Emotiv EEG headsets currently on the market. The registrant has recently developed and brought to market
a Brain-Computer-Interface (BCI) called "NeuroSync", which allows the user to operate thought-controlled applications
on their mobile smart phone devices as well as on traditional PC computers. This BCI receives electrical impulses from the brain
and allows the user to control actions on their smart phones and PC computers through the power of thought. The technology involves
the use of a wireless headset, which detects brainwaves on both the conscious and non-conscious level. This revolutionary neural
processing technology makes it possible for computers to interact directly with the human brain. The Company sells their recently
developed BCI device and software online through the Company's website as well as other online platforms such as Amazon.com.
NOTE 2- SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The Company’s financial statements as
of December 31, 2015 have been prepared using generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America applicable
to a going concern, which contemplates the realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities in the normal course of business.
The Company has not yet established an ongoing source of revenues sufficient to cover its operating costs and allow it to continue
as a going concern. These matters raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.
In order to continue as a going concern, the
Company will need, among other things, additional capital resources. Management’s plan is to obtain such resources for the
Company by obtaining capital from management and significant shareholders sufficient to meet its minimal operating expenses and
seeking equity and/or debt financing. However management cannot provide any assurances that the Company will be successful in
accomplishing any of its plans. These financial statements do not include any adjustments related to the recoverability and classification
of assets or the amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as
a going concern
The accompanying
consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustment to the recorded assets or liabilities that might be necessary
should the Company have to curtail operations or be unable to continue in existence.
A. Cash and equivalents
The registrant considers all cash on hand and in
banks, including accounts in book overdraft positions, certificates of deposit and other highly-liquid investments with
maturities of three months or less, when purchased, to be cash and equivalents. The Company had no cash equivalents at
December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014.
B. Fixed Assets
Fixed assets are recorded at cost. Major renewals and improvements
are capitalized, while maintenance and repairs are expensed when incurred. Depreciation of equipment is computed by the straight-line
method over the assets estimated useful life of three, five (5), or seven (7) years. Upon sale or retirement of equipment, the
related cost and accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any gain or loss is reflected in statements of operations.
C. Advertising expenses
Advertising and marketing expenses are charged to operations as
incurred. For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, advertising and marketing expense were $30,384 and $11,815, respectively.
D. Revenue recognition
The registrant follows paragraph 605-10-S99-1 of the FASB Accounting
Standards Codification for revenue recognition. The registrant will recognize revenue when it is realized or realizable and earned.
The registrant considers revenue realized or realizable and earned when all of the following criteria are met: (i) persuasive
evidence of an arrangement exists, (ii) the product has been shipped or the services have been rendered to the customer, (iii)
the sales price is fixed or determinable, and (iv) collectability is reasonably assured.
E. Stock-based compensation
The Company accounts for equity instruments
issued to parties other than employees for acquiring goods or services under guidance of Sub-topic 505-50 of the FASB Accounting
Standards Codification (“Sub-topic 505-50”).
Pursuant to ASC Section 505-50-30, all transactions
in which goods or services are the consideration received for the issuance of equity instruments are accounted for based on the
fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instrument issued, whichever is more reliably measurable.
The measurement date used to determine the fair value of the equity instrument issued is the earlier of the date on which the
performance is complete or the date on which it is probable that performance will occur. If the Company is a newly formed corporation
or shares of the Company are thinly traded the use of share prices established in the Company’s most recent private placement
memorandum (“PPM”), or weekly or monthly price observations would generally be more appropriate than the use of daily
price observations as such shares could be artificially inflated due to a larger spread between the bid and asked quotes and lack
of consistent trading in the market.The fair value of share options and similar instruments is estimated on the date of grant
using a Black-Scholes option-pricing valuation model. The ranges of assumptions for inputs are as follows:
|
—
|
Expected
term of share options and similar instruments: Pursuant to Paragraph 718-10-50-2(f)(2)(i) of the FASB Accounting Standards
Codification the expected term of share options and similar instruments represents the period of time the options and similar
instruments are expected to be outstanding taking into consideration of the contractual term of the instruments and holder’s
expected exercise behavior into the fair value (or calculated value) of the instruments. The Company uses historical
data to estimate holder’s expected exercise behavior. If the Company is a newly formed corporation or shares
of the Company are thinly traded the contractual term of the share options and similar instruments is used as the expected
term of share options and similar instruments as the Company does not have sufficient historical exercise data to provide
a reasonable basis upon which to estimate expected term.
|
|
|
|
|
—
|
Expected volatility
of the entity’s shares and the method used to estimate it. Pursuant to ASC Paragraph 718-10-50-2(f)(2)(ii)
a thinly-traded or nonpublic entity that uses the calculated value method shall disclose the reasons why it is not practicable
for the Company to estimate the expected volatility of its share price, the appropriate industry sector index that it has
selected, the reasons for selecting that particular index, and how it has calculated historical volatility using that index. The
Company uses the average historical volatility of the comparable companies over the expected contractual life of the share
options or similar instruments as its expected volatility. If shares of a company are thinly traded the use of
weekly or monthly price observations would generally be more appropriate than the use of daily price observations as the volatility
calculation using daily observations for such shares could be artificially inflated due to a larger spread between the bid
and asked quotes and lack of consistent trading in the market.
|
|
|
|
|
—
|
Expected annual rate
of quarterly dividends. An entity that uses a method that employs different dividend rates during the contractual
term shall disclose the range of expected dividends used and the weighted-average expected dividends. The expected
dividend yield is based on the Company’s current dividend yield as the best estimate of projected dividend yield for
periods within the expected term of the share options and similar instruments.
|
Risk-free rate(s). An entity that uses a method that employs different
risk-free rates shall disclose the range of risk-free rates used. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S.
Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant for periods within the expected term of the share options and similar instruments.
Pursuant to ASC paragraph 505-50-25-7,
if fully vested, non-forfeitable equity instruments are issued at the date the grantor and grantee enter into an agreement
for goods or services (no specific performance is required by the grantee to retain those equity instruments), then, because
of the elimination of any obligation on the part of the counterparty to earn the equity instruments, a measurement date has
been reached. A grantor shall recognize the equity instruments when they are issued (in most cases, when the agreement is
entered into). Whether the corresponding cost is an immediate expense or a prepaid asset (or whether the debit should be
characterized as contra-equity under the requirements of paragraph 505-50-45-1) depends on the specific facts and
circumstances. Pursuant to ASC paragraph 505-50-45-1, a grantor may conclude that an asset (other than a note or a
receivable) has been received in return for fully vested, non-forfeitable equity instruments that are issued at the date the
grantor and grantee enter into an agreement for goods or services (and no specific performance is required by the grantee in
order to retain those equity instruments). Such an asset shall not be displayed as contra-equity by the grantor of the equity
instruments. The transferability (or lack thereof) of the equity instruments shall not affect the balance sheet display of
the asset. This guidance is limited to transactions in which equity instruments are transferred to other than employees in
exchange for goods or services. Section 505-50-30 provides guidance on the determination of the measurement date for
transactions that are within the scope of this Subtopic.
Pursuant to Paragraphs 505-50-25-8 and 505-50-25-9,
an entity may grant fully vested, non-forfeitable equity instruments that are exercisable by the grantee only after a specified
period of time if the terms of the agreement provide for earlier exercisability if the grantee achieves specified performance
conditions. Any measured cost of the transaction shall be recognized in the same period(s) and in the same manner as if the entity
had paid cash for the goods or services or used cash rebates as a sales discount instead of paying with, or using, the equity
instruments. A recognized asset, expense, or sales discount shall not be reversed if a share option and similar instrument that
the counterparty has the right to exercise expires unexercised.
Pursuant to ASC paragraph 505-50-30-S99-1,
if the Company receives a right to receive future services in exchange for unvested, forfeitable equity instruments, those equity
instruments are treated as unissued for accounting purposes until the future services are received (that is, the instruments are
not considered issued until they vest). Consequently, there would be no recognition at the measurement date and no entry should
be recorded.
F. Valuation of Derivatives
The Company evaluates its convertible instruments,
options, warrants or other contracts to determine if those contracts or embedded components of those contracts qualify as derivatives
to be separately accounted for under ASC Topic 815, “Derivatives and Hedging.” The result of this accounting treatment
is that the fair value of the derivative is marked-to-market each balance sheet date and recorded as a liability. In the event
that the fair value is recorded as a liability, the change in fair value is recorded in the statement of operations as other income
(expense). Upon conversion or exercise of a derivative instrument, the instrument is marked to fair value at the conversion date
and then that fair value is reclassified to equity. Equity instruments that are initially classified as equity that become subject
to reclassification under ASC Topic 815 are reclassified to liabilities at the fair value of the instrument on the reclassification
date. We analyzed the derivative financial instruments in accordance with ASC 815. The objective is to provide guidance for determining
whether an equity-linked financial instrument is indexed to an entity’s own stock. This determination is needed for a scope
exception which would enable a derivative instrument to be accounted for under the accrual method. The classification of a non-derivative
instrument that falls within the scope of ASC 815-40-05 “Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and
Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own Stock” also hinges on whether the instrument is indexed to an entity’s
own stock. A non-derivative instrument that is not indexed to an entity’s own stock cannot be classified as equity and must
be accounted for as a liability. There is a two-step approach in determining whether an instrument or embedded feature is indexed
to an entity’s own stock. First, the instrument's contingent exercise provisions, if any, must be evaluated, followed by
an evaluation of the instrument's settlement provisions. The Company utilized multinomial lattice models that value the derivative
liability based on a probability weighted discounted cash flow model. The Company utilized the fair value standard set forth by
the Financial Accounting Standards Board, defined as the amount at which the assets (or liability) could be bought (or incurred)
or sold (or settled) in a current transaction between willing parties, that is, other than in a forced or liquidation sale.
The derivative liabilities result in a reduction
of the initial carrying amount (as unamortized discount) of the Convertible Notes. This derivative liability is marked-to-market
each quarter with the change in fair value recorded in the income statement. Unamortized discount is amortized to interest expense
using the effective interest method over the life of the Convertible Note.
G. Derivatives
In connection with the sale of debt or equity instruments, the
Company may sell options or warrants to purchase our common stock. In certain circumstances, these options or warrants may be
classified as derivative liabilities, rather than as equity. Additionally, the debt or equity instruments may contain embedded
derivative instruments, such as embedded derivative features which in certain circumstances may be required to be bifurcated from
the associated host instrument and accounted for separately as a derivative instrument liability.
The Company's derivative instrument liabilities are re-valued at
the end of each reporting period, with changes in the fair value of the derivative liability recorded as charges or credits to
income in the period in which the changes occur. For options, warrants and bifurcated embedded derivative features that are accounted
for as derivative instrument liabilities, the Company estimates fair value using either quoted market prices of financial instruments
with similar characteristics or other valuation techniques. The valuation techniques require assumptions related to the remaining
term of the instruments and risk-free rates of return, our current common stock price and expected dividend yield, and the expected
volatility of our common stock price over the life of the instrument.
The following table summarizes the derivative liability activity
for the period December 31, 2013 through December 31, 2015:
Description
|
|
Derivative Liabilities
|
Fair value at December 31, 2013
|
|
$
|
493,062
|
|
Change due to Issuances
|
|
|
1,755,967
|
|
Change due to Conversions/Redemptions
|
|
|
(1,412,706
|
)
|
Change in Fair Value
|
|
|
(121,690
|
)
|
Fair value at December 31, 2014
|
|
$
|
714,633
|
|
Change due to Issuances
|
|
|
1,051,502
|
|
Change due to Conversion/Redemptions
|
|
|
(1,051,320
|
)
|
Change in Fair Value
|
|
|
(110,713
|
)
|
Fair value at December 31, 2015
|
|
$
|
604,102
|
|
For the twelve month period ended December 31, 2014,
net derivative income/(loss) was ($121,690). For the twelve month period ended December 31, 2015, net derivative
income/(loss) was ($110,713).
The Company classifies the fair value of these securities under
level three of the fair value hierarchy of financial instruments. The fair value of the derivative liability was calculated using
a multi-nomial lattice model that values the compound embedded derivatives based on a probability weighted discounted cash flow
model. This model is based on future projections of the various potential outcomes. The fair values including the embedded derivatives
that were analyzed and incorporated into the model included the variable conversion feature with the full ratchet reset and dilutive
reset, and the redemption options. The lattice methodology was used to value the embedded derivatives within the convertible note
issued and converted/redeemed with the following assumptions.
Assumptions
|
|
December 31, 2014
|
|
December 31, 2015
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
0.00
|
%
|
|
|
0.00
|
%
|
Risk-free rate for term
|
|
|
.04-.25%
|
|
|
|
0.01-0.47%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
173.9-275.1%
|
|
|
|
143.5-396.5%
|
|
Maturity dates
|
|
|
.22-.96 years
|
|
|
|
.04-1.0 years
|
|
Stock Price
|
|
|
0.0013
|
|
|
|
0.0011
|
|
H.
Fair Value of Financial
Instruments.
The Company’s financial instruments
consist of cash and cash equivalents, accounts payable, accrued liabilities and convertible debt. The estimated fair value of
cash, accounts payable and accrued liabilities approximate their carrying amounts due to the short-term nature of these instruments.
The Company utilizes various types of financing
to fund its business needs, including convertible debt with warrants attached. The Company reviews its warrants and conversion
features of securities issued as to whether they are freestanding or contain an embedded derivative and, if so, whether they are
classified as a liability at each reporting period until the amount is settled and reclassified into equity with changes in fair
value recognized in current earnings. At December 31, 2015, the Company had convertible debt to purchase common stock. The fair
value of the warrants and the embedded conversion feature of the convertible debt is classified as a liability. Some of these
units have embedded conversion features that are treated as a discount on the notes. Such financial instruments are initially
recorded at fair value and amortized to interest expense over the life of the debt using the effective interest method.
Inputs used in the valuation to derive fair
value are classified based on a fair value hierarchy which distinguishes between assumptions based on market data (observable
inputs) and an entity’s own assumptions (unobservable inputs). The hierarchy consists of three levels:
Level one
— Quoted market prices
in active markets for identical assets or liabilities;
Level two
— Inputs other than
level one inputs that are either directly or indirectly observable; and
Level three
— Unobservable inputs
developed using estimates and assumptions, which are developed by the reporting entity and reflect those assumptions that a market
participant would use.
Determining which category an asset or liability
falls within the hierarchy requires significant judgment. The Company evaluates its hierarchy disclosures each quarter. The Company’s
derivative liability is measured at fair value on a recurring basis. The Company classifies the fair value of these convertible
notes and warrants derivative liability under level three. The Company’s settlement payable is measured at fair value on
a recurring basis based on the most recent settlement offer. The Company classifies the fair value of the settlement payable under
level three. The Company’s rescission liability is measured at fair value on a recurring basis based on the most recent
stock price. The Company classifies the fair value of the rescission liability under level one.
Based on ASC Topic 815 and related guidance, the Company concluded the common stock purchase warrants are required to be accounted
for as derivatives as of the issue date due to a reset feature on the exercise price. At the date of issuance warrant derivative
liabilities were measured at fair value using either quoted market prices of financial instruments with similar characteristics
or other valuation techniques. The Company records the fair value of these derivatives on its balance sheet at fair value with
changes in the values of these derivatives reflected in the consolidated statements of operations as “Gain (loss) on derivative
liabilities.” These derivative instruments are not designated as hedging instruments under ASC 815-10 and are disclosed
on the balance sheet under Derivative Liabilities.
The following table presents liabilities that are measured and recognized at fair value as of December 31, 2014 and 2015 on a
recurring and non-recurring basis:
Description
|
|
Level I
|
|
Level II
|
|
Level III
|
|
Gains (Losses)
|
|
Derivatives
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
714,633
|
|
|
$
|
121,690
|
|
|
Fair Value at December 31, 2014
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
714,633
|
|
|
$
|
121,690
|
|
The following table presents
liabilities that are measured and recognized at fair value as of December 31, 2015 on a recurring and non-recurring basis:
Description
|
|
Level I
|
|
Level II
|
|
Level III
|
|
Gains (Losses)
|
|
Derivatives
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
604,102
|
|
|
$
|
110,153
|
|
|
Fair Value at December 31, 2015
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
604,102
|
|
|
$
|
110,153
|
|
Assumptions
|
|
December 31, 2015
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
0.00
|
%
|
Risk-free rate for term
|
|
|
0.01-0.47%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
143.5-396.5%
|
|
Maturity dates
|
|
|
.04-1.0 years
|
|
Stock Price
|
|
|
0.0013-0.0001
|
|
I. Income Taxes
The Company
accounts for income taxes in accordance with FASB ASC 740, "Income Taxes," which requires that the Company recognize
deferred tax liabilities and assets based on the differences between the financial statement carrying amounts and the tax bases
of assets and liabilities, using enacted tax rates in effect in the years the differences are expected to reverse. Deferred income
tax benefit (expense) results from the change in net deferred tax assets or deferred tax liabilities. A valuation allowance is
recorded when it is more likely than not that some or all deferred tax assets will not be realized.
The Company
has adopted the provisions of FASB ASC 740-10-05
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
. The ASC clarifies the accounting
for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise's financial statements. The ASC prescribes a recognition
threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected
to be taken in a tax return. The ASC provides guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting
in interim periods, disclosure and transition. Open tax-years subject to IRS examination include 2009 – 2014.
J. Loss per share
The registrant adopted FASB ASC Topic 260,
Earnings Per Share. Basic earnings per share is based on the weighted effect of all common shares issued and outstanding and is
calculated by dividing net income (loss) available to common stockholders by the weighted average shares outstanding during the
period. Diluted earnings per share is calculated by dividing net income available to common stockholders by the weighted average
number of common shares used in the basic earnings per share calculation plus the number of common shares, if any, that would
be issued assuming conversion of all potentially dilutive securities outstanding. For all periods, potentially issuable securities
are anti-dilutive.
There are approximately potentially dilutive
shares of common stock outstanding as of December 31, 2015, which are derived from the outstanding convertible promissory notes.
The registrant also has 5,010,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock issued and outstanding, each share of which can be converted
into 100 shares of our common stock, therefore there are an additional 501,000,000 potentially dilutive shares of common stock.
K. 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 certain reported amounts and disclosures. Significant estimates for the periods reported include certain
assumptions used in deriving the fair value of share-based compensation recognized, the useful life of tangible assets and the
future value of our website development costs. Assumptions and estimates used in these areas are material to our reported financial
condition and results of our operations. Actual results will differ from those estimates.
L. Embedded Conversion Features
The Company evaluates
embedded conversion features within convertible debt under ASC 815 “Derivatives and Hedging” to determine whether
the embedded conversion feature(s) should be bifurcated from the host instrument and accounted for as a derivative at fair value
with changes in fair value recorded in earnings. If the conversion feature does not require derivative treatment under ASC 815,
the instrument is evaluated under ASC 470-20 “Debt with Conversion and Other Options” for consideration of any beneficial
conversion features.
M. Derivative Financial Instruments
Fair value accounting
requires bifurcation of embedded derivative instruments such as conversion features in convertible debt or equity instruments,
and measurement of their fair value for accounting purposes. In determining the appropriate fair value, the Company uses the multinomial
lattice model. In assessing the convertible debt instruments, management determines if the convertible debt host instrument is
conventional convertible debt and further if there is a beneficial conversion feature requiring measurement. If the instrument
is not considered conventional convertible debt, the Company will continue its evaluation process of these instruments as derivative
financial instruments.
Once determined, derivative liabilities are
adjusted to reflect fair value at each reporting period end, with any increase or decrease in the fair value being recorded in
results of operations as an adjustment to fair value of derivatives. In addition, the fair value of freestanding derivative instruments
such as warrants, are also valued using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
N. Debt Issue Costs and Debt Discount
The Company may record
debt issue costs and/or debt discounts in connection with raising funds through the issuance of debt. These costs may be paid
in the form of cash, or equity (such as warrants). These costs are amortized to interest expense over the life of the debt. If
a conversion of the underlying debt occurs, a proportionate share of the unamortized amounts is immediately expensed.
O. Recently Issued Accounting Standards
On May 28, 2014, the
FASB and International Accounting Standards Board issued a new accounting standard that will supersede virtually all existing
revenue recognition guidance under generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (and International Financial
Reporting Standards) which has been subsequently updated to defer the effective date of the new revenue recognition standard by
one year. This standard will be effective for us beginning in fiscal 2019. The fundamental principles of the new guidance are
that companies should recognize revenue in a manner that reflects the timing of the transfer of services to customers and the
amount of revenue recognized reflects the consideration that a company expects to receive for the goods and services provided.
The new guidance establishes a five-step approach for the recognition of revenue. Based on our preliminary assessment, we do not
anticipate that the new guidance will have a material impact on our revenue recognition policies, practices or systems.
On February 25, 2016,
the FASB issued the new lease accounting standard which requires lessees to put most leases on their balance sheets but recognize
the expenses on their income statements in a manner similar to current practice. The new standard states that a lessee will recognize
a lease liability for the obligation to make lease payments and a right-of-use asset for the right to use the underlying asset
for the lease term. Expense related to leases determined to be operating leases will be recognized on a straight-line basis, while
those determined to be financing leases will be recognized following a front-loaded expense profile in which interest and amortization
are presented separately in the income statement. We are currently evaluating the impact of this new standard on our financial
reporting, but recognizing the lease liability and related right-of-use asset will significantly impact our balance sheet. These
changes will be effective for our fiscal year beginning June 1, 2019 (fiscal 2020), with a modified retrospective adoption method
to the beginning of 2018.
On November 20, 2015,
the FASB issued an Accounting Standards Update that will require companies to classify all deferred tax assets and liabilities
as noncurrent on the balance sheet instead of separating deferred taxes into current and noncurrent amounts. This new guidance
had minimal impact on our accounting and financial reporting, and we chose to early adopt on a retrospective basis in the fourth
quarter of 2016.
In March 2016, the FASB
issued an Accounting Standards Update to simplify the accounting for share-based payment transactions. The new guidance requires
companies to recognize the income tax effects of awards that vest or are settled as income tax expense or benefit in the income
statement as opposed to additional paid-in capital as is current practice. The guidance also provides clarification of the presentation
of certain components of share-based awards in the statement of cash flows. Additionally, the guidance allows companies to make
a policy election to account for forfeitures either upon occurrence or by estimating forfeitures. We are currently evaluating
the impact of this new standard on our financial reporting. These changes will be effective for our fiscal year beginning June
1, 2017 (fiscal 2018).
In June 2014, FASB
issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2014-12, “Compensation – Stock Compensation ( Topic
718 ); Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved
after the Requisite Service Period”. The amendments in this ASU apply to all reporting entities that grant their
employees share-based payments in which the terms of the award provide that a performance target that affects vesting could
be achieved after the requisite service period. The amendments require that a performance target that affects vesting and
that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. A reporting entity should
apply existing guidance in Topic 718 as it relates to awards with performance conditions that affect vesting to account for
such awards. For all entities, the amendments in this ASU are effective for annual periods and interim periods within those
annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. Earlier adoption is permitted. Entities may apply the amendments in this
ASU either (a) prospectively to all awards granted or modified after the effective date or (b) retrospectively to all awards
with performance targets that are outstanding as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial
statements and to all new or modified awards thereafter. If retrospective transition is adopted, the cumulative effect of
applying this Update as of the beginning of the earliest annual period presented in the financial statements should be
recognized as an adjustment to the opening retained earnings balance at that date. Additionally, if retrospective
transition is adopted, an entity may use hindsight in measuring and recognizing the compensation cost. This updated guidance
is not expected to have a material impact on our results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. We are
currently reviewing the provisions of this ASU to determine if there will be any impact on our results of operations, cash
flows or financial condition.
All other newly issued
accounting pronouncements but not yet effective have been deemed either immaterial or not applicable.
Note
3-Restatement-
The Company has restated its 2014 financial statements for the following:
|
|
1.
Recalculation
of derivative liability and debt discount relating to the Company’s outstanding convertible debentures.
2.
Recalulation
of the valuation of preferred series A shares issued for consulting expense.
3.
Write
off worthless investment that resulted in accumulated comprehensive loss in prior year.
|
The following are previously recorded and restated balances as
of December 31, 2014, for the year ended December 31, 2014.
MIND SOLUTIONS, INC.
|
BALANCE SHEET
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2014
|
|
|
|
|
Originally
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
Restated
|
|
Difference
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
$
|
113,199
|
|
|
$
|
113,199
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
46,020
|
|
|
|
2,368,357
|
|
|
|
2,322,337
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Assets
|
|
|
159,219
|
|
|
|
2,481,556
|
|
|
|
2,322,337
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
2,777
|
|
|
|
2,777
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fixed Assets
|
|
|
2,777
|
|
|
|
2,777
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale securities
|
|
|
3,958
|
|
|
|
3,958
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Assets
|
|
|
3,958
|
|
|
|
3,958
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
165,954
|
|
|
$
|
2,488,291
|
|
|
$
|
2,322,337
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable & accrued expenses
|
|
$
|
389,165
|
|
|
$
|
389,166
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable to related parties
|
|
|
3,500
|
|
|
|
3,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued interest
|
|
|
342,647
|
|
|
|
342,647
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable
|
|
|
145,000
|
|
|
|
145,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible notes payable, net of discounts
|
|
|
451,728
|
|
|
|
69,339
|
|
|
|
(382,389
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative Liability
|
|
|
1,767,223
|
|
|
|
714,633
|
|
|
|
(1,052,590
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities
|
|
|
3,099,263
|
|
|
|
1,664,284
|
|
|
|
(1,434,978
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders' Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, Series A, par value $0.001, 10,000,000,000 shares authorized, 10,000,000 shares issued and outstanding
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $0.0015,000,000,000 shares authorized, 1,388,783,762 shares issued and outstanding,
|
|
|
1,389
|
|
|
|
1,389
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid in capital
|
|
|
18,336,763
|
|
|
|
21,726,763
|
|
|
|
3,390,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock subscription payable
|
|
|
36,605
|
|
|
|
36,605
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Comprehensive Loss
|
|
|
(426,042
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
426,042
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficit accumulated
|
|
|
(20,892,024
|
)
|
|
|
(20,950,751
|
)
|
|
|
(58,727
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders' equity (deficit)
|
|
|
(2,933,309
|
)
|
|
|
824,006
|
|
|
|
3,757,315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity
|
|
$
|
165,954
|
|
|
$
|
2,488,291
|
|
|
$
|
2,322,337
|
|
|
|
|
|
MIND SOLUTIONS, INC.
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2014
|
|
|
|
Originally
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
|
Restated
|
|
|
|
Difference
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Profit
|
|
|
100,360
|
|
|
|
100,360
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consulting
|
|
|
1,125,289
|
|
|
|
2,197,952
|
|
|
|
1,072,663
|
|
Officer Compensation
|
|
|
160,000
|
|
|
|
155,000
|
|
|
|
(5,000
|
)
|
Professional Fees
|
|
|
201,595
|
|
|
|
201,595
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
General and Administration
|
|
|
54,013
|
|
|
|
54,012
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Total Operating Expenses
|
|
|
1,540,897
|
|
|
|
2,608,559
|
|
|
|
1,067,662
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Loss
|
|
|
(1,440,537
|
)
|
|
|
(2,508,199
|
)
|
|
|
(1,067,662
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense
|
|
|
(143,332
|
)
|
|
|
(1,554,432
|
)
|
|
|
(1,411,100
|
)
|
Loss on Available-for-Sale Securities
|
|
|
(96,042
|
)
|
|
|
(96,042
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
Impairment loss
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(330,000
|
)
|
|
|
(330,000
|
)
|
Gain (Loss) on Derivative Adjustment
|
|
|
4,077,634
|
|
|
|
6,923,712
|
|
|
|
2,846,078
|
|
Total Other Expense
|
|
|
3,838,260
|
|
|
|
4,943,238
|
|
|
|
1,104,978
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss)
|
|
|
2,397,723
|
|
|
|
2,435,039
|
|
|
|
37,316
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss) Per Share
|
|
$
|
3.43
|
|
|
$
|
3.48
|
|
|
$
|
(0.05
|
)
|
MIND SOLUTIONS, INC.
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
Originally
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
Restated
|
|
Difference
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income (loss) for the period
|
|
$
|
2,493,765
|
|
|
$
|
2,435,039
|
|
|
$
|
(58,726
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock issued for services
|
|
|
562,361
|
|
|
|
1,021,638
|
|
|
|
459,277
|
|
Derivative (gain) or loss adjustment and interest
|
|
|
(5,871,123
|
)
|
|
|
(6,923,713
|
)
|
|
|
(1,052,590
|
)
|
Amortization of debt discounts
|
|
|
1,793,489
|
|
|
|
1,793,488
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Original interest discount
|
|
|
57,139
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(57,139
|
)
|
Available-for-sale securities received for services revenues
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
(100,000
|
)
|
|
|
(200,000
|
)
|
Impairment loss on available-for-sale securities
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
96,042
|
|
|
|
96,042
|
|
Impairment loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
330,000
|
|
|
|
330,000
|
|
Compensation for fair market value of Series B preferred shares
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
2,577
|
|
|
|
2,577
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Changes in Operating Assets and Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in inventory
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Increase in related party payable
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Decrease in prepaid expense
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
326,438
|
|
|
|
326,438
|
|
Increase in accounts payable
|
|
|
80,499
|
|
|
|
(5,695
|
)
|
|
|
(86,194
|
)
|
Increase in accrued interest
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
65,087
|
|
|
|
65,087
|
|
Net Cash Used in Operating Activities
|
|
|
(781,293
|
)
|
|
|
(959,099
|
)
|
|
|
(177,806
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of fixed assets
|
|
|
(2,936
|
)
|
|
|
(2,936
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
Net Cash (Used in) Provided by Investing Activities
|
|
|
(2,936
|
)
|
|
|
(2,936
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from convertible notes
|
|
|
850,000
|
|
|
|
1,027,806
|
|
|
|
177,806
|
|
Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities
|
|
|
850,000
|
|
|
|
1,027,806
|
|
|
|
177,806
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (Decrease) Increase in Cash
|
|
|
65,771
|
|
|
|
65,711
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Cash at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
47,428
|
|
|
|
47,428
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Cash at End of Period
|
|
$
|
113,199
|
|
|
$
|
113,199
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the year for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Income taxes paid
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF NON-CASH INVESTING
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AND FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares issued as payment of note payable and accrued interest
|
|
$
|
905,270
|
|
|
$
|
905,270
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Issuance of convertible note for consulting services
|
|
$
|
200,000
|
|
|
$
|
200,000
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
NOTE 4 – GOING CONCERN
The accompanying financial statements have
been prepared assuming that the registrant will continue as a going concern, which contemplates continuity of operations, realization
of assets, and liquidation of liabilities in the normal course of business.
As of December 31, 2015, the registrant
had an accumulated deficit of $26,952,305. Also, during the year ended December 31, 2015, the registrant used net cash of $618,705
for operating activities. These factors raise substantial doubt about the registrant’s ability to continue as a going concern.
While the registrant is attempting to commence
operations and generate revenues, the registrant’s cash position may not be significant enough to support the registrant’s
daily operations. Management intends to raise additional funds by way of a public or private offering. Management believes that
the actions presently being taken to further implement its business plan and generate revenues provide the opportunity for the
registrant to continue as a going concern. While the registrant believes in the viability of its strategy to generate revenues
and in its ability to raise additional funds, there can be no assurances to that effect. The ability of the registrant to continue
as a going concern is dependent upon the registrant’s ability to further implement its business plan and generate revenues.
The financial statements do not include any
adjustments that might be necessary if the registrant is unable to continue as a going concern.
NOTE
5 –
PREPAIDS
The prepaid assets recorded at December 31,
2015 and December 31, 2014 were the result of:
|
a.)
|
In the nine months ended September
30, 2015, the Company made prepayments totaling $69,292 in cash which consisted of $54,792 to a manufacturer overseas and
$14,500 for consulting and legal services.
|
|
b.)
|
The registrant executing a
six month consulting agreement on September 2, 2014, whereby the registrant issued 30,000,000 free trading S-8 shares to Noah
Fouch to provide weekly marketing services through social media platforms. The 30,000,000 shares were valued at the closing
price of $0.0016 on the date of the agreement which will result in the registrant recording consulting expense of $48,000
over the life of the contract.
|
|
c.)
|
The registrant executing a
one year service agreement on September 12, 2014, whereby the registrant issued 5,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock
to its CEO, Kerry Driscoll. The 5,000,000 shares were valued at par $0.0034 which will result in the registrant recording
officer compensation expense of $1,700,000 over the life of the contract.
|
|
d.)
|
The registrant executing a
(1) year service agreement on September 12, 2014, whereby the registrant issued 5,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock
to a former officer of the registrant. The 5,000,000 shares were valued at par $0.0034 which will result in the registrant
recording officer compensation expense of $1,700,000 over the life of the contract.
|
As of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014,
the registrant had a prepaid balance of $-0- and $2,414,376 which is derived from the uncompleted portion of the consulting agreements
as well as prepayments for manufacturing costs and legal services.
NOTE
6–
PROPERTY & EQUIPMENT
Furniture and Equipment consisted of the following:
|
|
December 31,
2015
|
|
December 31,
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment
|
|
$
|
85,467
|
|
|
$
|
85,467
|
|
Furniture
|
|
|
4,186
|
|
|
|
4,186
|
|
Total
|
|
|
89,653
|
|
|
|
89,653
|
|
Less accumulated Depreciation
|
|
|
(87,645
|
)
|
|
|
(86,876
|
)
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
2,008
|
|
|
$
|
2,777
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expense for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014
was $769 and $2,577.
NOTE
7 –
RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Consulting agreement(s) with CEO
The registrant executed a consulting agreement
on December 25, 2013, with its current Chief Executive Officer whereby the registrant issued 120,000,000 shares of common stock
for one year of executive services. The 120,000,000 shares were valued at the closing price of $0.0022 on the date of the agreement
which will result in the registrant recording officer compensation of $264,000 over the life of the contract.
The registrant executed a service agreement
on September 12, 2014, with its current Chief Executive Officer, Kerry Driscoll, whereby the registrant issued 5,000,000 shares
of Series A Preferred Stock for one year of services such as compliance, guidance, infrastructure and business strategy. The 5,000,000
shares were valued at par $0.0034 which resulted in the registrant recording officer compensation of $1,700,000 over the life
of the contract.
In 2015 the Company issued 1,000,000 shares
of preferred B stock to Mr. Driscoll. Each share of preferred B stock has 5,000 votes. These shares were valued at $581,000.
Service Agreement with Former Officer
The registrant executed a service agreement
on September 12, 2014, with Brent Fouch, a former officer of the Company, whereby the registrant issued 5,000,000 shares of Series
A Preferred Stock for one year services to facilitate the development of BCI software compatibility with the registrant’s
micro BCI headset. The 5,000,000 preferred shares were valued at par $0.0034 which resulted in the registrant recording a consulting
expense of $1,700,000 over the life of the contract.
Free office space provided by chief executive officer
The registrant has been provided office space
by its chief executive officer Kerry Driscoll at no cost. Management has determined that such cost is nominal and did not recognize
the rent expense in its financial statements. These shares were valued at $581,000.
NOTE
8–
AVAILABLE-FOR-SALE SECURITIES
On February 12, 2014, the
registrant entered into a consulting agreement with Monster Arts, Inc. (“Monster”), whereby the registrant
provided Monster with thought controlled software development services over a one year term. The registrant will be paid four
quarterly payments of $50,000 in restricted common stock of Monster. As of December 31, 2015, the registrant had received
two certificates of Monster’s stock totally 39,583,333 common shares worth approximately $100,000, based on the
closing stock price at the date of receipt. The registrant revalued the 39,583,333 shares on September 30, 2015. For the year
ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company realized an impairment loss on available-for-sale
securities of $3,938 and $96,042.
As of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014,
the registrant had available for sale securities balance of $20 and $3,958.
NOTE
9–
CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE
For the year ended December 31, 2015, the registrant
entered into five convertible note agreements. As of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the registrant has $204,778 (net
of debt discount of $132,351) and $69,339 (net of debt discount of $381,389) in outstanding convertible notes payable with five
non-related entities.
The following table reflects the convertible
notes payable, and the related debt discount and derivative liability that have been re-measured to fair value which are discussed
later in this footnote, as of December 31, 2015:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2015
|
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
Maturity
|
|
|
|
Original
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Conversion
|
|
|
Note
|
|
|
|
Unamortized
|
|
|
|
Derivative
|
|
|
|
|
Issued
|
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
feature
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
Discount
|
|
|
|
Liability
|
|
GEL Properties
|
|
|
8/28/14
|
|
|
|
8/28/15
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
55% of 1 lows in 10 previous trading days
|
|
$
|
500
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
|
815
|
|
JSJ Investments
|
|
|
5/28/15
|
|
|
|
11/28/15
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
12.0
|
%
|
|
52% of average 3 lows in previous 20 trading days
|
|
|
131,580
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
279,375
|
|
Iconic Holdings
|
|
|
11/4/14
|
|
|
|
11/4/15
|
|
|
|
35,750
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
50% of 1 lows in 20 previous trading days
|
|
|
8,250
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
19,681
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Iconic Holdings
|
|
|
2/5/15
|
|
|
|
2/5/16
|
|
|
|
55,000
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
50% of 1 lows in previous 20 trading days
|
|
|
165
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
378
|
|
LG Capital Funding
11/6/15-11/6/16
|
|
|
3/11/15
|
|
|
|
2/10/16
|
|
|
|
31,500
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
50% of 1 lows in previous 10 trading days
|
|
|
26,672
27,000
|
|
|
|
8,015
25,106
|
|
|
|
47,514
40,734
|
|
Iconic Holdings
|
|
|
3/30/15
|
|
|
|
3/30/16
|
|
|
|
82,500
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
50% of 1 lows in previous 20 trading days
|
|
|
10,500
|
|
|
|
7,923
|
|
|
|
23,918
|
|
Iconic Holdings
|
|
|
3/30/15
|
|
|
|
3/31/16
|
|
|
|
17,500
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
50% of 1 lows in previous 20 trading days
|
|
|
17,500
10,502
|
|
|
|
34,513
|
|
|
|
39,854
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JSJ Investment
|
|
|
7/29/2015
|
|
|
|
1/29/2016
|
|
|
|
57,000
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
50% of 1 lows in previous 20 trading days
|
|
|
57,000
|
|
|
|
29,467
|
|
|
|
101,023
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JMJ Financial
|
|
|
9/9/2015
|
|
|
|
9/9/2016
|
|
|
|
31,111
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
50% of 1 lows in previous 20 trading days
|
|
|
31,111
27,500
|
|
|
|
27,289
|
|
|
|
50,810
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
337,778
|
|
|
$
|
133,000
|
|
|
|
604,102
|
|
Conversion of convertible debt
.
For the year ended December 31, 2015 the company
converted $926,723 in debt into 2,172,626 shares of stock.
Derivative liability.
At December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the Company had $604,102
and $714,633 in derivative liability. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company reduced its derivative liability by $110,531.
We calculate the derivative liability using the multinominal lattice
model which factors in the Company’s stock price volatility as well as the convertible terms applicable to the outstanding
convertible notes. The following is the range of variables used in revaluing the derivative.
|
|
December 31,
2015
|
|
December 31,
2014
|
Annual dividend yield
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Expected life (years)
|
|
|
0.01 – .90
|
|
|
|
0.01 – .90
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
510.0
|
%
|
|
|
508.1
|
%
|
NOTE
10 –
NOTES PAYABLE
The total amount due on notes payable and related interest and
penalty is as follows:
|
|
December 31,
2015
|
|
December 31,
2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes Payable
|
|
$
|
145,000
|
|
|
$
|
145,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
145,000
|
|
|
$
|
145,000
|
|
The Company has outstanding notes due to a former director in the
aggregate amount of $145,000. The notes are unsecured and accrue interest and penalty of 15% inasmuch as they are past due. The
former director elected not to participate with the holders of other promissory notes, including our then executive officers,
in the exchange of those notes for equity which occurred during January 2009. At December 31, 2015, and December 31, 2014, total
accrued interest and penalty pertaining to the outstanding $145,000 in notes payable is $309,028 and $280,024.
NOTE
11–
STOCKHOLDERS’
EQUITY
Reverse Stock Split
In February of 2016 the Company effectuated a 1000 to 1 reverse
stock split. The financials have been adjusted for all periods presented to reflect this change.
Authorized Common Stock
On May 17, 2013, the company’s board voted to authorize an
amendment to the registrant’s articles of incorporation to increase its authorized shares of common stock from 1,000,000,000
to 3,000,000,000. On August 23, 2013, the registrant’s board authorized an amendment to the registrant’s articles
of incorporation to increase its authorized shares of common stock from 3,000,000,000 to 5,000,000,000.
Authorized
Preferred Stock
The registrant is authorized to issue 10,000,000 shares of Series
A Preferred Stock.
The board of directors passed a resolution designating certain
preferential liquidity, dividend, voting and other relative rights to Shares of Series A Preferred Stock. Each share of Series
A Preferred Stock may at the option of the holder be converted into 100 fully paid and non-assessable shares of common stock.
Issued Preferred Stock
On September 12, 2014, the registrant issued 5,000,000 Preferred
A Shares to its chief executive officer, Kerry Driscoll, for one year of services to be rendered to the registrant. The 5,000,000
shares were valued at market value of .0034 on the date of issuance, which resulted in the registrant recording officer compensation
of $1,700,000 over the life of the contract.
The registrant executed a service agreement on September 12,
2014, with Brent Fouch, a former officer, whereby the registrant issued 5,000,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock for one
year services to facilitate the development of BCI software compatibility with the registrant’s micro BCI headset. The
5,000,000 preferred shares were valued at market value of .0034 on the date of issuance, which resulted in the registrant
recording a consulting expense of $1,700,000 over the life of the contract.
During the year ended December 31, 2015, a preferred stockholder
converted 2,990,000 preferred shares into 299,000,000 shares of common stock.
On June 8, 2015, the Company designated a new class of preferred
stock known as Series B preferred stock. Par Value to be $0.001. The stock shall have the following rights, limitations, restrictions,
and privileges as follows: (1) The Series B preferred stock is entitled to receive dividends declared by the board of directors,
(2) Series B preferred stock would be entitled to a liquidation preference of $0.001 per share, (3) Series B preferred stock shall
have 5,000 votes per share in any matters voted on by the shareholders, (4) Series B preferred stock shall have the right to convert
to common shares at the rate of 100 common shares per share, (5) the Series B preferred stock can be redeemed by the Company at
the Market Value at the option of its directors, and (6) Holders of Series A preferred stock shall have preferred status, can
restrict dividends to common shareholders and retain purchase rights on an as converted basis.
On June 9, 2015 the Company exchanged 1,000,000 Series A preferred
shares for 1,000,000 Series B preferred shares with Kerry Driscoll, the Company’s sole director and CEO/CFO. The Company
recognized an additional $581,000 of compensation related to the super voting rights
Issued Common Stock
For the year ended December 31, 2015 the Company issued 2,831,776
shares of common stock, post split,
Stock Payable
During the year ended December 31, 2015 the registrant issued 55,150
shares of common stock pursuant to two conversion notices executed in December of 2014 totaling $36,605 leaving a stock payable
balance of $0.
NOTE
12–
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
We were a defendant in two actions, each entitled
951 Yamato
Acquisition registrant, LLC vs. VOIS, Inc.,
both as filed in December 2009 in the Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit
in and for Palm Beach County, Florida under case numbers 502010CA040121XXXXMB and 502010CC19027XXXXBBRS, which are related to
the lease agreements for our former office space. A combined summary judgment was entered in April, 2010 against VOIS, Inc. in
the amount of $106,231. At September 30, 2015 and December 31, 2014, our liabilities as reported in our financial statements contained
elsewhere in this report reflect the principal amount of the judgment together with $31,869 and $30,278 in accrued interest, respectively.
On April 30, 2008, we filed a complaint against two former
members of our board of directors alleging breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment. The complaint,
styled
VOIS Inc., Plaintiff, vs. Edward Spindel and Michael Spindel, Defendants
, Case No. CA012201XXXXMB, in the Circuit
Court for the 15th Judicial District in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, alleges that during 2002 and 2003 while Mind Solutions,
which at that time was known as Medstrong International, was under significant financial distress the defendants caused us to
issue demand promissory notes charging excessive and/or usurious interest rates with the knowledge that we would be unable to
repay the notes upon any demand. The defendants, who are brothers, were members of the Medstrong International board of directors
until their resignations in April 2006.
The complaint further alleges that the defendants engaged
in a repeated systematic scheme to defraud our company by continuing to restructure the promissory notes while they were members
of the prior board of directors at such excessive and usurious interest rates that the defendants violated their fiduciary duties
and responsibilities and approved debt obligations that benefited them and not Mind Solutions and that their wrongful actions
and omissions resulted in their unjust enrichment. We sought damages in excess of $968,000.
On June 18, 2009, the defendants removed the lawsuit from
Palm Beach Circuit Court (State) to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Federal). Thereafter,
the defendants sought to have the case to the United States District Court in New York. On October 27, 2009, the judge denied
the defendant’s Motion to Transfer. On October 28, 2009 the defendants filed their Answer and Defenses to the Complaint.
The defendants did not file a counterclaim at that time. On November 12, 2009, the Court entered a Scheduling Order and a Notice
of Trial for December 2009. On December 4, 2009, the Court selected a mediator. In February 2010, the defendants changed law firms
and sought leave from the Court to file a counterclaim. At that time, the defendants also served discovery in the form of interrogatories,
request for production and request for admission. The defendant’s counterclaim was filed on February 17, 2010, and we filed
our Answer on March 13, 2010. Over the course of the next several months we responded to the discovery requests.
On November 13, 2009, the parties attended a pretrial hearing
to address legal issues related to our complaint and the defendants’ counterclaim. Based upon questions posed by the Court
and the argument of counsel, the Court struck the defense of usury and additionally dismissed our complaint without prejudice,
providing us 10 days to file an amended complaint. The defendants were also provided 10 days to file an Amended counterclaim.
Based upon the rulings, the matter was then removed from the Court’s December 2009 trial docket. We have decided that it
is not cost effective or beneficial to pursue our affirmative claims in this matter and have, accordingly, elected not to file
an amended complaint.
On July 19, 2010, the counter–plaintiffs, Edward and
Michael Spindel filed a motion for summary judgment. We filed a response in opposition on August 5, 2010. The Spindels filed a
reply on September 9, 2010. The court held a hearing on September 16, 2010, and at the hearing granted summary judgment in favor
of the Spindels. Final judgment was ordered on November 16, 2010, in the amount of $287,266 plus post judgment interest. Attorney’s
fees of $172,304 were also awarded.
On December 6, 2010, we filed an appeal to the judgment.
On July 13, 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Eleventh Circuit issued an opinion in favor of VOIS, Inc. This Opinion was made final when the Court issued the mandate on
August15th, 2011. This ruling effectively reversed the Summary Judgment previously granted to the Spindels by the District Court
on November 4, 2010, in the amount of $287,266. At the present time, this lawsuit is still pending in the State Circuit Court
of Florida. Mind Solutions intends to mount a vigorous defense.
NOTE 13 - INCOME TAXES
The following table presents the
current and deferred income tax provision (benefit) for federal and state income taxes:
|
|
2015
|
|
2014
|
Current tax provision:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
State
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax provision (benefit):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
(449,945
|
)
|
|
|
(657,133
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
85,982
|
|
|
|
(125,010
|
)
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
(498,983
|
)
|
|
|
(727,291
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total provision for income tax
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Current income taxes are based upon the year's income taxable for
federal and state tax reporting purposes. Deferred income taxes (benefits) are provided for certain income and expenses, which
are recognized in different periods for tax and financial reporting purposes.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are computed for differences
between the financial statements and tax bases of assets and liabilities that will result in taxable or deductible amounts in
the future based on enacted tax laws and rates applicable to the period in which the differences are expected to affect taxable
income. The Company's deferred income taxes arise from the temporary differences between financial statement and income tax recognition
of net operating losses. These loss carryovers would be limited under the Internal Revenue Code should a significant change in
ownership occur within a three year period. In 2015 and 2014 the Company's tax losses were reduced by stock for services expense.
There were no depreciation differences.
At December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company had net operating loss
carryforwards of approximately $4,431,887 and $3,108,519 respectively, which begin to expire in 2029. The deferred tax assets
arising from the net operating loss carryforwards are approximately $1,667,719 and $1,697,020 as of December 31,2015 and 2014,
respectively. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during
the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax
liabilities, the projected future taxable income and tax planning strategies in making this assessment. Based on management's
analysis, they concluded not to retain a deferred tax asset since it is uncertain whether the Company can utilize this asset in
future periods. Therefore, they have established a full reserve against this asset. The change in the valuation allowance in 2015
and 2014 was approximately $497,983 and $527,284 respectively.
A reconciliation of the expected tax computed at the U.S. statutory
federal income tax rate to the total benefit for income taxes at December 31, 2015 and, 2014 is as follows:
|
|
2015
|
|
2014
|
Expected tax at 34%
|
|
$
|
(2,040,529
|
)
|
|
$
|
795,259
|
|
Effect of Non Temporary Differences
|
|
|
553,027
|
|
|
|
(1,397,540
|
)
|
Effect of State Taxes
|
|
|
(85,595
|
)
|
|
|
(125,010
|
)
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
497,983
|
|
|
|
727,291
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
The Company's continuing practice is to recognize interest and/or
penalties related to income tax matters in income tax expense. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company had no accrued interest
and penalties related to uncertain tax positions.
The Company is subject to taxation in the U.S. and California.
Our tax years for 2010 and forward are subject to examination by tax authorities. The Company is not currently under examination
by any tax authority.
Management has evaluated tax positions in accordance with FASB
ASC 740, and has not identified any tax positions, other than those discussed above, that require disclosure
NOTE 14
–
SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
On May 31, 2016, we entered into an agreement with GELI Holdings,
Inc., (hereinafter "GELI"), and Brent Fouch and Kerry Driscoll (collectively "Sellers") wherein Sellers conveyed
certain shares of our common and preferred stock to GELI and/or its designees in consideration of $50,000. The foregoing
agreement contained additional covenants and warranties by the parties thereto to perform certain acts, including but not limited
to causing us to become current in our reporting with the SEC. Further GELI acquired two promissory notes from Sellers.
After completion of the foregoing, GELI would own voting control of us.