UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 10-Q








(Mark One)


þ

QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014





or


o

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





For the transition period from _________ to __________.





Commission File Number 000-29461





SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.





(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)








Florida
90-0473054(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)





14497 N. Dale Mabry Highway, Suite 209-N, Tampa, Florida 33618





(Address of principal executive offices)(Zip code)





(813) 448-3577





Registrant’s telephone number














1





Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.





Yes þ No o





Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).





Yes þ No o





Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):





Large accelerated filer
o

Accelerated filer
oNon-accelerated filer
o

Smaller reporting company
þ(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)





Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).





Yes  o No þ





As of August 14, 2014, there were 905,098,892 shares of the registrant’s common stock, $.0001 par value per share, outstanding.















































2




SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.


Form 10-Q


For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2014





TABLE OF CONTENTS








PART I: FINANCIAL INFORMATION
4Item 1. Financial Statements (unaudited)
5Condensed Balance Sheets: June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013
5Condensed Statements of Operations: For the three months ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 and the period from inception (February 15, 2007) to June 30, 2014
6Condensed Statements of Cash Flows: For the six months ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 and the period from inception (February 15, 2007) to June 30, 2014
7Notes to Condensed Financial Statements
8 - 28Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
29Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
36Item 4T. Controls and Procedures
36PART II: OTHER INFORMATION
38Item 1. Legal Proceedings
38Item 1A. Risk Factors
40Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
40Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
40Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
40Item 5. Other Information
41Item 6. Exhibits
41SIGNATURES
42





























3


Part 1: Financial Information





Statements in this Form 10-Q Quarterly Report may be “forward-looking statements.”  Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements that express our intentions, beliefs, expectations, strategies, predictions or any other statements relating to our future activities or other future events or conditions.  These statements are based on our current expectations, estimates and projections about our business based, in part, on assumptions made by our management.  These assumptions are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict.  Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in the forward-looking statements due to numerous factors, including those risks discussed in this Form 10-Q Quarterly Report, under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in other documents which we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission.





In addition, such statements could be affected by risks and uncertainties related to our financial condition, factors that affect our industry, market and customer acceptance, changes in technology, fluctuations in our quarterly results, our ability to continue and manage our growth, liquidity and other capital resource issues, compliance with government regulations and permits, agreements with third parties to conduct operations, competition, fulfillment of contractual obligations by other parties and general economic conditions.  Any forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made, and we do not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Form 10-Q Quarterly Report, except as required by Federal Securities law.









































4








Item 1. Financial Statements
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS


June 30,


December 31,2014


2013AssetsCurrent assets:Cash

$
76,400


$
578Prepaid expenses


22,297



26,824Advances to shareholder


3,267



3,267Due from shareholder


7,542



-Deposits and other receivables


1,183



1,183Total current assets


110,689



31,852Property and equipment, net


113,247



130,239Investment in common stock


1,100



1,100Total assets

$
225,036


$
163,191Liabilities and Stockholders' DeficitCurrent liabilities:Accounts payable and accrued expense

$
139,444


$
142,583Convertible notes payable, net of discounts of $45,967 and $120,533


49,038



139,457Convertible notes payable, related parties, net of discounts of $11,539 and $26,889


31,966



24,111Convertible notes payable, in default


301,300



191,300Convertible notes payable, in default - related parties


131,000



113,500Convertible notes payable at fair value


451,583



-Notes payable, in default


30,000



30,000Notes payable, in default - related parties


7,500



7,500Total current liabilities


1,141,831



648,451Commitments and contingenciesStockholders' deficit:Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value - 50,000,000 shares authorized; 7 shares issuedand outstanding at June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013


-



-Common stock, $0.0001 par value - 950,000,000 shares authorized; 902,966,497 and844,216,349 shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2014 andDecember 31, 2013, respectively


90,297



84,422Additional paid-in capital


8,059,421



7,453,578Accumulated deficit


(9,066,513
)


(8,023,260
)Total stockholders' deficit


(916,795
)


(485,260
)Total liabilities and stockholders' deficit

$
225,036


$
163,191





5





SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 CONDENSED  STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
 (Unaudited)


February 15,2007(Inception) toThree month ended June 30,


Six month ended June 30,


June 30,2014


2013


2014


2013


2014Revenue

$
-


$
-


$
-


$
-Expenses:Consulting and contractor expenses


164,936



364,579



368,863



652,815



4,769,617Professional fees


45,415



149,702



75,347



184,744



860,273General and administrative expense


10,481



10,275



21,080



30,003



414,992Depreciation expense


8,496



8,496



16,992



16,992



219,174Rent expense


3,265



5,446



9,140



27,064



163,241Vessel expense


22,229



44,308



41,769



82,679



539,404Travel and entertainment expense


32,023



36,646



66,456



52,184



388,872Other operating expenses


-



-



-



-



13,187Total operating expenses


286,845



619,452



599,647



1,046,481



7,368,760Income from operations


(286,845
)


(619,452
)


(599,647
)


(1,046,481
)


(7,368,760
)Other income (expense):Interest expense


(220,667
)


(123,596
)


(443,606
)


(157,306
)


(1,479,317
)Interest income


-



-



-



80,609



243,922Loss on impairment


-



-



-



-



(42,800
)Loss on extinguishment of debt


-



-



-



(38,447
)


(419,560
)Total other income (expense)


(220,667
)


(123,596
)


(443,606
)


(115,144
)


(1,697,515
)Net loss

$
(507,512
)

$
(743,048
)

$
(1,043,253
)

$
(1,161,625
)

$
(9,066,513
)Net loss per share - basic and diluted

$
-


$
-


$
-


$
-Weighted average common shares outstanding - basic and diluted


985,783,228



811,905,248



876,021,813



779,676,653


See notes to condensed financial statements.









6




SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 (Unaudited)
  February 15,2007(Inception) toJune 30,


June 30,


June 30,2014


2013


2014Operating activitiesNet loss

$
(1,043,253
)

$
(1,161,625
)

$
(9,066,513
)Adjustments to reconcile net income tonet cash provided (used) by operating activitiesDepreciation


16,992



16,992



219,174Change in allowance for uncollectible note receivable


-



-



38,867Amortization of deferred financing costs


-



51,437



59,605Interest (income) expense on fair value adjustment


259,542



(4,464
)


724,406Loss on extinguishment of debt


-



-



381,113Write-off of uncollectible deposits


-



-



20,000Accrued interest on note receivable


-



-



(11,705
)Loss on impairment


-



-



42,800Amortization of beneficial conversion featureof the notes payable


187,477



-



365,906Common stock issued for services


141,759



937,037



3,123,154Common stock issued for legal services


7,683



-



130,106Common stock issued for financing fees


-



-



5,000Decrease (increase) in:Prepaid expenses


4,527



(185,862
)


(34,543
)Advances from shareholder


(7,542
)


-



(8,557
)Deposits and other receivables


-



-



(23,346
)Increase (decrease) in:Accounts payable and accrued expenses


(3,139
)


4,223



231,375Net cash provided (used) by operating activities


(435,954
)


(342,262
)


(3,803,158
)Cash flows from investing activities:Principal payments from notes receivable


-



-



(25,000
)Purchase of common stock


-



-



(34,100
)Property and equipment acquisitions


-



-



(325,000
)Net cash provided (used) by investing activities


-



-



(384,100
)Cash flows from financing activities:Proceeds from the issuance of common stock


233,266



193,843



2,559,153Proceeds from the issuance of convertible notes payable


235,005



55,500



1,142,305Proceeds from the issuance of convertible notes payable, related party


43,505



79,000



207,000Proceeds from issuance of notes payable


-



-



476,500Proceeds from issuance of notes payable, related parties


-



-



8,500Payment on convertible notes payable


-



(30,000
)


(76,000
)Payments on notes payable


-



-



(57,500
)Payments on notes payable, related parties


-



-



(1,000
)Proceeds from loans from stockholders


-



-



49,675Payments on loans from stockholders


-



-



(44,975
)Net cash provided by financing activities


511,776



298,343



4,263,658Net increase (decrease) in cash


75,822



(43,919
)


76,400Cash - beginning


578



43,919



-Cash - ending

$
76,400


$
-


$
76,400Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:Cash paid for interest expense

$
-


$
-


$
3,660Cash paid for income taxes

$
-


$
-


$
-Noncash operating and financing activities:Due to Organetix, Inc. reclassified to additional paid-in capital

$
-


$
-


$
91,500Common stock issued in connection with a joint venture

$
-


$
-


$
9,800Common stock issued to satisfy debt

$
7,683


$
-


$
140,870Common stock issued to satisfy minimum value guaranteed

$
-


$
-


$
87,667Convertible debt converted and accrued interest to commonstock

$
61,400






$
1,571,000Common stock issued in exchange for property and equipment

$
-






$
7,420


See notes to condensed financial statements.


7
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





The accompanying condensed financial statements of Seafarer Exploration Corp. (“Seafarer” or the “Company”) are unaudited, but in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) necessary to fairly state the Company’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flows as of and for the dates and periods presented. The financial statements of the Company are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) for interim financial information.





These unaudited condensed financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s audited financial statements and footnotes included in the Company’s Report on Form 10-K for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”). The results of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2014 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the entire year ending December 31, 2014 or for any future period.





NOTE 1 – DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS





Seafarer Exploration Corp. (the “Company”), formerly Organetix, Inc. (“Organetix”), was incorporated on May 28, 2003 in the State of Delaware.





The principal business of the Company is to develop the infrastructure necessary to engage in the archaeologically-sensitive exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks. During 2008, the Company changed its fiscal year end from April 30 to December 31.





The Company is in the development stage and its activities during the development stage include developing a business plan and raising capital.





In June of 2008, the Company merged with Organetix pursuant to a Share Exchange Agreement (the “Exchange Agreement”). The Exchange Agreement provided for the exchange of all of the Company’s common shares for 131,243,235 of Organetix post-merger common shares. Considering that Seafarer Inc.’s former stockholders controlled the majority of Organetix’s outstanding voting common stock, Seafarer Inc.’s management had actual operational control of Organetix and Organetix effectively succeeded its otherwise minimal operations to the Company’s operations.  The Company was considered the accounting acquirer in this reverse-merger transaction. A reverse-merger transaction with a non-operating public shell company is considered and accounted for as a capital transaction in substance; it is equivalent to the issuance of Seafarer Inc.’s common stock for the net monetary assets of Organetix, accompanied by a recapitalization. Accordingly, the accounting does not contemplate the recognition of unrecorded assets of the accounting acquiree, such as goodwill. On the date of the merger, Organetix was a blank-check public shell company and had no assets and no liabilities.  The condensed financial statements presented herein and subsequent to the merger reflect the condensed financial assets and liabilities and operations of Seafarer Inc., at their historical costs, giving effect to the recapitalization, as if it had been Organetix during the periods presented.





In July of 2008, the Company changed its name from Organetix, Inc. to Seafarer Exploration Corp.





NOTE 2 - GOING CONCERN





These condensed financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis which assumes the Company will be able to realize its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business for the foreseeable future. As shown in the accompanying condensed financial statements, the Company has incurred net losses of $9,066,513 since inception. Based on its historical rate of expenditures, the Company expects to expend its available cash in less than one month from August 14, 2014. Management's plans include raising capital through the equity markets to fund operations and eventually, the generating of revenue through its business. The Company does not expect to generate any revenues for the foreseeable future.





Failure to raise adequate capital and generate adequate revenues could result in the Company having to curtail or cease operations. The Company’s ability to raise additional capital through the future issuances of the common stock is unknown. Additionally, even if the Company does raise sufficient capital to support its operating expenses and generate adequate revenues, there can be no assurances that the revenue will be sufficient to enable it to develop to a level where it will generate profits and cash flows from operations. These matters raise substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern; however, the accompanying condensed financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business.





These condensed financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recovery of the recorded assets or the classifications of the liabilities that might be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern.





8
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 3 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES





This summary of significant accounting policies of Seafarer Exploration Corp. is presented to assist in understanding the Company’s condensed financial statements.  The condensed financial statements and notes are representations of the Company’s management, who are responsible for their integrity and objectivity.  These accounting policies conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and have been consistently applied in the preparation of the condensed financial statements.





Principles of Consolidation





The Company and its Subsidiary have been consolidated for financial statement purposes.  All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated.





Accounting Method





The Company’s condensed financial statements are prepared using the accrual basis of accounting in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.





Cash and Cash Equivalents





For purposes of the statement of cash flows, the Company considers all highly liquid investments and short-term debt instruments with original maturities of three months or less to be cash equivalents.





Revenue Recognition





The Company recognizes revenue on arrangements in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 101, “Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements” and No. 104, “Revenue Recognition”. In all cases, revenue is recognized only when the price is fixed or determinable, persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the service is performed and collectability is reasonably assured. For the periods ended June 30, 2014 and 2013, and for the period from inception to June 30, 2014, the Company did not report any revenues.





Earnings Per Share





The Company has adopted the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 260-10 which provides for calculation of "basic" and "diluted" earnings per share.  Basic earnings per share includes no dilution and is computed by dividing net income or loss available to common stockholders by the weighted average common shares outstanding for the period.  Diluted earnings per share reflect the potential dilution of securities that could share in the earnings of an entity.  Basic and diluted losses per share were the same at the reporting dates as there were no common stock equivalents outstanding at June 30, 2014 and 2013.





Fair Value of Financial Instruments





The fair value framework requires the categorization of assets and liabilities into three levels based upon the assumptions used to value the assets or liabilities.  Level 1 provides the most reliable measure of fair value, whereas Level 3 generally requires significant management judgment.  The three levels are defined as follows:





●
Level 1 – Valuation based on quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.





●
Level 2 – Valuation based on quoted market prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets.





●
Level 3 – Valuation based on unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity, therefore requiring management’s best estimate of what market participants would use as fair value.





The following table presents certain investments and liabilities of the Company’s financial assets measured and recorded at fair valuein  the Company’s consolidated balance sheets on a recurring basis and their level within the fair value hierarchy as of June 30, 2014:





Level 1


Level 2


Level 3


TotalFair value of derivative liability

$
-


$
-


$
451,583


$
451,583








9
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 3 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - continued





In instances where the determination of the fair value measurement is based on inputs from different levels of the fair value hierarchy, the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the entire fair value measurement falls is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety.  Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.  The valuation of our derivative liability is determined using Level 3 inputs, which consider (i) time value, (ii) current market and (iii) contractual prices.





Fair value estimates discussed herein are based upon certain market assumptions and pertinent information available to management as of June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013.    These financial instruments include cash, notes receivable, accounts payable and accrued expenses. The fair value of the Company’s debt instruments is estimated based on current rates that would be available for debt of similar terms, which is not significantly different from its stated value, except for the convertible note payable, at fair value, which has been revalued based on current market rates using Level 1 inputs.





Fixed Assets and Depreciation





Fixed assets are recorded at historical cost. Depreciation is computed on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets. Currently the Company’s only asset is a diving vessel, which was purchased for $325,000 during 2008 and is being depreciated over a 10 year useful life.





Impairment of Long-Lived Assets





In accordance with ASC 360-10, the Company, on a regular basis, reviews the carrying amount of long-lived assets for the existence of facts or circumstances, both internally and externally, that suggest impairment. The Company determines if the carrying amount of a long-lived asset is impaired based on anticipated undiscounted cash flows, before interest, from the use of the asset. In the event of impairment, a loss is recognized based on the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the asset. Fair value is determined based on appraised value of the assets or the anticipated cash flows from the use of the asset, discounted at a rate commensurate with the risk involved. There were no impairment charges recorded during the periods ended June 30, 2014 and 2013.





Employee Stock Based Compensation





The FASB issued SFAS No.123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, which was superseded by ASC 718-10. ASC 718-10 provides investors and other users of financial statements with more complete and neutral financial information, by requiring that the compensation cost relating to share-based payment transactions be recognized in financial statements. That cost will be measured based on the fair value of the equity or liability instruments issued. SFAS 123(R) covers a wide range of share-based compensation arrangements, including share options, restricted share plans, performance-based awards, share appreciation rights and employee share purchase plans. As of June 30, 2014, the Company has not implemented an employee stock based compensation plan.





Non-Employee Stock Based Compensation





The Company accounts for stock based compensation awards issued to non-employees for services, as prescribed by ASC 718-10, at either the fair value of the services rendered or the instruments issued in exchange for such services, whichever is more readily determinable, using the measurement date guidelines enumerated in EITF 96-18,  Accounting for Equity Instruments That Are Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services , which was superseded by ASC 505-50.  The Company issues compensatory shares for services including, but not limited to, executive, advisory, accounting, archeological, operations, strategic planning, corporate communications, financial, legal and administrative consulting services.





Use of Estimates





The process of preparing condensed financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires the use of estimates and assumptions regarding certain types of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses.  Such estimates primarily relate to unsettled transactions and events as of the date of the condensed financial statements.  Accordingly, upon settlement, actual results may differ from estimated amounts.











10
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 3 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - continued





Convertible Notes Payable





The Company accounts for conversion options embedded in convertible notes in accordance with ASC 815. ASC 815 generally requires companies to bifurcate conversion options embedded in convertible notes from their host instruments and to account for them as free standing derivative financial instruments. ASC 815 provides for an exception to this rule when convertible notes, as host instruments, are deemed to be conventional, as defined by ASC 815-40.





The Company accounts for convertible notes deemed conventional and conversion options embedded in non-conventional convertible notes which qualify as equity under ASC 815, in accordance with the provisions of ASC 470-20, which provides guidance on accounting for convertible securities with beneficial conversion features. Accordingly, the Company records, as a discount to convertible notes, the intrinsic value of such conversion options based upon the differences between the fair value of the underlying common stock at the commitment date of the note transaction and the effective conversion price embedded in the note. Debt discounts under these arrangements are amortized over the term of the related debt.





The classification of derivative instruments, including whether such instruments should be recorded as liabilities or as equity, is evaluated at the end of each reporting period.  Derivative instrument liabilities are classified in the balance sheet as current or non-current based on whether or not net-cash settlement of the derivative instrument could be required within 12 months of the balance sheet date.





Convertible Notes Payable at Fair Value





The   Company   elected   to   account   for   this   hybrid   contract   under   the   guidance   of   ASC   815-15-25-4.  This guidance allows an entity that initially recognizes a hybrid financial instrument that under paragraph 815-15-25-1 would be required to be separated into a host contract and a derivative instrument may irrevocably elect to initially and subsequently measure that hybrid financial instrument in its entirety at fair value (with changes in fair value recognized in earnings).





The fair value election is also available when a previously recognized financial instrument subject to a re-measurement event and the separate recognition of an embedded derivative. The fair value election may be made instrument by instrument. For purposes of this paragraph, a re-measurement event (new basis event) is an event identified in generally accepted accounting principles, other than the recognition of an other-than-temporary impairment, that requires a financial instrument to be re-measured to its fair value at the time of the event but does not require that instrument to be reported at fair value on a continuous basis with the change in fair value recognized in earnings. Examples of re-measurement events are business combinations and significant modifications of debt as defined in Subtopic 470-50.





Reclassifications





Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.

















11
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 3 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES - continued





Recent Accounting Pronouncements





In February 2013, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2013-04.  This update clarifies how entities measure obligations resulting from joint and several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation is fixed at the reporting date.  This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2013 and interim reporting periods thereafter.   This update is not expected to have an impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.





In April 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-07 to clarify when it is appropriate to apply the liquidation basis of accounting.  Additionally, the update provides guidance for recognition and measurement of assets and liabilities and requirements for financial statements prepared using the liquidation basis of accounting.  Under the amendment, entities are required to prepare their financial statements under the liquidation basis of accounting when a liquidation becomes imminent.  This guidance is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2013, and interim reporting periods thereafter.  This update is not expected to have an impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.





In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-11 which provides guidance relating to the financial statement presentation of unrecognized tax benefits. The update provides that a liability related to an unrecognized tax benefit would be presented as a reduction of a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carry forward, a similar tax loss or a tax credit carry forward, if such settlement is required or expected in the event the uncertain tax position is disallowed.  This update does not require any new recurring disclosures and is effective for public entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2013, and interim reporting periods thereafter.  This update is not expected to have an impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.





Other recent accounting pronouncements issued by the FASB, including its Emerging Issues Task Force, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, and the Securities and Exchange Commission did not or are not believed by management to have a material impact on the Company's present or future financial statements.





NOTE 4 - LOSS PER SHARE





Components of loss per share for the three and six months ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 are as follows:





For the Three Months Ended

June 30, 2014


For the Three Months Ended

June 30, 2013Net loss attributable to common stockholders

$
(507,512
)

$
(743,048
)Weighted average shares outstanding:Basic and diluted


985,783,228



811,905,248Loss per share:Basic and diluted

$
(0.00
)

$
(0.00
)

















12
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 4 - LOSS PER SHARE - continued





Components of loss per share for the six months ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 are as follows:





For the Six Months

Ended

June 30, 2014


For the Six Months

Ended

June 30, 2013Net loss attributable to common stockholders

$
(1,043,253
)

$
(1,161,625
)Weighted average shares outstanding:Basic and diluted


876,021,813



779,676,653Loss per share:Basic and diluted

$
(0.00
)

$
(0.00
)








NOTE 5 – CAPITAL STOCK





Common Stock





The Company is authorized to issue 950,000,000 shares of $0.0001 par value common stock.





As of August 14, 2014 the Company had 905,098,892 shares of common stock issued and outstanding.





Preferred Stock





The Company is authorized to sell or issue 50,000,000 shares of preferred stock.





Series A Preferred Stock





On March 30, 2011, the Company designated 50,000 shares, par value $0.0001 per share as Series A Preferred Stock (“Series A Preferred”). The Series A Preferred has a liquidation preference of $1. The holders have no voting rights and are entitled to receive dividends if and when declared by the board. Additionally, the Series A Preferred does not have a term or a maturity date; it is a perpetual financial instrument. We analyzed the instrument under EITF D-109 Determining the Nature of a Host Contract Related to a Hybrid Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share under FASB Statement 133 (ASC 815) to determine if the host preferred stock is more akin to an equity instrument or a debt instrument in terms of their economic characteristics and risks. The Company concluded that the Series A Preferred is more akin to an equity instrument. The Company further analyzed the instrument under EITF D-98 Classification and Measurement of Redeemable Securities (ASC 480-10) and concluded that because the instrument is not redeemable for cash, it does not require classification in the mezzanine section of the financial statements.





The Company previously issued seven shares of its preferred stock. The Company and the preferred shareholders have agreed to amend the preferred shareholder agreements so that each share of preferred stock has the right to convert into 214,286 shares of the Company’s common stock and receive a 1% share of any artifacts found at the Church Hollow Site. As of June 30, 2014, no shares of preferred stock had been converted into shares of the Company’s common stock.





13
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 5 – CAPITAL STOCK - continued





Series B Preferred Stock





On February 10, 2014, the Board of Directors of the Company under the authority granted under Article V of the Articles of Incorporation, defined and created a new preferred series of shares from the 50,000,000 authorized preferred shares. Pursuant to Article V, the Board of Directors has the power to designate such shares and all powers and matters concerning such shares. Such share class shall be designated Preferred Class B. The preferred class was created for 60 Preferred Class B shares. Such shares each have a voting power equal to one percent of the outstanding shares issued (totaling 60%) at the time of any vote action as necessary for share votes under Florida law, with or without a shareholder meeting.  Such shares are non-convertible to common shares of the Company and are not considered as convertible under any accounting measure. Such shares shall only be held by the Board of Directors as a Corporate body, and shall not be placed into any individual name. Such shares were considered issued at the time of this resolution’s adoption, and do not require a stock certificate to exist, unless selected to do so by the Board for representational purposes only.  Such shares are considered for voting as a whole amount, and shall be voted for any matter by a majority vote of the Board of Directors. Such shares shall not be divisible among the Board members, and shall be voted as a whole either for or against such a vote upon the vote of the majority of the Board of Directors. In the event that there is any vote taken which results in a tie of a vote of the Board of Directors, the vote of the Chairman of the Board shall control the voting of such shares. Such shares are not transferable except in the case of a change of control of the Corporation when such shares shall continue to be held by the Board of Directors. Such shares have the authority to vote for all matters that require a share vote under Florida law and the Articles of Incorporation.





NOTE 6 - INCOME TAXES





The items accounting for the difference between income taxes computed at the federal statutory rate and the provision for income taxes are as follows:





For the Six

Months Ended

June 30, 2014


For the Six

Months Ended

June 30, 2013Income tax at federal statutory rate


(34.00
)%


(34.00
)%State tax, net of federal effect


(3.96
)%


(3.96
)%37.96
%


37.96
%Valuation allowance


(37.96
)%


(37.96
)%Effective rate


0.00
%


0.00
%





















14
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 6 - INCOME TAXES - continued





Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amount of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes.





As of June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the Company’s only significant deferred income tax asset was an estimated net tax operating loss of $9,066,513 and $8,023,260 respectively that is available to offset future taxable income, if any, in future periods, subject to expiration and other limitations imposed by the Internal Revenue Service.  Management has considered the Company's operating losses incurred to date and believes that a full valuation allowance against the deferred tax assets is required as of June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013. Management has evaluated tax positions in accordance with ASC 740 and has not identified any tax positions, other than those discussed above, that require disclosure.





NOTE 7 - LEASE OBLIGATION





Office





The Company leases 823 square feet of office space located at 14497 North Dale Mabry Highway, Suite 209-N, Tampa, Florida 33618.  The Company entered into an amended lease agreement on July 1, 2013 for its current location. Under the terms of the amended lease agreement, the lease term has been extended to June 30, 2015, with a base monthly rent of $1,200 from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 and a base monthly rent of $1,235 from July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015. There may be additional monthly charges for pro-rated maintenance, late fees, etc.





NOTE 8 - CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE AND NOTES PAYABLE





The Company evaluates each financial instrument to determine whether it meets the definition of “conventional convertible” debt under ASC 815-40.  The note payable conversion feature of the outstanding convertible debt met the definition of conventional convertible for purposes of applying the conventional convertible exemption. The definition of conventional contemplates a limitation on the number of shares issuable under the arrangement. Since the convertible notes achieved the conventional convertible exemption, the Company was required to consider whether the hybrid contracts embody a beneficial conversion feature. The calculation of the effective conversion amount did result in a beneficial conversion feature.





Convertible Notes Payable




The following table reflects the convertible notes payable, other than three notes that have been remeasured to fair value which are discussed later in Note 8, as of June 30, 2014:


Issue
Maturity

March 31,


Interest


ConversionDate
Date

2014


Rate


RateConvertible notes Payable:October 30, 2013
October 30, 2014

$
50,000



6.00
%


0.0125March 11, 2014
September 11, 2014


5,005



6.00
%


0.0125May 15, 2014
November 15, 2014


40,000



6.00
%


0.007095,005Unamortized discounts



(45,967
)Balance


$
49,038
   15
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)
  NOTE 8 - CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE AND NOTES PAYABLE - continued
  Convertible Notes Payable - continued
  Convertible notes payable, in defaultOctober 31, 2012
April 30, 2013

$
8,000



6.00
%


0.0040July 16, 2012
July 30, 2013


5,000



6.00
%


0.0050November 20, 2012
May 20, 2013


50,000



6.00
%


0.0050January 19, 2013
July 30, 2013


5,000



6.00
%


0.0040January 28, 2013
January 28, 2014


25,000



6.00
%


0.0050January 28, 2013
January 28, 2014


25,000



6.00
%


0.0050February 11, 2013
August 11, 2013


9,000



6.00
%


0.0040September 25, 2013
March 25, 2014


10,000



6.00
%


0.0125August 28, 2009
November 1, 2009


4,300



10.00
%


0.0150April 7, 2010
November 7, 2010


70,000



6.00
%


0.0080November 12, 2010
November 7, 2011


40,000



6.00
%


0.0080October 4, 2013
April 4, 2014


50,000



6.00
%


0.0125301,300Unamortized discount



-Balance


$
301,300Convertible notes payable - related party, in defaultJanuary 19, 2013
July 30, 2013


15,000



6.00
%


0.0040February 7, 2013
August 7, 2013


10,000



6.00
%


0.0040January 9, 2009
January 9, 2010


10,000



10.00
%


0.0150January 25, 2010
January 25, 2011


6,000



6.00
%


0.0050January 18, 2012
July 18, 2012


50,000



8.00
%


0.0040July 17, 2013
January 17, 2014


30,000



6.00
%


0.0040July 26, 2013
January 26, 2014


10,000



6.00
%


0.0040131,000Unamortized discount



-Balance


$
131,000Convertible notes payable - related partyJanuary 17, 2014
July 17, 2014


31,500



6.00
%


0.0060April 22, 2014
October 22, 2014


5,005



6.00
%


0.0070May 27, 2014
November 27, 2014


7,000



6.00
%


0.007043,505Unamortized discount



(11,539
)Balance


$
31,966











16
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 8 - CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE AND NOTES PAYABLE - continued





Between January 1, 2014 and June 30, 2014, the Company issued three (5) convertible notes payable totaling $88,510. Each note includes interest at 6%. The principal amount of the notes and interest is payable on the maturity date. The note and accrued interest are convertible into common stock at fixed conversion prices. The conversion prices and maturity dates of these notes are detailed in the table in the preceding page.





The Company has evaluated the terms and conditions of the convertible notes under the guidance of ASC 815 and other applicable guidance. The conversion feature met the definition of conventional convertible for purposes of applying the conventional convertible exemption. The definition of conventional contemplates a limitation on the number of shares issuable under the arrangement. The note is convertible into a fixed number of shares and there are no down round protection features contained in the contracts. Since the convertible notes achieved the conventional convertible exemption, the Company was required to consider whether the hybrid contracts embody a beneficial conversion feature. The calculation of the effective conversion amount did result in a beneficial conversion feature.




The following tables reflect the aggregate allocation on the financing date(s):
 
 Face value of convertible notes payable

$
88,510Beneficial conversion feature


(88,067
)Carrying value

$
443





The discounts on the convertible notes arose from the allocation of basis to the beneficial conversion feature. The discount is amortized through charges to interest expense over the term of the debt agreement. For the three months ended June 30, 2014, the Company recorded interest expense related to the amortization of debt discounts in the amount of approximately $53,670. The aggregate carrying value of these convertible notes at June 30, 2014 was approximately $81,004.





Notes Payable





The following table reflects the notes payable as of June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013:





Issue Date
Maturity Date

June

30, 2014


December

31, 2013


Interest RateNotes payable, in default –related parties:February 24, 2010
February 24, 2011

$
7,500



7,500



6.00
%Notes payable, in default:June 23, 2011
August 23, 2011


25,000



25,000



6.00
%April 27, 2011
April 27, 2012


5,000



5,000



6.00
%30,000



30,000$
37,500



37,500





At June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, combined accrued interest on the convertible notes payable, notes payable and stockholder loans was $68,459 and $59,267, respectively, and included in accounts payable and accrued liabilities on the accompanying balance sheets.











17
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 8 - CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE AND NOTES PAYABLE - continued





Convertible Notes Payable and Notes Payable, in Default





The Company does not have additional sources of debt financing to refinance its convertible notes payable and notes payable that are currently in default. If the Company is unable to obtain additional capital, such lenders may file suit, including suit to foreclose on the assets held as collateral for the obligations arising under the secured notes. If any of the lenders file suit to foreclose on the assets held as collateral, then the Company may be forced to significantly scale back or cease its operations which would more than likely result in a complete loss of all capital that has been invested in or borrowed by the Company. The fact that the Company is in default of several promissory notes held by various lenders makes investing in the Company or providing any loans to the Company extremely risky with a very high potential for a complete loss of capital.





The convertible notes that have been issued by the Company are convertible at the lender’s option. These convertible notes represent significant potential dilution to the Company’s current shareholders as the convertible price of these notes is generally lower than the current market price of the Company’s shares. As such when these notes are converted into shares of the Company’s common stock there is typically a highly dilutive effect on current shareholders and very possible that such dilution may significantly negatively affect the trading price of the Company’s common stock.





Convertible Notes at Fair Value





Convertible Note Payable Dated January 16, 2014 at Fair Value





On January 16, 2014, the Company entered into a convertible note payable with a corporation.   The convertible note payable, with a face value of $50,000, bears interest at 6.0% per annum and is due on July 16, 2014. The convertible note payable is convertible, at the holder’s option, into the Company’s common shares at the Variable Conversion Price. The Variable Conversion Price is defined as 50% multiplied by the lowest closing price during the last twenty (20) trading days prior to closing, but not less than $0.002 per share.





In the evaluation of the financing arrangement, the Company concluded that the conversion feature did not meet the conditions set forth in current accounting standards for equity classification. Since equity classification is not available for the conversion feature, it requires bifurcation and liability classification, at fair value. The Company elected to account for this hybrid contract under the guidance of ASC 815-15-25-4.





In connection with the issuance of the convertible note payable, the Company recognized a day-one derivative loss totaling related to the recognition of (i) the hybrid note and (ii) the derivative instrument arising from the fair value measurement due to the fair value of the hybrid note and embedded derivative exceeding the proceeds that the Company received from the arrangement. Therefore, the Company was required to record a loss of $51,431 on the derivative financial instrument and is included in interest expense. In addition, the fair value will change in future periods, based upon changes in the Company’s common stock price and changes in other assumptions and market indicators used in the valuation techniques. These future changes will be currently recognized in interest expense or interest income on the Company’s statement of operations.





The conversion of the note into shares of the Company’s common stock is potentially highly dilutive to current shareholders. If the note holder elects to sell the shares that it has acquired as a result of converting the note into shares of common stock, then any such sales may result in a significant decrease in the market price of the Company’s shares.





At June 30, 2014, the $50,000 face value convertible note payable was recorded at its fair value of $131,749.





Convertible Note Payable Dated March 17, 2014 at Fair Value








18
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 8 - CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE AND NOTES PAYABLE - continued





On March 17, 2014, the Company entered into a convertible note payable with a corporation.  The convertible note payable, with a face value of $40,000, bears interest at 8.0% per annum and is due on March 17, 2015. The convertible note payable is convertible, at the holder’s option, into the Company’s common shares at the Variable Conversion Price. The Variable Conversion Price is defined as 57% multiplied by the average of the lowest bid price  two trading prices for the Company’s common stock during the fifteen (15) trading day period including the day the notice of conversion is received by the Company. The conversion feature is subject to full-ratchet, anti-dilution protection if the Company sells shares or share-indexed financing instruments at less than the conversion price.





In the evaluation of the financing arrangement, the Company concluded that the conversion feature did not meet the conditions set forth in current accounting standards for equity classification. Since equity classification is not available for the conversion feature, it requires bifurcation and liability classification, at fair value. The Company elected to account for this hybrid contract under the guidance of ASC 815-15-25-4.





In connection with the issuance of the convertible note payable, the Company recognized day-one derivative loss totaling $related to the recognition of (i) the hybrid note and (ii) the derivative instrument arising from the fair value measurement due to the fair value of the hybrid note and embedded derivative exceeding the proceeds that the Company received from the arrangement. Therefore, the Company was required to record a $31,321 loss on the derivative financial instrument and is included in interest expense. In addition, the fair value will change in future periods, based upon changes in the Company’s common stock price and changes in other assumptions and market indicators used in the valuation techniques. These future changes will be currently recognized in interest expense or interest income on the Company’s statement of operations.





The conversion of the note into shares of the Company’s common stock is potentially highly dilutive to current shareholders. If the note holder elects to sell the shares that it has acquired as a result of converting the note into shares of common stock, then any such sales may result in a significant decrease in the market price of the Company’s shares.





Additionally, the holder of this convertible note has substantial rights and protections regarding dilution if certain events, including a default were to occur. There are a number of events that could trigger a default, including but not limited to failure to pay principal or interest, failure to issue shares under the conversion feature, breach of covenants, breach of representations and warranties, appointment of a receiver or trustee,  judgments, bankruptcy, delisting of common stock, failure to comply with the exchange act, liquidation, cessation of operations, failure to maintain assets, material financial statement restatement, reverse split of borrowers stock, etc. In the event of default the interest rate is increase to 24% per annum.





Furthermore, there are additional events that could cause the lender to be owed additional shares of common stock above and beyond the shares due from a conversion. Some of these events include, but are not limited to a merger or consolidation of the Company, dividend distribution or spin off, dilutive issuances of the Company’s stock, etc. If the lender receives additional shares of the Company’s commons stock due to any of the foregoing events or for other reasons, then this may have an extremely dilutive effect on the shareholders of the Company. Such dilution would likely result in a significant drop in the per share price of the Company’s common stock. The potential dilutive nature of this note presents a very high degree of risk to the Company and its shareholders.





At June 30, 2014, the $40,000 face value convertible note payable was recorded at its fair value of $85,416.





Convertible Note Payable Dated April 24, 2014 at Fair Value





On April 24, 2014, the Company entered into a convertible note payable with a corporation.  The convertible note payable, with a face value of $107,000, bears interest at 12.0% per annum and is due on April 24, 2015. The convertible note payable is convertible, at the holder’s option, into the Company’s common shares at the Variable Conversion Price. The Variable Conversion Price is defined as 60% multiplied by the average of the lowest bid price  two trading prices for the Company’s common stock during the fifteen (15) trading day period including the day the notice of conversion is received by the Company. The conversion feature is subject to full-ratchet, anti-dilution protection if the Company sells shares or share-indexed financing instruments at less than the conversion price.





In the evaluation of the financing arrangement, the Company concluded that the conversion feature did not meet the conditions set forth in current accounting standards for equity classification. Since equity classification is not available for the conversion feature, it requires bifurcation and liability classification, at fair value. The Company elected to account for this hybrid contract under the guidance of ASC 815-15-25-4.





In connection with the issuance of the convertible note payable, the Company recognized day-one derivative loss totaling $related to the recognition of (i) the hybrid note and (ii) the derivative instrument arising from the fair value measurement due to the fair value of the hybrid note and embedded derivative exceeding the proceeds that the Company received from the arrangement. Therefore, the Company was required to record a $118,253 loss on the derivative financial instrument and is included in interest expense. In addition, the fair value will change in future periods, based upon changes in the Company’s common stock price and changes in other assumptions and market indicators used in the valuation techniques. These future changes will be currently recognized in interest expense or interest income on the Company’s statement of operations.


19
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 8 - CONVERTIBLE NOTES PAYABLE AND NOTES PAYABLE - continued





The conversion of the note into shares of the Company’s common stock is potentially highly dilutive to current shareholders. If the note holder elects to sell the shares that it has acquired as a result of converting the note into shares of common stock, then any such sales may result in a significant decrease in the market price of the Company’s shares.





Additionally, the holder of this convertible note has substantial rights and protections regarding dilution if certain events, including a default were to occur. There are a number of events that could trigger a default, including but not limited to failure to pay principal or interest, failure to issue shares under the conversion feature, breach of covenants, breach of representations and warranties, appointment of a receiver or trustee,  judgments, bankruptcy, delisting of common stock, failure to comply with the exchange act, liquidation, cessation of operations, failure to maintain assets, material financial statement restatement, reverse split of borrowers stock, etc. In the event of default the interest rate is increase to 24% per annum.





Furthermore, there are additional events that could cause the lender to be owed additional shares of common stock above and beyond the shares due from a conversion. Some of these events include, but are not limited to a merger or consolidation of the Company, dividend distribution or spin off, dilutive issuances of the Company’s stock, etc. If the lender receives additional shares of the Company’s commons stock due to any of the foregoing events or for other reasons, then this may have an extremely dilutive effect on the shareholders of the Company. Such dilution would likely result in a significant drop in the per share price of the Company’s common stock. The potential dilutive nature of this note presents a very high degree of risk to the Company and its shareholders.





At June 30, 2014, the $107,000 face value convertible note payable was recorded at its fair value of $234,418.





The following tables summarize the effects on earnings associated with changes in the fair values of the convertible notes payable, at fair value for the three months ended June 30, 2014:


Face value of the convertible notes payable

$
197,000Interest expense to record the convertible notes atfair value on the date of issuance


201,005Interest expense to mark to market the convertible noteson June 30, 2014


53,578June 30, 2014 fair value

$
451,583


NOTE 9 – MATERIAL AGREEMENT





Agreement to Explore a Shipwreck Site Located off of Brevard County, Florida





On March 1, 2014, Seafarer entered into a partnership and ownership with Marine Archaeology Partners, LLC, with the formation of Seafarer’s Quest, LLC. Such LLC was formed in the State of Florida for the purpose of permitting, exploration and recovery of artifacts from a designated area on the east coast of Florida. Such site area is from a defined, contracted area by a separate entity, which a portion of such site is designated from a previous contracted holding through the State of Florida. Under such agreement, Seafarer is responsible for costs of permitting, exploration and recovery, and is entitled to 60% of such artifact recovery. Seafarer has a 50% ownership, with designated management of the LLC coming from Seafarer. Further actions toward the permitting have been taken for such site and the Company and partnership are awaiting the review of such permit request by the State of Florida.  As of June 30, 2014, the partnership has had no operations.











20
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 9 – MATERIAL AGREEMENTS - continued





Agreement with Tulco Resources, Ltd.





As previously noted in its 8-K filing on June 11, 2010, the Company entered into an agreement with Tulco Resources, Ltd. (“Tulco”) on June 8, 2010 which granted the Company the exclusive rights to explore, locate, identify, and salvage a possible shipwreck within the territorial limits of the State of Florida, off of Palm Beach County, in the vicinity of Juno Beach, Florida (the “Exploration Agreement”).  The term of the Agreement is for three years and may renew for an additional three years under the same terms unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the Tulco and Seafarer. The Company agreed to pay Tulco a conservation payment of $20,000 per calendar year during the term of the Agreement.  The amount of the conservation payment my increase in future years based on the mutual agreement of Tulco and the Company. The Company agreed to furnish its own personnel, salvage vessel and equipment necessary to conduct operations at the shipwreck site. The Company also agreed to pay all of its own expenses directly associated with salvage operations, including but not limited to fuel, food, ground tackle, electronic equipment, dockage, wages, dive tanks, and supplies. The Company agreed to split any artifacts that it recovers equally with Tulco, after the State of Florida has selected up to twenty percent of the total value of recovered artifacts for the State of Florida’s museum collection. The Company and Tulco agreed to receive their share of the division of artifacts at the same time.  The Company and Tulco agreed to jointly handle all correspondence with the State of Florida regarding any agreements and permits required for the exploration and salvage of the shipwreck site. The original three year term of the Exploration Agreement was valid until June 10, 2013 and both Seafarer and Tulco had the option to extend the agreement for an additional three years. There have been no discussions between Tulco and Seafarer regarding extending the Exploration Agreement. It is possible that Tulco may claim that the Exploration Agreement is no longer valid and therefore the Company has no further rights to explore and salvage the Juno Beach site.   On June 18, 2013, Seafarer began litigation against Tulco Resources, LLC, in a lawsuit filed in the Circuit Court in and for Hillsborough County, Florida. Such suit was filed against Tulco based upon for breach of contract, equitable relief and injunctive relief.




Florida Division of Historical Resources Agreements/Permits





As previously noted on its form 8-K filed on May 9, 2011, the Company and Tulco received a 1A-31 Recovery Permit from the Florida Division of Historical Resources. The Recovery Permit is active through April 25, 2014. The Permit authorizes Seafarer to dig and recover artifacts from the designated site at Juno Beach, Florida. It will be necessary for the Company to obtain a renewal to the Recovery Permit for the Juno Beach shipwreck site in order to continue to perform exploration and recovery work at the site after April 25, 2014.





On November 2, 2012, the Company received a three year 1A-31 Exploration Permit from the Division of Historical Resources for an area identified off of Lantana Beach, Florida. Under the permit the Company began remote sensing at the site with a cesium vapor magnotemoter and did underwater exploration. Once the remote sensing was completed and the data analyzed, the Exploration permit moved to Phase 2, dig and identify. During Phase 2 testing was done which confirmed a mid to late 18th century shipwreck. Upon further testing, management believes a 1600s era shipwreck potentially exists, but not within the currently permitted area. Due to other developments and projects the Company is not pursuing Phase 3 at the Lantana site at this time but review the site at a later date that has not yet been determined.





On July 28, 2014 the Company’s partnership with Marine Archeological Partners, LLC, Seafarer’s Quest, LLC received a 1A-31 Recovery Permit (the “Permit”) from the Florida Division of Historical Resources for an area identified off of Cape Canaveral, Florida. The Permit is active for three years from the date of issuance.





Certain Other Agreements





In February of 2014 the Company entered into an agreement with an individual who is related to the Company’s CEO to continue serving as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors. Under the  agreement, the Director agreed to provide various services to the Company including making recommendations for both the short term and the long term business strategies to be employed by the Company, monitoring and assessing the Company's business and to advise the Company’s Board of Directors with respect to an appropriate business strategy on an ongoing basis, commenting on proposed corporate decisions and identifying and evaluating alternative courses of action, making suggestions to strengthen the Company's operations, identifying and evaluating external threats and opportunities to the Company, evaluating and making ongoing recommendations to the Board with respect for one year and may be terminated by either the Company or the Director by providing written notice to the other party. The agreement also terminates automatically upon the death, resignation or removal of the Director.  Under the terms of the agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Director 2,000,000 restricted shares of its common stock at the execution of the agreement and to negotiate future compensation on a year-by-year basis. The Company also agreed to reimburse the Director for preapproved expenses. The 2,000,000 shares are included as an expense in consulting and contractor fees in the accompanying income statements.










21
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 9 – MATERIAL AGREEMENTS - continued





In March of 2014 the Company entered into an agreement with a marine survey company. Under the terms of the agreement the survey company agreed to provide a forty foot survey vessel and captain in order to provide multi-beam data collection and processing on a daily basis for an area to be designated by the Company. Processed data will be provided to the Company in order to evaluate the area that was surveyed.





The Company must pay the surveying company $3,500 per day plus fuel costs. Future surveying services will be provided to the Company at a daily rate of $1,850 plus company stock equal to or greater than $2,000 with a written guarantee as to the minimum value of the stock. During the period ended June 30, 2014 the Company issued 142,900 shares to the principal of the marine survey company for services rendered under the agreement.





In April 2014 the Company entered into a consulting agreement with an individual to provide services and advice to the Company in the areas of business development, mergers and acquisitions, business strategy and the specific analysis of the treasure industry. The consultant also agreed to assist the Company in developing, studying, and evaluating acquisition proposals, and preparing reports and studies. Additionally the consultant agreed to provide meeting space for the Company to meet with shareholders. The consultant will not negotiate on behalf of the Company. The consultant will provide the services under the direction of the Company’s CEO. The Company agreed to pay the consultant 600,000 shares of its common stock within forty five days of the execution of the agreement. As of June 30, 2014 the Company had not issued the consultant the 600,000 shares.





In April of 2014 the Company issued 160,000 shares of its restricted common stock to a consultant involved in its dive operations. The shares were issued to the consultants for performing services that were not previously compensated and as a bonus for the consultant’s loyalty and willingness to perform services below market rates of compensation.





In April of 2014 the Company entered into agreements with fourteen consultants for providing services related to diving operations and administrative consulting for operations. Under the terms of the agreements the consultants agreed to provide various services related to the Company’s diving operations and administrative consulting.  Under the various agreements with the consultants the Company agreed to issue a total of 3,425,000 share of common stock for the services. The shares owed to the consultants are subject to a six month lock up agreement and may not be sold, contracted to sell or disposed of prior to six months from the effective date of the agreements. If any of the consultants quits or their services are no longer required during the six month period from the effective dates of the agreements, then all of the shares shall be forfeited to the Company. None of the shares were issued during the period ended June 30, 2014.





In April of 2014 the Company issued 50,000 shares of its restricted common stock to a consultant involved in its dive operations. The shares were issued to the consultant for performing services that were not previously compensated, for obtaining licensing to operate the Company’s equipment including its salvage vessel and as a bonus for the consultant’s loyalty and willingness to perform services below market rates of compensation.





In April of 2014 the Company entered into an agreement with an individual to join the Company’s advisory council. Under the advisory council agreements the advisor agreed to provide various advisory services to the Company, including making recommendations for both the short term and the long term business strategies to be employed by the Company, monitoring and assessing the Company's business and to advise the Company’s Board of Directors with respect to an appropriate business strategy on an ongoing basis, commenting on proposed corporate decisions and identifying and evaluating alternative courses of action, making suggestions to strengthen the Company's operations, identifying and evaluating external threats and opportunities to the Company, evaluating and making ongoing recommendations to the Board with respect to the Company's business, and providing such other advisory or consulting services as may be appropriate from time to time. The term of each of the advisory council agreements is for one year. In consideration for the performance of the advisory services, the Company agreed to issue the advisor an aggregate total of 300,000 restricted shares of its common stock. According to the agreement the shares vest at a rate of 25,000 per month during the term of the agreement.   If the advisory council agreements are terminated prior to the expiration of the one year terms, then each of the advisors has agreed to return to the Company for cancellation any portion of their shares that have not vested. Under the advisory council agreements, the Company has agreed to reimburse the advisors for pre-approved expenses. The Company issued 3000,000 shares of its restricted common stock to the advisor during the period ended June 30, 2014.





In May of 2014 the Company issued 2,000,000 shares of its restricted common stock to a consultant for various business advisory, financial and strategic consulting services. The Company believes that the consultant has provided services at below market rates of compensation and the shares were paid both for services rendered and to more fairly compensate the consultant and as a bonus and inducement for the consultant to continue to provide services to the Company.





The Company has an ongoing verbal agreement with a limited liability company that is controlled by a person who is related to the Company’s CEO to pay the related party consultant $3,000 per month to provide general business consulting, industry research, monitoring and assessing the Company's business and to advise management with respect to an appropriate business strategy on an ongoing basis, commenting on proposed corporate decisions and identifying and evaluating alternative courses of action, perform background research including background checks and provide investigative information on individuals and companies and acting as an administrative specialist to perform various administrative duties and clerical services including reviewing the Company’s agreements and books and records. The consultant provides the services under the direction and supervision of the Company’s CEO. All fees paid to the related party consultant during the period ended June 30, 2014 are included as an expense in consulting and contractor fees in the accompanying income statement for the period.




22
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 9 – MATERIAL AGREEMENTS - continued





The Company has an ongoing agreement with a limited liability company that is owned and controlled by a person who is related to the Company’s CEO to provide stock transfer agency services. At June 30, 2014, the Company owed the related party limited liability company $284 for transfer agency services rendered. During the period ended June 30, 2014 the Company paid the related party limited liability company $7,597 in fees for transfer agent services, including fees owed from past periods that had previously been accrued by the Company. In January 2014 the Company entered into a separate debt settlement agreement with the related party vendor to settle a total of $7,683 of outstanding debt related to legal fees incurred by the related party vendor due to a lawsuit against the Company in which suit the related party vendor was also named as a defendant due to its position as the Company’s stock transfer agency. The Company issued 768,293 shares of its


common stock to this vendor as satisfaction for the outstanding debt. The agreement between the Company and the vendor stipulated that should the transfer agency realize less than $7,683 from the sale of the stock, then the consultant is entitled to receive up to an additional 700,000 shares of common stock or a cash payment until the balance is paid in full. In March of 2014 the related party limited liability company also agreed to provide various corporate consulting, strategic planning and training under a separate consulting agreement and the Company agreed to pay 500,000 shares of its restricted common stock under the consulting agreement. All fees paid to the related party consultant during the period ended June 30, 2014 are included as an expense in consulting and contractor fees in the accompanying income statement for the period.





The Company has an ongoing consulting agreement to pay a limited liability company a minimum of $5,000 per month for providing ongoing business advisory and strategic planning and consulting services, assistance with financial reporting. IT management, and administrative services. The Company also agreed to pay additional compensation to the consultant in the form of cash and/or restricted stock to be awarded solely at the Company’s discretion. The Company also agreed to reimburse the consultant for certain expenses. The agreement is verbal and may be terminated by the Company or the consultant at any time. All fees paid to the consultant during the three month period ended June 30, 2014 are included as an expense in consulting and contractor fees in the accompanying income statements.





The Company has an ongoing agreement to pay a limited liability company a monthly fee for archeological and the review of historic shipwreck research consulting services. During the period ended June 30, 2014, the Company paid the consultant 1,103,448 shares of its restricted common stock. All fees paid to the consultant during the period ended June 30, 2014 are included as an expense in consulting and contractor fees in the accompanying statements of operations.














23
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 10 – DIVISON OF ARTIFACTS AND TREASURE





Under the Exploration Agreement with Tulco that was renewed on June 8, 2010, the Company is required to split any artifacts or treasure that it successfully recovers from the Juno Beach Shipwreck site with the FLDHR and Tulco. Tulco and the Company, assuming that the FLDHR’s portion will be 20%, have agreed to the following division of artifacts and treasure:





20% to the FLDHR


40% to Tulco


40% to the Company





More specifically, the FLDHR has the right to select up to 20% of the total value of recovered artifacts and treasure for the State's museum collection. After the FLDHR has selected those artifacts and treasure that it feels will complement its collection, then the Company and Tulco will split the remaining artifacts and treasure equally.





In addition to the division of artifacts with the FLDHR and Tulco, the Company has entered into agreements where it may be required to pay additional percentages of its net share of any artifacts that it recovers at the Juno Beach Shipwreck site:





●
The Company may elect to pay its divers or other personnel involved in the search for artifacts by giving them a percentage of the artifacts that they locate after a division of artifacts takes place with the FLDHR and Tulco. At the present time, the Company does not have any written agreements to pay any of its dive personnel a net percentage of any recovered artifacts; however, the Company reserves the right to do so in the future.





●
The Company has become aware that an individual has made a claim that he has a legally valid and binding agreement with Tulco to receive a percentage of any artifacts recovered from the Juno Beach Shipwreck. The individual has purportedly claimed that his agreement with Tulco was executed several years prior to the Company and Tulco entering into the Exploration Agreement in March 2007. The Company has not been able to verify the legal standing of this claim. If this alleged agreement exists and is legally valid and binding, or if there are other agreements that have a valid, legal claim on the Juno Beach Shipwreck site, then such consequences may have a material adverse effect on the Company and its prospects.





To date the Company has not located any artifacts that have any significant monetary value.  The chance that the Company will actually recover artifacts of any significant value from the Juno Beach shipwreck site is very remote and highly unlikely.























24
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 11 – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS





Since December 11, 2009, the Company, has been involved in a lawsuit where it was named as a Defendant, along with its CEO and transfer agent in Case Number 09-CA-030763, filed in the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County, Florida. The lawsuit was brought in the name of 31 individuals and 1 corporation. The lawsuit alleges that the Company, its CEO, and its transfer agent wrongfully refused to remove the restrictive legend from certain shares of the Company’s common stock that are collectively owned by the plaintiffs, which prevented the plaintiffs from selling or transferring their shares of the Company’s common stock. The plaintiffs allege that they have lost approximately $1,041,000 as of the date of the lawsuit. Such lawsuit continued to a hearing of the Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment against the Defendants including Seafarer, which was heard on September 1, 2011 and denied by the Court. Litigation of the matter has continued and the Company has presented evidence and arguments of law that the shares were distributed from their original recipient, Micah Eldred, in an illegal sale to another corporate entity. The Company further contends in its pleadings that such shares were then illegally purchased back by Eldred, then distributed in a manner by Eldred to others including the 31 other Plaintiffs to avoid reporting requirements under the Securities Act and as Eldred had a duty to report as a principal of a brokerage. The actions by Eldred, as pled by the Corporation, is that on or about October 8, 2008,  Eldred  gifted  most  of the  34,700,000   shares  to certain  friends,   family,  and  employees   (i.e.,  the  Plaintiffs   named  in this  Complaint),   and  kept ownership  of 4, 140,000  shares. On September 11, 2013, the Parties attended a voluntary mediation, which ended in an impasse.





Some discovery had progressed to the point that Seafarer had, on September 25, 2013, filed a Motion to File Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint (“Motion for Leave to File Counterclaim”) along with a proposed Counterclaim.  Such counterclaims were filed in December 2013.  Included in the counterclaim was an allegation of conspiracy between Eldred and Sean Murphy for the publication of false information which Seafarer sued Murphy for and received a judgment for libel against Murphy on April 1, 2011 for $5,080,000. Thus the counterclaim was filed against the Plaintiffs: Micah Eldred, Michael J. Daniels, Carl Dilley, Heather Dilley, James Eldred, Mary R. Eldred, Michole Eldred, Nathan Eldred, Toni A. Eldred, Diane J. Harrison, Ioulia Hess, Olessia  Kritskaia,  Anna Krokhina, George Lindner, Elizabeth Lizzano, Karen Lizzano, Robert Lizzano, Abby Lord, Jillian Mally, Ekaterina Messinger, Susan Miller, Michael Mona, Matthew J. Presy, Oksana Savchenko, Vanessa A. Verbosh, Alan Wolper, Sarah Wolper, and Christine Zitman. On April 23, 2014, the trial court ruled on the Counter-Claim Defendants’ motion to dismiss and ordered the dismissal of the claims for section 517.301 violations, conspiracy and fraud. The court ruled that the Corporation did not have standing and was not in privity with the counter-claim defendants at the time of their alleged actions so the company could not maintain the action, unlike private shareholders who could have standing. Thus the Company attempted to protect the shareholders by such suit, but was ruled against as not having standing to do so.





On October 18, 2013, the Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Removal to Federal Court in the Tampa Division of the United States District Court, citing the allegation that such lawsuit should be moved to Federal Court based upon the Defendants proposed counterclaims of Federal law. The pleading for removal contained the allegation by the Plaintiffs that they had the consent of all the listed Plaintiffs to remove the matter to Federal Court. On November 4, 2013, Seafarer filed a Motion to Remand back to State Court in the Federal Court, citing legal argument and the undisputed facts that removal to Federal Court was improper as having no basis in law, and asking for attorney’s fees from the Plaintiffs for such removal. On November 7, 2013, Judge James Moody of the United States District Court entered an Order granting the Remand Motion of Seafarer, finding that “Plaintiffs removed the case based on their assumption that the counterclaim would establish federal jurisdiction. Plaintiffs’ removal is patently without merit.” Judge Moody further held “Plaintiffs’ removal had no basis under the law or facts. Simply put, the removal was not objectively reasonable.”   Accordingly, the Court Ordered the case sent back to State Court and that the Federal Court would award Defendants [Seafarer] a reasonable amount of attorney’s fees and costs.” Seafarer collected such attorney’s fees through counsel. Such case was remanded to the Circuit Court in Hillsborough County, where Seafarer had the motion to file the Counterclaims and Third Party Claims heard and an Order Granting the filing and service of such claims was made by Circuit Judge Paul Huey on December 13, 2013. Seafarer filed such complaint and served such Counterclaim Defendants and Third Party Defendants during the months of December 2013 and January 2014. Such complaint included claims by Seafarer for damages including punitive damages against the Plaintiffs for their actions, which is alleged to have materially damaged the Corporation and its shareholders. Such litigation continues and the Company will continue to fight the release of such shares for sale. It is the position of Seafarer that due to the actions involved with such shares, they are tainted and should be ordered to be cancelled. Seafarer intends to continuously pursue this defense will assist any shareholders with any claims they may have against the Plaintiffs who hold such shares as to their actions which may have harmed any shareholders who were shareholders at the time of the Plaintiff’s action.








25
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)





NOTE 11 – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS - continued





In early October 2013, counsel for Seafarer was contacted by counsel representing the listed Plaintiff, CADEF: The Childhood Autism Foundation (CADEF), as to their being named in the lawsuit as Plaintiffs in the State Court action and the litigation being done in their name. Pursuant to those discussions, on November 5, 2013, Seafarer, Kyle Kennedy (individually), Cleartrust LLC and CADEF entered into a Settlement Agreement and Release from Litigation. CADEF agreed to surrender all rights to the 1,000,000 shares in its name, as well as causing dismissal of any such claims against the Seafarer, Kennedy and Cleartrust that had been brought in their name in the lawsuit. Specifically, CADEF agreed: “CADEF agrees that the following matters of fact exist based upon the knowledge of its Board of Directors and Principals: A) The Board of Directors of CADEF had no knowledge of the share certificate ever being issued for its benefit or the existence of such share certificate until recently in the month of October 2013 when such shares were sent to them. B) The Board of Directors of CADEF never authorized the filing of the lawsuit cited above or to be a party to such. C) Because of the above in B) CADEF’s Board of Directors was never advised of any settlement offer being made by the Defendants nor of the mediation held on September 11, 2013. On approximately October 30, 2013 CADEF delivered such 1,000,000 shares to counsel for Seafarer. Such shares were cancelled subsequently. Seafarer believes this pattern activity.





In the ongoing litigation in the above case against Micah Eldred and associated persons to protect the interests of the shareholders, the Corporation followed up on its counter-claims against Eldred by the filing of a notice of appeal of the dismissal of such claims, to the Second District Court of Appeal for Florida on May 17, 2014.On May 29, 2014, the Company was served a secondary lawsuit in Hillsborough County. The lawsuit challenges the creation of the Preferred B Series of Shares and the increase in authorized shares. The lawsuit in the opinion of the Corporation and multiple counsel has no merit since the corporation’s articles of incorporation and Florida statutes allow for the creation of the preferred shares, and thus the increase in authorized shares. The Corporation is defending such lawsuit and seeking dismissal by motion.





On March 2, 2010, the Company filed a complaint naming, Sean Murphy as a Defendant who formerly provided services as a captain, diver, and general laborer to the Company as a defendant in the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County, Florida case number 10-CA-004674. The lawsuit contains numerous counts against the defendant, including civil theft, breach of contract, libel and negligence. On April 5, 2011, a six person jury in Hillsborough County, Florida found in favor of the Company and found that the Defendant was responsible for $5,080,000 in compensatory damages. In 2012, the Company attempted to schedule a trial for the punitive damages, but the Court cancelled the trial due to scheduling of priority cases. The Company is currently seeking final entry of not only the judgment, but will be exercising collection matters against the Defendant. The Company intends to pursue collection, no matter the ability of the Defendant to pay.





On June 18, 2013, Seafarer began litigation against Tulco Resources, LLC, in a lawsuit filed in the Circuit Court in and for Hillsborough County, Florida. Such suit was filed for against Tulco based upon  for breach of contract, equitable relief and injunctive relief. Tulco was the party holding the rights under a permit to a treasure cite at Juno Beach, Florida. Tulco and Seafarer had entered into contracts  in March 2008, and later renewed under an amended agreement on June 11, 2010. Such permit was committed to by Tulco to be an obligation and contractual duty to which they would be responsible for payment of all costs in order for the permit to be reissued. Such obligation is contained in the agreement of March 2008 which was renewed in the June 2010 agreement between Seafarer and Tulco. Tulco made the commitment to be responsible for payments of all necessary costs for the gaining of the new permit. Tulco never performed on such obligation, and Seafarer during the period of approximately March 2008 and April 2012 had endeavored and even had to commence a lawsuit to gain such permit which was awarded in April 2012. Seafarer alleges in their complaint the expenditure of large amounts of shares and monies for financing and for delays due to Tulco’s non-performance. Seafarer seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief for the award of all rights held by Tulco to Seafarer. As of March 24, 2014, Seafarer, through Counsel with the assistance of a licensed investigator, established there was no party or individual to be served from Tulco due to the death of the former Manager, and having no other legal person or entity to serve, has established that it will seek the entry of a default judgment, and final judgment for award of all rights to such site for contractual and other rights held by Tulco. Seafarer gained a default and final Judgment on such matter on July 23, 2014. Seafarer is now working with the State for the renewed permit to be in Seafarer’s name and rights only, with Tulco removed per the Order of the Court.





The Company currently has litigation pending in Pinellas County, the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Civil Case No. 11-05539-Cl-19 naming as Defendants both an individual and a corporation controlled by the individual. The case is a collection case against the corporation for the balance of a promissory note due to the Company, and against the individual as a guarantor of the promissory note. The defendants have filed an answer in the nature of a general denial, certain affirmative defenses, and a singular counterclaim against the Company and its CEO, individually, alleging that the Company and its CEO were negligent in the use or maintenance of a vessel owned by the corporation, for which damages are sought in excess of $15,000. Seafarer’s legal counsel intends to argue that the Company’s CEO has been improperly individually joined in this action. The counterclaim allegations are being vigorously legally contested by both the Company and its CEO. Motion to strike and dismiss defenses and counterclaims are currently pending, legal discovery is ongoing, and the pleadings are not otherwise currently “at-issue” to schedule the action for trial. At the time of the filing of this form 10-Q, the Company’s motions have not been set for hearing and dispositions by the court.





NOTE 12 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS





During the three month period ended June 30, 2014:





In April of 2014 the Company entered into a convertible promissory agreement in the amount of $5,005 with an individual who is related to the Company’s CEO. This loan pays interest at a rate of 6% per annum and the principle and accrued interest are due on or before October 22, 2014. The note is not secured and is convertible at the lender’s option into shares of the Company’s common stock at a rate of $0.007 per share.





In May of 2014 the Company entered into a convertible promissory note agreement in the amount of $7,000 with an individual who is related to the Company’s CEO. This loan pays interest at a rate of 6% per annum and the principle and accrued interest are due on or before November 27, 2014. The note is not secured and is convertible at the lender’s option into shares of the Company’s common stock at a rate of $0.007 per share.








26
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 12 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS - continued





In June of 2014 an individual who is related to the Company’s CEO entered into a subscription agreement to purchase 900,000 shares of the Company’s restricted common stock at a price of $0.007 per share and the Company received proceeds of $6,300.





On various dates a related party investor converted the principal balance plus accrued interest of three convertible promissory notes and the accrued interest of three separate promissory notes into 4,492,150 shares of the Company’s common stock.





Additional information:





In February of 2014, the Company entered into an agreement with an individual who is related to the Company’s CEO to continue serving as a member of the Company’s Board of Directors. Under the  agreement, the Director agreed to provide various services to the Company including making recommendations for both the short term and the long term business strategies to be employed by the Company, monitoring and assessing the Company's business and to advise the Company’s Board of Directors with respect to an appropriate business strategy on an ongoing basis, commenting on proposed corporate decisions and identifying and evaluating alternative courses of action, making suggestions to strengthen the Company's operations, identifying and evaluating external threats and opportunities to the Company, evaluating and making ongoing recommendations to the Board with respect for one year and may be terminated by either the Company or the Director by providing written notice to the other party. The agreement also terminates automatically upon the death, resignation or removal of the Director.  Under the terms of the agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Director 2,000,000 restricted shares of its common stock at the execution of the agreement and to negotiate future compensation on a year-by-year basis. The Company also agreed to reimburse the Director for pre-approved expenses. The 2,000,000 shares are included as an expense in consulting and contractor fees in the accompanying income statements.





The Company has an ongoing verbal agreement with a limited liability company that is controlled by a person who is related to the Company’s CEO to pay the related party consultant $3,000 per month to provide general business consulting, industry research, monitoring and assessing the Company's business and to advise management with respect to an appropriate business strategy on an ongoing basis, commenting on proposed corporate decisions and identifying and evaluating alternative courses of action, perform background research including background checks and provide investigative information on individuals and companies and acting as an administrative specialist to perform various administrative duties and clerical services including reviewing the Company’s agreements and books and records. The consultant provides the services under the direction and supervision of the Company’s CEO. All fees paid to the related party consultant during the period ended June 30, 2014 are included as an expense in consulting and contractor fees in the accompanying income statement for the period.





The Company has an ongoing agreement with a limited liability company that is owned and controlled by a person who is related to the Company’s CEO to provide stock transfer agency services. At June 30, 2014, the Company owed the related party limited liability company $284 for transfer agency services rendered. During the period ended June 30, 2014 the Company paid the related party limited liability company $7,597 in fees for transfer agent services, including fees owed from past periods that had previously been accrued by the Company. In January 2014 the Company entered into a separate debt settlement agreement with the related party vendor to settle a total of $7,683 of outstanding debt related to legal fees incurred by the related party vendor due to a lawsuit against the Company in which suit the related party vendor was also named as a defendant due to its position as the Company’s stock transfer agency. The Company issued 768,293 shares of its common stock to this vendor as satisfaction for the outstanding debt. The agreement between the Company and the vendor stipulated that should the transfer agency realize less than $7,683 from the sale of the stock, then the consultant is entitled to receive up to an additional 700,000 shares of common stock or a cash payment until the balance is paid in full. In March of 2014 the related party limited liability company also agreed to provide various corporate consulting, strategic planning and training under a separate consulting agreement and the Company agreed to pay 500,000 shares of its restricted common stock under the consulting agreement. All fees paid to the related party consultant during the period ended June 30, 2014 are included as an expense in consulting and contractor fees in the accompanying income statement for the period.





At June 30, 2014 the following promissory notes and shareholder loans were outstanding to related parties:





A convertible note payable dated January 9, 2009 due to a person related to the Company’s CEO with a face amount of $10,000. This note bears interest at a rate of 10% per annum with interest payments to be paid monthly and is convertible at the note holder’s option into the Company’s common stock at $0.015 per share.  The convertible note payable was due on or before January 9, 2010 and is secured.  This convertible note payable is currently in default due to non-payment of principal and interest.





A convertible note payable dated January 25, 2010 in the principal amount of $6,000 with a person who is related to the Company’s CEO. This loan pays interest at a rate of 6% per annum and the principle and accrued interest are due on or before January 25, 2011. The note is not secured and is convertible at the lender’s option into shares of the Company’s common stock at a rate of $0.005 per share. This loan is currently in default due to non-payment of principal and interest.





A note payable dated February 24, 2010 in the principal amount of $7,500 with a corporation. The Company’s CEO is a director of the corporation and a former Director of the Company is an officer of the corporation. The loan is not secured and pays interest at a rate of 6% per annum and the principle and accrued interest were due on or before February 24, 2011. This loan is currently in default due to non-payment of principal and interest.








27
 
 SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.
 (A Development Stage Company)
 NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
 (Unaudited)


NOTE 12 – RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS- continued









A convertible note payable dated January 19, 2013 due to a person related to the Company’s CEO with a face amount of $15,000. This note bears interest at a rate of 6% per annum with accrued interest to be paid at the time that the principal balance is repaid or the note is converted into shares of the Company’s common stock. The note is convertible at the note holder’s option into the Company’s common stock at $0.004 per share.  The convertible note payable is due on or before July 30, 2013 and is not secured.  The note is currently in default due to non-payment of principal and interest.





A convertible note payable dated February 7, 2013 due to a person related to the Company’s CEO with a face amount of $10,000. This note bears interest at a rate of 6% per annum with accrued interest to be paid at the time that the principal balance is repaid or the note is converted into shares of the Company’s common stock. The note is convertible at the note holder’s option into the Company’s common stock at $0.005 per share.  The convertible note payable is due on or before August 7, 2013 and is not secured.  The note is currently in default due to non-payment of principal and interest.





A convertible note payable dated July 17, 2013 due to a person related to the Company’s CEO with a face amount of $30,000. This note bears interest at a rate of 6% per annum with accrued interest to be paid at the time that the principal balance is repaid or the note is converted into shares of the Company’s common stock. The note is convertible at the note holder’s option into the Company’s common stock at $0.01 per share.  The convertible note payable is due on or before January 17, 2014 and is not secured.





A convertible note payable dated July 26, 2013 due to a person related to the Company’s CEO with a face amount of $10,000. This note bears interest at a rate of 6% per annum with accrued interest to be paid at the time that the principal balance is repaid or the note is converted into shares of the Company’s common stock. The note is convertible at the note holder’s option into the Company’s common stock at $0.01 per share.  The convertible note payable is due on or before January 26, 2014 and is not secured.





A convertible note payable dated January 17, 2014 due to a person related to the Company’s CEO with a face amount of $31,500. This note bears interest at a rate of 6% per annum with accrued interest to be paid at the time that the principal balance is repaid or the note is converted into shares of the Company’s common stock. The note is convertible at the note holder’s option into the Company’s common stock at $0.006 per share.  The convertible note payable is due on or before July 17, 2014 and is not secured.





A convertible note payable dated April 22, 2014 due to a person related to the Company’s CEO with a face amount of $5,005. This note bears interest at a rate of 6% per annum with accrued interest to be paid at the time that the principal balance is repaid or the note is converted into shares of the Company’s common stock. The note is convertible at the note holder’s option into the Company’s common stock at $0.007 per share.  The convertible note payable is due on or before October 22, 2014 and is not secured.





A convertible note payable dated May 27, 2014 due to a person related to the Company’s CEO with a face amount of $7,000. This note bears interest at a rate of 6% per annum with accrued interest to be paid at the time that the principal balance is repaid or the note is converted into shares of the Company’s common stock. The note is convertible at the note holder’s option into the Company’s common stock at $0.007 per share.  The convertible note payable is due on or before November 27, 2014 and is not secured.





NOTE 13 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS





On July 28, 2014 the Company’s partnership with Marine Archeology Partners, LLC, Seafarer’s Quest, LLC, received a 1A-31 Recovery Permit (the “Permit”) from the Florida Division of Historical Resources for an area identified off of Cape Canaveral, Florida. The Permit is active for three years from the date of issuance.








28


Item 2. Management’s Discussion And Analysis Of Financial Condition And Results Of Operations





FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS





The following discussion contains certain forward-looking statements that are subject to business and economic risks and uncertainties, and which speak only as of the date of this annual report. No one should place strong or undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. The use in this Form 10-Q of such words as "believes", "plans", "anticipates", "expects", "intends", and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, but are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements. The Company’s actual results or actions may differ materially from these forward-looking statements for due to many factors and the success of the Company is dependent on our efforts and many other factors including, primarily, our ability to raise additional capital. Such factors include, among others, the following: our ability to continue as a going concern, general economic and business conditions; competition; success of operating initiatives; our ability to raise capital and the terms thereof; changes in business strategy or development plans; future revenues; the continuity, experience and quality of our management; changes in or failure to comply with government regulations or the lack of government authorization to continue our projects; and other factors referenced in the Form 10-Q. This Item should be read in conjunction with the financial statements,  the related notes and with the understanding that the Company’s actual future results may be materially different from what is currently expected or projected by the Company.





We caution readers not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made.  Such forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs and estimates of our management, as well as on assumptions made by and information currently available to us at the time such statements were made. Forward looking statements are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual events or results to differ from those reflected in the forward looking statements, including, without limitation, the failure to successfully locate cargo and artifacts from the Juno Beach shipwreck site and a number of other risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements, either as a result of the matters set forth or incorporated in this Report generally and certain economic and business factors, some of which may be beyond our control.





We disclaim any obligation subsequently to revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of such statements or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events.





Overview





General





The Company’s principal business plan is to develop the infrastructure to engage in the archaeologically-sensitive exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks. This type of business venture is extremely speculative in nature and there is a tremendous amount of risk that any capital invested in and/or borrowed by the Company will be lost.





It has been estimated that there are over three million undiscovered shipwrecks around the world and a few of these shipwrecks were lost with verifiable cargoes that contained valuable materials, including artifacts and treasure. However, the majority of these shipwrecks may have very little archaeological or historical value, and furthermore, a very high percentage of these shipwrecks would not have been carrying valuable cargo including artifacts or treasure of any kind.





The exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks involves a multi-year, multi stage process. It may take many years and/or be prohibitively expensive to locate, if any are ever located at all, and recover valuable artifacts from historic shipwrecks. Locating and recovering valuable artifacts is very difficult and the probability that the Company will locate valuable artifacts or treasure is very remote. If the Company is not able to locate artifacts or treasure with significant value then there is a very high probability that the Company will fail and all capital invested in or borrowed by the Company will be lost.


























29


Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - continued





Underwater recovery operations are inherently difficult and dangerous and may be delayed or suspended by weather, sea conditions or other natural hazards. Even though sea conditions in a particular search location may be somewhat predictable, the possibility exists that unexpected conditions may occur that adversely affect the Company’s operations. It is also possible that natural hazards may prevent or significantly delay search and recovery operations.





In addition to natural hazards, there are constant repair and maintenance issues with salvage vessels, which tend to be older vessels that were originally used in other industries which have been converted for use in shipwreck exploration and recovery. The repairs, maintenance and upkeep of this type of vessel, and in particular the Company’s main salvage vessel, is very time consuming and expensive and there may be significant periods of vessel down time that result from lack of financing to make repairs to the vessel.





Furthermore, there are very strict international, federal and state laws that govern the exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks. There is no guarantee that the Company will be able to secure permits or enter into agreements with government agencies in order to explore and salvage historic shipwrecks. There is a very substantial risk that government entities may enact legislation that is so strict that any recovery of artifacts and cargo from historic shipwrecks will be nearly impossible. Additionally, permits and agreements with governmental agencies to conduct historic shipwreck exploration and recovery operations are expensive, in terms of both direct costs and ongoing compliance costs. It is also entirely possible that the Company will not be successful in obtaining title or permission to excavate certain wrecks. It is possible that permits that are sought for potential future international projects may never be issued, and if issued, may not be legal or honored by the entities that issued them.





Even if the Company is able to obtain permits for shipwreck sites projects, there is a possibility that the shipwrecks may have already been salvaged or may not be found, or may not have had anything valuable on board at the time that they sank. In the event that valuable artifacts are located and recovered, it is possible that the cost of recovery will be greater than the value of the artifacts recovered. It is also possible that other entities, including both private parties and governmental entities, will assert conflicting claims and challenge the Company’s rights to the recovered artifacts.





Moreover, there is the possibility that should the Company be successful in locating and salvaging artifacts that have significant archeological and/or monetary value, a country whose ship was salvaged may attempt to claim ownership of the artifacts by pursuing litigation. In the event that the Company is able to make a valid claim to artifacts or other items at a shipwreck site, there is a risk of theft of such items at sea both before or after the recovery or while the artifacts are in transit to a safe destination as well as when stored in a secured location. Such thefts may not be adequately covered by insurance. Based on a number these and other potential issues, the Company could spend a great deal of time and invest a large sum in a specific shipwreck project and receive very little or no salvage claim or revenue for its work.





There are a number of additional significant issues and challenges including, but not limited to, government regulation and/or the Company’s inability to secure permits and contracts, lack of financing, lack of revenue and cash flow and continued losses from operations that make the exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks a very speculative and risky business venture with a very high degree of risk that the Company may fail.  There is a possibility that the Company will be forced to cease its operations if it is not successful in eventually locating valuable artifacts. If the Company were to cease its operations, then it is likely that there would be complete loss of all capital invested in or borrowed by the Company. As such, an investment in Seafarer is extremely speculative and of exceptionally high risk with a very high probability that all capital invested in and/or borrowed by the Company may be lost.





There is currently a limited trading market for our securities. We cannot assure when and if an active-trading market in our shares will be established, or whether any such market will be sustained or sufficiently liquid to enable holders of shares of our common stock to liquidate their investment in our company. The sale of unregistered and restricted securities by current shareholders, including shares issued to consultants and shares issued to settle convertible promissory notes, may cause a significant drop in the market price of the Company’s securities.





Accordingly, an investment in our securities should only be considered by those investors who do not require liquidity and can afford to suffer a total loss of their investment. An investor should consider consulting with professional advisers before making such an investment.





Plan of Operation





During the periods ended June 30, 2014 and 2013, the Company has taken the following steps to implement its business plan:





·
To date, the Company has devoted its time towards establishing its business to develop the infrastructure capable of exploring, salvaging and recovering historic shipwrecks. The Company has also performed some exploration and recovery activities.





·
Spent considerable time researching potential shipwrecks including obtaining information from foreign archives.





·
Although the Company has not generated revenues to date our development activities continue to evolve. We have been a development stage company since inception, in accordance with ASC 915-10.





30


Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - continued





The Company has evaluated various opportunities to enter into agreements or contracts to conduct exploration and recovery operations at known historic shipwreck locations or potential locations. The Company has previously spent some of its efforts exploring what it believes is a historic shipwreck site located off of Juno Beach, Florida. The Company and Tulco renewed their Exploration Agreement regarding the Juno Beach Shipwreck site in June of 2010.   Even though the Company had an Agreement with Tulco for the Exploration of the Juno Beach site through June 8, 2013, the Company is uncertain as to whether Tulco plans to renew this Exploration Agreement. The original three year term of the Exploration Agreement was valid until June 8, 2013 and both Seafarer and Tulco had the option to extend the agreement for an additional three years. There have been no discussions between Tulco and Seafarer regarding extending the Exploration Agreement. It is possible that Tulco may claim that the Exploration Agreement is no longer valid and therefore the Company has no further rights to explore and salvage the Juno Beach site. On June 18, 2013, Seafarer began litigation against Tulco Resources, LLC, in a lawsuit filed in the Circuit Court in and for Hillsborough County, Florida. Such suit was filed for against Tulco for breach of contract, equitable relief and injunctive relief.





As previously noted on its form 8-K filed on May 9, 2011, the Company and Tulco received a Recovery Permit from the Florida Division of Historical Resources. The Recovery Permit was active through April 25, 2014 and the Company is in the process of seeking a renewal to the permit. The permit authorizes Seafarer to dig and recover artifacts from the designated site at Juno Beach, Florida.





The Juno Beach Shipwreck site is a speculative and highly risky project as far as the potential for the Company to ever locate valuable artifacts or treasure. Although the Company has recovered various artifacts that it believes are interesting, it has not located artifacts and/or treasure of any significant value from the Juno Beach Shipwreck site. There is also the possibility that there are no artifacts of significant value located at the Juno Beach shipwreck site. Even if there are valuable artifacts and/or treasure located at the site, recovering them may be extremely difficult or impossible due to a variety of challenges that include, but are not limited to; inclement weather, hazardous ocean conditions, large amounts of sand that cover large areas of the site, lack the necessary equipment to be able to dig deep enough into the sand, ongoing maintenance and repair issues with the Company’s main salvage vessel, permitting issues and/or a lack of financing, etc.





Moreover, the Company does not currently have sufficient data to positively identify the potential Juno Beach shipwreck, or its country of origin, and it is therefore not possible to determine whether or not the ship was originally carrying cargo of any significant value. Only remnants and scattered pieces of a sunken ship have been located to date; no main shipwreck body has been located. It is also possible that a ship began to break up on the site but the body of the ship actually sank in another area that is outside of the designated Juno Beach site area and all that was left on the Juno Beach site were scattered remnants of the original ship that have little or no archeological or actual value. There is a possibility that there are no artifacts of significant value located on the Juno Beach shipwreck site.  The chance that the Company will ultimately recover valuable artifacts or treasure from the Juno Beach shipwreck site is very remote.





There is a historic shipwreck site located off of Lantana Beach Florida in which the Company has received a three stage permit from the Florida Division of Historical Resources. The permit is for three years starting in November 2012 and ending in November 2015. The permit may be renewed at the end of the third year. Phase 1 of the permit has been completed. The Company's plan was to salvage the site in an archeologically sensitive manner once Phase 2 has been completed. An archeologist with the technical skills, knowledge, and experience from around the world was hired to help insure the integrity of the work.





Under the permit, the Company began remote sensing at the site with a cesium vapor magnotemoter and did underwater exploration. Once the remote sensing was completed and the data analyzed, the Exploration permit moved to Phase 2, dig and identify. During Phase 2, testing was done which confirmed a mid to late 18th century shipwreck. Upon further testing, management believes a 1600s era shipwreck potentially exists, but not within the currently permitted area. Due to other developments and projects the Company is not pursuing Phase 3 at the Lantana site at this time but will review the site at a later date that has not yet been determined.





There is a purported historic shipwreck site in the waters off of Brevard County Florida that the Company desires to explore. In February 2013, the Company signed an agreement with a third party who has previously explored this site for the right to explore the site. On March 1, 2014, Seafarer entered into a partnership and ownership with Marine Archaeology Partners, LLC, with the formation of Seafarer’s Quest, LLC. Such LLC was formed in the State of Florida for the purpose of permitting, exploration and recovery of artifacts from a designated area on the east coast of Florida. Such site area is from a defined, contracted area by a separate entity, which a portion of such site is designated from a previous contracted holding through the State of Florida. Under such agreement, Seafarer is responsible for costs of permitting, exploration and recovery, and is entitled to 60% of such artifact recovery. Seafarer has a 50% ownership, with designated management of the LLC coming from Seafarer. There are a significant number of challenges inherent in the exploration and salvage of historic shipwrecks, including the possibility that the Company will never find artifacts of value at the site.





31
  Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - continued





On July 28, 2014 Seafarer’s Quest, LLC received a 1A-31 Recovery Permit (the “Permit”) from the Florida Division of Historical Resources for an area identified off of Cape Canaveral, Florida. The Permit is active for three years from the date of issuance.





The Company regularly reviews opportunities to perform exploration and recovery operations at purported historic shipwreck sites; however the Company does not have any specific plans to perform exploration and recovery operations at other shipwreck sites at the present time. The Company is actively reviewing other potential historic shipwreck sites for possible exploration and recovery. Should the Company decide that it will pursue exploration and salvage activities at other potential shipwreck sites it may be necessary to obtain salvage permits as well as environmental permits.





If the Company is not able to perform any exploration or recovery operations, then it may have to suspend or cease its operations. If the Company ceases its previously stated efforts, there are no plans to pursue other business opportunities.





Limited Operating History





The Company has not currently generated any revenue from operations and does not expect to report any significant revenue from operations for the foreseeable future.





At June 30, 2014, the Company had a working capital deficit of $1,031,142. The Company is in immediate need of further working capital and is seeking options, with respect to financing, in the form of debt, equity or a combination thereof.





Since inception, the Company has funded its operations through common stock issuances and loans in order to meet its strategic objectives; however, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to obtain further funds to continue with its efforts to establish a new business. There is a very significant risk that the Company will be unable to obtain financing to fund its operation and as such the Company may be forced to cease operations at any time which would likely result in a complete loss of all capital that has been invested in and/or borrowed by the Company to date.





The Company expects to continue to incur significant operating losses and to generate negative cash flow from operating activities, while building out its infrastructure in order to explore and salvage historic shipwreck sites and establishing itself in the marketplace. Based on our historical rate of expenditures, the Company expects to expend its available cash in less than one month from August 14, 2014.





The Company’s ability to eliminate operating losses and to generate positive cash flow from operations in the future will depend upon a variety of factors, many of which it is unable to control. If the Company is unable to implement its business plan successfully, it may not be able to eliminate operating losses, generate positive cash flow or achieve or sustain profitability, which may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, operations, and financial results, as well as its ability to make payments on its debt obligations, and the Company may be forced to cease operations.





The Company’s lack of operating cash flow and reliance on the sale of its commons stock and loans to fund operations is extremely risky. If the Company is unable to continue to raise capital or obtain loans or other financing on terms that are acceptable to the Company, or at all, then it is highly likely that the Company will be forced to cease operations. If the Company ceases its operations, then it is likely that all capital invested in and/or borrowed by the Company will be lost.





Results of Operations





Since February 15, 2007, our inception, we have generated no revenues.  Our operating expenses from inception through June 30, 2014 are $7,368,760. Since inception, we have incurred $4,769,617 in expenses for various consulting services including executive, management, accounting, operations, archeological, administrative, corporate communications, diving, etc. Since inception, we have incurred $539,404 in vessel expenses related to repair, maintenance and operation of its main salvage vessel and other vessels used in its operations.  Since inception, we have also incurred $860,273 in professional fees related to legal, auditing and accounting services.










32
  Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - continued





Summary of Six Months Ended June 30, 2014 Results of Operations





Net losses for the six month period ended June 30, 2014 were $1,043,253 versus $1,161,625 for the six month period ended June 30, 2013, a decrease of 10%. The decrease in net losses in 2014 is largely due to a decrease in consulting and contractor expenses, professional fees and vessel repair and maintenance expenses. During the six month period ended June 30, 2014, consulting and contractor fees were $368,863 compared to $652,815 during the six month period ended June 30, 2013. The 44% decrease in consulting and contractor fees in 2014 was largely a result of significantly less payments of stock based compensation paid to consultants. The Company paid 10,000,000 shares of its restricted common stock in the six month period ended June 30, 2013 pursuant to an agreement to acquire the rights to a historic shipwreck site.  There was no such payment made in 2014. The Company also paid a lower amount of stock based compensation for other services for the six month period in 2014. During the six month period ended June 30, 2014 the Company incurred professional fees related expenses of $75,347 versus $184,744 during the six month period ended June 30, 2013, a decrease of 59%. The 59% decrease in professional fees in 2014 was mostly due to a reduction in stock based compensation paid for legal services and for other consulting services. During the six month period ended June 30, 2014 the Company incurred vessel related expenses of $41,769 versus $82,679 during the six month period ended June 30, 2013. The approximate 50% decrease in vessel expenses in 2014 was due to fewer major repairs made to the Company’s primary salvage vessel. Travel and entertainment expenses increased 27%, from $52,184 for the six month period ended June 30, 2013 to $66,456 for the six month period ended June 30, 2014. The increase in travel and entertainment expenses was generally due to the Company paying for hotel lodging and travel expenses on a regular basis for several of its independent contract divers and operations personnel while they traveled to perform services for the Company as well as increased efforts by management to meet with shareholders and advisors and travel by management and certain consultants to explore opportunities to pursue various projects in the treasure salvage industry. Interest expense for the six month period ended June 30, 2014 was $443,606 versus $157,306 for the six month period ended June 30, 2013. The 285% increase in interest expense in 2014 was due to the fair value measurement of certain convertible notes.





Summary of Three Months Ended June 30, 2014 Results of Operations





The Company’s net loss for the three month period ended June 30, 2014 was $507,512 as compared to a net loss of $743,048 during the three month period ended June 30, 2013. The approximate 32% decrease in the net loss for the three month period ended June 30, 2014 was primarily attributable to a quarter-over-quarter decrease in consulting and contractor expenses, professional fees, and vessel expenses. During the three month period ended June 30, 2014 consulting and contractor fees were $164,936 as compared to $364,579 during the three month period ended June 30, 2013 which represents a decrease of nearly 55%. The decrease in consulting and contractor fees in 2014 was largely a result of a decrease in overall stock based compensation paid for consulting services.  During the three month period ended June 30, 2014, the Company incurred professional fee related expenses of $45,415 versus $149,702 during the three month period ended June 30, 2013, a decrease of 70%. The 70% decrease in professional fees in 2014 was mostly due to no stock based compensation being paid for legal services during the three month period in 2014. Travel and entertainment expenses decreased nearly 13% from $36,646 for the three month period ended June 30, 2013 to $32,023 for the three month period ended June 30, 2014. Travel and entertainment expenses decreased slightly during the three month period in 2014 as the Company attempted to hold costs down for travel, particularly for travel related to its dive operations. During the three month period ended June 30, 2014 the Company incurred vessel related expenses of $22,229 versus $44,308 during the three month period ended June 30, 2013. The approximate 50% decrease in vessel expenses in 2014 was due to there not being as great of a need for extensive repairs and maintenance work done on the Company’s primary salvage vessel in 2014 because there was extensive repair work done on the vessel 2013, however as the vessel is an older ship it continues to require constant maintenance and upkeep that is very expensive.   Interest expense for the three month period ended June 30, 2014 was $220,667 versus $123,596 for the three month period ended June 30, 2013. The approximate 79% increase in interest expense in 2014 was due to the fair value measurement of certain convertible notes.





Lack of Revenues and Cash Flow/Significant Losses from Operations





It is extremely challenging to build a publicly traded historic shipwreck exploration and recovery company. The exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks requires a multi-year, multi stage process and it may be many years before any revenue is generated from exploration and recovery activities, if ever. The Company believes that it may be several years before it is able to generate any cash flow from its operations, if any are ever generated at all. Without revenues and cash flow the Company does not have any steady cash flow to pay its expenses. The Company relies on outside financing in the form of equity and debt and it is possible that the Company may not be able to obtain outside financing in the future. If the Company is not able to obtain financing it would more than likely be forced to cease operations and all of the capital that has been invested in or borrowed by the Company would likely be lost.





The Company has experienced a net loss in every fiscal year since the reverse merger in 2008. The Company’s losses from operations were $599,647 for the six months ended June 30, 2014 and $1,046,481 for the six months ended June 30, 2013. The Company believes that it will continue to generate losses from its operation for the foreseeable future and the Company may not be able to generate a profit in the long-term, or ever.

















33


Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results Of Operations - continued





Liquidity and Capital Resources





At June 30, 2014, we had cash in the bank of $76,400.  During the six month period ended June 30, 2014, and the period from inception to June 30, 2014, we incurred net losses of $1,043,253 and $9,066,513, respectively. At June 30, 2014, we had $110,689 in current assets and $1,141,831 in current liabilities, leaving us a working capital deficit of $1,031,142.





Lack of Liquidity





A major financial challenge and significant risk facing the Company is a lack of liquidity. The company continued to operate with significant debt and a working capital deficit during the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2014. This working capital deficit indicates that the Company is unable to meet its short-term liabilities with its current assets. This working capital deficit is extremely risky for the Company as it may be forced to cease its operations due to its inability to meet all of its current obligations. If the Company is forced to cease its operations then it is highly likely that all capital invested in and/or borrowed by the Company will be lost.





The expenses associated with being a small publicly traded company attempting to develop the infrastructure to explore and salvage historic shipwrecks recovery are extremely prohibitive, especially given that the Company does not currently generate any revenues and does not expect to generate any revenues in the near future. There are ongoing expenses associated with operations that are incurred whether the Company is conducting shipwreck recovery operations or not. Vessel maintenance, particularly for an older vessel such as the Company’s main salvage vessel, upkeep expenses and docking fees are continuous and unavoidable regardless of the Company’s operational status. These repairs and maintenance are expensive and a drain on the Company’s cash.





In addition to the operations expenses, a publicly traded company also incurs the significant recurring corporate expenses related to maintaining publicly traded status, which include, but are not limited to accounting, legal, audit, executive, administrative, corporate communications, rent, etc. The recurring expenses associated with being a publicly traded company are very burdensome for smaller public companies such as Seafarer. This lack of liquidity creates a very risky situation for the Company in terms of its ability to continue operating, which in turn makes owning shares of the Company’s commons stock extremely risky and highly speculative. The Company’s lack of liquidity may cause the Company to be forced to cease operations at any time which would likely result in a complete loss of all capital invested in or borrowed by the Company to date.





Due to the fact that the Company does not generate any revenues and does not expect to generate revenues for the foreseeable future the Company must rely on outside equity and debt funding. The combination of the ongoing operational, even during times when there is little or no exploration or salvage activities taking place, and corporate expenses as well as the need for outside financing creates a very risky situation for the Company and its shareholders. This working capital shortfall and lack of access to cash to fund corporate activities is extremely risky and may force the Company to cease its operations which would more than likely result in a complete loss of all capital invested in or loaned to the Company to date.





Lack of Revenues and Cash Flow/Significant Losses from Operations





The exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks requires a multi-year, multi stage process and it may be many years before any revenue is generated from exploration and recovery activities, if ever. The Company believes that it may be several years before it is able to generate any cash flow from its operations, if any are ever generated at all. Without revenues and cash flow the Company does not have reliable cash flow to pay its expenses. The Company relies on outside financing in the form of equity and debt and it is possible that the Company may not be able to obtain outside financing in the future. If the Company is not able to obtain financing it would more than likely be forced to cease operations and all of the capital that has been invested in or borrowed by the Company would be lost.





The Company has experienced a net loss in every fiscal year since the reverse merger in 2008. The Company’s losses from operations were $286,845 for the three month period ended June 30, 2014. The Company believes that it will continue to generate losses from its operation for the foreseeable future and the Company may not be able to generate a profit in the long-term, or ever. Due to the significance of these of these matters there is substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.





34
  Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - continued





Convertible Notes Payable and Notes Payable, in Default





At June 30, 2014, the Company had convertible notes payable and notes payable with a face value of $805,310 of which $469,800 were in default.


The Company does not have additional sources of debt financing to refinance its convertible notes payable and notes payable that are currently in default. If the Company is unable to obtain additional capital, such lenders may file suit, including suit to foreclose on the assets held as collateral for the obligations arising under the secured notes. If any of the lenders file suit to foreclose on the assets held as collateral, then the Company may be forced to significantly scale back or cease its operations which would more than likely result in a complete loss of all capital that has been invested in or borrowed by the Company. The fact that the Company is in default regarding several loans held by various lenders makes investing in the Company or providing any loans to the Company extremely risky with a very high potential for a complete loss of capital.





The convertible notes that have been issued by the Company are convertible at the lender’s option. These convertible notes represent significant potential dilution to the Company’s current shareholders as the convertible price of these notes is generally lower than the current market price of the Company’s shares. As such when these notes are converted into equity there is typically a highly dilutive effect on current shareholders and very high probability that such dilution may significantly negatively affect the trading price of the Company’s common stock. Furthermore, management intends to have discussions or has already had discussions with several of the promissory note holders who do not currently have convertible notes regarding converting their notes into equity. Any such amended agreements to convert promissory notes into equity would more than likely have a highly dilutive effect on current shareholders and there is a very high probability that such dilution may significantly negatively affect the trading price of the Company’s common stock. Some of these note holders have already amended their non-convertible notes to be convertible and converted the notes into equity. Based on conversations with other note holders, the Company believes that additional note holders will amend their notes to contain a convertibility clause and eventually convert the notes into equity.





Critical Accounting Policies





Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.  The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments which affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities (see Note 3, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, contained in the notes to the Company’s financial statements for the periods ended June 30, 2014 and 2013, and for the period from inception to June 30, 2014, contained in this filing).  On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates.  We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions which we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities which are not readily apparent from other sources.  Actual results may differ from these estimates based upon different assumptions or conditions; however, we believe that our estimates are reasonable.





Management is aware that certain changes in accounting estimates employed in generating financial statements can have the effect of making the Company look more or less profitable than it actually is.  Management does not believe that either the Company or its auditors have made any such changes in accounting estimates.








Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements





None.























35


Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk





Not required for smaller reporting companies.







Item 4T. Controls and Procedures





Management’s Responsibility for Controls and Procedures





The Company’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over the Company’s financial reporting. The Company’s controls over financial reporting are designed under the supervision of the Company’s Principal Executive Officer/Principal Financial Officer to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports that the Company files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), is accumulated and communicated to the Company’s management, including the Company’s principal executive officer/principal financial officer, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.





Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures





Under the supervision and with the participation of our principal executive officer, the Company conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of its disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is defined under Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) promulgated under the Exchange Act, as of June 30, 2014.    Based on this evaluation, management concluded that our financial disclosure controls and procedures were not effective so as to timely record, process, summarize and report financial information required to be included on our Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) reports due to the Company’s limited internal resources and lack of ability to have multiple levels of transaction review.  However, as a result of our evaluation and review process, management believes that the financial statements and other information presented herewith are materially correct.





The management including its Principal Executive Officer/Principal Financial Officer, does not expect that its disclosure controls and procedures, or its internal controls over financial reporting will prevent all error and all fraud.  A control system no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable not absolute assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.  Further, the design of the control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefit 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.





The Company has limited resources and as a result, a material weakness in financial reporting currently exists, because of our limited resources and personnel, including those described below.





*
The Company has an insufficient quantity of dedicated resources and experienced personnel involved in reviewing and designing internal controls. As a result, a material misstatement of the interim and annual financial statements could occur and not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.





*
We have not achieved the optimal level of segregation of duties relative to key financial reporting functions.





*
We do not have an audit committee or an independent audit committee financial expert. While not being legally obligated to have an audit committee or independent audit committee financial expert, it is the managements view that to have audit committee, comprised of independent board members, and an independent audit committee financial expert is an important entity-level control over the Company's financial statements.*
We have not achieved an optimal segregation of duties for executive officers of the Company.





A material weakness is a deficiency (within the meaning of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) auditing standard 5) or combination of deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company's annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Management has determined that a material weakness exists due to a lack of segregation of duties, resulting from the Company's limited resources and personnel.





36
  Item 4T. Controls and Procedures - continued





Remediation Efforts to Address Deficiencies in Disclosure Controls and Procedures





As a result of these findings, management, upon obtaining sufficient capital and operations, intends to take practical, cost-effective steps in implementing internal controls, including the possible remedial measures set forth below.  As of March 31, 2014 we did not have sufficient capital and/or operations to implement any of the remedial measures described below.





*
Assessing the current duties of existing personnel and consultants, assigning additional duties to existing personnel and consultants, and, in a cost effective manner, potentially hiring additional personnel to assist with the preparation of the Company's financial statements to allow for proper segregation of duties, as well as additional resources for control documentation.





*
Assessing the duties of the existing officers of the Company and, in a cost effective manner, possibly promote or hire additional personnel to diversify duties and responsibilities of such executive officers.





*
Board to review and make recommendations to shareholders concerning the composition of the Board of Directors, with particular focus on issues of independence. The Board of Directors will consider nominating an audit committee and audit committee financial expert, which may or may not consist of independent members.





(b) Change in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting





The Company has not made any change in our internal control over financial reporting during the period ended June 30, 2014.









































37





Part II. Other Information





Item 1. Legal Proceedings





Since December 11, 2009, the Company, has been involved in a lawsuit where it was named as a Defendant, along with its CEO and transfer agent in Case Number 09-CA-030763, filed in the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County, Florida. The lawsuit was brought in the name of 31 individuals and 1 corporation. The lawsuit alleges that the Company, its CEO, and its transfer agent wrongfully refused to remove the restrictive legend from certain shares of the Company’s common stock that are collectively owned by the plaintiffs, which prevented the plaintiffs from selling or transferring their shares of the Company’s common stock. The plaintiffs allege that they have lost approximately $1,041,000 as of the date of the lawsuit. Such lawsuit continued to a hearing of the Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment against the Defendants including Seafarer, which was heard on September 1, 2011 and denied by the Court. Litigation of the matter has continued and the Company has presented evidence and arguments of law that the shares were distributed from their original recipient, Micah Eldred, in an illegal sale to another corporate entity. The Company further contends in its pleadings that such shares were then illegally purchased back by Eldred, then distributed in a manner by Eldred to others including the 31 other Plaintiffs to avoid reporting requirements under the Securities Act and as Eldred had a duty to report as a principal of a brokerage. The actions by Eldred, as pled by the Corporation, is that on or about October 8, 2008,  Eldred  gifted  most  of the  34,700,000   shares  to certain  friends,   family,  and  employees   (i.e.,  the  Plaintiffs   named  in this  Complaint),   and  kept ownership  of 4,140,000  shares. On September 11, 2013, the Parties attended a voluntary mediation, which ended in an impasse.





Some discovery had progressed to the point that Seafarer had, on September 25, 2013, filed a Motion to File Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint (“Motion for Leave to File Counterclaim”) along with a proposed Counterclaim.  Such counterclaims were filed in December 2013.  Included in the counterclaim was an allegation of conspiracy between Eldred and Sean Murphy for the publication of false information which Seafarer sued Murphy for and received a judgment for libel against Murphy on April 1, 2011 for $5,080,000. Thus the counterclaim was filed against the Plaintiffs: Micah Eldred, Michael J. Daniels, Carl Dilley, Heather Dilley, James Eldred, Mary R. Eldred, Michole Eldred, Nathan Eldred, Toni A. Eldred, Diane J. Harrison, Ioulia Hess, Olessia  Kritskaia,  Anna Krokhina, George Lindner, Elizabeth Lizzano, Karen Lizzano, Robert Lizzano, Abby Lord, Jillian Mally, Ekaterina Messinger, Susan Miller, Michael Mona, Matthew J. Presy, Oksana Savchenko, Vanessa A. Verbosh, Alan Wolper, Sarah Wolper, and Christine Zitman. On April 23, 2014, the trial court ruled on the Counter-Claim Defendants’ motion to dismiss and ordered the dismissal of the claims for section 517.301 violations, conspiracy and fraud. The court ruled that the Corporation did not have standing and was not in privity with the counter-claim defendants at the time of their alleged actions so the company could not maintain the action, unlike private shareholders who could have standing. Thus the Company attempted to protect the shareholders by such suit, but was ruled against as not having standing to do so.





On October 18, 2013, the Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Removal to Federal Court in the Tampa Division of the United States District Court, citing the allegation that such lawsuit should be moved to Federal Court based upon the Defendants proposed counterclaims of Federal law. The pleading for removal contained the allegation by the Plaintiffs that they had the consent of all the listed Plaintiffs to remove the matter to Federal Court. On November 4, 2013, Seafarer filed a Motion to Remand back to State Court in the Federal Court, citing legal argument and the undisputed facts that removal to Federal Court was improper as having no basis in law, and asking for attorney’s fees from the Plaintiffs for such removal. On November 7, 2013, Judge James Moody of the United States District Court entered an Order granting the Remand Motion of Seafarer, finding that “Plaintiffs removed the case based on their assumption that the counterclaim would establish federal jurisdiction. Plaintiffs’ removal is patently without merit.” Judge Moody further held “Plaintiffs’ removal had no basis under the law or facts. Simply put, the removal was not objectively reasonable.”   Accordingly, the Court Ordered the case sent back to State Court and that the Federal Court would award Defendants [Seafarer] a reasonable amount of attorney’s fees and costs.” Seafarer collected such attorney’s fees through counsel. Such case was remanded to the Circuit Court in Hillsborough County, where Seafarer had the motion to file the Counterclaims and Third Party Claims heard and an Order Granting the filing and service of such claims was made by Circuit Judge Paul Huey on December 13, 2013. Seafarer filed such complaint and served such Counterclaim Defendants and Third Party Defendants during the months of December 2013 and January 2014. Such complaint included claims by Seafarer for damages including punitive damages against the Plaintiffs for their actions, which is alleged to have materially damaged the Corporation and its shareholders. Such litigation continues and the Company will continue to fight the release of such shares for sale. It is the position of Seafarer that due to the actions involved with such shares, they are tainted and should be ordered to be cancelled. Seafarer intends to continuously pursue this defense will assist any shareholders with any claims they may have against the Plaintiffs who hold such shares as to their actions which may have harmed any shareholders who were shareholders at the time of the Plaintiff’s action.




38
  Item 1. Legal Proceedings - continued





In early October 2013, counsel for Seafarer was contacted by counsel representing the listed Plaintiff, CADEF: The Childhood Autism Foundation (CADEF), as to their being named in the lawsuit as Plaintiffs in the State Court action and the litigation being done in their name. Pursuant to those discussions, on November 5, 2013, Seafarer, Kyle Kennedy (individually), Cleartrust LLC and CADEF entered into a Settlement Agreement and Release from Litigation. CADEF agreed to surrender all rights to the 1,000,000 shares in its name, as well as causing dismissal of any such claims against the Seafarer, Kennedy and Cleartrust that had been brought in their name in the lawsuit. Specifically, CADEF agreed: “CADEF agrees that the following matters of fact exist based upon the knowledge of its Board of Directors and Principals: A) The Board of Directors of CADEF had no knowledge of the share certificate ever being issued for its benefit or the existence of such share certificate until recently in the month of October 2013 when such shares were sent to them. B) The Board of Directors of CADEF never authorized the filing of the lawsuit cited above or to be a party to such. C) Because of the above in B) CADEF’s Board of Directors was never advised of any settlement offer being made by the Defendants nor of the mediation held on September 11, 2013. On approximately October 30, 2013 CADEF delivered such 1,000,000 shares to counsel for Seafarer. Such shares were cancelled subsequently. Seafarer believes this pattern activity.





In the ongoing litigation in the above case against Micah Eldred and associated persons to protect the interests of the shareholders, the Corporation followed up on its counter-claims against Eldred by the filing of a notice of appeal of the dismissal of such claims, to the Second District Court of Appeal for Florida on May 17, 2014.On May 29, 2014, the Company was served a secondary lawsuit in Hillsborough County. The lawsuit challenges the creation of the Preferred B Series of Shares and the increase in authorized shares. The lawsuit in the opinion of the Corporation and multiple counsel has no merit since the corporation’s articles of incorporation and Florida statutes allow for the creation of the preferred shares, and thus the increase in authorized shares. The Corporation is defending such lawsuit and seeking dismissal by motion.





On March 2, 2010, the Company filed a complaint naming, Sean Murphy as a Defendant who formerly provided services as a captain, diver, and general laborer to the Company as a defendant in the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County, Florida case number 10-CA-004674. The lawsuit contains numerous counts against the defendant, including civil theft, breach of contract, libel and negligence. On April 5, 2011, a six person jury in Hillsborough County, Florida found in favor of the Company and found that the Defendant was responsible for $5,080,000 in compensatory damages. In 2012, the Company attempted to schedule a trial for the punitive damages, but the Court cancelled the trial due to scheduling of priority cases. The Company is currently seeking final entry of not only the judgment, but will be exercising collection matters against the Defendant. The Company intends to pursue collection, no matter the ability of the Defendant to pay.





On June 18, 2013, Seafarer began litigation against Tulco Resources, LLC, in a lawsuit filed in the Circuit Court in and for Hillsborough County, Florida. Such suit was filed for against Tulco based upon  for breach of contract, equitable relief and injunctive relief. Tulco was the party holding the rights under a permit to a treasure cite at Juno Beach, Florida. Tulco and Seafarer had entered into contracts  in March 2008, and later renewed under an amended agreement on June 11, 2010. Such permit was committed to by Tulco to be an obligation and contractual duty to which they would be responsible for payment of all costs in order for the permit to be reissued. Such obligation is contained in the agreement of March 2008 which was renewed in the June 2010 agreement between Seafarer and Tulco. Tulco made the commitment to be responsible for payments of all necessary costs for the gaining of the new permit. Tulco never performed on such obligation, and Seafarer during the period of approximately March 2008 and April 2012 had endeavored and even had to commence a lawsuit to gain such permit which was awarded in April 2012. Seafarer alleges in their complaint the expenditure of large amounts of shares and monies for financing and for delays due to Tulco’s non-performance. Seafarer seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief for the award of all rights held by Tulco to Seafarer. As of March 24, 2014, Seafarer, through Counsel with the assistance of a licensed investigator, established there was no party or individual to be served from Tulco due to the death of the former Manager, and having no other legal person or entity to serve, has established that it will seek the entry of a default judgment, and final judgment for award of all rights to such site for contractual and other rights held by Tulco. Seafarer gained a default and final Judgment on such matter on July 23, 2014. Seafarer is now working with the State for the renewed permit to be in Seafarer’s name and rights only, with Tulco removed per the Order of the Court.





The Company currently has litigation pending in Pinellas County, the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Civil Case No. 11-05539-Cl-19 naming as Defendants both an individual and a corporation controlled by the individual. The case is a collection case against the corporation for the balance of a promissory note due to the Company, and against the individual as a guarantor of the promissory note. The defendants have filed an answer in the nature of a general denial, certain affirmative defenses, and a singular counterclaim against the Company and its CEO, individually, alleging that the Company and its CEO were negligent in the use or maintenance of a vessel owned by the corporation, for which damages are sought in excess of $15,000. Seafarer’s legal counsel intends to argue that the Company’s CEO has been improperly individually joined in this action. The counterclaim allegations are being vigorously legally contested by both the Company and its CEO. Motion to strike and dismiss defenses and counterclaims are currently pending, legal discovery is ongoing, and the pleadings are not otherwise currently “at-issue” to schedule the action for trial. At the time of the filing of this form 10-Q, the Company’s motions have not been set for hearing and dispositions by the court.








39


Item 1A.  Risk Factors





Not required for smaller reporting companies.





Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds





During the three month period ended June 30, 2014, the Company issued 3,756,348 restricted common shares of its common stock to various consultants for consulting services including advisory, archeological, operations, and other services. The Company believes that the issuance of the securities was exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, in reliance on Section 4(2) of the Securities Act as a transaction by an issuer not involving any public offering and based on the fact that such securities were issued for services to sophisticated or accredited investors and persons who are thoroughly familiar with the Company’s proposed business by virtue of their affiliation with the Company.





On various dates during the three month period ended June 30, 2014, the Company entered into subscription agreements to sell 18,315,000 shares of its restricted common stock to seven investors and receive proceeds of $128,015. The proceeds were used for general corporate purposes, working capital and the repayment of some debt.





Exemptions from Registration for Sales of Restricted Securities.





The issuance of securities referenced above were issued to persons who the Company believes were either “accredited investors,” or “sophisticated investors” who, by reason of education, business acumen, experience or other factors, were fully capable of evaluating the risks and merits of an investment in us; and each had prior access to all material information about us. None of these transactions involved a public offering. An appropriate restrictive legend was placed on each certificate that has been issued, prohibiting public resale of the shares, except subject to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Act”) or in compliance with Rule 144. The Company believes that the offer and sale of these securities was exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act pursuant to Section 4(2) under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Act”) thereof, and/or Regulation D. There may be additional exemptions available to the Company.





Issuance of Securities Due to Conversion of Notes and Debt





During the three month period ended June 30, 2014 the holders of four convertible promissory notes with an aggregate face value of $73,500 elected to convert the principal balance of their notes plus accrued interest into 8,119,650 shares of the Company’s common stock and a holder of three separate convertible promissory notes elected to convert accrued interest into 492,500 shares of the Company’s common stock. These amounts include 4,492,150 shares issued to a related party investor for the conversion or partial conversion of the principal and accrued interest of various promissory notes. The Company believes that the offer and sale of these securities were exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act pursuant to Sections 3(a)(9) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.





Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities





The Company has several promissory notes that are currently in default to non-payment of principle and interest. See Part I, Item 2, notes payable and convertible notes payable, in default, for discussion of defaults on certain debt obligations of the Company.




















40


Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders





None.





Item 5. Other Information





None





Item 6. Exhibits





Set forth below is a list of the exhibits to this quarterly report on Form 10-Q.





Exhibit Number
Description*31.1
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.*32.1
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.*99.1
Temporary Hardship Exemption. Filed with this Form 10-K.**101.INS
XBRL Instance Document**101.SCH
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema**101.CAL
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase**101.DEF
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase**101.LAB
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase**101.PRE
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase
 * Filed herewith.
 ** To be furnished by amendment per Temporary Hardship Exemption under Regulation S-T.


























41




















SIGNATURE





Pursuant to the requirements 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.








SEAFARER EXPLORATION CORP.Date: August 14, 2014
By:
/s/ Kyle KennedyKyle Kennedy

President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of the Board

(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)








Date: August 14, 2014
By:
/s/ Charles BranscumCharles Branscum, Director








Date: August 14, 2014
By:
/s/ Robert L. KennedyRobert L. Kennedy, Director















































42