20 Sep 2010 07:00
ViaLogy plc
("the Company")
Report and Financial Statements
For the year ended 31 March 2010
Chairman's Statement
I am pleased to present the annual report and financial results for your company for the year ending 31 March 2010 and to comment on progress achieved during that year.
Highlights of the Year
·; ViaLogy's QuantumRD technology positions a second successful well on Atascosa Exploration's Galba lease in South Central Texas
·; Two successful well completions for Vecta Oil and Gas in Central Texas Permian Basin based on QuantumRD analysis. Two pay zones accurately located in the Wolfcamp carbonate and the Cisco Canyon sandstone formations
·; For a large E&P company, and in collaboration with the University of Texas' Bureau of Economic Geology, QuantumRD analysis locates a commercial well in the difficult Strawn formation in Andrews County, Texas. The 10 square mile field has a history of dry holes; in 15 out of 18 previous attempts the Strawn has not been located with the requisite porosity for a commercial well. This is a signal success and a major step forward; hitherto, detecting porosity in carbonate formations away from the wellbore and with precision was generally considered out of reach
·; Delivery to new clients of QuantumRD analysis for seven well locations in Texas and New Mexico
·; As wider global industry interest in QuantumRD increases, ViaLogy strategy is refocused on larger firms a master services agreement to provide QuantumRD services was signed in August 2010 with a global oil supermajor
·; Whilst not our prime focus, in the security and surveillance business area ViaLogy won a contract as core team mate of US defence contractor SAIC
·; Equity placings and warrant conversions during the year raise a total of £6.5 million before expenses
In April 2009 ViaLogy was a relative newcomer to the oil patch. In the previous month the first well to be located using our technology, QuantumRD, had been successfully completed. This initial success marked the start of a steep learning curve for our business. Oil exploration and production is an extremely conservative industry with an in-built scepticism towards new technologies. Compared with other analysis techniques in use QuantumRD relies on an approach to active signal processing that exploits the 'noise' in which weak seismic signals are often buried to determine hydrocarbon formation characteristics. Other signal processing methods rely on eliminating as much of the noise as possible. Essentially, ViaLogy's work has redesigned the physics of the signal detection problem. Another important point is that, with some variations, the existing industry exploration and production analysis process comprises a variety of interdependent tools that are used in an integrated workflow to answer a number of drilling questions, not just well location. QuantumRD augments these tools, and it must achieve compatibility with them.
It is instructive to understand why and how companies determine to drill wells. ViaLogy may be contracted to de-risk a site and provide 'drill here' coordinates, but the decision to actually drill is subject to a number of considerations that have nothing to do with where ViaLogy specifies drilling. Common among these are the boundaries and durations of lease holdings, the proximity of transport in relation to the recommended drill site, the availability of rigs, the operational need to go after seemingly larger targets elsewhere, and overriding corporate goals such as drilling only one well on a lease to resell it at an appreciated value. Equally as important is the overall analysis process and set of tools that larger companies use to make drilling decisions. While there is a heavy dependence on seismic data (and this is the huge addressable market which ViaLogy is penetrating) there are also existing models of fields, and interpretive and visualization technologies that set the context for the use of QuantumRD. Together they are used to determine what it takes to have a commercial producing well. For example, in a case where a ViaLogy location accurately predicts total depth, porosity, and hydrocarbon-bearing sand formation - all absolutely key factors in de-risking a well, and our competitive discriminator - until the drill bit has been properly placed and other characteristics at depth have been determined by logging, one cannot determine if a well can be successfully and cost-effectively stimulated. QuantumRD's ability to predict porosity, natural fractures and fluid saturation based on seismic data is enormously significant to the overall process and potentially game-changing as a constituent part of the overall process. Hence our strategy, as our CEO points out, is to win the adoption of QuantumRD as a standard tool by an increasing number of larger companies. My summary point here is that ViaLogy's success is not a simple matter of the number of wells drilled.
That said, in a business where often millions of dollars are committed to the drilling of a well, building a users' track record for a new technology is essential. The Board, therefore, decided to initiate a carefully planned programme to extend the use of QuantumRD analysis and to win customers with a variety of exploration sites in a range of formations. For logistical and economic reasons we decided that initially our efforts should continue to be concentrated in Texas. We wanted to gain experience, to refine the technology to deal with differing challenges, and to add additional highly-qualified geophysicists and others to our team.
As the year progressed we learned many lessons. For instance, we found that the sales cycle - the period from initial contact with a new customer to actually signing a work order for a specific project - can be lengthy. Also, larger companies often insist upon an initial "Show Me" clause in the contract which means that they will pay a reduced amount for their first operational analysis. In addition, long forward work schedules are common so it can be months from our delivery of analysis to drilling actually taking place if, in fact, the client decides to drill at all (we have had the experience of clients selling or mothballing fields where we have provided analysis). Also, it is worth pointing out that ViaLogy can be paid to advise on when NOT to drill. All this can mean unavoidable delays in cash flow. Nevertheless, during our FY 2010 we produced analyses for three more successfully completed wells including a Strawn formation well on a 10 square mile Permian Basin site near Midland, Texas. Of 18 previous exploratory wells on the prospect only three had produced oil in commercial quantities. We predicted a 6% porosity for the find and we were right.
Our work has produced considerable interest and enquiries from bigger companies, several of them global players. In January 2010, recognizing that broad industry acceptance of QuantumRD would depend upon its use by recognized firms, the Board decided to focus on such customers. Convincing them of the efficacy and reliability of QuantumRD can be a relatively lengthy process involving detailed technical explanations to multiple internal experts. I am delighted to say that our efforts have now begun to bear fruit - since the year end ViaLogy has signed a master services agreement with a supermajor, one of the world's Big Six oil companies. We are also in collaboration discussions with other international oil companies.
Other applications and interests
Because of personnel and financial constraints, as the Recession bit two years ago we decided to concentrate the entire effort of the company on the oil and gas application of our technology. This meant that the two additional products under development, SPM® which integrates and automates disparate sensors in large scale security and surveillance systems, and QSUB™ which analyses data from airborne synthetic aperture radar to detect buried pipelines, had to be mothballed. We have had a number of serious enquiries from possible partners for the two technologies and the Board is considering how best to maximise shareholder value.
As this annual report goes to press we have some rather depressing news about ViaLogy's only 'outside' investment, Acrobot Limited, which is a legacy spinout technology development company from Imperial College, London. The business develops surgical navigation systems and robotic devices for orthopaedic surgery. In last year's annual report I explained that this private company had been seriously affected by the slowdown in the economy. Now, because of a series of commercial and financial setbacks, Acrobot has decided to seek a trade sale for its business. Negotiations are close to completion and while we are assured this will preserve the solvency of the business it is our understanding that it is unlikely that there will be a surplus for distribution to Acrobot shareholders. In these circumstances your Board considers it prudent to write down the value of Acrobot to zero in the accounts.
Finance
For the year ending 31 March 2010 the ViaLogy consolidated financial statements accounts show revenue of £151,388 and a net loss of £5.7 million, (2009 - £5.8 million). The loss after tax and after adding back the non cash items; depreciation and amortisation charge and share based payment expense was £2.1 million (2009: £1.93 million).
In April 2009 the Company raised £1.6 million before expenses by way of a warrant re-pricing exercise, in this instance 75 million shares were issued to warrant holders. In August 2009 the Company completed the placing of 49,564,800 shares at 4p raising £2 million before expenses. In February 2010 the Company completed a further placing of 59,118,828 new ordinary shares at 4.875p, raising £2.88 million before expenses.
Our thanks
The year saw some important changes in personnel as well as a move to new and more cost-effective offices in Pasadena. As our technology emphasis focussed almost entirely on QuantumRD and we became increasingly involved in the oil and gas business our skill set requirements altered and we said goodbye to some old colleagues and hello to some fresh faces. We wish those who have left all the best for the future and we extend a warm welcome to our new friends. In particular we are delighted that Dr. Robert Parney joins ViaLogy as Chief Geophysicist and Vice President, Geophysical Services, and Dr. Andres Chavarria has been appointed as Senior Geophysicist.
During the year Michael Kelly, whose full-time business interests have caused him to relocate to northern California, resigned as a non-executive director of the company. Michael has been a ViaLogy Board member for several years and his advice and guidance have always been invaluable. On behalf of the Board, and indeed the staff and the shareholders, we thank him and wish him well.
The future
We are on course to sign new and larger clients, to extend the technology to additional types of formations and complete additional wells during the current fiscal year. We have a healthy near term and extended term sales pipeline and in the coming months, as more analyses are delivered to new and existing customers, we will achieve a business rhythm. Most importantly we have an exciting technology that, in an industry where change is viewed with understandable suspicion, is attracting worldwide attention.
On behalf of the directors, I thank you for your continued support.
Terry Bond
Chairman
17 September 2010
Chief Executive Officer's report
ViaLogy's successes during the year attracted the attention of a number of well-known global industry players. Our results surpassed industry standards in hydrocarbon exploration and translated into business growth. We now have a supermajor energy company as a contracted client. The initial deliverable to this global company is QuantumRD analysis of a complex onshore prospect that has frustrated the internal analysis staff and has hitherto produced multiple dry holes. ViaLogy's work will extend over months and be benchmarked against the firm's internal results. This is exactly the kind of challenge we welcome because it will give us wider recognition, further credibility, and a key reference customer.
With multiple successful wells completed ViaLogy is now focused on extending the market for our QuantumRD technology to an "A List" of clients, and its reach to an increasing variety of hydrocarbon formation types and geographical regions. This is a tall order for a resource-constrained firm, but with an excellent geophysical staff now aboard, a select list of projects in the offing, and the outsourcing of more routine processing tasks, we are making considerable progress. Our ambition is to redefine how seismic and other geophysical data can be used to accurately target hydrocarbon formations by predicting rock and fluid properties of any formation in the world.
Our business objective is to achieve ViaLogy's financial success by developing QuantumRD further and positioning it as a widely used technology in the upstream segment of the industry. At this stage of our growth it is not just about drilling successful wells although that is the ultimate goal of geophysical analysis and an important ViaLogy objective. But top tier companies in the exploration and production segment of the industry typically have long lead times for drilling, and they use multiple tools and technologies to analyze seismic and other data in more or less standard integrated workflows. The vital addition that QuantumRD brings to the task is a game-changing tool derived from our core active signal processing technology, Quantum Resonance Interferometry, that dramatically improves analysis results to permit far more accurate predictions of formation porosity, lithology, and fluid saturation - the key determinants in the industry for de-risking drilling and enabling net-pay sizing. Thus far, our work can take credit for completed producing wells, test wells whose purpose was to produce data for subsequent drillings and, importantly, retrospective explanation of over 240 drilling attempts that resulted in dry holes - analyses where ViaLogy would have advised that these locations should not be drilled.
Contracting with larger, often global firms as clients has increased our sales cycle. At the same time, our current client list of smaller companies (i.e., those drilling 100 or fewer wells per year) is healthy, and our client prospect list is robust. We are in active discussions with more than half-a- dozen leading companies, both exploration/production companies and oilfield services companies. We aspire to a mix of smaller and larger clients because the former give us the nearer term opportunity to get drill bits into the ground, and the latter serve our strategic purposes. Our limited capacity is an impediment in servicing an increasing client count. Nevertheless, our objective is to demonstrate QuantumRD applications in shale gas, enhanced oil recovery onshore and offshore, and to work on wells and prospects of increasing size. Further, because we need the larger firms as clients, our business model must also include smaller firms inasmuch as they generally have accepted the payment of a service fee and a success fee and they applaud ViaLogy's risk-sharing approach. On the whole, the larger clients will not share ownership of wells. They will, we believe, accept significantly higher price points given the high added value of ViaLogy's product.
We are on track to meet this year's operating plan and our revenue targets. Since Day One we have met the terms and delivery schedules in all our contracts, although I want to stress again that our clients drilling schedules are completely out of our control, and often subject to delays. We do get to know our clients well, because our delivery process is very much a technical give-and-take in which our performance wins supporters and advocates. We need to place additional emphasis on developing the technology itself and the software associated with it which is key to gaining the broadest industry acceptance, and we are resource-constrained in this regard. As our Chairman points out in his statement, this is not an industry characterized by the early adoption of new technology, so our technology needs to be made robust and usable by others as we go forward.
Finally, I am very pleased with our progress to date. Since our entry into the oil patch in March 2008, much has been achieved thanks to the dedicated efforts of a small but highly skilled staff and the ongoing support of our shareholders. We encounter consistent market recognition that ViaLogy's technology is novel, and goes well beyond what is currently available. Our current FY2011 will be a very important one for us and should result in a new strategic positioning for the company.
Dr. Robert W Dean
Chief Executive Officer
17 September 2010
Chief Technology Officer's Review
The company's new tag line REDEFINING SEISMIC™ best captures our technology, R&D and operational focus for FY 2010 and going forward. We repurposed and extended our intellectual property portfolio in Quantum Resonance Interferometry (QRI®) for computational weak signal processing developed over the years, to demonstrate, validate and bring new capabilities to the upstream oil and gas industry. We focused on positioning and maturing QuantumRD® analytical services to discover, delineate and size reservoirs:
·; at intervals where reservoir and non-reservoir lithologies could not be previously differentiated using 3D seismic data;
·; achieving areal and depth resolution where reservoir features could be given geological or geomorphological significance; and
·; mapping in-place fluid distribution based on new hydrocarbon indicators to amplify conformity with structure.
The best of today's migration, seismic inversion, and stacking algorithms narrow-out the acquired spectral bandwidth to cancel or average out seismic noise. Their purpose is to extract sound-reflecting boundaries below the earth's surface for correlating the strength of reflections from a boundary to the lithological properties of rock within the layer above and the layer below a given boundary. The discerned lithologies are then interpreted within different geological contexts to infer hydrocarbon presence. While subsurface structure can be accurately mapped using current techniques, these reflection-based methods are challenged in accurately discerning subtle changes in rock and fluid properties and porosity in complex stratigraphies.
QuantumRD attacks the subsurface imaging and reservoir de-risking problem at three levels to derive more value from 3D seismic:
(a) reliance on fundamentally alternate physics of acoustic reflection imaging to derive reservoir attributes; QuantumRD assesses how coherent and random noise within the full seismic acquisition spectrum is differentially and directly modulated by subtle changes in porosity, varying levels of hydrocarbon saturation, anisotropy and lithology. Unlike conventional signal processing, QuantumRD does not filter out coherent and incoherent information, and low and high frequency noise. These reservoir-driven signal changes are extremely small and buried below levels of background noise in the data and have not been exploited due to algorithmic limitations, although their physics has been known for years. Exploiting subtle disturbances in noise, to characterize signals or events of interest is a core paradigmatic tenet of QRI.
(b) using ViaLogy's patented interferometeric signal processing protocol - in software - to see how noise within the seismic data has been impacted by changing reservoir properties of interest, without the need for either explicitly defining or precisely isolating signal from noise. QuantumRD uses a synthetic noise source, designed using rock-physics and well-control data to probe the acquired seismic data and to detect, characterize and amplify changes in seismic noise. Termed Virtual Vibe™, this process of excitation of conventionally acquired seismic data using synthetic noise in software, determines attributes of interest, such as presence of pre-specified levels of porosity, as emergent resonances. ViaLogy's unique expertise and toolkit for designing complex synthetic noise to broadly deploy Virtual Vibe processing enabled QuantumRD to significantly increase confidence and resolution in reservoir attribute processing.
(c) implementation of a new workflow sequence that relies upon the deconstruction of conventionally processed complex seismic datasets into optimal smaller volume cells (or voxels) over the formation of interest to immunize against errors in velocity estimation and gather conditioning over the entire dataset. Individual voxels analyzed for porosity, fluid and other rock properties are recombined to build net-pay reservoir models from bottom-up. QuantumRD achieves higher precision and accuracy by deploying Virtual Vibe excitation at the individual voxel level.
QuantumRD 's key constituents summarized above provide actionable information, significant scale and business leverage. During FY 2010 these allowed us to assist our E&P clients in addressing a broad spectrum of operating challenges and priorities ranging from how to lease prospects; design seismic surveys; discover and delineate reservoir on their prospects; generate drilling targets to position wells; develop optimal offsets; how to stimulate and fracture them; and understanding reservoir compartmentalization for enhanced recovery. Industry acceptance of what ViaLogy believes to be a significant advance in the use of seismic data has begun, but will ultimately depend upon well completion statistics and applicability to a variety of formations. We are now focused on standardizing our QuantumRD deliverables, porosity, fluid saturation and fracture maps for conventional reservoirs, and extending the technology to non-conventional shale gas resource plays. Project execution during 2009 allowed us to demonstrate our value-proposition in some of the most complex but prolific formations with tremendous opportunity for future growth.
Carbonate Reservoirs
Recognizing that more than 60% of the world's oil and 40% of the world's remaining gas reserves are in carbonates, ViaLogy devoted substantial effort in focusing QuantumRD capability to de-risk and characterize complex stratigraphic carbonates, their stacking, continuity, fracture density and spacing prediction. Porosity prediction is at the heart of discriminating potentially productive carbonate bodies. Carbonate reservoirs continue to be difficult to characterize using 3D seismic due to their greater heterogeneity from rapid vertical and lateral facies variation, lower seismic resolution due to higher velocities, and inherent inability to directly image fracturing. Basin geology models provide limited insight to positioning of individual wells and offsets, as formation properties change unpredictably. Because of the broad-spectrum of diagenesis (chemical, physical, or biological change undergone by a sediment in its initial deposition) that affects carbonate rocks, the final porosity in these carbonates may or may not be related to the depositional environment. Also, unlike other lithologies, the original primary porosity in carbonates may be totally destroyed during diagenesis and significant new secondary porosity may be created. So to get a successful well, it is important to find certain patterns of natural fracturing and high continuous porosities from 3D seismic.
QuantumRD's high vertical and areal resolution and sensitivity in assessing fine-scale lithological variations and heterogeneities to find porous and permeable lenses within carbonate bodies was validated in positioning the successful onshore strawn well in the Midland Basin after a 15 previous failures using conventional seismic processing. ViaLogy continues to develop new capabilities to recognize and identify characteristic abrupt changes in rock type distribution to discriminate between local regions of macroporosity (e.g. vugs) and large aperture fractures for exploration, field redevelopment and enhanced recovery. In addition to de-risking new drilling locations, ViaLogy is working on developing a systematic, automated approach to redevelop under-performing or abandoned wells that could be sitting near near-pay zones that may have just been missed.
Clastic Reservoirs
On-shore and deep-water clastic reservoirs are among the world's largest, most explored, and most productive hydrocarbon plays. These include a variety of turbidite sand-body geometries such as channels, lobes, sheets and levees in complex down-slope settings. Post-depositional stresses modify primary sedimentary structures changing pore size distribution and permeability characteristics challenging interpretation of pay and saturation distribution in otherwise sand-prone reservoirs. Exploration success, and subsequent appraisal and development of these highly productive reservoirs depends upon accurately mapping the interplay of sediment dispersal within reservoir-scale or basin-scale geometry to delineate source, seal, and reservoir geologies. Conventional de-risking has relied on acquiring large offsets and higher frequency data. While this has advanced structural interpretation, success has been spotty due to lack of fluid imaging capability. QuantumRD's ability to exploit noise within seismic data and increase resolution for jointly assessing sand-stacking along with in-place fluid saturation could be significant in derisking and finding net pay. QuantumRD clastics application, on a New Mexico 3D seismic survey explained distribution of producers and dry-holes, de-risked and significantly altered the existing reservoir model delivering drilling targets with potential for multiple large gas wells.
Shale Gas Resource Plays
Unconventional shale gas resource development is rapidly becoming a dominant global trend in onshore exploration. As this hydrocarbon resource is pervasive in the formations, efforts over the past few years focused on grid-based drilling that made extensive use of horizontal drilling and high volume fracturing. But that is changing. The wells produce from low permeability shale formations that are also the source rock for the oil and natural gas. As the larger hydrocarbon volumes are restricted to fracture porosity within the shale, or within micropores, or adsorbed onto the minerals and organic matter within the shale, subtle changes in lithology produce dramatic changes in production outcomes and economics even in closely space wells. However, these lithology changes register only as weak changes in conventional 3D seismic signal; that has been designed to primarily image large impedance contrasts across lithologies. As the changes in impedance contrast within shales formations are very subtle, geophysicists struggle to add value by using the signal measured by conventional seismic in unconventional reservoirs. Other influences on shale productivity include the "brittleness" or ability to fracture the reservoir, and the accurate identification of thin stringers embedded with the shales from which they can be produced. Combining the sensitivity and enhanced resolutions payoffs demonstrated for carbonates and clastic reservoirs in 2009, ViaLogy sees shale gas and oil resource plays as a major focus area going forwards.
New Applications
Market leaders and E&P customers are driving future applications of ViaLogy 's broad subsurface imaging capability. In addition to hardening QuantumRD services to a transferable, licensable product we are assessing new opportunities in improving signal-to-noise in onshore and offshore seismic and electromagnetic acquisitions, microseismic for hydraulic fracture monitoring and optimization, and interferometric acquisition protocol for direct hydrocarbon imaging using conventional 3D vibrators.
Dr. Sandeep Gulati
Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
ViaLogy PLC
17 September 2010
Consolidated income statement for the ended 31 March 2010
|
| Notes |
| 2010 | 2009 |
|
|
|
| £ | £ |
| Revenue |
|
| 151,388 | 129,028 |
| Cost of sales |
|
| 326,412 | 12,369 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Gross (loss)/profit |
|
| (175,024) | 116,659 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Share based payments |
|
| 532,051 | 1,068,953 |
| Depreciation and amortisation |
|
| 3,009,785 | 2,761,158 |
| Other administrative expenses |
|
| 2,441,074 | 2,510,311 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Total administrative expenses |
|
| 5,982,910 | 6,340,422 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Loss from operations |
|
| (6,157,934) | (6,223,763) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Finance income |
|
| 687 | 43,006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Loss for the year before taxation | 3 |
| (6,157,247) | (6,180,757) |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Taxation |
|
| 489,784 | 424,345 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Loss for the year attributable to equity |
|
|
|
|
| holders of the parent company |
|
| (5,667,463) | (5,756,412) |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Loss per share |
|
|
|
|
| Basic and diluted (pence) | 4 |
| (0.931) | (1.183) |
Consolidated statement of comprehensive income for the ended 31 March 2010
|
|
|
| 2010 | 2009 |
|
|
|
| £ | £ |
| Loss after taxation |
|
| (5,667,463) | (5,756,412) |
|
Other comprehensive income Exchange differences on translating foreign operations |
|
|
(678,044) |
3,115,225 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Total other comprehensive income for the year |
|
| (678,044) | 3,115,225 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Total comprehensive income for the year attributable to the equity holders of the parent company |
|
| (6,345,507) | (2,641,187) |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated statement of changes in equity
|
| Share | Share | Warrant | Foreign | Retained | Total |
|
| capital | premium | reserve | exchange | earnings |
|
|
|
| account |
| reserve |
|
|
|
| ₤ | ₤ | ₤ | ₤ | ₤ | ₤ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| At 1 April 2009 | 5,037,736 | 15,705,702 | 387,500 | 2,678,831 | (13,124,562) | 10,685,207 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Total comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| recognised for the year | - | - | - | (678,044) | (5,667,463) | (6,345,507) |
| Issue of shares (net of expenses) | 1,867,017 | 4,951,404 | (379,375) | - | - | 6,439,046 |
| Warrants lapsed during year | - | 8,125 | (8,125) | - | - | - |
| Share options expense | - | - | - | - | 532,051 | 532,051 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Balance at 31 March 2010 | 6,904,753 | 20,665,231 | - | 2,000,787 | (18,259,974) | 11,310,797 |
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Share | Share | Warrant | Foreign | Retained | Total |
|
| capital | premium | reserve | exchange | earnings |
|
|
|
| account |
| reserve |
|
|
|
| ₤ | ₤ | ₤ | ₤ | ₤ | ₤ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| At 1 April 2008 | 4,587,736 | 14,511,702 | 275,000 | (436,394) | (8,437,103) | 10,500,941 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Total comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| recognised for the year | - | - | - | 3,115,225 | (5,756,412) | (2,641,187) |
| Issue of shares (net of expenses) | 450,000 | 1,194,000 | 112,500 | - | - | 1,756,500 |
| Share options expense | - | - | - | - | 1,068,953 | 1,068,953 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Balance at 31 March 2009 | 5,037,736 | 15,705,702 | 387,500 | 2,678,831 | (13,124,562) | 10,685,207 |
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Consolidated statement of financial position as at 31 March 2010 |
|
|
| |
| Notes | 2010 | 2009 | ||
|
|
|
| £ | £ |
| Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Non current assets |
|
|
|
|
| Property, plant and equipment |
|
| 467,064 | 166,806 |
| Intangible assets |
|
| 8,564,187 | 12,095,841 |
| Financial assets |
|
| - | 200,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
| 9,031,251 | 12,462,647 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Current assets |
|
|
|
|
| Inventories |
|
| - | 15,945 |
| Trade and other receivables |
|
| 90,006 | 15,597 |
| Cash and cash equivalents |
|
| 3,697,866 | 432,190 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
| 3,787,872 | 463,732 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Total assets |
|
| 12,819,123 | 12,926,379 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
| Current liabilities |
|
|
|
|
| Trade and other payables |
|
| 161,930 | 240,177 |
| Corporation tax liability
|
|
| 6,288 | 29,788 |
| Non-current liabilities |
|
|
|
|
| Deferred tax liability |
|
| 1,340,108 | 1,971,207 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Total liabilities |
|
| 1,508,326 | 2,241,172 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Capital and reserves attributable to equity |
|
|
|
|
| holders of the parent company |
|
|
|
|
| Share capital |
|
| 6,904,753 | 5,037,736 |
| Warrant reserve |
|
| - | 387,500 |
| Share premium account |
|
| 20,665,231 | 15,705,702 |
| Foreign exchange translation reserve |
|
| 2,000,787 | 2,678,831 |
| Retained deficit |
|
| (18,259,974) | (13,124,562) |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Total equity |
|
| 11,310,797 | 10,685,207 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Total equity and liabilities |
|
| 12,819,123 | 12,926,379 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
.
| Consolidated statement of cash flows for the year ended 31 March 2010 |
|
| 2010 | 2009 |
|
|
|
| £ | £ |
| Cash flow from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
| Loss before tax |
|
| (6,157,247) | (6,180,757) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Adjustments for : |
|
|
|
|
| Finance income |
|
| (687) | (43,006) |
| Depreciation | 3 |
| 55,320 | 63,570 |
| Amortisation | 3 |
| 2,954,614 | 2,697,588 |
| Share option expense | 3 |
| 532,051 | 1,068,953 |
| Provision against available for sale investment | 3 |
| 200,000 | - |
| Foreign exchange movements | 3 |
| 5,589 | (187,804) |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Cash flow from operating activities before changes in working capital |
|
| (2,410,360) | (2,581,456) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (Increase)/decrease in trade and other receivables |
|
| (75,399) | 13,519 |
| Decrease/(increase) in inventories |
|
| 15,945 | (5,430) |
| Decrease in trade and other payables |
|
| (78,247) | (52,859) |
| Interest received |
|
| 687 | 43,006 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Cash generated from operations |
|
| (2,547,374) | (2,583,220) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tax paid |
|
| (23,500) | - |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Investing activities |
|
|
|
|
| Internally generated intangible asset |
|
| (271,512) | (997,859) |
| Purchase of property plant and equipment |
|
| (358,827) | (106,991) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
| (630,339) | (1,104,850) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
| Cash inflow from issue of new shares |
|
| 6,590,601 | 1,800,000 |
| Share issue costs |
|
| (151,555) | (43,500) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
| 6,439,046 | 1,756,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
| 3,237,833 | (1,931,570) |
| Foreign exchange differences on translation of cash and cash equivalents |
|
| 27,843 | 173,710 |
| Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year |
|
| 432,190 | 2,190,050 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
| Cash and cash equivalents at end of year |
|
| 3,697,866 | 432,190 |
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
1 Principal accounting policies
The Company is a public limited company incorporated and domiciled in the United Kingdom. The address of its registered office is Ashcome Court, Woolsack Way Godalming, Surrey, GU7 1LQ. The principal accounting policies applied in the preparation of these consolidated financial statements are set out below. These policies have been consistently applied to all the years presented, unless otherwise stated.
Basis of preparation
The consolidated financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2010 have been prepared on the basis of all IFRS and interpretations adopted by the European Union that are mandatory for periods ending 31 March 2010. The consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the historical cost basis as modified by the revaluation of available for sale financial assets.
The consolidated financial statements have been drawn up on the basis of accounting policies consistent with those applied in the financial statements for the year to 31 March 2009. The following standards, interpretations and amendments to existing standards have been adopted for the first time in 2010:
| International Accounting Standards (IAS/IFRS) | Effective date | ||
|
| IFRS7 | - Amendment - improving disclosures about financial instruments | 1 January 2009 |
|
| IAS 1 (revised) | - Amendment - Presentation of financial statements: a revised presentation | 1 January 2009 |
|
| IFRS 8 | - Operating segments | 1 January 2009 |
|
| IAS 23 | - Amendment - Borrowing costs | 1 January 2009 |
|
| IFRS 2 | - Amendment - Share based payment: vesting conditions and cancellations | 1 January 2009 |
|
| IAS32 & IAS1 | - Amendment - Puttable financial instrument and obligations arising on liquidation | 1 January 2009 |
|
| IAS39 & IFRIC 9 | - Amendment - Embedded derivitives | 1 January 2009 |
|
| Improvements to IFRSs (2009) |
| 1 January 2009 |
| International Financial Reporting Interpretations (IFRIC) | Effective date | ||
|
| IFRIC 15 | - Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate | 1 January 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
The adoption of these standards, interpretations and amendments did not affect the Group results of operations or financial positions. The presentation of these financial statements incorporates changes arising from adoption of these standards, interpretations and amendments.
The IASB and IFRIC have issued the following standards and interpretations which are effective for reporting periods beginning after the date of these financial statements, and which the Group is not early adopting:
| International Accounting Standards (IAS/IFRS) | Effective date | ||
|
| IAS 27 | - Amendment - Consolidated and separate financial statements | 1 July 2009 |
|
| IFRS 3 | - Revised - Business combinations | 1 July 2009 |
|
| IAS 39 | - Amendment - Financial Instruments: recognition and measurement eligible hedged Items | 1 July 2009 |
|
| IAS 39 & IFRIC 9 | - Amendment - embedded derivatives | 30 June 2009 |
|
| Improvements to IFRSs (2010) | - Amendments to various standards Issued 16 April 2009 | 1 January 2010 |
|
| IFRS 2 | - Amendment - Group cash-settled share-based payment transactions | 1 January 2010 |
|
| IFRS 1 | - Amendment - Additional exemptions for first-time adopters | 1 January 2010 |
|
| IAS 32 | - Amendment - Classification of Rights Issues | 1February 2010 |
|
| IAS 24 (revised) | - Revised definition of related party | 1 January 2011 |
|
| IAS 19 & IFRIC 14 | - Amendments - Limit of a defined benefit asset, minimum funding requirements and their interaction | 1 January 2011 |
|
| Improvements to IFRSs (2010)* | - Amendments to various standards Issued 6 May 2010 | 1 January 2011 |
|
| IFRS 9* | - New standard replacing IAS 39 | 1 January 2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
| International Financial Reporting Interpretations (IFRIC) | Effective date | ||
|
| IFRIC 17 | - Distributions of non-cash assets to owners | 1 July 2009 |
|
| IFRIC 18 | - Transfers of assets from customers | 1 July 2009 |
|
| IFRIC 19 | - Extinguishing Financial Liabilities with Equity Instruments | 1 July 2010 |
* These standards have not been endorsed by the European Union. The Group is evaluating the impact of the above pronouncements but they are not expected to be material to the Group's earnings or to shareholders' funds.
The Group financial information is presented in UK sterling ('£').
Going concern
The Group's financial plans require it to secure a number of sales contracts over the course of the coming year in order to fund the working capital requirements and the development programme of the Company and Group. Since the balance sheet date the Group have delivered analysis for multiple new oil well locations, have signed a contract with a global supermajor oil firm and are in advanced talks with prospective clients to apply Quantum RD for shale gas exploration and productions.
The Board believes that the sales pipeline from current clients and new customers will be secured, it does recognise that this constitutes a significant uncertainty given the risks associated with the oil and gas industry in which the Group have focussed their efforts. In the event that these sales are not received in line with the Group's financial plans then Directors are confident that further equity funding could be raised or expenditure could be sufficiently reduced to ensure that funds are available to meet working capital requirements.
The financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, however the conditions outlined above indicate the existence of material uncertainties which may cast doubt about the Company's and the Group's ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include the adjustments that would result if the Group and Company were unable to continue as a going concern.
Revenue
Service fees arising from analytical surveys using ViaLogy's patented computational software products are recognised once the report is delivered to the customer.
Revenue arising from sales of ViaLogy's direct entitlement of oil and gas production is recognised by reference to the quantity and price of oil sold by the customer into the market at the date of transfer of the risk and reward.
Operating segments
Operating segments are reported in a manner consistent with the internal reporting provided to the chief operating decision-maker. The chief operating decision maker has been identified as Dr Robert Dean, Chief Executive Officer.
Basis of consolidation
Where the Company has the power, either directly or indirectly, to govern the financial and operating policies of another entity or business so as to obtain benefits from its activities, it is classified as a subsidiary. The consolidated financial statements present the results of the Company and its subsidiaries ("the Group") as if they form a single entity. Inter-company transactions and balances between Group companies are therefore eliminated in full.
Business combinations
The consolidated financial statements incorporate the results of business combinations using the purchase method. In the consolidated balance sheet, the acquiree's identifiable assets and liabilities and contingent liabilities are initially recognised at their fair values at the acquisition date. The results of the acquired operations are included in the consolidated income statement from the date on which control is obtained. The acquirer has been identified as that entity giving up equity instruments and cash for control of the acquiree.
Critical accounting estimates and judgments
The preparation of consolidated financial statements under IFRS requires the Group to make estimates and judgments that effect the application of policies and reported amounts. In applying these policies the directors are required to make estimates and subjective judgements that may affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the balance sheet date and reported profit for the year. Although the Directors base these on combination of past experience and any other evidence that is relevant to the particular circumstance, the actual results could ultimately differ from those estimates.
Included in the notes to the full financial statements are accounting policies which cover areas that the Directors consider require estimates and assumptions which have a significant risk of causing a material adjustment to the carrying amount of assets and liabilities within the next financial year. A list of these policies can be found below:
Taxation
Deferred tax Intangible assets and amortisation Financial assets Share based payments
Impairment of property, plant and equipment and intangible assets
Property, plant and equipment and identifiable intangibles are reviewed for impairment at the balance sheet date in addition to whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. If the expected discounted future cash flow from the use of the assets and their eventual disposition is less than the carrying amount of the assets, an impairment loss is recognised and measured using the asset's fair value or discounted cash flows.
Externally acquired intangible assets
Externally acquired intangible assets are initially recognised at cost and subsequently amortised on a straight-line basis over their useful economic lives. The amortisation expense is included within the administrative expenses line in the income statement.
Intangible assets are recognised on business combinations if they are separable from the acquired entity or give rise to other contractual/legal rights. The amounts arrived at by using appropriate valuation techniques.
In-process research and development programmes acquired in such combinations are recognised as an asset even if subsequent expenditure is written off because the criteria specified in the policy for research and development costs above are not met.
The significant intangible assets recognised by the Group their useful economic lives and the methods used to determine the cost of intangibles are as follows:
|
Intangible assets | Useful economic life |
|
Intellectual Property |
6 years |
Internally generated intangible assets (development costs)
Expenditure on internally developed products is capitalised if it can be demonstrated that:
·; it is technically feasible to develop the product to be sold;
·; adequate resources are available to complete the development;
·; there is an intention to complete and sell the product;
·; the Group is able to sell the product;
·; sale of the product will generate future economic benefits; and
·; expenditure on the project can be measured reliably.
Capitalised development costs are amortised over the periods the Group expects to benefit from selling the products developed. The amortisation expense is included within administrative expenses in the income statement
Development expenditure not satisfying the above criteria and expenditure on the research phase of internal projects are recognised in the income statement as incurred.
|
Intangible assets | Useful economic life |
|
|
Development |
6 years |
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment
Items of property, plant and equipment are initially recognised at cost.
Depreciation is provided on all items of property, plant and equipment to write off the carrying value of items over their expected useful lives. Depreciation is applied at the following rates:
Office equipment 20% per annum reducing balance
Computer equipment 33.3% per annum reducing balance
Motor vehicles 33.3% per annum reducing balance
Furniture 20% per annum reducing balance
Oil and gas assets
ViaLogy follows a successful efforts based accounting policy for oil and gas assets.
Interests acquired in successful production wells are initially recognised at cost within property, plant and equipment. Where interests in such wells are acquired as the success fee element of the revenue from an analytical contract, no cost is initially recognised.
Subsequent expenditure is capitalised only where it enhances the economic benefits of the producing asset.
Depletion
ViaLogy depletes oil and gas assets on a unit of production basis, based on proved and probable reserves on a field by field basis.
Impairment
Impairment reviews on Oil and Gas assets are carried out on each cash-generating unit. ViaLogy's cash generating units are those assets which generate largely independent cash flows and are normally, but not always, single development areas.
Inventories
Inventories are initially recognised at cost, and subsequently at the lower of cost and net realisable value. Cost comprises all costs of purchase and other costs incurred in bringing the inventories to their present location and condition.
Share-based payments
Where share options are awarded to employees, the fair value of the options at the date of grant is charged to the statement of comprehensive income over the vesting period. Non-market vesting conditions are taken into account by adjusting the number of equity instruments expected to vest at each balance sheet date so that, ultimately, the cumulative amount recognised over the vesting period is based on the number of options that eventually vest. Market vesting conditions are factored into the fair value of the options granted. As long as all other vesting conditions are satisfied, a charge is made irrespective of whether the market vesting conditions are satisfied. The cumulative expense is not adjusted for failure to achieve a market vesting condition.
Where the terms and conditions of options are modified before they vest, the increase in the fair value of the options, measured immediately before and after the modification, is also charged to the income statement over the remaining vesting period.
Where equity instruments are granted to persons other than employees, the income statement is charged with the fair value of goods and services received.
Tax
The major components of income tax on the profit or loss from ordinary activities include current and deferred tax.
Current tax is based on the profit or loss from ordinary activities adjusted for items that are non-assessable or disallowed and is calculated using tax rates that have been enacted or substantively enacted by the year end date.
Income tax is charged or credited to the income statement, except when the tax relates to items credited or charged directly to equity, in which case the tax is also dealt with in equity.
Deferred taxation
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognised where the carrying amount of an asset or liability in the statement of financial position differs to its tax base, except for differences arising on:
·; the initial recognition of goodwill;
·; goodwill for which amortisation is not tax deductible;
·; the initial recognition of an asset or liability which is not a business combination and at the time of the transaction affects neither accounting or taxable profit; and
·; investments in subsidiaries and jointly controlled entities where the Group is able to control the timing of the reversal of the difference and it is probable that the difference will not reverse in the foreseeable future.
Recognition of deferred tax assets is restricted to those instances where it is probable that the taxable profit will be available against which the differences can be utilised.
The amount of the asset of liability is determined using tax rates that have been enacted or substantially enacted by the balance sheet date and are expected to apply when the deferred tax liabilities/(assets) are settled/(recovered). Deferred tax balances are not discounted.
Foreign currency
The functional currency of the parent entity is pounds sterling. The functional currency of the subsidiary is US dollars. Transactions entered into by Group entities in a currency other than the reporting currency are recorded at the rates ruling when the transaction occur. Foreign currency monetary assets and liabilities are translated at the rates ruling at the statement of financial position date. Exchange differences arising on the re-translation of the unsettled monetary assets and liabilities are similarly recognised in the income statement.
On consolidation, the results of overseas operations are translated into sterling at rates approximating to those ruling when the transactions took place. All assets and liabilities of overseas operations are translated at the rate ruling at the balance sheet date.
Presentation currency
These accounts have been presented in Sterling as the Directors consider this to be most useful form of presentation to the shareholders.
Financial assets
The Group classifies its financial assets into one of the following categories, depending on the purpose for which the asset was acquired. The Group accounting policy for each category is as follows:
Loans and receivables: These assets are non-derivative financial assets with fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market. They arise principally through the provision of goods and services to customers (trade receivables), but also incorporate other types of contractual monetary asset. They are carried at cost less any provision for impairment.
Available-for-sale: These comprise of the Group's strategic investments in entities not qualifying as subsidiaries, associates or jointly controlled entities. They are carried at fair value with changes in fair value recognised directly in equity. Where a decline in the fair value of an available-for-sale financial asset constitutes objective evidence of impairment, the amount of the loss is removed from equity and recognised in the income statement. Investments in equity instruments that do not have a quoted market price in an active market and whose fair value cannot be readily measured are measured at cost.
Financial liabilities and equity
Financial liabilities and equity instruments issued by the Group are classified according to the substance of the contractual arrangements entered into and the definitions of a financial liability and an equity instrument. A financial liability is a contractual obligation to either deliver cash or another financial asset to another entity or to exchange a financial asset or financial liability with another entity, including obligations which may be settled by the Group using its equity instruments. An equity instrument is any contract that evidences a residual interest in the assets of the Group after deducting all of its liabilities. The accounting policies adopted for specific financial liabilities and equity instruments are set out below.
Financial liabilities
At initial recognition, financial liabilities are measured at their fair value plus, if appropriate, any transaction costs that are directly attributable to the issue of the financial liability
Equity instruments
Equity instruments issued by the Group are recorded at the proceeds received net of direct issue costs.
The financial information set out above does not constitute the Company's statutory accounts for the years ended 31 March 2010 or 2009 but is derived from those accounts. Statutory accounts for 2009 have been delivered to the registrar of companies, and those for 2010 will be delivered in due course. The auditors have reported on those accounts; their reports were (i) unqualified, and (ii) did include a reference to matters to which the auditors drew attention by way of emphasis, in respect of going concern, without qualifying their report and (iii) did not contain a statement under section 237 (2) or (3) of the Companies Act 1985 in respect of the accounts for 2009 nor a statement under section 498 (2) or (3) of the Companies Act 2006 in respect of the accounts for 2010. This announcement does not constitute the Group's annual report and statutory accounts.
2 Segmental analysis
The Group has two reportable segments:
·; Head office - this segment is the head office of the Group.
·; Operations - this segment is involved in sales technology development in the USA.
The operating results of these segments are regularly reviewed by the Group's chief operating decision maker in order to make decisions about the allocation of resources and assess their performance.
2 Segmental analysis continued
| 2010 Reportable segment analysis |
| Operations | Head office | Consolidated |
|
|
| £ | £ | £ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Revenue from external customers |
| 151,388 | - | 151,388 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Gross profit |
| 151,388 | - | 151,388 |
| Finance income |
| - | 687 | 687 |
| Tax credit |
| 489,784 | - | 489,784 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Loss for the year after taxation |
| (4,669,096) | (998,367) | (5,667,463) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Segment assets |
| 8,775,583 | 4,043,540 | 12,819,123 |
| Segment liabilities |
| 1,424,672 | 83,654 | 1,508,326 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Costs to acquire plant property and equipment |
| 351,117 | 7,710 | 358,827 |
| Costs to acquire intangible assets |
| 271,512 | - | 271,512 |
| Depreciation and amortisation |
| 3,006,648 | 3,286 | 3,009,934 |
| Share based payments charged |
| 530,381 | 1,670 | 532,051 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2009 Reportable segment analysis |
| Operations | Head office | Consolidated |
|
|
| £ | £ | £ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Revenue |
| 129,028 | - | 129,028 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Gross profit |
| 116,659 | - | 116,659 |
| Finance income |
| - | 43,006 | 43,006 |
| Tax credit |
| - | 424,345 | 424,345 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Loss for the year after taxation |
| (6,032,408) | 275,996 | (5,756,412) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Segment assets |
| 10,379,536 | 2,546,843 | 12,926,379 |
| Segment liabilities |
| 149,840 | 2,091,332 | 2,241,172 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
| Costs to acquire plant property and equipment |
| 89,328 | 663 | 89,991 |
| Costs to acquire intangible assets |
| 923,241 | - | 923,241 |
| Depreciation and amortisation |
| 2,760,129 | 1,029 | 2,761,158 |
| Share based payments charged |
| - | 1,068,953 | 1,068,953 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All material non-current assets are owned by the USA subsidiary and are located in the USA.
2 Segmental analysis continued
| Revenues by product / service |
| 2010 | 2009 |
|
|
| £ | £ |
|
|
|
|
|
| Oil and gas revenues |
| 16,862 | - |
| Revenues from analytical surveys |
| 134,526 | - |
| Sensor Policy Manager |
| - | 129,028 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
| 151,388 | 129,028 |
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
All sales in the current and previous year were to external customers based in the USA. £148,412 of total external revenues arose from five customers (2009: three customers attributed £120,315) each of which accounted for over 10% of revenues.
3 Loss for the year before taxation
|
|
| 2010 | 2009 |
|
|
| £ | £ |
| This is arrived at after charging/(crediting): |
|
|
|
| Staff costs |
| 1,428,273 | 1,294,723 |
| Share option expense |
| 532,051 | 1,068,953 |
| Depreciation of property, plant and equipment |
| 55,320 | 63,570 |
| Amortisation of intangible fixed assets |
| 2,954,614 | 2,697,588 |
| Provision against available for sale financial asset |
| 200,000 | - |
| Foreign exchange differences |
| 5,589 | (187,804) |
| Operating lease expense Auditors remuneration for : |
| 91,429 | 153,411 |
| Audit of financial statements of the Group |
| 23,500 | 23,500 |
| Audit of the financial statements of the parent company |
|
3,000 |
3,000 |
| Taxation services |
| 10,000 | 10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| -------- | -------- |
|
|
|
|
|
4 Loss per share
Basic
Basic loss per share is calculated by dividing the loss after tax attributable to the equity holders of the parent company for the year of £5,667,463 (2009: loss £5,756,412) by the weighted average number of ordinary shares in issue during the year 608,928,041 (2009: 486,390,059).
Diluted
Diluted earnings per share dilute the basic earnings per share to take into account share options and warrants. The calculation includes the weighted average number of ordinary shares that would have been issued on the conversion of all the dilutive share operations and warrants into ordinary shares. 72,726,396 options (2009: 77,330,352) and 1,193,654 (2009: 76,193,654) warrants have been excluded from this calculation as the effect would be anti-dilutive.
5 Events after the reporting period
There are no significant events after the reporting period.
Availability of Report and accounts
The Company's report and accounts for the year ended 31 March 2010 will be available on www.Vialogy.com today and will be posted to shareholders on 21 September 2010. Copies of the report and accounts for the year ended 31 March 2010 are available from the Company's registered address.