Item 1. Business (and Information for Item 2 on Properties).
Business Development
Can-Cal Resources Ltd. (“Can-Cal” or the “Company” ) is a Nevada corporation incorporated on March 22, 1995 under the name of British Pubs USA, Inc. as a wholly owned subsidiary of 305856 B.C., Ltd. d/b/a N.W. Electric Carriage Company (“NWE”), a British Columbia, Canada company (“NWE”). On April 12, 1995, NWE exchanged shares of British Pubs USA, Inc. for shares of NWE held by its existing shareholders, on a share for share basis. NWE changed its name to Can-Cal Resources Ltd. on July 2, 1996.
In January 1999, the Company sold its wholly-owned Canadian subsidiary, Scotmar Industries, Inc., which was engaged in the business of buying and salvaging damaged trucks from insurance companies for resale of guaranteed truck part components. The subsidiary was sold for a profit and the proceeds used to acquire and explore mineral properties, as the Company determined that the subsidiary would lose money in the vehicle salvage business unless more capital was obtained at that time specifically for that business.
Business of Issuer
The Company is an exploration company. Since 1996, we have examined various mineral properties prospective for precious metals and minerals and acquired those deemed promising. We own, lease or have mining interest in four mineral properties in the southwestern United States (California and Arizona, as follows: Wikieup, Arizona; Cerbat, Arizona; Owl Canyon, California; and Pisgah, California).
Prior to 2003, we performed more than 1,000 “in-house” assays on mineral samples from our properties in the United States. An assay is a test performed on a sample of minerals to determine the quantity of one or more elements contained in the sample. The in-house work was conducted with our equipment by persons under Can-Cal contract who are experienced in performing assays, but who were not independent of us. We also sent samples of materials from which we obtained the most promising results to outside independent assayers to confirm in-house results.
In 2003, the Company incorporated a wholly owned subsidiary in Mexico, Sierra Madre Resources S.A. de C.V. (“SMR”), to be an operating entity for mining-related acquisitions and activities in Mexico. In February 2004, SMR acquired a 100% interest in a gold-silver mineral concession, in Durango State, Mexico. In July 2004, SMR applied to the Mexican Government for a gold-silver concession, also in Durango State, Mexico. These were exploration stage properties, referred to in previous Company reports as “Arco Project” and “Arco 2 Project”. In November 2004, SMR applied to Mexico’s Director of Mines for three grass roots, gold-silver exploration concessions located in the State of Chihuahua, Mexico. These applications were subsequently cancelled in February 2005 due to incomplete application filings. SMR may reapply for one or more of these concessions in the future, but has currently ceased operations in Mexico.
The Company’s current focus has changed from Mexico to the United States with present emphasis on the Pisgah Mountain material and Wikieup material.
All the United States properties are considered “grass roots” because they are not known to contain reserves of precious metals or other minerals (a reserve is that portion of a mineral deposit which could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserve determination). None of these properties is in production.
In 2005, we sold $11,500 of volcanic cinder materials arising from the Pisgah, California property to industrial users. As of June 1, 2005, we discontinued sales of volcanic cinder materials.
Can-Cal is currently an exploration stage company. An entity remains in the exploration stage until such time as proven or probable reserves have been established for its deposits. Upon the location of commercially mineable reserves, in the event that we are successful in locating commercially mineable reserves, the Company plans to prepare for mineral extraction and enter the development stage. To date, the exploration stage of the Company’s operations consists of contracting with geologists who sample and assess the mining viability of the Company’s claims.
To the extent that financing is available, we intend to explore, develop, and, if producible and warranted, bring into production precious metals properties for either on our own account or in conjunction with joint venture partners (in those instances where we acquire less than a 100% interest in a property). However, either due to a combination of a lack of available financing, the number of properties which merit development, and/or the scope of the exploration and development work of a particular property being beyond the Company’s financial and administrative capabilities, the Company may contract out one or more of its properties to other mining companies.
Executive offices are located at 8205 Aqua Spray Ave, Las Vegas, Nevada 89128 (tel. 702.243.1849; fax 702.243.1869).
Item 1A.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
In the course of conducting our business operations, we are exposed to a variety of risks that are inherent to our industry specifically, and to early stage companies and for investments in securities, generally. The following discusses some of the key inherent risk factors that could affect our business and operations, as well as other risk factors which are particularly relevant to us in the current period of significant economic and market disruption. Other factors besides those discussed below or elsewhere in this report also could adversely affect our business and operations, and these risk factors should not be considered a complete list of potential risks that may affect us.
Risk Factors Related to Our Business
Losses to Date and General Risks Faced by the Company.
We are an exploration stage company engaged in the acquisition and exploration of precious metals mineral properties. To date, we have no producing properties. As a result, we have had minimal sources of operating revenue and we have historically operated and continue to operate at a loss. For the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company recorded a net loss of $682,012 and had an accumulated deficit of $10,362,791 at that date. Our ultimate success will depend on our ability to generate profits from our properties.
We lack material operating cash flow and rely on external funding sources, which might become unavailable. If we are unable to continue to obtain needed capital from outside sources, we will be forced to reduce, curtail or cease our operations. Furthermore the, planned exploration and development of the mineral properties in which we hold interests depends upon our ability to obtain financing through:
As a mineral exploration company, our ability to commence production and generate profits is dependent on our ability to discover viable and economic mineral reserves. Our ability to discover such reserves are subject to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control and are not predictable.
All of the mineral properties in which we have an interest or right are in the exploration stages only and are without reserves of gold or other precious metals minerals. We cannot assure that current or proposed exploration or development programs on properties in which we have an interest will result in the discovery of gold or other mineral reserves or will result in a profitable commercial mining operation.
Exploration for gold is speculative in nature, involves many risks and is frequently unsuccessful. Any gold exploration program entails risks relating to:
The commercial viability of a mineral deposit is dependent on a number of factors including:
The audit report on the financial statements at December 31, 2012 has a “going concern” qualification, which means we may not be able to continue operations unless we obtain additional funding and are successful with our strategic plan.
We have experienced losses since inception. The extended period over which losses have been experienced is principally attributable to the fact that we have spent substantial sums of money has been spent on exploring grass roots mineral properties to determine if precious metals might be present in economic quantities. In order to fund future activities the Company must identify and verify the presence of precious metals in economic quantities, which is currently ongoing “In House” in addition to independent third party testing. If economic results are identified, the Company then would either seek to raise capital itself to put the Pisgah property and the Wikieup into production, sell the properties to another company, or place the properties into a joint venture with another company.
Attaining these objectives will require capital, which the Company will have to obtain principally by selling stock or other equity in the Company, and, or through debt financing, however, we have currently have no definitive arrangements in place to raise the necessary capital to continue operations for any extended period of time, and have generally relied upon relatively small, and intermittent infusions to sustain operations.
If we do not obtain additional financing, our business will fail.
Our current operating funds are less than necessary to fund basic operations or to complete all intended objectives and therefore we will need to obtain additional financing in order to continue our business. We currently do not generate any operating income.
We do not currently have any arrangements for financing and we can provide no assurance to investors that we will be able to find such financing if required. Obtaining additional financing would be subject to a number of factors, including investor acceptance of our business model and general market conditions. These factors may make the timing, amount, terms or conditions of additional financing unavailable to us.
The most likely source of future funds presently available to us is through the sale of equity capital in one or more negotiated private sale transactions. Any sale of share capital will result in dilution to existing shareholders.
As an exploration company, we are subject to the risks of the minerals business.
The exploration for minerals is highly speculative and involves risks different from and in some instances greater than risks encountered by companies in other industries. Without extensive technical and economic feasibility studies, which Can-Cal is not currently undertaking, no one can reasonably predict if any property can be mined at a profit. Even with promising reserve reports and feasibility studies, profits cannot be assured. Furthermore, most exploration programs do not result in the discovery of mineralization that leads to commercially viable mining activities and most exploration programs never recover the funds invested in them.
The British Columbia Securities Commission has required us to obtain a report by an independent consultant qualified under the standards of the BCSC.
The British Columbia Securities Commission (“BCSC”) previously required the Company to obtain a report by an independent consultant qualified under the standards of the BCSC. Under British Columbia securities laws, all disclosure of scientific or technical information, including disclosure of a mineral resource or mineral reserve must be based on information prepared by or under the supervision of an independent third party who is “qualified” under the terms of that law. The Company was therefore required under order to supply such verification by a “qualified” third party consultant, and its stock was prohibited from trading in British Columbia until the BCSC accepted such verification. The BCSC also requested documentation regarding all subscribers to the Company stock who were at such time residing in British Columbia. The Company subsequently retained a “qualified” third party consultant who prepared and filed the necessary reports with the BCSC. If the BCSC continues with additional investigatory proceedings, it will require the Company to expend additional funds on legal and accounting fees, which will have a negative impact on our resources available for exploration and general operating activities.
We have not systematically drilled and sampled any of our properties to confirm the presence of any concentrations of precious metals, and drilling and sampling results to date have been inconclusive.
There is substantial risk that such testing on the United States properties would show limited concentrations of precious metals, and such testing may show a lack of precious metals in the properties. Any positive test results will only confirm the presence of precious metals in the samples, and it cannot be assumed that precious metals-bearing materials exist outside of the samples tested.
Policy changes.
Changes in regulatory or political policy could adversely affect our exploration and future production activities. Any changes in government policy, in the United States or other countries where properties are or may be held, could result in changes to laws affecting ownership of assets, land tenure, mining policies, taxation, environmental regulations, and labor relations.
Environmental costs.
Compliance with environmental regulations could adversely affect our exploration and future production activities. There can be no assurance that future changes to environmental legislation and related regulations will not adversely affect our operations.
Future reserve estimates.
All of the mineral properties in which we have an interest or right are in the exploration stages only and are without reserves of gold or other minerals. Even if and when we can prove such reserves, reserve estimates may not be accurate. There is inherent uncertainty attributable to any calculation of reserves or resources. Until reserves or resources are actually mined and processed, the quantity of reserves or resources must be considered as estimates only. In addition, the quantity of reserves or resources may vary depending on metal prices. Any material change in the quantity of reserves, resource grade or stripping ratio may affect the economic viability of our properties. In addition, there can be no assurance that mineral recoveries in small-scale laboratory tests will be duplicated in large tests under on-site conditions or during production.
The possibility of a global financial crisis may significantly impact our business and financial condition for the foreseeable future.
The credit crisis and related turmoil in the global financial system may adversely impact our business and our financial condition, and we may face challenges if conditions in the financial markets do not improve. Our ability to access the capital markets may be restricted at a time when we would like, or need, to raise financing, which could have a material negative impact on our flexibility to react to changing economic and business conditions. The economic situation could have a material negative impact on our lenders or customers, causing them to fail to meet their obligations to us. We will need additional capital and financing to fund our fiscal 2013 operating forecast. There is no assurance that additional capital or financing will be available to us on terms that are acceptable to us or at all.
Risks Related to Our Securities
Because our common stock is deemed a low-priced “Penny” stock, an investment in our common stock should be considered high risk and subject to marketability restrictions.
Since our common stock is a penny stock, as defined in Rule 3a51-1 under the Securities Exchange Act, it will be more difficult for investors to liquidate their investment even if and when a market develops for the common stock. Until the trading price of the common stock rises above $5.00 per share, if ever, trading in the common stock is subject to the penny stock rules of the Securities Exchange Act specified in rules 15g-1 through 15g-10. Those rules require broker-dealers, before effecting transactions in any penny stock, to:
·Deliver to the customer, and obtain a written receipt for, a disclosure document;
·Disclose certain price information about the stock;
·Disclose the amount of compensation received by the broker-dealer or any associated person of the broker-dealer;
·Send monthly statements to customers with market and price information about the penny stock; and
·In some circumstances, approve the purchaser’s account under certain standards and deliver written statements to the customer with information specified in the rules.
Consequently, the penny stock rules may restrict the ability or willingness of broker-dealers to sell the common stock and may affect the ability of holders to sell their common stock in the secondary market and the price at which such holders can sell any such securities. These additional procedures could also limit our ability to raise additional capital in the future.
The market price of our Common Stock is, and is likely to continue to be, highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations.
The market price of our Common Stock is likely to continue to be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control, including but not limited to:
These and other factors are largely beyond our control, and the impact of these risks, singly or in the aggregate, may result in material adverse changes to the market price of our Common Stock and our results of operations and financial condition.
FINRA sales practice requirements may also limit a stockholder’s ability to buy and sell our stock.
In addition to the “penny stock” rules described above, FINRA has adopted rules that require that in recommending an investment to a customer, a broker-dealer must have reasonable grounds for believing that the investment is suitable for that customer. Prior to recommending speculative low priced securities to their non-institutional customers, broker-dealers must make reasonable efforts to obtain information about the customer’s financial status, tax status, investment objectives and other information. Under interpretations of these rules, the FINRA believes that there is a high probability that speculative low priced securities will not be suitable for at least some customers. The FINRA requirements make it more difficult for broker-dealers to recommend that their customers buy our common stock, which may limit your ability to buy and sell our stock and have an adverse effect on the market for our shares.
Shareholders will experience dilution upon the exercise of options and issuance of common stock under our incentive plans.
As of December 31, 2012, we had no options outstanding under our 2003 Non-Qualified Option Plan. Our 2003 Non-Qualified Option Plan permits us to issue up to 1,500,000 shares of our common stock either upon exercise of stock options granted under such plan or through restricted stock awards under such plan. If the holders of outstanding options exercise those options or our full board of directors determines to grant additional stock awards under our incentive plan, shareholders may experience dilution in the net tangible book value of our common stock. In addition, 15,280,394 shares of our common stock may be issued upon the exercise of warrants held by certain of our stockholders. If the stockholders exercise their warrants, shareholders may experience dilution in the net tangible book value of our common stock. Further, the sale or availability for sale of the underlying shares in the marketplace as a result of the exercise of existing options, the grant of additional options, and the exercise of the warrants could depress our stock price.
We do not expect to pay dividends in the foreseeable future.
We do not intend to declare dividends for the foreseeable future, as we anticipate that we will reinvest any future earnings, if any, in the development and growth of our business. In addition, debt arrangements we may enter into in the future may preclude us from paying dividends. Therefore, investors will not receive any funds unless they sell their common stock, and shareholders may be unable to sell their shares on favorable terms or at all. Investors cannot be assured of a positive return on investment or that they will not lose the entire amount of their investment in our common stock.
We may issue additional stock without shareholder consent.
Our board of directors has authority, without action or vote of the shareholders, to issue all or part of our authorized but unissued shares. Additional shares or securities convertible or exercisable into shares are likely to be issued in connection with future financing, acquisitions, employee stock plans, or otherwise. Any such issuance will dilute the percentage ownership of existing shareholders. We are also currently authorized to issue up to 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock. The board of directors can issue preferred stock in one or more series and fix the terms of such stock without shareholder approval. Preferred stock may include the right to vote as a series on particular matters, preferences as to dividends and liquidation, conversion and redemption rights and sinking fund provisions. The issuance of preferred stock could adversely affect the rights of the holders of common stock and reduce the value of the common stock. In addition, specific rights granted to holders of preferred stock could discourage, delay or prevent a transaction involving a change in control of our company, even if doing so would benefit our shareholders. Such issuance could also discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for you and other shareholders to elect directors of your choosing and to cause us to take other corporate actions you desire.
There is currently a limited trading market for our common stock and we cannot ensure that one will ever develop or be sustained.
To date there has not been a significant liquid trading market for our common stock. We cannot predict how liquid the market for our common stock might become. We currently do not satisfy the initial listing standards for any major securities exchange. Currently our common stock is traded on the OTCQB. Should we fail to remain traded on the OTCQB or not be able to be traded on the OTCQB, the trading price of our common stock could suffer, the trading market for our common stock may be less liquid and our common stock price may be subject to increased volatility. Furthermore, for companies whose securities are quoted on the OTCQB, it may be more difficult (i) to obtain accurate quotations, (ii) to obtain coverage for significant news events because major wire services generally do not publish press releases about such companies and (iii) to obtain needed capital.
Offers or availability for sale of a substantial number of shares of our common stock may cause the price of our common stock to decline.
If our stockholders sell substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, or upon the expiration of any statutory holding period under Rule 144, or issued upon the exercise of outstanding options or warrants, it could create a circumstance commonly referred to as an “overhang” and in anticipation of which the market price of our common stock could fall. The existence of an overhang, whether or not sales have occurred or are occurring, also could hinder our ability to raise additional financing through the sale of equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and price that we deem reasonable or appropriate.
Our internal controls may be inadequate, which could cause our financial reporting to be unreliable and lead to misinformation being disseminated to the public.
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. As defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f), internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the principal executive and principal financial officer and effected by the 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: (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company, and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
We have a limited number of personnel that are required to perform various roles and duties as well as be responsible for monitoring and ensuring compliance with our internal control procedures. As a result, our internal controls may be inadequate or ineffective, which could cause our financial reporting to be unreliable and lead to misinformation being disseminated to the public. Investors relying upon this misinformation may make an uninformed investment decision.
Item 1B.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.
Not applicable.
Item 2.
Item 2. Properties.
GENERAL
We own or have interests in four United States properties. They are:
·Pisgah, San Bernadino County, California
·Owl Canyon, California
·Cerbat, Arizona
·Wikieup, Arizona
A summary of important features about each of these properties is set forth in Exhibit 99.1 to our Form 10-KSB/A filed on March 11, 2009, and investors should take care to review this summary.
On September 26, 2006, the Company signed a letter of intent with E.R.S. Ltd., an Israeli owned Cyprus corporation with offices located in Tel Aviv. The letter of intent was to expand testing by E.R.S. on material from Can-Cal’s Pisgah property. The Company and E.R.S. did not enter into a definitive agreement in 2007.
In May and June 2006, Can-Cal acquired an additional 66 20-acre lode claims for the filing cost of $1,200. This increased the Company’s property holding to 1,900 acres or 2.97 square miles of 95 lode claims.
In April, June, July and September 2006, the Company conducted further surface sampling and rock wall sampling on its Wikieup, Arizona property. These samples were shipped to ALS Chemex, an internationally recognized assayer for fire assays (process of testing the original head ore material at high temperatures to determine the recoverability of precious metals) and I.C.P. tests. The preliminary assay results were encouraging and the Company will continue with further surface sampling from various areas of the approximate six square miles of claimed land.
On August 28, 2006, Can-Cal acquired an additional 1,800 acres from the Rose Trust in exchange for 1,000,000 restricted shares of its common stock. This increased the Company’s property holding on its Wikieup, Arizona property to 3,700 acres or approximately six square miles of 185 lode claims. The area is accessed by gravel road just off highway 93 approximately eight miles from the town of Wikieup, Arizona.
Adits (A type of entranche to underground mine shafts), tunnels and open pit locations following what may be a trend (direction that an ore body may follow) or vein structure (faults and cracks caused by shifts in the earth that had filled in with silica fluids and other magma volcanics which solidified leaving minerals behind) over a large region have been found on the property. The legacy of previous mining activity including; abandoned equipment, stone built homes, a cement water reservoir and numerous tailings piles, or piles of dirt left over from previous mining operations, can be seen from various locations.
The geology of the Wikieup area claims is comprised of Precambrian ganoids and gneiss. Outcrop is extensive on the property and rock units include diorite, gabbro and granitic dikes. The Company is continuing the surface sampling program and has hired an independent geologist, working together with students from the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) for continued exploration.
In the United States, one property is owned (patented mining claims on a volcanic cinders property at Pisgah, California), one is leased with an option to purchase (the Cerbat property in Mohave County, Arizona), and two properties are groups of unpatented mining claims located on federal public land and managed by the United States Bureau of Land Management (the “BLM”): the Owl Canyon property (23 miles northeast of Baker, California); and the Wikieup property (in Mohave County, Arizona).
In the United States, unpatented claims are “located” or “staked” by individuals or companies on federal public land. Each placer claim covers 160 acres and each lode claim covers 20 acres. The Company is obligated to pay a maintenance fee of $140 per claim per year to the BLM and file an Affidavit of Assessment Work with the County showing labor and improvements of at least $100 for each claim yearly.
If the statutes and regulations for the location and maintenance of a mining claim in the United States are complied with, the locator obtains a valid possessory right, or claim, to the contained minerals. Failure to pay such fees or make the required filings may render the mining claim void or voidable. We believe we have valid claims, but, because mining claims are self-initiated and self-maintained, it is impossible to ascertain their validity solely from public real estate records. If the government challenges the validity of an unpatented mining claim, we would have the burden of proving the present economic feasibility of mining minerals located on the claims.
The evaluation and acquisition of precious metals, mining properties and mineral properties is competitive; as there are numerous companies involved in the mining and minerals business.
Exploration for and production of minerals is highly speculative and involves greater risks than exist in many other industries. Many exploration programs do not result in the discovery of mineralization and any mineralization discovered may not be of a sufficient quantity or quality to be profitably mined. Also, because of the uncertainties in determining metallurgical amenability of any minerals discovered, the mere discovery of mineralization may not warrant the mining of the minerals on the basis of available technology.
The Company’s decision as to whether any of the mineral properties it now holds, or which it may acquire in the future, contain commercially mineable deposits, and whether such properties should be brought into production, will depend upon the results of the exploration programs and independent feasibility analysis and the recommendation of engineers and geologists. The decision will involve the consideration and evaluation of a number of significant factors, including, but not limited to: 1. The ability to obtain all required permits; 2. Costs of bringing the property into production, including exploration and development or preparation of feasibility studies and construction of production facilities; 3. Availability and costs of financing; 4. Ongoing costs of production; 5. Market prices for the metals to be produced; and 6. The existence of reserves or mineralization with economic grades of metals or minerals. No assurance can be given that any of the properties the Company owns, leases or acquires contain (or will contain) commercially mineable mineral deposits, and no assurance can be given that the Company will ever generate a positive cash flow from production operations on such properties.
The Company has processed and tested mineralized materials and produced very small amounts of precious metals on a testing basis. These have come primarily from testing material from the Pisgah Mountain, Wikieup, Cerbat and the Owl Canyon properties.
The Company is not currently dependent upon one or a few major customers.
Exploration and mining operations in the United States are subject to statutory and agency requirements which address various issues, including: (i) environmental permitting and ongoing compliance, including plans of operations which are supervised by the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”), the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and state and county regulatory authorities and agencies (e.g., state departments of environmental quality) for water and air quality, hazardous waste, etc.; (ii) mine safety and OSHA generally; and (iii) wildlife (Department of Interior for migratory fowl, if attractive standing water is involved in operations). See (b)(11) below. The Company has been added by San Bernardino County as a party to the Approved Mining/ Reclamation Plan and related permits, which have been issued for the Pisgah property. See Item 2, Description of Properties - Pisgah, California - Pisgah Property Mining Lease.
Because any exploration (and future mining) operations of the Company would be subject to the permitting requirements of one or more agencies, the commencement of any such operations could be delayed, pending agency approval (or a determination that approval is not required because of size, etc.), or the project might even be abandoned due to prohibitive costs.
The Company has historically expended a significant amount of funds on consulting, geochemical analytical testing, metallurgical processing and extracting, and precious metal assaying of material, however, the Company does not consider those activities as research and development activities. All those expenses are borne by the Company.
Federal, state and local provisions regulating the discharge of material into the environment, or otherwise relating to the protection of the environment, such as the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response Liability Act (“Superfund”) affect mineral operations. For exploration and mining operations, applicable environmental regulation includes a permitting process for mining operations, an abandoned mine reclamation program and a permitting program for industrial development. Other non-environmental regulations can impact exploration and mining operations and indirectly affect compliance with environmental regulations. For example, a state highway department may have to approve a new access road to make a project accessible at lower costs, but the new road itself may raise environmental issues. Compliance with these laws, and any regulations adopted there under, can make the development of mining claims prohibitively expensive, thereby frustrating the sale or lease of properties, or curtailing profits or royalties which might have been received there from. In 1997, the S & S Joint Venture spent approximately $32,000 to clean up areas of the Owl Canyon properties as requested by the BLM. The Company cannot anticipate what the further costs and/or effects of compliance with any environmental laws might be. The BLM approved the S&S Joint Venture trenching program at Owl Canyon without a requirement for bonding. The BLM approved the reclamation of this trenching program in 2000. BLM demanded further clean-up of the mill site and surrounding area, and the Joint Venture complied with their request in 2000.
The Company presently has one full-time employee and relies on outside subcontractors, consultants and agents, to perform various administrative, legal and technical functions, as required.
PISGAH, CALIFORNIA PROPERTY
GENERAL TESTING. In 1997 we acquired fee title to a “volcanic cinders” property at Pisgah, San Bernardino County, California, for $567,000. The cinders material resulted from a geologically recent volcanic eruption.
The property is privately owned and is comprised of approximately 120 acres located 10 miles southwest of Ludlow, California, with a very large hill of volcanic cinders, accessible by paved road from Interstate 40. An independent survey service hired by the Company reported that there are approximately 13,500,000 tons of volcanic cinders above the surface. Approximately 3,500,000 tons of the cinders have been screened and stockpiled, the result of prior operations by Burlington Northern Railroad Co. It processed the cinders from the hill for railroad track ballast, taking all cinders above about one inch diameter and leaving the rest on the ground surface within one-quarter mile of the hill. The remaining material in the hill and the material left over from Burlington’s operations can easily be removed by front end loaders and loaded into dump trucks for hauling. The Cinder and Cinder #2 patented mining claims contain morphologically young alkali basalt and hawaiite lava flows and cinder (rock types created by volcanic activity). The cinder and spatter cone is about 100 meters high and has a basal diameter (circumference area at the base of the volcanic material) of about 500 meters, and was formed by the splattering of lava into a cone shape during volcanic activity. The volcanic cone and crater consists of unsorted basalis tephra (volcanic material), ranging from finest ash, through scoriascious cinders and blocks, or slag like structures born from igneous rock, to dense and broken bombs up to two meters in dimension.
The Company owns equipment which was acquired with the property, and is located on the property: a ball mill used for crushing cinders, truck loading pads, two buildings, large storage tanks, conveyors to load trucks, material silos and screening equipment.
The Pisgah property consists of patented claims we own; no fees have to be paid to the BLM or work performed on the claims to retain title to the property.
From the year 2000 through 2002, the Company ran numerous tests on the volcanic cinders property to determine if the material contains precious metals. Although the program indicated precious metals might exist in material taken from the Pisgah property, overall the program results were inconclusive.
Pisgah Property - Mining Lease
To generate working capital, as of May 1, 1998, we signed a Mining Lease Agreement for the Pisgah property with Twin Mountain Rock Venture, a California general partnership (“Twin Mountain,”). The Agreement is for an initial term of 10 years, with an option to renew for an additional ten-year term. Twin Mountain has the right to take 600,000 tons of volcanic cinders during the initial term, and 600,000 more tons during the additional term, for processing and sale as decorative rock. The material would be removed from the original cinder deposit, not the stockpiled material. Twin Mountain has not removed any material to date.
The agreement provides that Twin Mountain will pay minimum annual rental payments of $22,500 for the initial term and $27,500 per year for the additional term. Twin Mountain is also obligated to pay us a monthly production royalty for all material removed from the premises: The greater of 5% of gross sales f.o.b. Pisgah, or $0.80 per ton for material used for block material; plus 10% of gross sales f.o.b. Pisgah for all other material. Twin Mountain will be credited against these payments for minimum royalty payments previously made.
Twin Mountain is current in payments, which are pledged to service company debt. Twin Mountain has not yet removed any material from the property and has not indicated when it would do so. Twin Mountain does not have the right to remove or extract any precious metals from the property; it does have the right to remove cinder material, which could contain precious metals (and Twin Mountain would have title to the removed cinder material), but it cannot process the materials for precious metals either on or off site.
Mining and reclamation permits, and an air quality permit have been issued by the California regulatory agencies in the names of both Twin Mountain and the Company. We posted a cash bond in the amount of $1,379 (1% of the total bond amount) and Twin Mountain has posted the remainder of the $137,886 bond. If Twin Mountain defaults, we would be responsible for reclamation of the property, but reclamation costs incurred in that event would be paid in whole or part by the bond posted by us and Twin Mountain. Reclamation costs are not presently determinable.
In addition to our historic exploration activities, we are currently under taking alternative revenue producing opportunities at our Pisgah property. On January 23, 2012 we entered into a mineral lease agreement with a partner who will purchase up to 100,000 tons of resources derived from the property to produce commercial products for resale. The agreement is for an initial period of ten (10) years, with an additional five (5) year extension at the option of the lessee. We will receive fees for the removal of minerals at diminishing prices in $0.50 increments between $12 per ton and $10 per ton for each 20,000 tons of material removed.
Pisgah Property - Debt Transactions
We owed a second private lender (First Colony Merchant) a total of $852,767 including accrued interest, on three notes payable secured by a deed of trust and assignment of rents (payments under the Twin Mountain lease) on the Pisgah property, which were cancelled during 2011 in accordance with the statute of limitations. The resulting gain on extinguishment of debt of $852,767 was recognized within the statement of operations during the year ended December 31, 2011. For additional consideration for part of the amounts loaned, the Company granted the lender a five-year option to purchase 300,000 restricted shares of common stock, at the lower of $0.65 per share or 50% of the lowest trading price during the month before exercise, payable in cash. The option was exercised in 2000 at $0.52 per share. In addition, in fiscal year 2000, as further consideration, we issued 45,000 restricted shares of common stock to a corporate affiliate of the lender as a loan placement fee.
Location and Access Pisgah Project - General Location Map
The Pisgah Project is located in San Bernardino County, 72 kilometers (45 miles) east of the city of Barstow, California, and 307 kilometers (192 miles) south-southeast of Las Vegas, Nevada, United States. Barstow lies near the southwest border of California, east of the junction of Interstate 15, Interstate 40 and U.S. Route 66. The Project is centered at Latitude 34o 44’ 47” North, Longitude 116o 22’ 29” West (See Figures 1, 2 and 3), or UTM (metric) co-ordinates 55700 E/384500 N in Zone 11, datum point NAD 27. It lies within the NW ¼ of Section 32, Township 8 North, Range 6 East from San Bernardino Meridian and has an area of 48.4 hectares (120.2 acres).
Access to the Pisgah Project is by the paved 2-lane paved road. From the junction of Interstate 15 and Interstate 40 just east of Barstow, California travel east along Interstate 40 for 52 kilometers (32.5 miles). Take the Hector Rd. Exit and turn right onto Hector Rd. From here turn left onto Historic Route 66 for 7.4 kilometers (4.6 miles), and then turn right (south) onto the Pisgah Crater road. Follow this road for 3.2 kilometers (2.0 miles) to the Pisgah Crater workings.
Pisgah Project
Regional Location Map
Pisgah Project
Township Location Map
Pisgah Project
Topography Map
OWL CANYON - S & S JOINT VENTURE
In 1996, the Company entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with the Schwarz family covering approximately 425 acres of unpatented placer and lode mining claims in the Silurian Hills of California, known as Owl Canyon (the “S&S Joint Venture”). The S & S Joint Venture has since reduced its holdings to 160 acres of lode claims and a five-acre mill site claim. These claims are prospective for precious metals and some base metals. The property is located approximately 23 miles northeast of Baker, California, accessible by 23 miles of paved and dirt road. The Company and the Schwarz family each have a 50% interest in the venture which is operated by a management committee, comprised of G. Michael Hogan, a director of the company, and Ms. Robin Schwarz.
Holding costs are approximately $160 per year for county and BLM filing fees for each of the eight lode claims, in accordance with filings under provisions of the “Small Miner Waiver”. Work must be performed on the property each year to keep title to the claims.
Pursuant to the Joint Venture Agreement, we are funding the venture’s operations. Any income from the venture will first be paid to the Company to repay funds advanced to the venture or spent on its account, with any additional income divided 50% to the Company and 50% to the Schwarz family.
As the acquisition price of its 50% interest in the S & S Joint Venture, in 1996 the Company issued 500,000 restricted shares of common stock to the Schwarz family.
Prior to 2003, the Company conducted extensive preliminary testing and assaying on the Owl Canyon property. Results indicate precious metals are present in material located on the Owl Canyon property, and further exploration is warranted. Upon conclusion of the trenching program conducted by Geochemist, Bruce Ballantyne, the assay results confirmed that the “Papa Hill” section of Owl Canyon should be a designated drill target in the future.
Geology of Owl Canyon
Mineralization on the property migrates along north/south oriented faulting and at the contact point between metamorphic and dolomite rocks. Metalliferous deposits, or deposits filled with fine metal particles, along these fractures are prevalent near the central area of Owl Canyon. Along the southern side of the property, fault contact areas exhibit localized zone alteration from migrating hydrothermal fluids, or areas altered from hot lava and hydrothermal fluids due to volcanic activity, producing a mineralized vein ranging in width from approximately 18 to 36 inches.
We have performed external and in-house fire assays on material from the Owl Canyon property, sending both trench and rock samples to independent laboratories. Approximately 15 tons of material was removed to a depth of 3 to 4 feet to expose a continuation of one of the veins. An independent laboratory analyzed samples from this material.
A detailed structural and geologic mapping survey has been completed on the property, indicating some zones in certain areas are suitable exploration targets. Currently, work on this property has been suspended. This property is without known reserves and future work would be exploratory in nature. There was no significant activity on this property in 2011.
Location Owl Canyon Project - Township Location Map
The Silurian Hills are located in the Silurian Hills 15-minute quadrangle. The property is located in the northeastern corner of the 7.5 minute series topographic map entitled North of Bank Quadrangle California - San Bernardino County in Section 9, Township 16N, Range 9E. It is centered along the topographic feature known as Owl Canyon.
The area lies within the California Desert Conservation Area administered by the Bureau of Land Management. This agency identified the Silurian Hills as having high mineral potential for silver (1980) which led the County of San Bernardino to zone the area for mining and mineral exploration.
Access
From Interstate 15 at Baker, California, access is via California State Highway 127 for a distance of nine miles north of the service center town of Baker. At the Powerline Road junction turn right and travel on a USGS class 3 road generally under the Power Transmission Line for a further 9 miles. At this point turn to the left and head north to the Silurian Hills until metal gates are reached after 5 miles of slow, track-road, travel. This is the eastern boundary of the Owl Canyon Mineral Property.
Topography
Relief at the Owl Canyon Mineral Property area ranges from 650 meters to about 775 meters (elevation 2,000 to 3,000 feet above sea level). Locally, topographic relief is on the order of 1,000 feet in less than one half a mile along the Owl Canyon topographic feature.
CERBAT PROPERTY
On March 12, 1998, we signed a Lease and Purchase Option Agreement covering six patented mining claims in the Cerbat Mountains, Hualapai Mining District, and Mohave County, Arizona. The patented claims cover approximately 120 acres. We paid $10,000 as the initial lease payment and are obligated to pay $1,500 per quarter as minimum advance royalties. The Company has the option to purchase the property for $250,000, less payments already made. In the event of production before purchase, we will pay the lessor a production royalty of 5% of the gross returns received from the sale or other disposition of metals produced. Except for limited testing and evaluation work performed in mid- 2002, no work has been performed on this property since 1999. Access is north 15 miles from Kingman, Arizona on Highway 93, east from the historical market to Mill Ranch, then left three miles to a locked gate.
The country rock is pre-Cambrian granite, gneiss and schist complex. It is intruded by dikes of minette, granite porphyry, diabase, rhyolite, basalt and other rocks, some of which are associated with workable veins and are too greatly serieitized (altered small particles within the material) for determination. The complex is also flanked on the west by masses of the tertiary volcanic rocks, principally rhyolite. The mineralized body contains principally gold, silver and lead. They occur in fissure veins, which generally have a north-easterly trend and a steep north-easterly or south-westerly dip. Those situated north of Cerbat wash are chiefly gold bearing while those to the south principally contain silver and lead. The gangue (material that is considered to have base metals that are not precious or worth recovering for market value) is mainly quartz and the values usually favor the hanging wall. The Company has been informed by the owner that the property contains several mine shafts of up to several hundred feet in depth and tailings piles containing thousands of tons of tailings. The property has not produced since the late 1800’s.
The buildings on the property are practically valueless, owing to being in disuse for so many years.
We conducted (in late June and July 2002) a limited number of preliminary tests and assays on material taken from mine dumps (material left on the property from mining by others many years ago). It was anticipated that this material could be economically processed. However, the dump material tonnage will not support a small-scale operation without being supplemented with additional underground ore. We are considering selling or farming out the property, as there have been expressions of interest in the property from time to time. We have had no significant activity on Cerbat as of the date of this annual report.
Location and Access
The Cerbat Group of claims is located in the Hualapai Mining District about 15 miles north from Kingman which is the nearest railroad and supply point. The state highway from Kingman to Boulder Dam and Las Vegas passes within 4 miles of the property and a good County road connects the highway with the mining site. The County road passes through the Rolling Wave and Red Dog claims making transportation available to the lower workings. An old road connects the New Discovery shaft with the Cerbat workings near the crest of the hill. This group of claims is favorably situated for trucking and transportation purposes.
WIKIEUP PROPERTY
The Wikieup property consists of 2,400 acres or approximately 3.8 square miles of 120 lode claims. The lode claims are accessed via gravel road approximately eight miles just off Highway 93 at the town of Wikieup, Arizona.
Holding costs are approximately $155 per year for county and BLM filing fees, and work must be performed on the property each year to keep title to the claims.
The geology of the area is comprised of Precambrian ganoids and gneiss. Outcrop is extensive on the property and rock units include diorite, gabbro and granitic dikes. The Company has kept the claims in good standing by submission of the required rental fees. During the past nine months, the Company has conducted surface sampling of the rock units on the property for “In House” and independent third party companies’ analytical evaluation and assay tests. We are currently holding the property for further exploration. At the present time the property is without known reserves.
During 2011, we began the process of conducting a comprehensive research and development program to ascertain the potential for any rare earth elements on the Wikieup property with the assistance of an independent geologist working together with students from the University of Nevada Las Vegas’ geology department (UNLV). The study is expected to be completed during 2013.
Location and Access Wikieup Project - General Location Map
The Wikieup Project is located in southern Mohave County, 88 kilometers (55 miles) south of the city of Kingman, Arizona, and 253 kilometers (158 miles) southeast of Las Vegas, Nevada, United States. Wikieup lies on Interstate 93. It occurs at Latitude 34o 44’ 47” North, Longitude 116o 22’ 29” West, the site of Wikieup, and west from there for approximately 19 kilometres (12 miles; Figures 1, 2 and 3). The Project is located 37 kilometers (23 miles) northwest of the mining camp of Bagdad, Arizona and 25 kilometers (16 miles) northwest of the mining camp of Bagdad, Arizona.
Access to the Wikieup Project is by the paved 2-lane Interstate 93 from the village of Wikieup. A few claims straddle the highway at Wikieup, but the main body of mining claims is accessed by heading west from the junction of Interstate 93 at Wikieup onto Chicken Springs Road and following various secondary and tertiary gravel and sand roads. Many of the tertiary roads require a 4-wheeldrive vehicle for access.
Wikieup Project
Regional Location Map
Wikieup Project
District Location Map
Wikieup Project
Geology Map
Item 3.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
The Company is not currently a party to, or otherwise involved in any legal proceedings.
In the ordinary course of business, we are from time to time involved in various pending or threatened legal actions. The litigation process is inherently uncertain and it is possible that the resolution of such matters might have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and/or results of operations. However, in the opinion of our management, matters currently pending or threatened against us are not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.
Item 4.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.
The Company does not currently operate any mines related to its claims. As a result, mine safety disclosures are not applicable.
PART II
Item 5.
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
(a) Market Information
Our Common Stock trades sporadically on the over-the-counter bulletin board market (OTC:QB) under the symbol CCRE. Our common stock has traded infrequently on the OTC:QB, which limits our ability to locate accurate high and low bid prices for each quarter within the last two fiscal years. Therefore, the following table lists the quotations for the high and low bid prices as reported by a Quarterly Trade and Quote Summary Report of the OTC Bulletin Board for the calendar years 2012 and 2011. The quotations from the OTC Bulletin Board reflect inter-dealer prices without retail mark-up, markdown, or commissions and may not represent actual transactions.
(b) Holders of Common Stock
As of March 31, 2013, there were approximately 596 holders of record of our Common Stock and 42,027,060 shares outstanding.
(c) Dividends
In the future we intend to follow a policy of retaining earnings, if any, to finance the growth of the business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The declaration and payment of future dividends on the Common Stock will be the sole discretion of board of directors and will depend on our profitability and financial condition, capital requirements, statutory and contractual restrictions, future prospects and other factors deemed relevant.
(d) Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans
STOCK OPTION PLANS
THE CAN-CAL 2003 QUALIFIED INCENTIVE STOCK OPTION PLAN: The 2003 Qualified Incentive Stock Option Plan was established by the Board of Directors in June 2003 and approved by shareholders in October 2003. A total of 1,500,000 shares of common stock are reserved for issuance under this plan, which will be used to compensate senior executives and mid-level employees in the future. An option on 500,000 shares had been granted to Mr. Ciali under this plan. These options expired unexercised in 2006. An option on 300,000 shares had been granted to Anthony F. Ciali when he was appointed an officer of the company in March 2003. These options expired unexercised in 2006.
An option on 500,000 shares has been granted to Mr. Ronald Sloan with an exercise price of $0.20 in June 2006 under this plan. These options expired unexercised in 2011. An option on 125,000 shares has been granted to Mr. James Dacyszyn with an exercise price of $0.20 in June 2006 under this plan. This option was exercisable upon issuance and expired in June 2008. An option on 125,000 shares has been granted to Mr. John Brian Wolfe with an exercise price of $0.20 in June 2006 under this plan. This option was exercisable upon issuance and expired in June 2008.
THE CAN-CAL 2003 NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION PLAN FOR SENIOR EXECUTIVES, OUTSIDE DIRECTORS, AND CONSULTANTS: The 2003 Non-Qualified Option Plan was established by the Board of Directors in June 2003 and approved by shareholders in October 2003. A total of 1,500,000 shares of common stock are reserved for issuance under this plan. An option on 300,000 shares had been granted to Anthony F. Ciali, a former officer of the Company, when he was appointed an officer of the company in March 2003. These options expired unexercised in 2006. An option on 100,000 shares had been granted to Luis Vega when he signed a consulting agreement with the company in April 2003. Mr. Vega’s options expired unexercised in 2006.
The total number of options issued and outstanding at any time, under both the Qualified and Non-Qualified Stock Option Plans will not exceed 10% of the company’s issued and outstanding common stock, calculated on a pro forma basis.
WARRANTS
For the fiscal years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, we issued a total of 3,078,314 and 5,824,584 warrants, respectively, to purchase shares of registered or unregistered common stock. We also modified a total of 6,377,496 warrants during each of the fiscal years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. We had a total of 15,280,394 warrants outstanding at December 31, 2012.
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
The following sales of equity securities by the Company occurred during the three month period ended December 31, 2012:
None.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
We did not repurchase any of our equity securities during the year ended December 31, 2012.
Item 6.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data.
Not applicable.
Item 7.
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
The following discussion of the business, financial condition and results of operation of the Company should be read in conjunction with the financial statements of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 and the notes to those statements that are included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our discussion includes forward-looking statements based upon current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties, such as our plans, objectives, expectations and intentions. Actual results and the timing of events could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including those set forth under the section titled “Risk Factors.”
Overview
Can-Cal Resources Ltd. is a publicly traded exploration stage company engaged in seeking the acquisition and exploration of metals mineral properties. As part of its growth strategy, the Company will focus its future activities in the USA, with an emphasis on the Pisgah Mountain, California property and the Wikieup, Arizona property.
At December 31, 2012, we had cash on hand of approximately $1,300 available to sustain operations. Accordingly, we are uncertain as to whether the Company may continue as a going concern. While we intend to seek additional investment capital, or possible funding or joint venture arrangements with other mining companies, to finance operations we have no assurance that such investment capital or additional funding and joint venture arrangements will be available to the Company.
We expect in the near term to continue to rely on outside financing activities to finance our operations. We used investment proceeds realized during 2012 and 2011 for (i) completion of work-up of two potential extraction processes to determine which process we will employ to potentially prove up any precious metals, platinum groups elements and/or other base metals on the Pisgah, California property and the Wikieup, Arizona property, if any; (ii) the development of a drill program to potentially prove up any tonnages and precious metals and/or other base metals on the Wikieup, Arizona property, if any; (iii) the continued development a comprehensive research and development program to ascertain the potential for any rare earth elements on the Owl Canyon, California property; (iv) strategic working capital reserve and (v) to finance our operations.
In addition to our historic exploration activities, we are currently under taking alternative revenue producing opportunities at our Pisgah property. On January 23, 2012 we entered into a mineral lease agreement with a partner who will purchase up to 100,000 tons of resources derived from the property to produce commercial products for resale. The agreement is for an initial period of ten (10) years, with an additional five (5) year extension at the option of the lessee. We expect to receive fees for the removal of minerals at diminishing prices in $0.50 increments between $12 per ton and $10 per ton for each 20,000 tons of material removed. As of the date of this report, we have not yet sold any minerals under this agreement.
With reference to the Wikieup Property, Can-Cal has commissioned a Geologist to perform a three-phased project to evaluate the property and its surrounding areas. The use of Satellite Imaging Interpretation software will provide regional, geological mapping. The next phase is to take surface samplings from various areas and have the samples analyzed. The results will determine the potential for any commercially viable mineral deposits as well as prospective drilling locations.
Results of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2012 and 2011:
Revenues:
We are an exploration stage company and had no revenue to recognize in the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. As such, there were no comparative revenues or cost of revenues.
Exploration Costs:
For the year ended December 31, 2012, exploration costs were $51,837 compared to $46,499 for the year ended December 31, 2011, an increase of $5,338, or 11%. The increase in exploration costs for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the year ended December 31, 2011 is due to increased exploration activities at our Owl Canyon and Wikieup locations.
General and Administrative:
General and administrative expenses were $291,571 for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $311,743 for the year ended December 31, 2011, a decrease of $20,172 or approximately 6%. The decrease in general and administrative expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the year ended December 31, 2011 was due to decreased professional fees provided during 2012 as we made improvements in our reporting procedures that enabled us to become more cost effective.
Depreciation:
For the year ended December 31, 2012, depreciation expense was $6,162 compared to $8,230 for the year ended December 31, 2011, a decrease of $2,068, or 25%. The decrease in depreciation expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the year ended December 31, 2011 is due to diminishing depreciation expense as assets have become fully depreciated and have not been replaced.
Officer Salary:
For the year ended December 31, 2012, officer salary expense was $120,000 compared to $120,000 for the year ended December 31, 2011. Officer salary expense for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the year ended December 31, 2011 remained constant as our CEO’s compensation is fixed at $10,000 per month. All salaries payable in 2012 and 2011 were accrued, but not paid, and remain an outstanding obligation of the Company.
Net Operating Loss:
Net operating loss for the year ended December 31, 2012 was $469,570, or ($0.01) per share, compared to a net operating loss of $486,472 for the year ended December 31, 2011, or ($0.01) per share, a decrease of $16,902 or 3%. Net operating loss decreased primarily due to decreased professional fees provided during 2012 as we made improvements in our reporting procedures that enabled us to become more cost effective.
Other Income:
Other income was $3,100 for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $12,400 for the year ended December 31, 2011, a decrease of $9,300, or 75%. Other income decreased due to the diminished collection of restitution proceeds received in settlement of misappropriated funds by our former bookkeeper as the balance due was collected in full during the year.
Interest Expense:
Interest expense was $243,042 for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $118,490 for the year ended December 31, 2011, an increase of $124,552, or 105%, which increased primarily to the extinguishment of debts during the fourth quarter of 2011 and differences in the expenses related to the fair value of warrants extended. Interest expense included $238,419 and $57,626 related to the additional fair value of warrants extended based on estimated valuations using a Black-Scholes valuation model during the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Rental Revenue:
Rental revenue was $27,500 for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $39,000 for the year ended December 31, 2011, a decrease of $11,500, or 29%. The decrease in rental revenue for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to the year ended December 31, 2011 is due to revenues received from special leasing projects in 2011 that were not realized in 2012. Such revenues include, but are not limited to, sub-leasing land for video shoots and television commercials.
Loss on disposal of fixed assets:
Loss on disposal of fixed assets was $-0- for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $23,673 for the year ended December 31, 2011. The loss on disposal of fixed assets in 2011 consisted of the disposal of an ARC Furnace with a historical cost basis of $32,386 and accumulated depreciation of $8,713, resulting in a loss on disposal of $23,673.
Gain on extinguishment of debts:
Gain on extinguishment of debts was $-0- for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to $1,152,039 for the year ended December 31, 2011. The gain on extinguishment of debts in 2011 consisted of a total of $852,767 of principal and accrued interest that was written off during 2011 in accordance with the statute of limitations, along with another $17,268 of accrued interest on a debt that was previously paid in full. We also recognized a gain of $282,004 due to the forgiveness of accrued salaries previously earned by our former CEO, Ron Sloan.
Net Income (Loss):
The net income (loss) for the year ended December 31, 2012 was $(682,012) compared to net income of $574,804 for the year ended December 31, 2011, resulting in a decreased net income (loss) of $1,256,816, or 219%. Net income (loss) decreased primarily due to a gain of $1,152,039 on the extinguishment of debts in 2011 that were not realized during the comparative period in 2012, and the additional expense related to the fair value of warrants extended based on estimated valuations using a Black-Scholes valuation model during the years ended December 31, 2012 compared to 2011.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
The following table summarizes total assets, accumulated deficit, stockholders’ equity (deficit) and working capital at December 31, 2012 compared to December 31, 2011.
At December 31, 2012, we had total assets of $38,312, consisting principally of cash, prepaid expenses and property and equipment. We have implemented financial controls in the business to ensure each expense is warranted and needed. Our cash on hand at December 31, 2012 was $1,316.
Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any off-balance sheet arrangements of any kind.
Contractual Obligations
We have certain fixed contractual obligations and commitments. The table below summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2012 and for the future periods identified. The exploration of our properties, changes in our business needs and other factors may result in our incurring significant future obligations which would impact our cash and liquidity position and requirements. We cannot provide certainty regarding the timing and amounts of payments.
(1) Includes total principal amounts of $31,291 and interest of $1,077.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments, including those related to revenue recognition, allowance for sales returns and doubtful accounts, inventory valuation, business combination purchase price allocations, our review for impairment of long-lived assets, intangible assets and goodwill, income taxes and stock-based compensation expense. Actual results may differ from these judgments and estimates, and they may be adjusted as more information becomes available. Any adjustment may be significant.
An accounting policy is deemed to be critical if it requires an accounting estimate to be made based on assumptions about matters that are highly uncertain at the time the estimate is made, if different estimates reasonably may have been used, or if changes in the estimate that are reasonably likely to occur may materially impact the financial statements. We refer readers to Note 1 to our audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2012 filed with this Annual Report.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
See Note 1 contained in the “Notes to the Financial Statements” for a discussion of new and recently adopted accounting pronouncements.
Item 7A.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.
Not applicable.
Item 8.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
Item 9.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants On Accounting and Financial Disclosure.
None
Item 9A.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.
We maintain “disclosure controls and procedures,” as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. We conducted an evaluation (the “Evaluation”), under the supervision and with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (“Disclosure Controls”) as of the end of the period covered by this report pursuant to Rule 13a-15 of the Exchange Act. Based on this Evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer has concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were not effective because of the identification of a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting which is identified below in Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting, which we view as an integral part of our disclosure controls and procedures.
Changes in Internal Control
We have also evaluated our internal control over financial reporting, and there have been no significant changes in our internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect those controls as of December 31, 2012.
Limitations on the Effectiveness of Controls
Our management, including our CEO and CFO, does not expect that our Disclosure Controls and internal controls will prevent all errors 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 the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of a simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management or board override of the control.
The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions; over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
CEO and CFO Certifications
Appearing immediately following the Signatures section of this report there are Certifications of the CEO and the CFO. The Certifications are required in accordance with Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the Section 302 Certifications). This Item of this report, which you are currently reading is the information concerning the Evaluation referred to in the Section 302 Certifications and this information should be read in conjunction with the Section 302 Certifications for a more complete understanding of the topics presented.
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 Rules 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act.
The management of the Company assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on the criteria for effective internal control over financial reporting established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) and SEC guidance on conducting such assessments. Based on this assessment, management determined that, during the year ended December 31, 2012, our internal controls and procedures were not effective to detect the inappropriate application of US GAAP rules, as more fully described below. This was due to deficiencies in the design or operation of the Company’s internal control that adversely affected the Company’s internal controls and that may be considered to be material weaknesses.
Management identified the following material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting:
1.	The Company has limited segregation of duties, which is not consistent with good internal control procedures.
2.	The Company does not have a written internal control procedurals manual which outlines the duties and reporting requirements of the Directors and any staff to be hired in the future. This lack of a written internal control procedurals manual does not meet the requirements of the SEC or good internal controls.
Management believes that the material weaknesses set forth in items 1 and 2 above did not have an effect on the Company’s financial results.
The Company and its management will endeavor to correct the above noted weaknesses in internal control once it has adequate funds to do so.
Management will continue to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls and procedures and its internal controls over financial reporting on an ongoing basis and are committed to taking further action and implementing additional enhancements or improvements, as necessary and as funds allow.
This annual report does not include an attestation report of the company’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the company’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the company to provide only the management’s report in this annual report.
Item 9B.
Item 9B. Other Information.
On February 27, 2013, following the Company’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, Mr. William J. Hogan resigned from the Board of Directors. Wlliam Hogan’s resignation from the Board did not occur in connection with any disagreement on any matter relating to the Company’s operations, policies or practices, nor regarding the general direction of the Company.
On August 12, 2012, Dr. Michael Giuffre was appointed to the Company’s Board of Directors. Dr. Giuffre MD, MBA is currently “Clinical Professor” of Cardiac Sciences and Pediatrics in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary and a recipient of the “Distinguished Fellow of the American Academy of Cardiology.” Dr Giuffre is also the current President of the Alberta Medical Association. He currently sits on the board of FoodChek Systems, a private Life Sciences company in Calgary, Canada owned by another former member of the Company’s Board of Directors, William Hogan; DiaMedica, a biotechnology company currently traded on the TSX; and UNICEF Canada. Dr. Giuffre is a past Board member of MedMira, a public biotechnology company in rapid HIV and hepatitis diagnostics, and is a past consultant for Redsky Inc. that was sold to Research In Motion (“RIM”). Dr. Giuffre subsequently resigned on March 1, 2013.
On April 17, 2012 the Company appointed Ron Schinnour to the Board of Directors. Mr. Schinnour has held countless executive, leadership and management roles in the agricultural industry, both domestically and globally. This has included positions with Monsanto, United Agri Products and Agrium (Cominco). He recently moved back to Calgary and joined the UFA, holding the position of Executive VP of Agri Business. Mr. Schinnour’s expertise in Strategic Planning, Financial Management, International Business and M&A Leadership has been instrumental for the business success and growth of his current and previous companies. Mr. Schinnour holds an MBA from Washington University with special recognition for Excellence in Team Process, Strategic Planning and Finance. He also holds a CMA Designation from the University of Calgary/Society of Management Accountants. Mr. Schinnour currently serves on the Board of Directors of FoodChek Systems Inc., a private Life Sciences company in Calgary, Canada owned by another former member of the Company’s Board of Directors, William Hogan, and Universal Co-op Ltd. (Minneapolis). He has previously served as the Chairman and Director for RAPID & AEC, and on the Board of Directors for the Latin America Agricultural Development Bank, AgroBio & the Agricultural Future of America. He has been President, Treasurer and Director of numerous corporate entities at Monsanto and UAP.
PART III
Item 10.
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.
Officers and directors of the Company are listed below. Directors are elected to hold offices until the next annual meeting of shareholders and until their successors are elected or appointed and qualified. Officers are appointed by the board of directors until a successor is elected and qualified or until resignation, removal or death.
G. MICHAEL HOGAN. Mr. G. Michael Hogan spent the majority of his career in various senior management positions at Texaco Canada Ltd and Imperial Oil Ltd. He began his career as an Industrial/Lubrication Engineer for Texaco Canada. Shortly thereafter, he was promoted to District Supervisor making him the youngest supervisor in the company. After graduating with a degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Toronto, Ontario and an MBA in Finance from the University of Western Ontario in 1971, he returned to Texaco as the Assistant Manager in Strategic Planning at the corporate office of Texaco Canada. After several promotions, he was appointed Manager of Budgets and Long Range Strategic Planning, where he managed the team that computerized the budget and planning process. Prior to the merger with Imperial Oil, he served on the Corporate M&A team for two years. After the merger with Imperial Oil, he served as the Manager of Retail Pricing.
Mr. Hogan joined Equion Securities in 1991, as a Financial Advisor (FA) serving high net worth individual investors. After joining Equion, the company merged with Loring Ward and the combined company changed its name to Assante Corp. Assante then grew by purchasing fifteen (15) Independent Financial Advisory firms. Subsequently, Assante was purchased by CI Financial, during the second half of 2003, for approximately $900 million.
Mr. Hogan sold his prosperous FA practice in 2004, and went into semi-retirement and ultimately into full retirement in 2007. Mr. G. Michael Hogan has a degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Toronto, Ontario and an MBA in Finance from the University of Western Ontario.
WILLIAM J. HOGAN. Mr. Hogan specializes in business development and has a track record of adding shareholder value to his endeavors in both the public and private sectors, with over 33 years of experience in the areas of development, operations, fund raising and strategic planning for startup and growth level companies. Mr. Hogan currently holds the position of Vice Chairman, Founder of Vacci-Test Corporation, a Calgary, Alberta developing food safety pathogen testing company. Mr. Hogan resigned from the Board of Directors on February 27, 2013, following the Company’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2012.
DR. MICHAEL GIUFFRE. Dr. Giuffre MD, MBA is currently “Clinical Professor” of Cardiac Sciences and Pediatrics in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary and a recipient of the “Distinguished Fellow of the American Academy of Cardiology.” Dr Giuffre is also the current President of the Alberta Medical Association. He currently sits on the board of FoodChek Systems, a private Life Sciences company in Calgary, Canada owned by another former member of the Company’s Board of Directors, William Hogan; DiaMedica, a biotechnology company currently traded on the TSX; and UNICEF Canada. Dr. Giuffre is a past Board member of MedMira, a public biotechnology company in rapid HIV and hepatitis diagnostics, and is a past consultant for Redsky Inc. that was sold to Research In Motion (“RIM”).
RON SCHINNOUR. Mr. Schinnour has held countless executive, leadership and management roles in the agricultural industry, both domestically and globally. This has included positions with Monsanto, United Agri Products and Agrium (Cominco). He recently moved back to Calgary and joined the UFA, holding the position of Executive VP of Agri Business. Mr. Schinnour’s expertise in Strategic Planning, Financial Management, International Business and M&A Leadership has been instrumental for the business success and growth of his current and previous companies. Mr. Schinnour holds an MBA from Washington University with special recognition for Excellence in Team Process, Strategic Planning and Finance. He also holds a CMA Designation from the University of Calgary/Society of Management Accountants. Mr. Schinnour currently serves on the Board of Directors of FoodChek Systems Inc., a private Life Sciences company in Calgary, Canada owned by another former member of the Company’s Board of Directors, William Hogan, and Universal Co-op Ltd. (Minneapolis). He has previously served as the Chairman and Director for RAPID & AEC, and on the Board of Directors for the Latin America Agricultural Development Bank, AgroBio & the Agricultural Future of America. He has been President, Treasurer and Director of numerous corporate entities at Monsanto and UAP.
DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, we had five directors. Our chairman of the board of directors, William J. Hogan, received annual compensation in the amount of $60,000 to be paid in a combination of cash and restricted shares of the Company’s common stock, as funds are available. The board can approve to award the compensation in a combination of cash or common stock as agreed upon to be computed utilizing the trading price of the Company’s common stock as quoted on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) on the last trading day of each month. In the past, the Company has not compensated outside (non-employee) directors for service but has reimbursed them for travel costs to attend Board meetings. In the future, the Board of Directors may issue non-qualified options to non-executive directors. The terms of such options to be granted have not yet been established.
Our other director, Mr. G. Michael Hogan, who also serves as CEO and President, receives compensation for his services as CEO and President in the amount of $120,000 annually. The board can approve to award the compensation in a combination of cash or common stock as agreed upon to be computed utilizing the trading price of the Company’s common stock as quoted on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) on the last trading day of each month.
William J. Hogan’s and G. Michael Hogan’s salaries for 2012 and 2011 were accrued, but not paid.
Compensation has not yet been determined for our other three Directors.
(b) Identification of Certain Significant Employees and Consultants
None.
(c) Family Relationships.
Not applicable.
(d) Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings.
During the past five years, no director, person nominated to become a director, or executive officer of the Company:
(1) has filed or had filed against him, a petition under the federal bankruptcy law or any state insolvency law, nor has any court appointed a receiver, fiscal agent or similar officer by or against any business of which such person was a general partner, or any corporation or business association of which he was an executive officer within two years before the time of such filing;
(2) was convicted in a criminal proceeding or is the named subject of a pending criminal proceeding (excluding traffic violations and other minor offenses);
(3) was the subject of any order, judgment, or decree, not subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated, of any court of competent jurisdiction, permanently or temporarily enjoining, barring or suspending him from, or otherwise limiting his involvement in, any type of business, securities or banking activities, or
(4) was found by a court of competent jurisdiction in a civil action or by the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to have violated any federal or state securities or commodities law, and the judgment in such civil action or finding by the Commission has not been subsequently reversed, suspended or vacated.
SECTION 16(A) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCE
Based upon a review of Forms 3 and 4 furnished to the company pursuant to Rule 16a-3(a) and written representations referred to in Item 405(b) (2)(i) of Regulation S-K, no directors, officers, beneficial owners of more than 10% of the company’s common stock, or any other person subject to Section 16 of the Exchange Act failed for the period from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012 to file on a timely basis the reports required by Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act.
CODE OF ETHICS
The Company has adopted a Code of Ethics. A copy of the Code of Ethics will be provided to any person, without charge, upon written request addressed to G. Michael Hogan, President/Chief Executive Officer, 8205 Aqua Spray Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada 89128.
Item 11.
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
The following table sets forth summary compensation information for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 for our chief executive officers and directors.
(1)Accrued, but not paid.
(2)Compensation has not yet been determined.
Grants of Plan-Based Awards in Fiscal 2012
We did not grant any plan-based awards to our named executive officer during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012.
Outstanding Equity Awards at 2012 Fiscal Year-End
There were no unexercised stock options, stock that has not vested, and equity incentive plan awards held by our executive officers at December 31, 2012.
Option Exercises for 2012
There were no options issued or exercised by our executive officers during fiscal 2012.
Item 12.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
The following table presents information, to the best of Can-Cal’s knowledge, about the ownership of Can-Cal’s common stock on March 31, 2013 relating to those persons known to beneficially own more than 5% of Can-Cal’s capital stock and by Can-Cal’s directors and executive officers. The percentage of beneficial ownership for the following table is based on 42,027,060 shares of common stock outstanding as of March 31, 2013.
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and does not necessarily indicate beneficial ownership for any other purpose. Under these rules, beneficial ownership includes those shares of common stock over which the shareholder has sole or shared voting or investment power. It also includes shares of common stock that the shareholder has a right to acquire within 60 days after March 31, 2013 pursuant to options, warrants, conversion privileges or other right. The percentage ownership of the outstanding common stock, however, is based on the assumption, expressly required by the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, that only the person or entity whose ownership is being reported has converted options or warrants into shares of Can-Cal’s common stock.
(1)As used in this table, “beneficial ownership” means the sole or shared power to vote, or to direct the voting of, a security, or the sole or shared investment power with respect to a security (i.e., the power to dispose of, or to direct the disposition of, a security).
(2)Figures are rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent.
(3)The address of each person is care of Can-Cal: 8205 Aqua Spray Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada 89128.
(4)Includes warrants to purchase an additional 2,439,920 shares.
(5)Includes warrants to purchase an additional 1,321,312 shares.
(6)Includes warrants to purchase an additional 1,284,491 shares.
(7)Includes warrants to purchase an additional 416,666 shares.
(8)Includes warrants to purchase an additional 416,650 shares.
(9)Includes warrants to purchase an additional 1,000,000 shares.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2012 regarding outstanding options granted under the plan, warrants issued to consultants and options reserved for future grant under the plan.
Total shares underlying unexercised options cannot exceed 10% of the Company’s total issued and outstanding shares of common stock, calculated on a pro forma basis.
Item 13.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.
On November 30, 2012, the Company sold a promissory note to FutureWorth Capital Corp., a consulting firm owned by our former Chairman of the Board of Directors. The note is unsecured, bears interest at 10% and matures on November 29, 2013. In connection with the promissory note, the Company granted warrants to purchase 20,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.10. The warrants expire on November 29, 2014.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended 348,320 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued to the Company’s former CEO, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $13,022 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended 2,439,920 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued to the Company’s CEO, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $91,215 and was recognized as interest during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended a total of 1,301,312 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued to the one of the Company’s directors, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $48,649 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended a total of 2,287,944 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued amongst a total of five former investors, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $85,533 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
Item 14.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
(5)(i) The Board of Directors has not established an audit committee. However, the Board of Directors, as a group, carries out the responsibilities, which an audit committee would have. In this respect the Board of Directors has the responsibility of reviewing our financial statements, exercising general oversight of the integrity and reliability of our accounting and financial reporting practices, and monitoring the effectiveness of our internal control systems. The Board of Directors also recommends selection of the auditing firm and exercises general oversight of the activities of our independent auditors, principal financial and accounting officers and employees and related matters.
The Board of Directors delegates to management of Mr. G. Michael Hogan and the Board of Directors, the terms of engagement, before we engage independent auditor for audit and non-audit services, except as to engagements for services outside the scope of the original terms, in which instances the services have been provided pursuant to pre-approval policies and procedures, established by management. These pre-approval policies and procedures are detailed as to the category of service and the Board of Directors is kept informed of each service provided.
(7) L.L. Bradford & Company was retained as our auditing firm by the Board of Directors for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. L.L. Bradford & Company billed us as follows for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively:
(a) Includes fees for audit of the annual financial statements and review of quarterly financial information filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
(b) For assurance and related services that were reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of the financial statements, which are not included in the Audit Fees category. The Company had no Audit-Related Fees for the periods ended December 31, 2012, and 2011, respectively.
(c) For tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning services, relating to any and all federal and state tax returns as necessary for the periods ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
(d) For services in respect of any and all other reports as required by the SEC and other governing agencies.
PART IV
Item 15.
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.
The following information required under this item is filed as part of this report:
(a) 1. Financial Statements
(b) 2. Financial Statement Schedules
None.
(c) 3. Exhibit Index
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
By: /s/ G. Michael Hogan	
G. Michael Hogan, President and Chief Executive Officer
Date: April 16, 2013
POWER OF ATTORNEY
Each of the undersigned members of the Board of Directors of Can-Cal Resources Ltd., whose signature appears below hereby constitutes and appoints G. Michael Hogan, such person’s true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent with full power of substitution and resubstitution for such person and in such name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign the Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Annual Report”) of Can-Cal Resources Ltd. and any or all amendments to such Annual Report, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as such person might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agent, or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been signed by the following persons in the capacities indicated on the dates indicated.
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and
Stockholders of Can-Cal Resources Ltd.
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Can-Cal Resources Ltd. as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the related statements of operations, stockholders' deficit and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2012, and the period from inception (March 22, 1995) to December 31, 2012. Can-Cal Resources Ltd.’s management is responsible for these financial statements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Can-Cal Resources Ltd. as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2012, and the period from inception (March 22, 1995) to December 31, 2012 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial statement, the Company suffered net losses from operations and has a net capital deficiency, which raises substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans regarding those matters are also described in Note 2. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.
/s/ L. L. Bradford & Company, LLC
Las Vegas, Nevada
April 16, 2013
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(AN EXPLORATION STAGE COMPANY)
BALANCE SHEETS
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(AN EXPLORATION STAGE COMPANY)
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(AN EXPLORATION STAGE COMPANY)
STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(AN EXPLORATION STAGE COMPANY)
STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)
(continued)
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(AN EXPLORATION STAGE COMPANY)
STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY (DEFICIT)
(continued)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(AN EXPLORATION STAGE COMPANY)
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 1 - Nature of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Nature of Business
Can-Cal Resources Ltd. (“Can-Cal” or the “Company”) is a Nevada corporation incorporated on March 22, 1995.
The Company is an exploration company engaged in the exploration for precious metals, specifically focused on gold exploration projects. We have examined various prospective mineral properties for precious metals and acquired those deemed promising. We currently own, lease or have mining interest in four mineral properties in the southwestern United States (California and Arizona, as follows: Wikieup, Arizona; Cerbat, Arizona; Owl Canyon, California; and Pisgah, California).
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
These financial statements and related notes are presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The Company’s fiscal year-end is December 31.
The Company’s functional and reporting currency is the United States dollar (USD). Monetary assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated in accordance with ASC 820, using the exchange rate prevailing at the balance sheet date. Gains and losses arising on settlement of foreign currency denominated transactions or balances are included in the determination of income. Foreign currency transactions are primarily undertaken in the Canadian dollar (CDN). The Company has not, to the date of these financial statements, entered into derivative instruments to offset the impact of foreign currency fluctuations.
Certain amounts in the prior periods presented have been reclassified to conform to the current period financial statement presentation.
Exploration Stage Company
The Company is currently an exploration stage company. As an exploration stage enterprise, the Company discloses the deficit accumulated during the exploration stage and the cumulative statements of operations and cash flows from inception to the current balance sheet date. The Company has incurred net losses of $10,362,791 and used net cash in operations of $7,102,909 for the period from inception (March 22, 1995) through December 31, 2012. An entity remains in the exploration stage until such time as proven or probable reserves have been established for its deposits. Upon the location of commercially mineable reserves, the Company plans to prepare for mineral extraction and enter the development stage. To date, the exploration stage of the Company’s operations consists of contracting with geologists who sample and assess the mining viability of the Company’s claims.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash equivalents include money market accounts which have maturities of three months or less. For the purpose of the statements of cash flows, all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less are considered to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents are stated at cost plus accrued interest, which approximates market value.
Long-Lived Assets
Fixed assets are recorded at the lower of cost or estimated net recoverable amount, and is depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the related asset as follows:
Machinery and equipment	10 years
Transportation equipment	5 years
Furniture and fixtures	7 years
Maintenance and repairs will be charged to expense as incurred. Significant renewals and betterments will be capitalized. At the time of retirement or other disposition of equipment, the cost and accumulated depreciation will be removed from the accounts and the resulting gain or loss, if any, will be reflected in operations.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The Company will assess the recoverability of equipment by determining whether the depreciation and amortization of these assets over their remaining life can be recovered through projected undiscounted future cash flows. The amount of equipment impairment, if any, will be measured based on fair value and is charged to operations in the period in which such impairment is determined by management.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
Under FASB ASC 820-10-05, the Financial Accounting Standards Board establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. This Statement reaffirms that fair value is the relevant measurement attribute. The adoption of this standard did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial statements as reflected herein. The carrying amounts of cash, accounts payable and accrued expenses reported on the balance sheets are estimated by management to approximate fair value primarily due to the short term nature of the instruments. The Company had no items that required fair value measurement on a recurring basis.
Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share
The basic net loss per common share is computed by dividing the net loss by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding. Diluted net loss per common share is computed by dividing the net loss adjusted on an “as if converted” basis, by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding plus potential dilutive securities. For 2012 and 2011, potential dilutive securities had an anti-dilutive effect and were not included in the calculation of diluted net loss per common share.
Stock-Based Compensation
The Company has adopted FASB guidance on stock based compensation. Under FASB ASC 718-10-30-2, all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Pro forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. Stock and stock options issued for services and compensation totaled $239,510 and $69,464 for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, based on the fair value of the common stock at the grant date.
Modification of Warrants
The Company extended a total of 6,417,496 warrants on September 30, 2012, which were originally granted on June 30, 2009 as part of debt financing arrangements. A modification of the terms or conditions of an equity award is treated as an exchange of the original award for a new award. The incremental (additional) cost is computed as any excess of the fair value of the modified award over the fair value of the original award immediately before modification. As a result, a total of $238,419 has been expensed as finance charges during the year ended December 31, 2012.
Income Taxes
The Company recognizes deferred tax assets and liabilities based on differences between the financial reporting and tax basis of assets and liabilities using the enacted tax rates and laws that are expected to be in effect when the differences are expected to be recovered. The Company provides a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets for which it does not consider realization of such assets to be more likely than not.
Uncertain Tax Positions
In accordance with ASC 740, “Income Taxes” (“ASC 740”), the Company recognizes the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be capable of withstanding examination by the taxing authorities based on the technical merits of the position. These standards prescribe 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. These standards also provide guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition.
Various taxing authorities periodically audit the Company’s income tax returns. These audits include questions regarding the Company’s tax filing positions, including the timing and amount of deductions and the allocation of income to various tax jurisdictions. In evaluating the exposures connected with these various tax filing positions, including state and local taxes, the Company records allowances for probable exposures. A number of years may elapse before a particular matter, for which an allowance has been established, is audited and fully resolved. The Company has not yet undergone an examination by any taxing authorities.
The assessment of the Company’s tax position relies on the judgment of management to estimate the exposures associated with the Company’s various filing positions.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Mineral Claim Payments and Exploration Expenditures
The Company is primarily engaged in the acquisition and exploration of mining properties. Mineral property exploration costs are expensed as incurred. Mineral property acquisition costs are initially capitalized when incurred. We assess the carrying cost for impairment under the FASB ASC topic 360 at each fiscal quarter end. When it has been determined that a mineral property can be economically developed as a result of establishing proven and probable reserves, the costs subsequently incurred to develop such property are capitalized. Such costs will be amortized using the units-of-production method over the established life of the proven and probable reserves. If mineral properties are subsequently abandoned or impaired, any capitalized costs will be charged to operations.
Capitalized Mineral Costs
Mineral rights are recorded at cost of acquisition. When there is little likelihood of a mineral right being exploited; the value of mineral rights have diminished below cost, or the economic feasibility of extraction is limited, a write-down is affected against income in the period that such determination is made. The Company did not record any write downs during the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011. Non-mining assets are recorded at cost of acquisition. These assets include the assets of the mining operation not included in the previous categories and all the assets of the non-mining operations. Mining assets, including mine development and infrastructure costs and mine plant facilities, are recorded at cost of acquisition. Expenditure incurred to evaluate and develop new ore bodies, to define mineralization in existing ore bodies, to establish or expand productive capacity, is capitalized until commercial levels of production are achieved, at which time the costs will be amortized.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In February 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2013-02, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, to improve the transparency of reporting these reclassifications. Other comprehensive income includes gains and losses that are initially excluded from net income for an accounting period. Those gains and losses are later reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income into net income. The amendments in the ASU do not change the current requirements for reporting net income or other comprehensive income in financial statements. All of the information that this ASU requires already is required to be disclosed elsewhere in the financial statements under U.S. GAAP. The new amendments will require an organization to:
-Present (either on the face of the statement where net income is presented or in the notes) the effects on the line items of net income of significant amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income - but only if the item reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified to net income in its entirety in the same reporting period; and
-Cross-reference to other disclosures currently required under U.S. GAAP for other reclassification items (that are not required under U.S. GAAP) to be reclassified directly to net income in their entirety in the same reporting period. This would be the case when a portion of the amount reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income is initially transferred to a balance sheet account (e.g., inventory for pension-related amounts) instead of directly to income or expense.
The amendments apply to all public and private companies that report items of other comprehensive income. Public companies are required to comply with these amendments for all reporting periods (interim and annual). The amendments are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2012, for public companies. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of ASU No. 2013-02 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In January 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-01, Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Clarifying the Scope of Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities, which clarifies which instruments and transactions are subject to the offsetting disclosure requirements originally established by ASU 2011-11. The new ASU addresses preparer concerns that the scope of the disclosure requirements under ASU 2011-11 was overly broad and imposed unintended costs that were not commensurate with estimated benefits to financial statement users. In choosing to narrow the scope of the offsetting disclosures, the Board determined that it could make them more operable and cost effective for preparers while still giving financial statement users sufficient information to analyze the most significant presentation differences between financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP and those prepared under IFRSs. Like ASU 2011-11, the amendments in this update will be effective for fiscal periods beginning on, or after January 1, 2013. The adoption of ASU 2013-01 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In October 2012, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update ASU 2012-04, “Technical Corrections and Improvements” in Accounting Standards Update No. 2012-04. The amendments in this update cover a wide range of Topics in the Accounting Standards Codification. These amendments include technical corrections and improvements to the Accounting Standards Codification and conforming amendments related to fair value measurements. The amendments in this update will be effective for fiscal periods beginning after December 15, 2012. The adoption of ASU 2012-04 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
In August 2012, the FASB issued ASU 2012-03, “Technical Amendments and Corrections to SEC Sections: Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 114, Technical Amendments Pursuant to SEC Release No. 33-9250, and Corrections Related to FASB Accounting Standards Update 2010-22 (SEC Update)” in Accounting Standards Update No. 2012-03. This update amends various SEC paragraphs pursuant to the issuance of SAB No. 114. The adoption of ASU 2012-03 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In July 2012, the FASB issued ASU 2012-02, “Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment” in Accounting Standards Update No. 2012-02. This update amends ASU 2011-08, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment and permits an entity first to assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that an indefinite-lived intangible asset is impaired as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the quantitative impairment test in accordance with Subtopic 350-30, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other - General Intangibles Other than Goodwill. The amendments are effective for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. Early adoption is permitted, including for annual and interim impairment tests performed as of a date before July 27, 2012, if a public entity’s financial statements for the most recent annual or interim period have not yet been issued or, for nonpublic entities, have not yet been made available for issuance. The adoption of ASU 2012-02 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-12, “Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05. This update defers the requirement to present items that are reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to net income in both the statement of income where net income is presented and the statement where other comprehensive income is presented. The adoption of ASU 2011-12 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11 “Balance Sheet: Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities” (“ASU 2011-11”). This Update requires an entity to disclose information about offsetting and related arrangements to enable users of its financial statements to understand the effect of those arrangements on its financial position. The objective of this disclosure is to facilitate comparison between those entities that prepare their financial statements on the basis of U.S. GAAP and those entities that prepare their financial statements on the basis of IFRS. The amended guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. The Company is currently evaluating the impact, if any, that the adoption of this pronouncement may have on its results of operations or financial position.
Note 2 - Going Concern
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming the Company will continue as a going concern. As shown in the accompanying financial statements, the Company had a net loss of $682,012 for the year ended December 31, 2012, has used net cash in operating activities of $7,102,909 from inception and had a working capital deficit of $611,286 at December 31, 2012. The future of the Company is dependent upon its ability to obtain financing and upon future profitable operations from the development of its new business opportunities. Management has plans to seek additional capital through private placements and public offerings of its common stock. The financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded assets, or the amounts of and classification of liabilities that might be necessary in the event the Company cannot continue in existence.
The ability of the Company to continue as a going concern is dependent on securing additional sources of capital and the success of the Company’s plan. The financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary if the Company is unable to continue as a going concern.
Note 3 - Related Party
Management Changes
On March 1, 2013, Dr. Michael Giuffre resigned from the Board of Directors.
On February 27, 2013, Mr. William J. Hogan resigned from the Board of Directors.
On August 12, 2012, Dr. Michael Giuffre was appointed to the Company’s Board of Directors. Compensation has not yet been determined.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
On April 17, 2012 the Company appointed Ron Schinnour to the Board of Directors. Mr. Schinnour currently serves on the Board of Directors of FoodChek Systems Inc., a Company owned by another former member of the Company’s Board of Directors, William Hogan. Compensation has not yet been determined.
On January 30, 2012, the Company appointed Mr. Thompson MacDonald to the Board of Directors. Compensation has not yet been determined.
Notes Payable, Related Parties
From time to time we have received and repaid loans from Officers and Directors to fund operations. These related debts are fully disclosed in Note 6 below.
Compensation
On July 1, 2010, the Company entered into a twelve month employment agreement, subject to automatic monthly renewals, with the Company’s CEO, G. Michael Hogan. The terms of the agreement include a fixed annual salary of $120,000. The Company may elect to satisfy payment in shares of common stock in lieu of cash at a market value equal to $0.10 above the average closing trading price of the common stock for the preceding five (5) days from the date of such election. No payments have been made in cash or stock to date.
We owed accrued salaries to our CEO of $360,000 and $240,000 at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
On June 30, 2010, the Company entered into a consulting agreement, with a Board of Director’s consulting firm, Futureworth Capital Corp. The terms of the agreement include annual compensation of $60,000, payable monthly. The Company may elect to satisfy payment in shares of common stock in lieu of cash at a market value equal to $0.10 above the average closing trading price of the common stock for the preceding five (5) days from the date of such election. No payments have been made in cash or stock to date. As of December 31, 2012 we owed Futureworth Capital Corp. $180,000, as included in accounts payable, related parties, for service prior to, and during the service period under the consulting agreement. The consulting agreement was terminated on February 27, 2013 with Mr. William Hogan’s resignation from the Board of Directors.
Share Based Compensation
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended 2,439,920 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued to the Company’s CEO, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $91,215 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended a total of 1,301,312 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued to the one of the Company’s directors, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $48,649 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On April 4, 2012, the Company sold 416,667 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to unit offerings to a member of the Company’s Board of Directors in exchange for proceeds of $25,000. The warrants are exercisable over two years at an exercise price of $0.08 per share. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On June 30, 2011, the Company extended 2,439,920 previously granted common stock warrants issued to the Company’s CEO, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 15 months from their expiration on June 30, 2011. These warrants are fully vested and expire on September 30, 2012. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 180% and a call option value of $0.0090, was $22,047 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2011. These warrants were again extended for an additional 21 months with all other terms remaining consistent with these previously amended terms.
On June 30, 2011, the Company extended a total of 1,301,312 previously granted common stock warrants issued to the one of the Company’s directors, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 15 months from their expiration on June 30, 2011. These warrants are fully vested and expire on September 30, 2012. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 180% and a call option value of $0.0090, was $11,758 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2011. These warrants were again extended for an additional 21 months with all other terms remaining consistent with these previously amended terms.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 4 - Prepaid Expenses
Prepaid expenses consisted of the following as of December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively:
On April 23, 2012 and May 10, 2012, the Company paid $30,000 and $5,000, respectively to the University of Nevada Las Vegas (UNLV) as part of a research project on our Wikieup property to be conducted from May 1, 2012 through September 30, 2013. These fees were paid pursuant to a donation to the UNLV’s Economic Geology Research Program Fund, and will be amortized over the duration of the project on a straight line basis. The project will use both field and laboratory analyses to investigate the surface geology of the property in order to address the following questions:
1. Is there geologic evidence consistent with the presence of a porphyry copper system within the area of Can-Cal's claim block?
2. Is there evidence to support the hypothesis that the property represents the root zone of a porphyry system that has been decapitated and transported into the valley to the east?
Note 5 - Property and Equipment
Property and Equipment consists of the following:
Depreciation expense totaled $6,162 and $8,230 for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
During 2011, we disposed of an Arc Furnace classified as machinery with a cost basis of $32,386 that had accumulated depreciation of 8,713 and was no longer in service. No proceeds were received from the disposals and a $23,673 loss on disposal of fixed assets was recognized in the statement of operations.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 6 - Notes Payable, Related Parties
Notes payable, related parties consisted of the following as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively:
During the year ended December 31, 2011, in connection with the cancellation of obligations with certain debt holders, the Company recognized a gain of $870,035 representing the entire carrying value of the amounts due on four promissory notes that have been extinguished in accordance with the statute of limitations, consisting of total principal of $360,550 and total accrued interest of $509,485 as of December 31, 2011.
The following presents components of interest expense by instrument type for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively:
Note 7 - Unearned Rental Revenues
On May 1, 1998, we entered into an agreement with Twin Mountain Rock Venture (“Twin Mountain”) to lease our property located in San Bernardino County, California for a period of ten years. Further, we will make available to Twin Mountain a minimum of 600,000 tons of finished material during the term of the agreement in exchange for a minimum annual royalty payment in the amount of $22,500. The initial agreement expired on April 30, 2008. Twin Mountain elected to utilize the renewal option for an additional ten-year period with an increased minimum annual royalty of $27,500. As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, we had unearned revenue from this agreement totaling $9,167 and $9,167, respectively.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 8 - Commitments and Contingencies
Mining claims - The Company has a lease and purchase option agreement covering six patented claims in the Cerbat Mountains, Hualapai Mining District and Mohave County Arizona. The Company pays $1,500 per quarter as minimum advance royalties. The Company has the option to purchase the property for $250,000 plus interest at a rate of 8% compounded annually from and after the date of its exercise of the option to purchase the property. If the Lessee exercises its option to purchase, all funds paid to Lessors shall be credited toward the purchase price as of the date the payments were made.
Mining reclamation costs - Mining and reclamation permits, and an air quality permit have been issued by the California regulatory agencies in the names of both Twin Mountain, our joint venture partner, and the Company. The Company posted a cash bond in the amount of $1,379 (1% of the total bond amount) and Twin Mountain has posted the remainder of the $137,886 bond. If Twin Mountain defaults, we would be responsible for reclamation of the property, but reclamation costs incurred in that event would be paid in whole or part by the bond posted by us and Twin Mountain. Reclamation costs are not presently determinable.
Note 9 - Changes in Securities
On August 1, 2012 the Company issued 17,500 shares of its common stock to satisfy the $1,050 of subscriptions payable realized pursuant to common stock granted on March 20, 2012 as commission on the sale of securities.
On July 31, 2012, the Company sold a total of 1,000,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to unit offerings to an individual investor in exchange for proceeds of $100,000. The warrants are exercisable over two years at an exercise price of $0.15 per share. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On April 4, 2012, the Company sold 416,667 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to unit offerings to a member of the Company’s Board of Directors in exchange for proceeds of $25,000. The warrants are exercisable over two years at an exercise price of $0.08 per share. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On April 4, 2012, the Company sold a total of 874,982 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to unit offerings amongst three individual investors in exchange for total proceeds of $52,499. The warrants are exercisable over two years at an exercise price of $0.08 per share. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On March 20, 2012, the Company sold a total of 566,665 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $34,000 received amongst four investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On March 20, 2012, the Company granted a total of 17,500 shares of its common stock as commissions on the sale of securities. The total fair value of the common stock was $1,050 based on the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. The Company elected not to net these commissions against the proceeds received from the sales and recognized the $1,050 of finance costs as interest expense within the statement of operations. The shares were subsequently issued in April of, 2012.
On March 20, 2012 the Company issued 50,000 shares of its common stock to satisfy the $1,500 of subscriptions payable realized pursuant to common stock granted to an employee for services on December 29, 2011.
On February 15, 2012, the Company sold a total of 200,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $12,000 received amongst two investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
On December 29, 2011 the Company granted 50,000 shares of common stock to an employee for services rendered. The fair value of the common stock was $1,500 based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. The shares were authorized, but unissued and recognized as a subscription payable as of December 31, 2011.
On October 24, 2011, the Company issued a total of 218,793 shares of its common stock as commissions on the sale of securities amongst three different sales persons. The total fair value of the common stock was $12,078 based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. The Company elected not to net these commissions against the proceeds received from the sales and recognized the $12,078 of finance costs as interest expense within the statement of operations.
On October 18, 2011, the Company sold a total of 200,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $12,000 from two investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On October 14, 2011, the Company sold a total of 150,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $9,000 from two investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On September 26, 2011, the Company sold a total of 700,000 shares of common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $42,000 from three investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On July 12, 2011, the Company sold 84,000 shares of common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for proceeds $5,040. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On June 29, 2011, the Company sold a total of 1,067,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $64,020 from five investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On June 22, 2011, the Company sold a total of 595,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $35,700 from three investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On June 10, 2011, the Company sold a total of 565,250 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $33,915 from six investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On May 31, 2011, the Company sold a total of 255,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $15,300 from two investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On April 1, 2011, the Company sold a total of 320,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $19,200 from three investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On March 16, 2011, the Company sold a total of 698,334 shares of common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for total proceeds of $41,900 from four investors. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On February 25, 2011, the Company sold 170,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for proceeds of $10,200. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On January 26, 2011, the Company sold 85,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for proceeds of $5,100. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
On January 26, 2011, the Company sold 85,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for proceeds of $5,100. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On January 5, 2011, the Company issued a total of 2,146,666 shares of its par value common stock to satisfy subscriptions payable outstanding as of December 31, 2010 related to debts converted by a total of nine investors in the amount of $128,800.
On January 4, 2011, the Company sold 680,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for proceeds of $40,800. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On January 4, 2011, the Company sold 170,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for proceeds of $10,200. The proceeds received were allocated between the common stock and warrants on a relative fair value basis.
On December 31, 2010, the Company converted $128,800 of previously issued convertible debentures to a total of nine investors in exchange for a total of 2,146,666 shares, at $0.06 per share, and a total of 2,146,666 warrants exercisable at $0.08 per share over a two year term, that were not issued until January 5, 2011. The shares were presented as a subscription payable of $128,800 at December 31, 2010. A total of $3,598 of accrued interest was forgiven by the note holders, as presented in other income. The total estimated value of the warrants granted as an inducement for conversion using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 179% and a call option value of $0.0347, was $74,403, as presented in the income statement as interest expense.
Finders acting in connection with the conversion are entitled to receive aggregate fees of $2,790 and 46,500 shares of common stock. The fair market value of the common stock payable based on the closing stock price at the grant date was $2,790.
On December 31, 2010, the Company cancelled 26,993 previously granted shares to related parties.
On March 17, 2010, the Company received $12,125 in payment on a rescission receivable outstanding at December 31, 2009.
On January 20, 2010, the Company issued 40,000 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering in exchange for proceeds of $5,000. The warrants are exercisable over fifteen months at an exercise price of $0.15 per share.
On January 20, 2010, the Company received $25,000 in payment on a subscription receivable outstanding at December 31, 2009.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company issued 2,926,600 shares of its common stock and an equal number of warrants pursuant to a unit offering whereby each recipient received one share of common stock and one warrant certificate for a unit price of $0.125. The Company recorded proceeds from the offering of $340,825 and a subscription receivable in the amount of $25,000, subsequently paid in January 2010.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company issued a total of 107,000 shares of its restricted common stock to individuals for services rendered to the Company. As of December 31, 2009, the Company recorded an expense of $14,260 representing the fair value of the grant.
On December 31, 2009, the Company authorized the issuance of 9,000 and 6,000 shares of its restricted common stock to a director and officer of the Company, respectively for services performed for the Company. As of December 31, 2009, we recorded an expense of $1,200, representing the fair value of the issuance on the date of grant.
On June 30, 2009, certain note holders elected to convert the principal balance of their notes together with accrued interest into shares of the Company’s common stock at a rate of $0.125 per share. In addition, the Company agreed to issue a warrant to purchase two shares of the Company’s common stock for each share converted. The total principal balance converted was $369,500 and was converted into 2,956,000 common shares. Total accrued interest converted was $29,093 or 232,741 common shares.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
During the year ended December 31, 2008, the Company issued 32,500 shares of common stock and warrants to purchase 32,500 shares common stock for cash totaling $8,124. The warrants are fully vested upon grant, expire in two years and have an exercise price of $0.35 per share.
During the twelve months ended December 31, 2007, we sold 1,238,167 restricted common shares to 72 Canadian residents and 4 US residents for a total of $375,534 and issued warrants to purchase 492,795 restricted common shares, exercisable between $0.35 and $0.65 per share. These securities were issued in private transactions, with respect to the Canadian residents, in reliance on the exemption from registration with the SEC provided by Regulation S, and with respect to the U.S. citizen, in reliance on the exemption available under Section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
On June 29, 2007, the Company also issued 4,000 shares of restricted common stock for services rendered to a U.S. citizen, in reliance on the exemption available under Section 4(2) of the 1933 Act. The shares were valued at a total of $2,000.
On April 30, 2007, the Company also issued 50,000 shares of restricted common stock as part of a settlement agreement with a former officer of the Company for compensation of accrued salaries. The common stock was rendered to a U.S. citizen, in reliance on the exemption available under Section 4(2) of the 1933 Act. The shares were valued at a total of $22,000. In addition to monthly cash payments of $3,500 per month the Company has recorded debt forgiveness of $147,419 in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement. Due to the related party nature of the transaction the gain has been recorded to additional paid in capital, therefore there has been no impact on the Company’s net loss.
During the twelve months ended December 31, 2006, we sold 2,622,213 restricted common shares to 76 Canadian residents, 8 US residents, 5 Israeli Nationals and 1 Swiss National for a total of $688,000, and issued warrants to purchase 2,348,213 restricted common shares, exercisable between $0.25 to $.45 per share. These securities were issued in private transactions, with respect to the Canadian residents, in reliance on the exemption from registration with the SEC provided by Regulation S, and with respect to the U.S. citizen, in reliance on the exemption available under Section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
We also issued, for services, 8,500 restricted common shares for a total value of $2,325 and these securities were issued to one U.S. resident in reliance on the exemption provided by Section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
On August 22, 2006, the Company entered into an agreement to purchase mining claims located in Mohave County, Arizona in exchange for 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s par value common stock. The Company recorded an asset totaling $400,000, the fair value of the underlying shares.
On July 11, 2006, the Company issued 206,767 shares of its par value common stock pursuant to the convertible debenture agreement entered into on January 24, 2006 whereby the Company received a $40,000 convertible at a rate of $0.20 per share bearing interest of 10% per annum. The note holder elected to convert all accrued interest totaling $1,895 into 6,767 shares of the Company’s par value common stock.
On July 3, 2006, the Company issued 2,200 shares of its par value common stock for services received by an individual. As of September 30, 2006, the Company recorded consulting expense in the amount of $462, the fair value of the shares issued on the date of grant. Additionally, the Company granted a warrant to purchase 2,200 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.25 for a period of 2 years. The Company recorded an expense in the amount of $373, the fair value of the warrant on the date of grant. Fair value was determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model based on the following assumptions: expected dividends: $-0-; volatility: 187%; risk free interest rate: 5.12%.
On July 3, 2006, the Company issued 8,800 shares of its par value common stock for services received from an individual. As of September 30, 2006, the Company recorded consulting expense in the amount of $2,200, the fair value of the shares issued on the date of grant. Additionally, the Company granted a warrant to purchase up to 8,800 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.25 for a period of 2 years. The Company recorded an expense in the amount of $1,812, the fair value of the warrant on the date of grant. Fair value was determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model based on the following assumptions: expected dividends: $-0-; volatility: 187%; risk free interest rate: 5.12%.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
On July 3, 2006, an officer of the Company elected to convert half of his accrued salary in exchange for 385,714 shares of common stock valued at $81,000, the fair value of the shares issued on the date of grant. Additionally, the Company granted a warrant to purchase up to 385,714 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.25 for a period of two years. The Company recorded an expense in the amount of $65,418, the fair value of the warrant on the date of grant. Fair value was determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model based on the following assumptions: expected dividends: $-0-; volatility: 187%; risk free interest rate: 5.12%.
On July 3, 2006, the Company issued 56,821 shares of its common stock for conversion of a note in the amount of $11,932 from a shareholder of the Company. Additionally, the Company granted a warrant to purchase up to 56,821 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.25 for a period of two years. The Company recorded an expense in the amount of $9,637, the fair value of the warrant on the date of grant. Fair value was determined using the Black Scholes option pricing model based on the following assumptions: expected dividends: $-0-; volatility: 187%; risk free interest rate: 5.12%.
During the twelve months ended December 31, 2005, we sold 712,500 restricted common shares to 21 Canadian residents for a total of $142,500, and issued warrants to purchase 712,500 restricted common shares, exercisable at $0.25 per share. These securities were issued in private transactions in reliance on the exemption from registration with the SEC provided by Regulation S.
A prior U.S. shareholder exercised other warrants, at exercise prices ranging from $0.22, for proceeds of $11,000, which resulted in the issuance of 50,000 restricted common shares. These securities were issued in private transactions in reliance on the exemption available under Section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
We also issued, for services, 349,545 restricted common shares for a total value of $69,800 valued at fair market value at date of issuance and granted 13,575 warrants (exercisable for two years at $0.25 per share) valued at fair market value at date of issuance. These securities were issued to two Canadian residents, and one Mexican Corporation in reliance on the exemption from registration available under Regulation S, and one U.S. resident, in reliance on the exemption provided by Section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
During 2004, 2,255,586 restricted common shares were issued to one hundred and seven (107) Canadian residents or companies controlled and owned by Canadian resident investors for $431,425 and 10,000 restricted common shares were issued to one U.S. resident investor for $2,000 (245,000 shares were priced at $0.18 per share, 1,620,131 shares were priced at $0.20 per share, 261,200 shares were priced at $0.25 per share, and 139,255 shares were issued as a 25% premium on the conversion of warrants, representing premiums of up to 25% and discounts ranging from 0% to approximately 25% from market prices at the time of issuance). With respect to 1,319,308 of these restricted common shares, the investors were also issued warrants to purchase 1,259,308 additional restricted common shares at $0.25 per share and 60,000 additional restricted common shares at $0.20 per share. With respect to 245,000 restricted common shares, the investors were also issued warrants to purchase 245,000 additional restricted common shares at $0.25, and with respect to another 245,000 restricted common shares, the investors were also issued warrants to purchase 245,000 additional restricted common shares at $0.50 per share. Of these, we also sold 5,000 shares to a director of the Company for proceeds of $1,000 and issued warrants to purchase 5,000 restricted common shares, exercisable at $0.25 per share for a two year period. All warrants will expire two years from the date of issuance. The shares and warrants were sold to Canadian investors pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act, and the shares and warrants sold to U.S. investors were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
During 2004, 702,760 restricted common shares were issued in conversion of $99,657 principal and interest on a debenture held by Dutchess Fund. The conversion prices were $0.216 for 92,593 shares ($20,000 of the debenture); $0.160 for 31,250 shares ($5,000 of the debenture); $0.144 for 34,722 shares ($5,000 of the debenture); $0.128 for 544,195 shares ($69,657 of the debenture). All of the prices were determined by the conversion formula in the debenture (80% of the average bid prices for the three lowest (out of 15) trading days before conversion). These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
During 2004, 215,336 restricted common shares were issued in payment of $40,932 of services by Luis Vega, consulting geologist. The price per share was determined by dividing the amount owed by the average closing price of the Company’s stock for each day’s service. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
During 2004, 15,367 restricted common shares were issued in payment of accounts payable amounting to $3,842. The price per share was based on the average closing share price for the period during which the services were rendered. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act.
During 2004, 87,388 restricted common shares were issued to Terry Brown, a Mexican resident, for technical consulting services amounting to $15,247. The price per share was based on the average closing share price for the period during which the services were rendered. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act.
On December 22, 2004, 2,500 restricted common shares were issued to Karen Barra, a U.S. resident, for services amounting to $500. The price per share was $0.20 based on private placement offering for the period during which the services were rendered. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act.
On March 1, 2004, in connection with the conversion of $82,687 in notes payable and $225,595 in accrued officers’ salary payable, we issued 1,233,127 restricted common shares at $0.25 per share and 1,233,127 warrants, with an exercise price of $0.30 and expiring on March 1, 2006, to two officers, two directors, and a former director and his insurance agency. These persons and the insurance agency are accredited investors.
Between February 10 and March 31, 2004, 75,000 restricted common shares were issued to Jeff Whitford, a Canadian resident, for investor relation services, in the amount of $15,000. In addition, Mr. Whitford received 50,000 warrants at an exercise price of $0.20 per share; the warrants will expire between February 2006 and March 2006. The warrants were valued at $12,200 utilizing the Black Scholes model. These shares were issued pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act.
On February 4, 2004, 10,000 restricted common shares were issued to Yvonne St. Pierre, a Canadian resident, for computer-related services, in the amount of $2,500. These shares were issued pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act.
During 2003, 673,410 restricted common shares were issued to nineteen (19) Canadian residents or companies controlled and owned by Canadian resident investors for $134,682 and 150,000 restricted common shares were issued to 12 U.S. resident investors for $30,000 (all shares were priced at $0.20 per share, representing premiums of up to 25% and discounts ranging from 0% to approximately 25% from market prices at the time of issuance). With respect to 237,410 restricted common shares, the investors were also issued warrants to purchase 474,820 additional restricted common shares and with respect to 473,500 restricted common shares, the investors were also issued warrants to purchase 473,500 additional restricted common shares; all warrants were priced at $0.20 per share and will expire two years from the date of issuance. With respect to 112,500 restricted common shares, the investors were also issued 112,500 warrants to purchase additional restricted common shares, at a price of $0.25 per share for a period of two years from the date of issuance. The shares and warrants were sold to Canadian investors pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act, and the shares and warrants sold to U.S. investors were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
During 2003, 364,305 restricted common shares were issued in conversion of $35,000 principal and interest on a debenture held by Dutchess Fund. The conversion prices were $0.099 for 50,710 shares ($5,000 of the debenture); $0.112 for 44,643 shares ($5,000 of the debenture); $0.061 for 81,433 shares ($5,000 of the debenture); $0.067 for 75,075 shares ($5,000 of the debenture); and $0.1334 for 112,444 shares ($15,000 of the debenture). All of the prices were determined by the conversion formula in the debenture (80% of the average bid prices for the three lowest (out of 15) trading days before conversion. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
During 2003, 205,166 restricted common shares in payment of $31,500 of services by Luis Vega, consulting geologist. The price per share was determined by dividing the amount owed by the average closing price of the Company’s stock for each day’s service. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
On March 14, 2003, 24,960 restricted common shares were issued to Catherine Nichols, a Canadian resident, for marketing services amounting to $5,000. The price per share was based on the average closing share price for the period during which the services were rendered. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act.
During the period from July 15 to December 31, 2003, 112,326 restricted common shares in payment of $22,250 of investor relations services by Jeffrey Whitford, a Canadian resident who is a consultant to the Company. The price per share was based on the average monthly closing share prices for the period. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
33,600 restricted common shares were issued to pay $4,200 of legal services provided by Stephen E. Rounds, outside company counsel. The price per share was based on the average closing share price for the period during which the services were rendered. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by section 4(2) of the 1933 Act.
On December 30, 2003, 5,208 restricted common shares were issued to Terry Brown, a Mexican resident, for technical consulting services amounting to $1,250. The price per share was based on the average closing share price for the period during which the services were rendered. These shares were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act.
In November 2002, the Company issued 52,292 restricted common shares to four individuals in exchange for various services, valued at approximately $9,900.
During October 2002, the Company issued 35,679 shares of the Company’s common stock for $4,600 in cash related to the Dutchess Private Equities Fund, net of offering costs of $700.
During September 2002, the Company issued 32,281 shares of the Company’s common stock for $5,500 in cash related to the Dutchess Private Equities Fund, net of offering costs of $200, and issued 30,000 shares to Joseph B. LaRocco, attorney for Dutchess Fund and DRH Investment Company, LLC for legal services to such entities.
From July 1, 2002 through December 24, 2002, 609,720 restricted common shares were issued to 20 investors (19 whom are Canadian residents or companies controlled and owned by Canadian residents, and one who is a resident of Great Britain) for $152,400 cash ($0.25 per share, representing prices that ranged from 22% over market to approximately 40% below market prices at the time of issuance). The investors also were issued warrants to purchase a total of 609,720 additional restricted shares, at a price of $0.25 per share; the warrants will expire two years from the date of issuance. No commissions were paid.
On June 21, 2002, 40,000 restricted common shares were issued to Financial Communications Corp. for public relations services, valued at approximately $14,000.
From March 1, 2002 through June 3, 2002, 369,600 restricted common shares were issued to 48 investors (all Canadian residents or companies controlled and owned by Canadian residents) for $92,400 cash ($0.25 per share, representing discounts ranging from 0% to approximately 50% from market prices at the time of issuance). These investors also were issued warrants to purchase 369,600 additional restricted shares, at a price of $0.25 per share; the warrants will expire two years from the date of issuance. No commissions were paid.
On February 11, 2002, 10,000 restricted common shares were sold to one investor (a Canadian resident) for $3,500 cash ($0.35 per share, representing a discount of approximately 50% from market price). This investor also was issued warrants to purchase 10,000 additional restricted shares, at a price of $0.35 per share; the warrants will expire February 11, 2004. Complete information about the Company was provided to these investors. These shares and warrants were sold pursuant to the exemption provided by Regulation S of the 1933 Act. No commissions were paid.
On January 31, 2002, we issued 309,677 restricted common shares to a lender (First Colony Merchant) for payment of past due and current interest on debt, $119,800. No commissions were paid.
On January 8, 2002, we sold 36,000 restricted common shares to three investors (one Canadian resident, and two private companies controlled and owned by Canadian residents) for $12,600 cash ($0.35 per share, representing a discount of approximately 50% from market price). These investors also were issued warrants to purchase 36,000 additional restricted shares, at a price of $0.35 per share; the warrants will expire January 8, 2004.
On December 12, 2001 the Board of Directors approved the sale of 40,000 shares of restricted common stock.
On November 2, 2001 the Board of Directors approved the sale of 82,888 shares of restricted common stock.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
During October, 2001 the Company signed an Investment Agreement with two funds (Dutchess Private Equities Fund LP and DRH Investment Company LLC) to sell to those funds up to $8,000,000 in common stock of the Company, for a period of three years. In connection with the Investment Agreement, the Company issued 606,059 shares of restricted common stock to Dutchess Fund and its advisor, and to a broker-dealer firm, for services valued at $400,000, to induce those entities to enter into the Investment Agreement and perform services contemplated under such agreement. The Company also issued 37,000 shares of restricted common stock to the attorney for Dutchess Fund.
In September, 2001, the Board of Directors authorized the sale of 20,000 shares of its common stock to an individual.
On November 24, 2000, the Company borrowed $300,000 from a lender. As part of the transaction, the Company issued 45,000 shares of its common stock as a loan placement fee and granted the lender an option to purchase up to 300,000 shares of its common stock. On November 24, 2000, the lender exercised its option in full and purchased 300,000 shares of Can-Cal’s common stock.
In July 2000 the Board of Directors authorized the sale of 74,009 shares of its common stock to eight persons, all of whom reside outside the United States. During the third quarter 46,670 shares were sold and the remaining 27,339 shares were sold during the fourth quarter. All of those shares were issued on December 15, 2000.
On July 3, 2000, the Board of Directors exercised the option to acquire technology related to the extraction and processing of ore and, in accordance with the agreement with the two owners of that technology, issued 200,000 shares of Can-Cal’s common stock to them.
On February 27, 2000, the Board of Directors approved the sale of 500,000 shares of common stock to three of its directors (all of whom reside in Canada), an offshore trust and another person affiliated with the Company.
On November 9, 1999 the board approved the issuance of 10,000 shares of common stock to an investor.
On September 7, 1999 the Board approved the sale of 20,000 shares of common stock to an investor.
On August 24, 1999 the Board approved the sale of 274,000 shares of common stock to various investors.
On July 21, 1999 the Board approved the sale of 357,500 shares of common stock to various investors.
On April 1, 1999 the Board approved the sale of 1,000 shares of restricted common stock in return for equipment.
On March 17, 1999 the Board approved the issuance of 40,000 shares of Can-Cal common stock in return for equipment.
On March 15, 1999 the Board approved the sale of 86,000 shares of Can-Cal common stock to various investors.
On March 10, 1999 the Board approved the sale of 295,500 shares of Can-Cal common stock to various investors.
On March 1, 1999 the Board approved the issuance of 32,121 shares of Can-Cal common stock in return for services rendered.
On February 8, 1999 the Board approved the sale of 70,000 shares of Can-Cal common stock to a Board member.
On February 1, 1999, the Board of Directors approved the Sale of 62,500 shares of Can-Cal common stock to a Board member.
During December, 1998 the Board approved the sale of 263,059 restricted common shares to various investors.
In October, 1998 the Board approved the sale of 172,450 restricted common shares to various investors.
In July, 1998 the Board approved the issuance 122,000 restricted common shares to various investors.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
During December, 1997 the Board approved the issuance of 42,000 restricted common shares in return for services rendered.
During November, 1997 the Board approved the sale of 124,683 restricted common shares to various investors.
On October 27, 1997 the Board approved the issuance of 2,181,752 restricted common shares to ARUM, LLC to repay an existing debt of $315,046 and to purchase a property located in San Bernadino County, California, known as the Pisgah property.
On February 13, 1997 the Board approved the acquisition of Scotmar Industries, Inc. 200,000 shares of Can-Cal common stock were issued in return for all of the issued and outstanding stock of the acquired company.
On January 15, 1997 the Company issued 500,000 shares of Can-Cal common stock along with a cash payment of $100,000 in exchange for a 50% interest in S&S Joint Venture. Additionally, the Company agreed to loan the joint venture up to $48,000.
During 1996 the Company issued 3,441,217 shares of Can-Cal common stock to various investors resulting in cash proceeds of $628,400.
Note 10 - Options
Option Plan
Options granted for employee and consulting services - The 2003 Non-Qualified Option Plan was established by the Board of Directors in June 2003 and approved by shareholders in October 2003. A total of 1,500,000 shares of common stock are reserved for issuance under this plan.
Options Granted
There were no options issued during the years ended December 31, 2012 through 2007.
On June 7, 2006, the Company granted options to buy 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.20 with a five year term from the date of issuance to the former Directors of the Company.
On June 7, 2006, the Company granted options to buy 250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.20 with a three year term from the date of issuance to an unrelated consultant.
On May 22, 2006, the Company granted options to buy 250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.20 with a three year term from the date of issuance to an unrelated consultant.
On October 1, 2003, the Company granted options to buy 500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $0.16 with a ten year term from the date of issuance to a former employee of the Company.
Options Exercised
On June 19, 2006, a consultant exercised 100,000 options of 250,000 that were originally granted on May 22, 2006 in exchange for $20,000 of proceeds.
Options Cancelled
On June 6, 2011, options to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock, exercisable at $0.20 per share, held by our former CEO expired.
On June 6, 2011, options to purchase 500,000 shares of common stock, exercisable at $0.16 per share, held by a former employee expired due to his previous resignation.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
On June 6, 2009, options to purchase 250,000 shares of common stock, exercisable at $0.20 per share, held by outside consultants expired.
On May 21, 2009, the remaining 150,000 options of the original 250,000 options granted to a consultant on May 22, 2006 expired.
In accordance with ASC 505, “Share-Based Payment”; the Company recognized the fair value of the options in the statement of operations on the date of grant. The following is a summary of information about the stock options outstanding at December 31, 2012.
The fair value of each option grant is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions used for grants under the fixed option plan:
The Black-Scholes option valuation model was developed for use in estimating the fair value of short-term traded options that have no vesting restrictions and are fully transferable. In addition, option valuation models require the input of highly subjective assumptions including expected stock price volatility. Because the Company’s employee stock options have characteristics significantly different from those of traded options and because changes in the subjective input assumptions can materially affect the fair value estimate, in management’s opinion the existing models do not necessarily provide a reliable single measure of the fair value of its employee stock options. During 2012 and 2011, there were no options granted with an exercise price below the fair value of the underlying stock at the grant date.
The following table summarizes the Company’s option activity related to employees and consultants:
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note 11 - Warrants
Warrants Granted
On November 30, 2012, the Company granted 20,000 common stock warrants s to a former member of the Company’s Board of Directors with an exercise price of $0.10 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with a $5,000 loan from the Director. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.10 per share.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended 348,320 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued to the Company’s former CEO, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $13,022 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended 2,439,920 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued to the Company’s CEO, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $91,215 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended a total of 1,301,312 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued to the one of the Company’s directors, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $48,649 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On September 30, 2012, the Company extended a total of 2,287,944 previously granted and extended common stock warrants issued amongst a total of five former investors, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 21 months from their expiration on September 30, 2012. These warrants are fully vested and expire on June 30, 2014. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 216% and a call option value of $0.0374, was $85,533 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2012.
On July 31, 2012, the Company granted 1,000,000 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.15 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 1,000,000 shares of common stock in exchange for proceeds of $100,000. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.15 per share.
On April 4, 2012, the Company granted a total of 874,982 common stock warrants amongst three individual investors with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 874,982 shares of common stock in exchange for total proceeds of $52,499. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.08 per share.
On April 4, 2012, the Company granted 416,667 common stock warrants s to a member of the Company’s Board of Directors with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 874,982 shares of common stock in exchange for total proceeds of $25,000. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.08 per share.
On March 20, 2012, the Company granted 150,000 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 150,000 shares of common stock in exchange for proceeds of $9,000. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.08 per share.
On March 20, 2012, the Company granted 83,333 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 83,333 shares of common stock in exchange for proceeds of $5,000. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.08 per share.
On March 20, 2012, the Company granted 166,666 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 166,666 shares of common stock in exchange for proceeds of $10,000. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.08 per share.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
On March 20, 2012, the Company granted 166,666 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 166,666 shares of common stock in exchange for proceeds of $10,000. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.08 per share.
On February 15, 2012, the Company granted 100,000 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 100,000 shares of common stock in exchange for proceeds of $6,000. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.08 per share.
On February 15, 2012, the Company granted 100,000 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the sale of 100,000 shares of common stock in exchange for proceeds of $6,000. These warrants are exercisable over two years from the date of grant at an exercise price of $0.08 per share.
During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company granted a total of 5,824,584 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.08 per share for its common stock amongst a total of thirty six investors. These stock warrants were granted in connection with financing activities related to the sale of common stock sold at various dates between January 4, 2011 and October 18, 2011. These warrants were exercisable upon issuance and expire two years from the date of grant, consisting of maturity dates between January 4, 2013 and October 18, 2011.
On June 30, 2011, the Company extended 348,320 previously granted common stock warrants issued to the Company’s former CEO, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 15 months from their expiration on June 30, 2011. These warrants are fully vested and expire on September 30, 2012. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 180% and a call option value of $0.0090, was $3,147 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2011. These warrants were again extended for an additional 21 months with all other terms remaining consistent with these previously amended terms.
On June 30, 2011, the Company extended 2,439,920 previously granted common stock warrants issued to the Company’s CEO, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 15 months from their expiration on June 30, 2011. These warrants are fully vested and expire on September 30, 2012. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 180% and a call option value of $0.0090, was $22,047 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2011. These warrants were again extended for an additional 21 months with all other terms remaining consistent with these previously amended terms.
On June 30, 2011, the Company extended a total of 1,301,312 previously granted common stock warrants issued to the one of the Company’s directors, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 15 months from their expiration on June 30, 2011. These warrants are fully vested and expire on September 30, 2012. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 180% and a call option value of $0.0090, was $11,758 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2011. These warrants were again extended for an additional 21 months with all other terms remaining consistent with these previously amended terms.
On June 30, 2011, the Company extended a total of 2,287,944 previously granted common stock warrants issued amongst a total of five former investors, with an exercise price of $0.15 for an additional 15 months from their expiration on June 30, 2011. These warrants are fully vested and expire on September 30, 2012. The total estimated value using the Black-Scholes Pricing Model, based on a volatility rate of 180% and a call option value of $0.0090, was $20,674 and was recognized as interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2011. These warrants were again extended for an additional 21 months with all other terms remaining consistent with these previously amended terms.
On December 31, 2010, the Company granted 2,146,666 common stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.08 per share. These stock warrants were granted in connection with the conversion of $128,800 of previously issued convertible debentures on December 31, 2010 to a total of nine investors in exchange for a total of 2,146,666 shares. These warrants were exercisable upon issuance and expire on December 31, 2012.
On January 22, 2010, the Company granted 40,000 stock warrants with an exercise price of $0.15 per share for its common stock. These stock warrants were granted in connection with financing activities relating to stock sold on January 22, 2010. These warrants were exercisable upon issuance and expired on March 31, 2011.
Warrants Expired
A total of 2,146,666 and -0- warrants expired during the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following is a summary of information about the common stock warrants outstanding at December 31, 2012:
The following is a summary of the common stock warrant activity as of December 31, 2012.
Note 12 - Income Taxes
The Company accounts for income taxes under FASB ASC 740-10, which requires use of the liability method. FASB ASC 740-10-25 provides that deferred tax assets and liabilities are recorded based on the differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their carrying amounts for financial reporting purposes, referred to as temporary differences.
As of December 31, 2012, the Company incurred a net operating loss and, accordingly, no provision for income taxes has been recorded. In addition, no benefit for income taxes has been recorded due to the uncertainty of the realization of any tax assets. The Company had approximately $8,395,720 and $8,076,600 of federal net operating losses at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The net operating loss carry forwards, if not utilized, will begin to expire in 2029.
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. Significant components of the Company’s deferred tax assets are as follows:
CAN-CAL RESOURCES LTD.
(An Exploration Stage Company)
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Based on the available objective evidence, including the Company’s history of its loss, management believes it is more likely than not that the net deferred tax assets will not be fully realizable. Accordingly, the Company provided for a full valuation allowance against its net deferred tax assets at December 31, 2012 and 2011.
A reconciliation between the amounts of income tax benefit determined by applying the applicable U.S. and State statutory income tax rate to pre-tax loss is as follows:
In accordance with FASB ASC 740, the Company has evaluated its tax positions and determined there are no uncertain tax positions.
Note 13 - Gain from Extinguishment of Debt
During the year ended December 31, 2011, in connection with the settlement of obligations involving our former CEO, Ron Sloan, the Company recognized a gain of $282,004 representing the entire carrying value of the amounts due to Mr. Sloan for unpaid accrued salary earned prior to January 1, 2010 which were forgiven by Mr. Sloan on November 19, 2011.
During the year ended December 31, 2011, in connection with the cancellation of obligations with certain debt holders, the Company recognized a gain of $870,035 representing the entire carrying value of the amounts due on four promissory notes that have been extinguished in accordance with the statute of limitations, consisting of total principal of $360,550 and total accrued interest of $509,485 as of December 31, 2011.
The Company evaluated the classification of this gain and determined that the gain does not meet the criteria for classification as an extraordinary item. As a result, the gain has been included as “Gain on extinguishment of debt” under “Other income (expense)” within income from continuing operations in the accompanying Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2011.
Note 14 - Subsequent Events
On March 1, 2013, Dr. Michael Giuffre resigned from the Board of Directors.
On February 27, 2013, Mr. William J. Hogan resigned from the Board of Directors.