<table>
<tbody><tr>
<td valign="top" width="5%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
<td valign="top" width="95%">
<div style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">We evaluated the terms and conditions of the Senior Secured Notes under the guidance of ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. The terms of the Notes that qualify as a derivative instrument are (i) a written put option which allows the holders of the Notes to accelerate interest and principal (effectively forcing an early redemption of the Notes) in the event of certain events of default, including a change of control of the Company, and (ii) the holders’ right to increase the interest rate on the Notes by 4% per year in the event of a suspension from trading of the Company’s Common Stock or an event of default. Pursuant to ASC 815-15-25-40, put options that can accelerate repayment of principal meet the requisite criteria of a derivative financial instrument. In addition, as addressed in ASC 815-15-25-41, for a contingently exercisable put to be considered clearly and closely related to the relevant instrument and not constitute a separate derivative financial instrument, it can be indexed only to interest or credit risk. In this instance, the put instruments embedded in the Notes are indexed to events that are not related to interest or credit risk, namely, a change of control of the Company, and suspension of trading of the Company’s Common Stock. Accordingly, these features are not considered clearly and closely related to the Note, and bifurcation is necessary.</font></div>
</td>
</tr><tr>
<td valign="top" width="5%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
<td valign="top" width="95%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
</tr><tr>
<td valign="top" width="5%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
<td valign="top" width="95%">
<div style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">The Company determined that the Warrants should be classified as stockholders’ equity. The principal concepts underlying accounting for warrants provide a series of conditions, related to the potential for net cash settlement, which must be met in order to achieve equity classification. Our conclusion is that the Warrants are indexed to the Company’s common stock and meet all of the conditions for equity classification. The Company measured the fair value of the Warrants on the inception date to provide a basis for allocating the net proceeds to the various financial instruments issued in the December 2009 financing. As more fully discussed below, the Company used the Black-Scholes-Merton valuation technique, because that method embodies, in its view, all of the assumptions that market participants would consider in determining the fair value of the Warrants for purposes of a sale or exchange. The allocated value of the Warrants was recorded to Additional Paid-in Capital.</font></div>
</td>
</tr><tr>
<td valign="top" width="5%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
<td valign="top" width="95%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
</tr><tr>
<td valign="top" width="5%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
<td valign="top" width="95%">
<div style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">The financial instruments sold to the Management Buyers, were recognized as compensation expense in the amount by which the fair value of the share-linked financial instruments (i.e. Series D Preferred Stock and Warrants) exceeded the proceeds that the Company received. The financial instruments subject to allocation are the Secured Notes, Series D Preferred Stock, Compound Embedded Derivatives (“CED”) and the Warrants. Other than the compensatory amounts, current accounting concepts generally provide that the allocation is, first, to those instruments that are required to be recorded at fair value; that is, the CED; and the remainder based upon relative fair values.</font></div>
</td>
</tr><tr>
<td valign="top" width="5%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
<td valign="top" width="95%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
</tr><tr>
<td valign="top" width="5%"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">&nbsp; </font></td>
<td valign="top" width="95%">
<div style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN-LEFT: 0pt; TEXT-INDENT: 0pt; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0pt" align="justify"><font style="DISPLAY: inline; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman">The following table provides the components of the allocation and the related fair values of the subject financial instruments:</font></div>
</td>
</tr></tbody></table>
<table>
<tbody><tr>
<td><font>  </font></td>
<td>
<div><font>We evaluated the terms and conditions of the Senior Secured Notes under the guidance of ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. The terms of the Notes that qualify as a derivative instrument are (i) a written put option which allows the holders of the Notes to accelerate interest and principal (effectively forcing an early redemption of the Notes) in the event of certain events of default, including a change of control of the Company, and (ii) the holders’ right to increase the interest rate on the Notes by 4% per year in the event of a suspension from trading of the Company’s Common Stock or an event of default. Pursuant to ASC 815-15-25-40, put options that can accelerate repayment of principal meet the requisite criteria of a derivative financial instrument. In addition, as addressed in ASC 815-15-25-41, for a contingently exercisable put to be considered clearly and closely related to the relevant instrument and not constitute a separate derivative financial instrument, it can be indexed only to interest or credit risk. In this instance, the put instruments embedded in the Notes are indexed to events that are not related to interest or credit risk, namely, a change of control of the Company, and suspension of trading of the Company’s Common Stock. Accordingly, these features are not considered clearly and closely related to the Note, and bifurcation is necessary.</font></div>
</td>
</tr><tr>
<td><font>  </font></td>
<td><font>  </font></td>
</tr><tr>
<td><font>  </font></td>
<td>
<div><font>The Company determined that the Warrants should be classified as stockholders’ equity. The principal concepts underlying accounting for warrants provide a series of conditions, related to the potential for net cash settlement, which must be met in order to achieve equity classification. Our conclusion is that the Warrants are indexed to the Company’s common stock and meet all of the conditions for equity classification. The Company measured the fair value of the Warrants on the inception date to provide a basis for allocating the net proceeds to the various financial instruments issued in the December 2009 financing. As more fully discussed below, the Company used the Black-Scholes-Merton valuation technique, because that method embodies, in its view, all of the assumptions that market participants would consider in determining the fair value of the Warrants for purposes of a sale or exchange. The allocated value of the Warrants was recorded to Additional Paid-in Capital.</font></div>
</td>
</tr><tr>
<td><font>  </font></td>
<td><font>  </font></td>
</tr><tr>
<td><font>  </font></td>
<td>
<div><font>The financial instruments sold to the Management Buyers, were recognized as compensation expense in the amount by which the fair value of the share-linked financial instruments (i.e. Series D Preferred Stock and Warrants) exceeded the proceeds that the Company received. The financial instruments subject to allocation are the Secured Notes, Series D Preferred Stock, Compound Embedded Derivatives (“CED”) and the Warrants. Other than the compensatory amounts, current accounting concepts generally provide that the allocation is, first, to those instruments that are required to be recorded at fair value; that is, the CED; and the remainder based upon relative fair values.</font></div>
</td>
</tr><tr>
<td><font>  </font></td>
<td><font>  </font></td>
</tr><tr>
<td><font>  </font></td>
<td>
<div><font>The following table provides the components of the allocation and the related fair values of the subject financial instruments:</font></div>
</td>
</tr></tbody></table>