Quarterlytics / Communication Services / Internet Content & Information / TrueCar

TrueCar

true · NASDAQ Communication Services
Claim this profile
Ticker true
Exchange NASDAQ
Sector Communication Services
Industry Internet Content & Information
Employees 501-1000
← All annual reports
FY2015 Annual Report · TrueCar
Sign in to download
Loading PDF…
2
0
1
5

2
0
1
5
A
n
n
u
a

l

R
e
p
o
r
t

•  Annual Report

3/14/16   5:27 PM

 
 
2015 
Annual Report

45586cvr.indd   4-6

TrueCar, Inc.

Message from the President and Chief Executive Officer

I joined TrueCar on December 14th, 2015,  

and I cannot tell you how excited I am to  

be here. As a twenty-year online automotive  

industry executive, I strongly believe in the 

potential that exists here at TrueCar, and I  

am confident that TrueCar can become the 

number one player in the online automotive 

space over the next few years, creating  

significant value for our shareholders. 

In my view, TrueCar has four important strengths and 

leveragable assets that differentiate us in the market and 

will allow us to scale and win:

Our biggest strength is our new car pricing transparency 

model. For consumers, we contextualize highly relevant  

Chip Perry

market information about what other people have paid 

for their new cars, as well as inventory and pricing 

information for new cars from our dealers, in a way that 

encourages these buyers to use our marketplace to initiate 

their purchasing process with our dealers.

Our second major asset is a powerful value proposition 

for dealers that allows them to pay us on an accountable 

45586txt.indd   3

03

3/17/16   9:34 PM

2015 
Annual Report

basis when a TrueCar consumer buys a car from 

and valuable because of the very close relationships 

them. Generally, we do this while charging dealers 

that our partners have with their members, which is 

a per sale transaction fee that is well below their 

reflected in the productivity of these channels.

average marketing cost per car sold. As a result, I 

believe TrueCar has the best commercial platform for 

Finally, we have a rapidly growing brand which  

monetizing consumer-dealer introductions in the 

has a positive image with consumers. Based on  

entire online auto industry.

third-party research data, it is evident that new car 

buyers view TrueCar as the marketplace of choice 

Our third strength is our relationship with affinity 

all across America. This is no small feat and speaks 

partners such as USAA, AAA, Sam’s Club and many 

to the powerful work TrueCar has done over the 

others. Our dealers view these partnerships as unique 

past ten years to establish its place in the market. 

Dealer Network

Over 11,000 TrueCar Certified Dealers in our Network and Counting

Franchise  
Dealers 
9,094

8,501

1,339

383

6,651

Independent 
Dealers 
2,082

2013

2014

2015

t
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
c
y
m
o
d
e
l
.
”

“
O
u
r
b
g
g
e
s
t

i

s
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

i

s
o
u
r
n
e
w
c
a
r
p
r
i
c
n
g

i

04

45586txt.indd   4

3/17/16   9:34 PM

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TrueCar, Inc.

2,780,849

4,296,660

5,999,606

2013

2014

2015

Unique Monthly Visitors

Average Number of People Visiting TrueCar.com and our Affinity Partners Each Month

These strengths are noteworthy and are the main 

While TrueCar’s fundamental value proposition is sound, 

reasons we have come this far in our industry. They  

it is apparent to me after two months on the job that 

are also the main reasons I took this job and why 

we have some important opportunities for improvement 

I am so enthusiastic about our future.

that we need to address to enable this company to 

reaccelerate its growth and achieve its full potential. 

We start this next phase of TrueCar’s growth with a 

strong foundation. TrueCar generated $260 million in 

In my view, these challenges are the result of some 

revenue in 2015, and we have nearly 600 talented and 

shortcomings in the ways in which the company has 

passionate employees that serve over 11,000 dealer 

executed its business model in the past, not in the 

customers. We attract 6 million monthly unique visitors 

fundamentals of the model itself.

and last year introduced nearly 4 million consumers to 

our dealer customers, 750,000 of whom transacted at 

To begin re-energizing TrueCar, the management team 

these dealerships. We have a brand that is growing  

and I are setting a new strategic direction for the com-

very rapidly and has a positive image with consumers. 

pany that will build on the strong fundamentals of our 

45586txt.indd   5

05

3/17/16   9:34 PM

2015 
Annual Report

Total: $134.0M

Transaction: $118.7M

Total: $259.8M

Transaction: $241.4M

Total: $206.6M

Transaction: $189.4M

2013

2014

2015

Revenue

Total and Transaction Revenue since 2013

business model while making major improvements 

we are passionate about helping them succeed  

in the ways in which this model is executed. That is  

in our marketplace, while also enabling consumers 

the first and most important part of this process. 

to obtain pricing transparency and targeted  

Everyone at TrueCar, beginning now, is embracing 

incentives, leading to a high level of confidence in 

a new philosophical rudder and a new set of core  

their purchasing decision.

business principles.

Finally, we will explain our value proposition to 

To start, we define our business as a specialized 

consumers in a way that does not reflect negatively 

two-sided digital marketplace that aspires to reduce 

on car dealers, while continuing to provide actionable 

the inherent friction in automotive transactions, deliver 

information that improves the overall purchasing 

the best car buying experience for consumers and 

experience. This new philosophical rudder and new 

provide dealers and OEMs an excellent ROI on their 

set of core business principles will guide our decision 

marketing dollars.

making in 2016 and beyond.

Second, we will manage our marketplace to produce 

In 2016 we will focus on key opportunities for 

a win-win for dealers, auto manufacturers and 

improvement, so that we can get this company  

consumers. TrueCar recognizes that dealers and  

back on the path to generating significant revenue 

OEMs are our revenue generating customers and 

growth and healthy margins.

06

45586txt.indd   6

3/17/16   9:34 PM

“This new philosophical 
rudder and new set of core 
business principles will 
guide our decision making 
in 2016 and beyond.”

Specifically, there are three main areas we need to address:

Our first and highest priority will be to turn around the 

use of our targeted incentives product, it will take some 

negative sentiment that some dealers feel today towards 

time to win over the industry as a whole.

TrueCar. I do not believe any company in our category 

can build a sustainably great business that serves car 

Our third priority is to improve the overall yield of our 

dealers unless those dealers believe that the company 

user funnel. In 2016, we will be investing in product  

is supporting their success, not undermining them or 

and technology initiatives in order to evolve our 

marginalizing their place in the industry. 

user experience in ways that enable us over time to 

dramatically improve our yield.

Our second priority is to improve the perception of 

TrueCar among the major OEMs. It is important to 

In 2016 and beyond, I see enormous potential in front  

us that the OEMs see TrueCar as a useful marketing 

of TrueCar. We have the right plan, and I feel confident 

channel that can help improve the efficiency of their 

that we can overcome our challenges and become the 

more than $50 billion in annual spending on sales 

clear category winner in the online automotive space 

incentives. While a number of OEMs are making good 

over the next few years. 

45586txt.indd   7

07

3/17/16   9:34 PM

2015 
Annual Report

Units Sold

Through TrueCar.com and Affinity Partner Sites

2015

2014

2013

TrueCar.com 316,865

 Affinity Partner 433,243

Total: 750,108

234,686

104,218 

Total: 399,919

295,701

Total: 610,620

 375,934

As we embark on this journey to take TrueCar to the 

next level of success, I would like to take a moment 

to thank all of the stakeholders that make this 

possible. To the TrueCar team, thank you for your 

continued dedication and hard work. To dealers, auto 

manufacturers and consumers, thank you for your 

support—we look forward to ultimately bringing a new 

and unprecedented dimension of value to each of you. 

Finally, I would like to thank you, our shareholders, for 

your continued confidence and support. 

I’m looking forward to a bright future here at TrueCar.

Sincerely,

Chip Perry

President & Chief Executive Officer

08

45586txt.indd   8

3/17/16   9:34 PM

 
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(cid:2) ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)  OF THE SECURITIES

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015

(cid:3) TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION  13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Commission File Number: 001-36449

TRUECAR, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)

04-3807511
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)

120 Broadway, Suite 200
Santa Monica, California 90401
(Address of principal executive offices and  Zip  Code)

(800) 200-2000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Common Stock, par value $0.0001 per share

The Nasdaq Global Select Market

(Title of each class)

(Name of each exchange on which registered)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known  seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities

Act.  Yes (cid:3) No  (cid:2)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not  required  to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of  the

Act. Yes  (cid:3) No  (cid:2)

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 (Exchange Act) 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 (cid:2) No  (cid:3)

Indicate  by  check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on  its corporate Website, if any, every

Interactive Data File required to be submitted and  posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§  232.405 of this chapter) during
the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter  period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes (cid:2) No (cid:3)
Indicate  by  check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant  to Item 405  of Regulation S-K  (§  229.405 of this  chapter) is
not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated  by  reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form  10-K. (cid:3)

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:
Large accelerated filer  (cid:3)

Smaller reporting company (cid:3)

Accelerated filer  (cid:2)

Non-accelerated filer  (cid:3)
(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 Exchange

Act).  Yes  (cid:3) No (cid:2)

The  aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting stock held  by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2015,  the

last  business day  of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was $499,467,430 based upon the closing  price
reported  for  such date on the NASDAQ Global Select Market.

As  of March 3, 2016, the registrant had 83,518,958 shares of common stock outstanding.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated herein by

reference in  Part III of this Annual Report  on Form 10-K to the extent stated herein. Such proxy statement will be filed with the
Securities  and Exchange Commission within 120 days of the registrant’s  fiscal year  ended  December 31, 2015. Except with respect to
information  specifically incorporated by reference in this Form  10-K, the Definitive Proxy Statement is not  deemed to be filed as
part of  this  Form 10-K.

TRUECAR, INC.
FORM 10-K

PART I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 1.
Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 1A. Risk Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 2.
Legal Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 3.
Mine Safety Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 4.

PART II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 5.

Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer

Item 6.
Item 7.

Purchases of Equity Securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Selected Financial Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results  of

Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative  Disclosures  about Market Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Financial Statements and Supplementary  Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 8.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on  Accounting and Financial
Item 9.

Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 9B. Other Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate  Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 10.
Executive Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 11.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and  Management and Related
Item 12.

Item 13.
Item 14.

Stockholder Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Certain Relationships and  Related Transactions, and Director Independence . . . . . . . .
Principal Accounting Fees  and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PART IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exhibits and Financial Statement  Schedules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 15.
Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5
5
11
37
37
37
37

38

38
40

46
69
70

70
70
71

72
72
72

72
72
72

73
73
79

2

As used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the  terms ‘‘TrueCar’’, ‘‘the  Company,’’ ‘‘we,’’  ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to TrueCar, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiaries, TrueCar.com, Inc. and ALG, Inc.,
unless the context indicates otherwise.  TrueCar.com, Inc.  is referred to as ‘‘TrueCar.com’’ and
ALG, Inc. is referred to as ‘‘ALG’’.

Special Note Regarding Forward Looking  Statements and Industry  and Market Data

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains  forward-looking statements  within the meaning of  the

federal securities laws, which statements involve substantial risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking
statements generally relate to future  events or our future financial or  operating performance.  In some
cases you can identify forward-looking  statements  because they contain words such  as ‘‘anticipates,’’
‘‘believes,’’ ‘‘could,’’ ‘‘estimates,’’ ‘‘expects,’’ ‘‘intends,’’ ‘‘may,’’  ‘‘might,’’  ‘‘likely,’’ ‘‘plans,’’ ‘‘potential,’’
‘‘predicts,’’ ‘‘projects,’’ ‘‘seeks,’’ ‘‘should,’’ ‘‘target,’’ ‘‘will,’’ ‘‘would’’  or  similar expressions and the
negatives of those terms. Forward-looking  statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K
include, but are not limited to, statements about:

(cid:129) our future financial performance and  our  expectations regarding  our revenue, cost of revenue,
gross profit or gross margin, operating  expenses, ability to generate cash flow, and  ability  to
achieve, and maintain, future profitability;

(cid:129) our relationship with key industry participants, including  car dealers and automobile

manufacturers;

(cid:129) anticipated trends, growth rates and challenges  in our business and in the markets in which we

operate;

(cid:129) our ability to anticipate market needs and develop  new and enhanced products and  services to

meet those needs, and our ability to successfully monetize them;

(cid:129) maintaining and expanding our customer base, including our ability  to increase the  number of

high  volume brand dealers in our network generally and in key geographies;

(cid:129) the impact of competition in our industry and innovation  by our  competitors;

(cid:129) our anticipated growth and growth strategies, including  our ability to increase the rate at which

site visitors obtain Guaranteed Savings Certificates  and close  rates;

(cid:129) our failure to anticipate or adapt to future changes in  our industry;

(cid:129) the impact of seasonality on our business;

(cid:129) our ability to hire and retain necessary qualified employees, including anticipated additions to

our  dealer, product and technology teams;

(cid:129) our ability to integrate newly hired  members of management;

(cid:129) the impact of any failure of our solutions  or solution  innovations;

(cid:129) our reliance on our third-party service providers;

(cid:129) the evolution of technology affecting our products,  services  and markets;

(cid:129) our ability to adequately protect our intellectual property;

(cid:129) the anticipated effect on our business of litigation to which we are a party;

(cid:129) our ability to stay abreast of new or modified laws and regulations that currently apply or

become applicable to our business;

(cid:129) the expense and administrative workload associated  with being a  public company;

3

(cid:129) failure to maintain an effective system of internal controls  necessary to  accurately report our

financial results and prevent fraud;

(cid:129) our liquidity and working capital requirements;

(cid:129) the estimates and estimate methodologies used in  preparing our consolidated  financial

statements;

(cid:129) the future trading prices of our common stock and the impact  of  securities analysts’ reports  on

these prices;

(cid:129) the preceding and other factors discussed  in Part I,  Item  1A, ‘‘Risk Factors,’’ and in other
reports we may file with the Securities and  Exchange Commission  from  time  to  time; and

(cid:129) the factors set forth in Part II, Item 7, ‘‘Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial

Condition and Results of Operations.’’

Forward-looking statements involve  known  and  unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors  that

may cause our actual results, performance or  achievements  to  be  materially different  from any  future
results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking  statements. We
discuss these risks in greater detail in the section entitled  ‘‘Risk Factors’’ and elsewhere in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K. Given these uncertainties, you should not  place undue reliance on  these
forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as  of  the date the  statements are
made. You should not put undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. We assume no obligation
to update forward-looking statements to reflect actual results, changes in assumptions or changes in
other factors affecting forward-looking  information, except to the extent  required by applicable
securities laws. If we do update one or more forward-looking statements, no inference  should be drawn
that we will make additional updates with respect to those or other forward-looking statements.

4

PART I

Item 1. Business

Overview

Our mission is to deliver the best car-buying experience for consumers and provide  dealers and
automakers with an excellent return on their  marketing dollars. We have established  a diverse software
ecosystem on a common technology infrastructure, powered by proprietary  data  and analytics.  We
operate our company-branded platform  on the TrueCar  website and our branded  mobile experience. In
addition, we customize and operate our platform  on a  co-branded basis for our  many affinity group
marketing partners, including financial  institutions like  USAA and American Express,  membership-
based organizations like Consumer Reports, AARP, Sam’s Club,  and AAA, and employee buying
programs for large enterprises such as IBM and Walmart.  We enable users to obtain market-based
pricing data on new and used cars, and  to connect with our  network of TrueCar  Certified Dealers.  We
also allow automobile manufacturers,  known in  the industry as OEMs, to connect with  TrueCar users in
the purchase process and efficiently deliver targeted incentives to consumers.

We  benefit consumers by providing information  related to what others have paid  for a  make and
model of car in their area and, where  available, estimated prices for that make and  model,  which we
refer to as upfront pricing information, from  our  network of  TrueCar Certified Dealers. This upfront
pricing information generally includes guaranteed savings off MSRP which the  consumer may then take
to the dealer in the form of a Guaranteed Savings Certificate and apply toward the purchase of the
specified make and model of car. We benefit our network  of TrueCar Certified Dealers by enabling
them to attract these informed, in-market  consumers in  a cost-effective, accountable  manner,  which we
believe helps them to sell more cars  profitably.  We  benefit OEMs by  allowing  them to more  effectively
target their incentive spending at deep-in-market  consumers during their purchase process.

Our network of over 11,000 TrueCar Certified  Dealers consists  primarily of new car franchises,
representing all major makes of cars,  as well as independent dealers selling used vehicles. TrueCar
Certified Dealers operate in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Our subsidiary, ALG, Inc., provides forecasts and consulting services regarding determination of
the residual value of an automobile at given  future points in time. These residual values are  used  to
underwrite  automotive loans and leases to determine  payments by consumers.  In addition, financial
institutions use this information to measure exposure  and risk across loan, lease,  and fleet  portfolios.
We  also obtain automobile purchase  data from  a variety of sources and use this data to provide
consumers and dealers with highly accurate,  geographically specific, real-time  pricing  information.

Consumer

Products and Services

Consumers interface with us via our website  and  our TrueCar branded mobile applications and

affinity group marketing partner websites.

The following are key elements of our consumer  experience:

Market pricing data. Through our websites and mobile applications, a consumer selects a vehicle,
adds desired options and inputs a ZIP code. In most  instances,  we then present the  consumer with the
TrueCar Curve, a graphical distribution of what others paid for the same  make and  model  of car.
Within this distribution, we include MSRP, factory invoice, and  average  price  paid for  that  make  and
model in the consumer’s local market. We generally provide consumers  with our TrueCar  Estimate,
which  is based on data relevant to the consumer’s configured vehicle. This information enables the
consumer to evaluate a potential price in the context of broader market data.

5

In-Stock Offers.

In most instances, after reviewing the  report with the  Estimated Price stating the
available Guaranteed Savings off MSRP provided  by dealers, the consumer may  elect  to  receive offers
on in-stock vehicles from each of the  selected  dealers; they do so  by providing  contact  information to
said dealers. These offers entitle the consumer to receive  the stated amount of Guaranteed Savings off
MSRP for the consumer’s selected make and  model. While  the offer  presents the Estimated Price  for
the in-stock offers, it also entitles the  consumer to receive  a  Guaranteed  Savings off MSRP on any
vehicle of that particular make and model that the dealer has available for sale. Consumers typically
present  the offer to the dealer at the time of purchase.

Dealer

Our network of TrueCar Certified Dealers interfaces with our  platform primarily through our
Dealer  Portal, an application that can be accessed online or using  a mobile  device. The Dealer Portal is
considered a sales enhancement tool,  and  it enables  dealers to access unique information  on their
prospects unavailable to them in their  standard customer relationship management (CRM) software.
The Portal allows dealers to assess the  competitiveness of their vehicle pricing  relative to their market,
create vehicle pricing rules, access details on potential buyers wants and needs, create custom detailed
offers based on vehicles in stock, manage how their dealership profile appears on the network,  assess
their competitive market performance  on vehicles  sold  through their  dealership,  as well a  number of
administrative and other management tools. With the  mobile application for iOS and  Android, dealers
also have the ability to provide a price quote on  a vehicle relative  to  the local market,  regardless of
whether the potential buyer was sourced  via the  TrueCar network or not.

Pricing tools. The Pricing Manager provides dealers with  a single interface to assess the

competiveness of their vehicle pricing relative to their market and set pricing on all makes and  models
they offer for sale. The Sales Analyzer  helps dealers better  understand  how their pricing for recently
sold vehicles compares to the market, whether or not the customer  transaction was with one of our
users.

Sales closing tools. The Offer Tool helps dealers create custom detailed  offers based on vehicles in

stock. The Dealership Profile enables  dealers to identify their selling benefits to customers, including
salesperson names and pictures, dealership  makes,  hours of operation and  website and social media
links.

Manufacturers

We  enable manufacturers to target consumers based  on membership in an  affinity  group and other

criteria. By integrating this process into our platform, manufacturers  provide  consumers the ability  to
generate a unique coupon that can be  redeemed and validated  at any dealership across  the country in
connection with the purchase of a new car.  By tracking these incentives  in their own reporting systems,
manufacturers can account directly for  this method of reaching consumers. These manufacturers pay a
per-vehicle fee to us for this service.

Used car listings

For consumers looking to purchase a used car, we provide an  aggregated listing of used vehicles in
their local marketplace. These listings are consolidated from a variety  of sources, including  members of
our  network of TrueCar Certified Dealers  which sell used cars in addition  to  new cars,  and dedicated
non-franchise or independent dealers that  do  not  sell new cars. In addition to displaying stated
information made available by the seller about the pricing and condition of car,  we provide consumers
with information related to the value of other cars of the same make,  model,  year and stated condition
in the market. At our website, the user can contact the seller, identifying herself  as a TrueCar user, to
initiate communications that may ultimately result in a completed  transaction.

6

ALG

We  forecast data on residual values  of  cars and  provide this  information on a  subscription and

consultative basis via ALG, our wholly-owned subsidiary. Automotive manufacturers, lenders,  lessors,
dealers, and software providers use information from ALG to determine the  residual value of an
automobile at given points in time in  the future.  These residual  values are used to underwrite
automotive loans and leases to determine payments by consumers.  In  addition, financial institutions use
this  information to measure exposure  and risk across  loan, lease, and fleet portfolios.

Insurance

We  offer insurers FastTrack, a toolset that allows claims representatives  to refer consumers  who
have experienced a vehicle total loss  event, when the insurer estimates the repair cost to exceed the
replacement value of the vehicle, to our  car-buying program. We  first introduced this service in 2008.

Consumer marketing

Sales and Marketing

We  reach consumers through the TrueCar  website  and our branded  mobile applications and
websites we maintain for our affinity group  marketing  partners. Our  marketing  is focused on building
the TrueCar brand. The key tenets of  our brand are  providing  transparent market price information
and enhancing the car-buying experience for both consumers  and  dealers. We divide our  marketing
spend between traditional media sources,  such as television and radio, and digital media. Our  consumer
brand awareness efforts are aided by the  fact that we are  quoted in various media outlets from  time to
time as a recognized industry authority on  automotive retail and online data forecasting.

We  also support initiatives for our affinity group marketing  partners, including  USAA, Consumer

Reports, AAA, American Express, and PenFed. These initiatives  are  designed  to  promote awareness of
the organizations’ car-buying programs  among  their  memberships through  a variety  of  media, including
television, email, direct mail, website development,  print,  online  advertising,  Internet search  engine
marketing, Internet search engine optimization,  and social networking.

Dealer engagement and industry relations

Our dealer sales force is responsible  for supporting  our network  of  TrueCar Certified Dealers,
optimizing our TrueCar Certified Dealer coverage  across brands and geographies and for providing
onboarding and dealer support. Our  sales  force helps  dealers grow their businesses  by  regularly
providing data-driven insights on inventory management and pricing.

Our ability to understand the needs of, actively listen to, and  collaborate with our network of
TrueCar Certified Dealers is crucial to our success. Many of our dealer  sales force employees  have
worked at dealerships or OEMs. In response to feedback from our  dealer  network, in  2012 we  formed
an advisory panel of influential dealers to regularly meet with our senior management  team to provide
updates  and opinions on how to improve our role in the  car selling  experience  for dealers.

Competition

The automotive retail industry is highly  competitive  and  fragmented.  Consumers use  a variety  of

online and offline sources to research vehicle information, obtain vehicle pricing information and
identify dealers. In addition, dealers  use  a  variety of marketing  channels  to promote themselves  to
consumers.

7

Competition for consumer awareness

We  compete to attract consumers directly to our TrueCar.com website  and mobile applications

primarily on the basis of the quality of the  consumer experience;  the  breadth, depth and accuracy of
information; brand awareness and reputation.

Our principal competitors for consumer awareness include:

(cid:129) online automotive classified listings sites  such as  AutoTrader.com, Cars.com, CarGurus.com, and

eBay Motors;

(cid:129) online automotive content publishers  such as Edmunds.com,  KBB.com, and Autobytel.com;

(cid:129) Internet search engines such as Google, Bing, and  Yahoo;

(cid:129) online sites operated by automobile manufacturers,  such as General Motors and Ford;

(cid:129) membership-based car-buying services, such as the Costco Auto Program,  enabling members  to

purchase cars from affiliated dealers at preferential terms; and

(cid:129) offline automotive classified listings, such as trade periodicals  and  local newspapers.

Competition for car dealer marketing spend

We  compete for a share of car dealers’ overall marketing expenditures within online and offline
media marketing channels. We compete primarily on the basis of the transaction-readiness  of  our  users;
the efficiency of customer acquisition  as compared to alternative  methods; the  accountability  and
measurability of our service; product  features, analytics and tools; dealer support;  and the  size of our
prospective car buyer audience. Other  businesses also derive a majority  of their  revenue by offering
consumer marketing services to dealers.  These companies include  listings,  information, lead generation
and car-buying services, and compete with us  for dealer  marketing  spend.

Our principal competitors for car dealer marketing spend include:

(cid:129) online automotive content publishers  such as Edmunds.com  and KBB.com selling impression-
based display advertising, and online  automotive classified listing sites such as AutoTrader.com
and Cars.com selling inventory-based  subscription billing;

(cid:129) lead generators  such as Autobytel.com selling pay-per-lead advertising;

(cid:129) Internet search engines such as Google selling cost-per-click advertising;  and

(cid:129) offline media, including newspaper, outdoor advertising, radio,  television and direct mail.

Technology

We  have designed our technology platform, website and  products  to  provide  consumers, dealers
and other parties with the information they  need to effect a successful car  purchase.  This platform is
accessed by consumers through the TrueCar website and our  branded mobile  applications and  affinity
group marketing partner websites and  by dealers through our software  tools available on our Dealer
Portal. Supporting each of these user  interfaces are  advanced systems for processing and analyzing
automotive data, including features such as  vehicle configurators and predictive consumer behavior
modeling, as well as our proprietary  matching algorithm  to compare our  transaction-based data sources
with our record of online users for processing and billing. We use  a  combination of open  source  and
licensed software running on optimized  hardware.

Our data is housed in co-location facilities  in Los Angeles  and Chicago. We  have adopted  a
centralized approach to quality assurance and  testing for our platform and all products aimed  at

8

enhancing consumer and dealer experiences while seeking to optimize availability, scalability,  security
and performance.

Intellectual Property

We  protect our intellectual property  through a  combination of patents, copyrights, trademarks,
service marks, domain names, trade secret laws, confidentiality procedures and contractual restrictions.

At December 31, 2015, we had 22 U.S. issued patents, 33 pending U.S.  patent applications,
2 issued foreign patents, and 19 pending  foreign patent applications. The issued and allowed patents
begin expiring in 2029 through 2033.  We intend  to  pursue additional patent protection to the extent we
believe it would be beneficial to our competitive  position.

We  have a number of registered and  unregistered trademarks. We registered ‘‘TrueCar,’’ the
TrueCar logo, various TRUE marks and other marks  as trademarks in the  U.S. and several  other
jurisdictions. We also have filed trademark  applications for ALG and others in the  U.S. and other
jurisdictions, and will pursue additional  trademark  registrations  to  the extent we believe it would  be
beneficial to our competitive position.

In addition to the protection provided by our intellectual  property rights, we enter  into
confidentiality and proprietary rights  agreements with our employees, consultants, contractors,  and
business partners. Our employees and  contractors are also subject  to  invention  assignment  agreements.
We  further control the use of our proprietary technology and intellectual  property through provisions in
both our general and product-specific terms of  use on our  website.

Regulatory Matters

Various aspects of our business are or may be subject to U.S. federal and state  regulation. In
particular, the advertising and sale of  new  or used motor vehicles is highly  regulated by the states in
which  we do business. Although we do not sell motor vehicles, the dealers from  which we  derive  a
significant portion of our revenues do  sell  motor vehicles. Moreover, state regulatory authorities  or
other third parties could take and, on some occasions,  have taken the position that some of the
regulations applicable to dealers or to the manner in which motor vehicles are advertised and sold
generally are directly applicable to our business model.

In May 2015, we were named as a defendant in a  lawsuit  filed by the  California New Car  Dealers

Association in the Superior Court for the County  of Los Angeles  (the ‘‘CNCDA Litigation’’). The
complaint, both as originally filed and  as  subsequently amended, seeks declaratory  and injunctive relief
based on allegations that we are operating  in the State of  California as an unlicensed automobile
dealer and autobroker. On December  7, 2015, the court dismissed  this lawsuit ‘‘without prejudice,’’
meaning that the complaint could be amended and  re-filed. On January  4, 2016, the plaintiff amended
and re-filed the complaint. On February 3, 2016,  the Company filed a  ‘‘demurrer’’ to the  amended
complaint, which is a pleading that requests the court  to  dismiss the case.  We believe  the amended
complaint is without merit and intend to vigorously defend  the Company  in this matter.

In July 2015, we were named as a defendant  in a lawsuit filed in  the California Superior Court  for

the County of Los Angeles (the ‘‘Participating Dealer Litigation’’). The complaint, filed  by  numerous
dealers participating on the TrueCar  Platform, and as subsequently amended, sought declaratory and
injunctive relief based on allegations that the  Company is engaging in  unfairly competitive practices and
is operating as an unlicensed automobile dealer and autobroker in contravention  of  various state  laws.
On September 29, 2015, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this  lawsuit ‘‘without  prejudice.’’  There have
been no further pleadings in this action.

In September 2015, we received a letter from the Texas  Department  of  Motor Vehicles (the  ‘‘Texas

DMV Notice’’) asserting that certain  aspects of our advertising in Texas constitute  false, deceptive,

9

unfair, or misleading advertising within the  meaning of applicable  Texas law.  On September 24, 2015,
we responded to the Texas DMV Notice  in an effort  to  resolve  the concerns raised by the  Texas  DMV
Notice without making material, unfavorable  adjustments to our  business practices  or user experience
in Texas.

In December 2015, the Company was  named as a defendant in a putative class  action lawsuit filed
by Gordon Rose in the California Superior Court for  the County of  Los  Angeles. The complaint asserts
claims for unjust enrichment, violation  of  the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and violation
of the California Business and Professions Code,  based in  part  on allegations that we are operating in
the State of California as an unlicensed  automobile dealer  and autobroker. The plaintiff seeks to
represent a class of California consumers  defined as  ‘‘[a]ll  California  consumers who purchased an
automobile by using TrueCar, Inc.’s price certificate during  the applicable  statute of limitations.’’ On
January 12, 2016, the Court entered  an  order  staying  all  proceedings  in the case pending an initial
status conference, which is presently  scheduled for April  13, 2016. We believe the  complaint  is without
merit and intend to vigorously defend the Company in this matter.

In order to operate in this highly regulated environment, we have developed our products  and
services with a view toward appropriately managing the risk  that our regulatory  compliance or the
regulatory compliance of the dealers  in  our dealer network could be challenged. If, and to the extent
that, our products and services fail to  satisfy relevant  regulatory requirements, our business or our
TrueCar Certified Dealers could be subject  to  significant civil and criminal penalties, including fines, or
the award of significant damages in class  action or other civil litigation, as well as orders interfering
with our ability to continue providing  our  products and services in  certain states.

Given the regulatory environment in  which we and our participating dealers  operate,  in designing

our  products and services, we have focused considerable  attention on two areas  of state regulation:
state advertising regulations and state  brokering  or ‘‘bird-dogging’’ regulations.  With respect to
advertising, we believe that most of the content displayed  on the websites we operate does  not
constitute advertising for the sale of new motor vehicles.  Nevertheless,  we endeavor to design the
content such that it would comply insofar as practicable with state advertising regulations if and  to  the
extent that the content is considered to be new  vehicle  sales advertising. With respect  to  state brokering
or ‘‘bird-dogging’’ regulations, we have  designed our products  and  services  in a manner that aims to
avoid the applicability of those regulations.

Our efforts to design products and services in a  manner  that appropriately manages the  regulatory

compliance risk for our business and  our  participating dealers are complicated  by  the fact that the
related automotive sales and marketing  laws vary from state  to  state, and even within a  given state,  are
frequently susceptible to multiple interpretations. These  laws were  generally developed decades  before
the emergence of the Internet, are subject  to  significant revision  or modification, and  the manner in
which  they should be applied to our business model is  frequently open to question. As a practical
matter, state automobile dealer associations  often have considerable influence over the  construction of
these laws by the relevant state regulatory authorities. Accordingly, in addition to our dialogues with
relevant state agencies, we interface on a  regular basis with  representatives from automobile dealer
associations in order to take their views  into account as we continually  update our products and
services. The specific manner in which  we have designed our products  and  services  in an effort to
manage state regulatory compliance  concerns for us and our network of TrueCar  Certified  Dealers  is
the result of extensive analysis, which  has required the investment  of  substantial  resources  that  we
believe represents a valuable asset of  our  business.  However,  we cannot  assure you  that  we will be able
to successfully comply with current or  future regulations  to which our business may be subject.

10

Employees

At December 31, 2015, we had 574 full-time  employees at  locations in  Santa  Monica, Austin,
Denver, and San Francisco. We also engage a  number of  temporary employees and consultants to
support our operations. None of our  employees are represented by a labor  union or subject  to  a
collective bargaining agreement. We  have not experienced  any work stoppages, and we consider  our
relations with our employees to be good.

Corporate Information

We  were incorporated in Delaware in February 2005 under our then corporate name Zag.com Inc.
and began business operations in April  2005. We  completed our initial public offering in  May 2014  and
our  common stock is listed on The NASDAQ Global  Select Market under the  symbol ‘‘TRUE.’’

Available Information

Our internet address is www.true.com. Our investor  relations  website is located at

http://ir.true.com/. We make our Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’) periodic reports
(Form 10-Q and Forms 10-K) and current reports  (Forms 8-K),  and amendments to these reports,
available free of charge through our  website as  soon  as reasonably practicable after  they are  filed
electronically with the SEC. We may from time to time provide  important disclosures to investors by
posting them in the investor relations section  of  our  website, as allowed  by SEC rules.

Materials we file with the SEC may be read  and  copied at  the SEC’s Public Reference  Room at

100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.  20549. Information on the  operation  of  the Public Reference
Room may be obtained by calling the  SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains an  Internet
website at www.sec.gov that contains  reports, proxy  and  information statements,  and other information
regarding our company that we file electronically with  the SEC.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Investing in our common stock involves  a high degree  of risk.  You  should consider carefully the  risks

and uncertainties described below, together with  all of the  other information in this report,  including our
consolidated financial statements and related notes,  and Part  II, Item 7,  ‘‘Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of  Operations’’ before  making an investment  in  our common
stock. If any of the following risks is realized, our  business, financial condition, operating results and
prospects could be materially and adversely affected. In that event,  the trading price  of our common stock
could decline and you could lose part  or all  of your investment. Additional risks and  uncertainties  not
presently known to us or not believed by us to be material could  also impact us.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

The growth of our business relies significantly on our ability to increase the number  of  dealers in our network
of TrueCar Certified Dealers, including increasing representation of high volume  brands and optimizing
geographic coverage, such that we are able  to increase the number of transactions  between our users and
TrueCar Certified Dealers. Failure to do  so would limit  our growth.

Some automotive brands consistently achieve higher  than  average sales  volume  per  dealer. As a

consequence, dealers representing those  brands make a disproportionately  greater contribution to our
unit volume. Our ability to grow the number  of dealers in  our network  of  TrueCar Certified Dealers,
including dealers representing high volume brands,  both  on an  overall basis and in  important
geographies, is an important factor in  growing our business. As described elsewhere in this ‘‘Risk
Factors’’ section, we are a relatively new participant in the  automobile retail industry and our business
has sometimes been viewed in a negative light by car  dealerships.  There can  be  no assurance that we

11

will be able to improve our relationships with,  and  image  among, car dealerships, maintain or grow the
number of car dealers in our network or increase the proportion of  dealers  in our network representing
high volume brands. During the second half of 2015, we  experienced both a  decline  in the proportion
of such high volume dealers in our network and slowed quarter over quarter revenue growth. There
can be no assurance we will be successful  in reversing these declines. Failure  to  do  so could have  a
material adverse effect on our business, growth, financial condition, results of operations and  cash
flows.

In addition, our ability to increase the number of TrueCar  Certified Dealers  in an optimized
manner depends on strong relationships  with other constituents, including  car manufacturers and  state
dealership associations. From time to  time,  car manufacturers  have communicated concerns  about our
business to the dealers in our network.  For example,  some car  manufacturers  maintain  guidelines that
prohibit dealers from advertising a car  at a price that  is below an established floor.  If a TrueCar
Certified Dealer submits pricing information  to  our  users that  falls  below pricing guidelines established
by the applicable manufacturer, the manufacturer may discourage that dealer from remaining in the
network and may discourage other dealers within its brand from  joining the network. For  example, in
late 2011, Honda publicly announced that it  would not provide advertising allowances to dealers  that
remained in our network of TrueCar  Certified Dealers.  While  we  subsequently addressed  Honda’s
concerns and it ceased withholding advertising allowances from  our TrueCar Certified Dealers, discord
with specific car manufacturers impedes our ability to grow our dealer  network. More recently, in
January 2016, Toyota modified its marketing covenant  to  include  guidelines on minimum allowable
advertised pricing. If we are unable to accommodate these  guidelines without making material,
unfavorable adjustments to our business practices or user experience,  it could have  a material adverse
effect on our business, growth, financial  condition, results  of operations  and  cash flows.

In addition, state dealership associations maintain significant  influence over  the dealerships in  their

state as lobbying groups and as thought  leaders. To the extent that these associations view us in a
negative light, our reputation with car dealers in  the corresponding state  may be negatively affected. If
our  relationships with car manufacturers or  state dealership associations suffer, our ability to maintain
and grow the number of car dealers in our  network  will be harmed.

We  cannot assure you that we will expand our network  of  TrueCar Certified Dealers in a  manner

that provides a sufficient number of dealers by brand  and  geography for our unique visitors and failure
to do so would limit our growth.

If key industry participants, including car dealers and automobile manufacturers, perceive us in a negative
light or our relationships with them suffer  harm, our ability to grow  and our financial performance  may be
damaged.

Our primary source of revenue consists of fees paid by TrueCar Certified Dealers  to  us  in

connection with the sales of automobiles to our users. In addition, our value proposition to consumers
depends on our ability to provide pricing information on automobiles from a sufficient  number of
automobile dealers by brand and in a given consumer’s geographic area. If our relationships with our
network of TrueCar Certified Dealers suffer harm  in a manner that  leads  to  the departure of these
dealers from our network, then our revenue and  ability to maintain and  grow unique visitor traffic will
be adversely affected.

At the end of 2011 and the beginning of 2012,  due  to  certain regulatory  and publicity-related
challenges,  many dealers canceled their  agreements with us and our  franchise dealer  count  fell  from
5,571 at November 30, 2011 to 3,599 at  February 28,  2012. More recently, 279 franchise dealers became
inactive as the result of a contractual dispute with a large  dealer group, and our franchise dealer  count
decreased from 9,300 at June 30, 2015 to 8,702 at  September  30, 2015. At December  31, 2015, our
franchise dealer count was 9,094.

12

TrueCar Certified Dealers have no contractual  obligation  to  maintain their  relationship with  us.
Accordingly, these dealers may leave our network at any time or may develop or  use other products or
services in lieu of ours. Further, while we  believe that our service provides a  lower cost,  accountable
customer acquisition channel, dealers  may have difficulty rationalizing their marketing spend across
TrueCar and other channels, which potentially has the effect of diluting our dealer value proposition. If
we are unable to create and maintain  a  compelling value proposition for dealers to become and remain
TrueCar Certified Dealers, our dealer network would  not  grow  and could decline.

In addition, although the automobile dealership  industry is fragmented, a small number of groups

have significant influence over the industry. These groups include state and national  dealership
associations, state regulators, car manufacturers, consumer groups,  individual dealers and consolidated
dealer groups. To the extent that these  groups believe  that automobile  dealerships should not do
business with us, this belief may become  quickly and  widely shared by automobile dealerships and we
may lose a significant number of dealers in  our network. In May 2015, the California  New Car Dealers
Association filed a lawsuit alleged that  we  are operating in the State of California as an unlicensed
automobile dealer and autobroker. For more information concerning  this  lawsuit,  refer  to  the risk
factor below, ‘‘We face litigation and  are party to legal proceedings that could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition,  results of operations  and cash flows.’’ A significant number
of automobile dealerships are also members  of  larger dealer groups,  and  to the  extent that a group
decides  to leave our network, this decision  would typically apply  to  all dealerships  within the group.

Furthermore, automobile manufacturers may  provide  their  franchise dealers  with financial or other

marketing support, provided that such  dealers  adhere to certain marketing guidelines. Automobile
manufacturers may determine that the  manner in  which certain of their franchise dealers use our
platform is inconsistent with the terms of such  marketing  guidelines, which  determination could result
in potential or actual loss of the manufacturers’ financial  or other marketing support to the  dealers
whose use of the platform is deemed objectionable. The potential  or  actual loss of such marketing
support may cause such dealers to cease being  members of our TrueCar Certified  Dealer  network,
which  may adversely affect our ability to maintain  or grow the number and productivity of dealers in
our  network or the revenue derived from those dealers.

We  cannot assure you that we will maintain strong relationships  with the dealers in our network of

TrueCar Certified Dealers or that we  will not suffer  dealer  attrition in  the future.  We may also  have
disputes with dealers from time to time, including relating to the collection of  fees  from them  and
other matters. We may need to modify  our products, change pricing or take other actions  to  address
dealer concerns in the future. If a significant  number of  these  automobile dealerships decided to leave
our  network or change their financial or business relationship with us, then  our business, growth,
operating results, financial condition  and  prospects would  suffer.

If we are unable to provide a compelling  car-buying  experience  to  our users, the number of transactions
between our users and TrueCar Certified  Dealers will decline and our revenue and  results of operations  will
suffer harm.

The user experience on our company-branded platform on  the TrueCar  website has evolved since

its  launch in 2010, but has not changed  dramatically.  We cannot assure you that we are able to provide
a compelling car-buying experience to our users,  and our failure  to  do so  could  mean that the number
of transactions between our users and TrueCar Certified Dealers  may decline and  we would  be  unable
to effectively monetize our user traffic. We believe that  our ability  to  provide a compelling car-buying
experience is subject to a number of factors, including:

(cid:129) our ability to launch new products that are effective and have a high degree of consumer

engagement;

(cid:129) our ability to constantly innovate and improve our existing products;

13

(cid:129) compliance of the dealers within our network of  TrueCar  Certified Dealers with  applicable laws,
regulations and the rules of our platform,  including honoring the TrueCar certificates submitted
by our users; and

(cid:129) our access to a sufficient amount of data  to  enable us to provide relevant pricing information to

consumers.

Changes to management, including continued turnover of our top executives,  or an inability  to retain, attract
and integrate qualified personnel, could  harm our ability to develop  and successfully  grow our business.

We  believe our success has depended, and continues to depend, on  the efforts and talents of  our

executives and employees. Our future  success  depends on our continuing ability to attract, develop,
motivate and retain highly qualified and  skilled  employees. Qualified individuals  are in high demand,
and we may incur significant costs to  attract and retain them. In  order to  attract and  retain executives
and other key employees in a competitive marketplace, we  must provide competitive compensation
packages, including cash and stock-based compensation. Our primary forms of stock-based incentive
awards are stock options and restricted stock  units. If the  anticipated value of such stock-based
incentive awards does not materialize, if our stock-based compensation otherwise ceases  to  be  viewed
as a valuable benefit, or if our total compensation package is not  viewed  as being competitive, our
ability to attract, retain and motivate executives and key employees could  be  weakened.

The loss of any of  our senior management or key employees could  materially adversely affect our

ability to execute our business plan and strategy, and we  may not be able  to  find adequate
replacements on a timely basis, or at all. Our executive officers and other employees are at-will
employees, which means they may terminate their employment relationship  with us at any  time, and
their knowledge of our business and industry would be extremely difficult to replace. Recently, we  have
experienced increased turnover in key  executive positions, including our chief executive  officer and
president. Recently hired executives may view the  business differently than prior members of
management, and over time may make  changes to our  strategic focus, operations or  business  plans with
corresponding changes in how we report our results  of  operations. We can make no assurances that our
new executives will be able to properly  manage  any  such shift  in focus or that any changes to our
business would ultimately prove successful. We cannot ensure that we will be able  to  retain the  services
of any members of our senior management or  other key employees.  If we do  not  succeed in attracting
well-qualified employees, retaining and motivating existing employees or integrating new executives and
employees, our business could be materially and adversely affected.

Our recent growth may not be indicative  of our future  growth  and, we may  not  be able to manage future
growth effectively.

Our revenue grew from $38.1 million in 2010  to  $259.8 million in 2015.  We expect that, in the

future, as our revenue increases, our rate  of growth may decline.  In  addition, we may not be able to
grow as fast or at all if we do not accomplish the  following:

(cid:129) Expand our dealer network, including  increasing  dealers in our network representing high

volume brands and optimizing our network in important geographies;

(cid:129) increase the number of transactions  between our users and TrueCar Certified Dealers;

(cid:129) maintain and grow our affinity group marketing partner  relationships and increase the

productivity of our current affinity group marketing partners;

(cid:129) increase the number of users of our products  and services,  and in  particular the number of

unique visitors to the TrueCar website and our TrueCar branded mobile  applications;

14

(cid:129) further improve  the quality of our  existing products and services, and introduce high  quality new

products and services; and

(cid:129) introduce third party ancillary products  and services.

We  may not successfully accomplish any of these objectives. We plan to continue our investment  in

future growth. We expect to continue  to expend  substantial financial  and  other resources on:

(cid:129) marketing and advertising;

(cid:129) dealer outreach and training, including the hiring of  significant additional personnel  in our

dealer team;

(cid:129) technology and product development,  including the  hiring of additional  personnel in  our  product

development and technical teams, harmonization of our software  infrastructure,  and the
development of new products and new features  for existing products; and

(cid:129) general administration, including legal, accounting and  other compliance  expenses related to

being a public company.

In addition, our historical growth has placed and may continue  to  place significant  demands on our

management and our operational and financial  resources. We  have also  experienced significant  growth
in the number of users of our platform  as well  as the amount of  data that we analyze.  We expect  to
hire additional personnel, particularly  in our dealer  and  technology teams.  The additional personnel in
our  dealer team are intended to enhance the  service  experience and the productivity of our dealer
network while the additional personnel  in our technology team will focus on delivering  a better
experience to consumers and dealers.  Finally, our  organizational structure is becoming more  complex as
we add additional staff, and we will need to improve our operational, financial and  management
controls as well as  our reporting systems  and  procedures. We will require  significant capital
expenditures and the allocation of valuable  management resources to grow and change in  these areas
without undermining our corporate culture of rapid innovation,  teamwork  and attention  to  the
car-buying experience for the consumer  and the  economics of  the  dealer.

If we suffer a significant interruption in  our  ability to gain  access to third-party data, we may  be  unable to
maintain key aspects of our user experience, including the  TrueCar  Curve, and our business and operating
results will suffer.

Our business relies on our ability to analyze data for  the benefit of  our users and  the TrueCar

Certified Dealers in our network. We use data obtained pursuant to agreements  with third parties to
power certain aspects of the user experience on  our  platform, including the TrueCar Curve, a  graphical
distribution of what others paid for the same  make  and  model  of  car. In addition,  the effectiveness of
our  user acquisition efforts depends  in part on the availability of data  relating  to  existing and potential
users of our platform. If we are unable  to renew data agreements  as they  expire or if third-party data
providers terminate their relationship with us and  we experience a material disruption in  the data
provided to us, the information that we  provide  to  our  users and TrueCar  Certified Dealers  may be
limited, the quality of this information  may  suffer, the user  experience  may be negatively affected and
certain functionality on our platform may be disabled,  and  our business, financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

15

We may  be unable to maintain or grow relationships  with information  data providers  or may experience
interruptions in the data feeds they provide, which  may  limit the information  that we are  able to  provide  to
our users and dealers as well as the timeliness of such information and may impair  our  ability to attract or
retain consumers and TrueCar Certified  Dealers  and to timely  invoice our dealers.

We  receive automobile purchase data from  many  third-party data  providers, including our network

of TrueCar Certified Dealers, dealer management system, or DMS, data feed providers, data
aggregators and integrators, survey companies, purveyors  of registration data and our affinity group
marketing partners. In the states in which  we employ  a pay-per-sale  billing model, we  use this data to
match purchases with users that obtained a  Guaranteed Savings  Certificate  from a TrueCar Certified
Dealer  so that we may collect a transaction fee from those  dealers and recognize revenue from the
related transactions.

From time to time, we experience interruptions  in one or more  data feeds that we receive from
third-party data providers, particularly  DMS system data feed  providers,  in a manner that affects  our
ability to timely invoice the dealers in our network. These  interruptions  may occur  for a  number of
reasons, including changes to the software  used  by these data feed  providers  and difficulties in
renewing our agreements with third-party data feed providers.  In the  states in  which we employ a
pay-per-sale billing model, an interruption in the  data feeds that we receive may  affect our ability to
match automobile purchases with users that obtained a Guaranteed Savings Certificate from a  TrueCar
Certified Dealer, thereby delaying our submission of an  invoice to an automobile dealer in  our network
for a given transaction and delaying the timing  of  cash  receipts  from the dealer.  The redundancies of
data feeds received from multiple providers may not result  in sufficient data to match automobile
purchases with users that obtained a  Guaranteed Savings  Certificate from a  TrueCar Certified Dealer.
In the case of an interruption in our data feeds, our billing structure may transition to a subscription
model for automobile dealers in our network  until the interruption ceases. However, our subscription
billing model may result in lower revenues during an  interruption and,  when  an interruption ceases, we
are not always able to retroactively match a transaction  and  collect  a  fee.  In addition, our likelihood of
collection of the fee owed to us for a  given  transaction decreases  for those periods in which  we are
unable to submit an invoice to automobile dealers.  Interruptions which occur in close proximity to the
end of a given reporting period could result in delays in our ability  to  recognize those transaction
revenues in that reporting period and  these shortfalls  in transaction revenue could be material to our
operating results.

We have  a history of losses and we may not achieve or maintain  profitability in the  future.

We  have not been profitable since inception and had an accumulated  deficit of $275.9 million  at

December 31, 2015. From time to time  in the past,  we have  made significant investments in  our
operations which have not resulted in corresponding  revenue growth and,  as a result,  increased  our
losses. We expect to make significant  future  investments to  support the further development and
expansion of our business and these investments  may  not  result in  increased  revenue or growth on a
timely basis or at all. Our revenue growth has  been highly  influenced by marketing expenditures.
Incremental marketing expenditures in certain  situations do  not  result in  sufficient incremental revenue
to cover their cost. This limits the growth in revenue that can  be  achieved through  marketing
expenditures. In addition, as a public company,  we have and will  continue to incur significant  legal,
accounting and other expenses that we did  not  incur  as a private company.  As a  result of these
increased expenditures, we have to generate and sustain increased revenue to achieve and maintain
profitability.

We  may incur significant losses in the future  for a number  of  reasons, including  slowing demand
for our  products and services, increasing competition, weakness in  the automobile  industry generally, as
well as other risks described in this report, and we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties,
complications and delays, and other unknown  factors. If  we incur losses  in the future, we  may not be

16

able to reduce costs effectively because  many  of our costs  are  fixed.  In addition,  to  the extent that we
reduce variable costs to respond to losses, this  may  affect our ability to acquire consumers and dealers
and grow our revenues. Accordingly, we  may not be able  to achieve or maintain profitability  and we
may continue to incur significant losses  in the future, and  this could  cause the  price of our common
stock to decline.

We have  operated our business at scale  for a  limited period of time and we  cannot predict whether we will
continue  to grow. If we are unable to successfully respond  to changes in the market, our business  could be
harmed.

Our business has grown as users and automobile dealers have increasingly used our products and

services. However, our business is relatively new and has operated  at a  substantial scale for only a
limited period of time. Given this limited  history, it  is difficult  to  predict  whether  we will be able to
maintain or grow our business. We expect that our business will evolve in ways which may  be  difficult
to predict. For example, marketing expenditures in  certain situations become  inefficient, particularly
with respect to the TrueCar website and  our branded mobile applications.  Continued revenue growth
will require more focus on increasing  the number of transactions from which  we derive revenue by
growing our network of TrueCar Certified Dealers, including  dealers representing high  volume brands,
both on an overall basis and in important  geographies. It is also  possible that car  dealers could broadly
determine that they no longer believe in  the value  of our services. In the event of these or  any other
developments, our continued success will depend on our  ability  to  successfully  adjust our strategy to
meet the changing market dynamics.  If we are  unable to do so, our  business  could  be  harmed and our
results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

The loss of a significant affinity group marketing  partner or a significant  reduction in the number of cars
purchased from our TrueCar Certified Dealers by members of  our affinity group marketing partners would
reduce our revenue and harm our operating  results.

Our financial performance is substantially  dependent upon the number of automobiles purchased
from TrueCar Certified Dealers by users of the TrueCar website, our branded mobile applications and
the car-buying sites we maintain for  our affinity  group marketing partners. Currently, a majority  of the
automobiles purchased by our users were matched  to  the car-buying sites  we maintain for our affinity
group marketing partners. As a result, our relationships with  our affinity group marketing partners are
critical to our business and financial performance. However, several  aspects of our relationship with
affinity groups might change in a manner  that harms our business and financial  performance, including:

(cid:129) affinity group marketing partners might terminate their relationship with us or make such

relationship non-exclusive, resulting in a reduction in the  number of transactions between users
of our platform and TrueCar Certified Dealers;

(cid:129) affinity group marketing partners might de-emphasize the automobile buying  programs  within

their offerings, resulting in a decrease in  the number  of  transactions between their members  and
our  TrueCar Certified Dealers; or

(cid:129) the economic structure of our agreements with affinity  group marketing partners might change,

resulting in a decrease in our operating margins  on transactions  by their members.

A significant change to our relationships with affinity  group  marketing partners may have a
negative effect on our business in other ways. For example, the termination by an affinity group
marketing partner of our relationship may  create the  perception  that our  products and services are no
longer beneficial to the members of affinity  groups or a  more general  negative association with our
business. In addition, a termination by  an affinity group marketing  partner  may result in the loss of the
data provided to us by them with respect to automobile transactions.  This loss of data may decrease the
quantity and quality of the information that  we provide to consumers and  may also reduce our ability

17

to identify transactions for which we  can invoice dealers. If  our relationships with affinity group
marketing partners change our business,  revenue, operating results and  prospects may be harmed.

Any adverse change in our relationship  with  United Services Automobile  Association, or USAA, could harm
our business.

The single largest source of user traffic from our affinity group marketing  partners  comes  from the

site we maintain for USAA, and USAA  is  our largest stockholder. At December 31, 2015, USAA
beneficially owned 13,764,669 shares,  which represented 16.5%  of our  outstanding common stock.  In
2015, nearly 234,233 units, or 31% of  all units purchased by  users  from TrueCar Certified Dealers,  were
matched to users of the car-buying site we maintain for USAA.  We define units as the  number of
automobiles purchased by our users from  TrueCar Certified Dealers through  the TrueCar  website and
our  branded mobile applications or the car  buying sites  we  maintain  for our affinity group marketing
partners. As such, USAA has a significant influence on our  operating results.

In May 2014, we entered into an extension of our  affinity group marketing agreement  with USAA
that extends through February 13, 2020, but we cannot assure  you that  our agreement with USAA will
be extended at the expiration of the current agreement on terms satisfactory  to  us, or at  all.  In
addition, USAA has broad discretion  in how the car-buying  site  we  maintain  for USAA is promoted
and marketed on its own website. Changes  in this  promotion and marketing  have in the  past and  may
in the future adversely affect the volume of user traffic we receive from USAA. Changes in  our
relationship with USAA or its promotion and marketing of  our platform could adversely  affect our
business and operating results in the future.

The success of our business relies heavily  on our marketing and branding efforts, especially with respect  to the
TrueCar website and our branded mobile  applications,  as  well as  those efforts  of the  affinity group marketing
partners whose websites we power, and these efforts may not be  successful.

We  believe that an important component of our growth will  be  the  growth of our business derived

from the TrueCar website and our TrueCar branded  mobile applications. Because  TrueCar.com is a
consumer brand, we rely heavily on marketing  and advertising to increase  the visibility of this brand
with potential users of our products  and services. We currently  advertise through television  and radio
marketing campaigns, digital and online media, sponsorship  programs and other means,  the goal of
which  is to increase the strength, recognition  and  trust in the  TrueCar brand  and drive more unique
visitors to our website and mobile applications. We incurred expenses  of $151.0 million on  sales and
marketing during 2015.

Our business model relies on our ability to scale rapidly and to decrease incremental user

acquisition costs as we grow. Our revenue growth has been highly influenced by marketing
expenditures. Incremental marketing expenditures  in certain situations do not result in the acquisition
of sufficient users visiting our website and mobile applications to permit recovery of such costs  through
revenue growth. This limits the growth  in revenue that can  be  achieved through  marketing
expenditures. If we are unable to recover our marketing costs  through increases  in user traffic and in
the number of transactions by users of our platform it  could have a material adverse effect on our
growth, results of operations and financial  condition.

Additionally, to the extent that we discontinue our broad marketing campaigns or elect to reduce
our  sales and marketing costs to decrease our losses, this may affect our ability to acquire consumers
and dealers and grow our revenues. Our current and potential competitors may have significantly more
financial, marketing and other resources than  we have  and the ability to devote greater resources to the
promotion and support of their products  and  services. The realities of competing for users and brand
visibility, as well as ensuring the satisfaction  of  our  dealers, may limit our ability to reduce our  own
marketing expenditures, potentially negatively impacting our operating margins and financial results.

18

In addition, the number of transactions generated  by the  members of our affinity group marketing

partners depends in part on the emphasis that  these affinity  group marketing partners place  on
marketing the purchase of cars within  their platforms. For example, USAA is a large diversified
financial services group of companies serving the United States military community  with hundreds of
highly competitive product and service  offerings. At any  given time,  USAA’s car-buying service may  or
may not be a priority relative to its other offerings. Consequently,  changes in  how USAA  promotes and
markets the car buying site we maintain for them  can and has,  from time  to  time in the past, affected
the volume of purchases generated by  USAA members. For example, in the past  USAA adjusted the
location and prominence of the links  to  our platform on  its  web pages, adversely affecting the  volume
of traffic to our platform. Should USAA  or one or more  of  our other  affinity group  marketing partners
decide to de-emphasize the marketing  of our platform, or  if their marketing  efforts are otherwise
unsuccessful, our revenue, business and financial results will be harmed.

Failure to increase our revenue or reduce  our sales and marketing  expense as a percentage of revenue  would
adversely affect our financial condition  and profitability.

We  expect to make significant future investments  to  support the further  development and
expansion of our business and these investments  may  not  result in  increased  revenue or growth on a
timely basis or at all. Furthermore, these  investments may not decrease as a percentage  of revenue if
our  business grows. In particular, we intend to increase expenditures to grow our network  of  TrueCar
Certified Dealers and to improve the  satisfaction of the dealers in  this network. We also intend  to
continue investing to increase awareness of our  brand, including via television and radio
advertisements. There can be no assurance that these  investments will increase revenue or that we will
eventually be able to decrease our sales  and marketing expense as  a  percentage of revenue, and failure
to do so would adversely affect our financial condition and profitability.

We are subject to a complex framework of  federal  and  state laws  and regulations primarily concerning vehicle
sales, advertising and brokering, many of  which are unsettled,  still developing  and contradictory,  which have
in  the past, and could in the future, subject us to  claims, challenge our business model  or otherwise  harm our
business.

Various aspects of our business are or may be subject, directly  or indirectly, to U.S. federal  and
state laws and regulations. Failure to  comply with such laws  or  regulations may  result in  the suspension
or termination of our ability to do business in  affected jurisdictions  or  the imposition of significant civil
and criminal penalties, including fines or the award of significant damages against us  and our TrueCar
Certified Dealers in class action or other  civil litigation.

State Motor Vehicle Sales, Advertising and  Brokering  Laws

The advertising and sale of new or used  motor vehicles is  highly regulated  by  the states  in which

we do business. Although we do not  sell motor vehicles, state regulatory authorities  or third parties
could take the position that some of  the regulations  applicable  to  dealers or to the manner in  which
motor vehicles are advertised and sold generally are directly applicable to our business. If our products
and services are determined to not comply  with relevant regulatory requirements,  we or  our TrueCar
Certified Dealers could be subject to  significant  civil and criminal  penalties,  including fines, or the
award of significant damages in class action or other civil  litigation as well  as orders interfering with
our  ability to continue providing our  products  and  services in certain states. In addition, even  absent
such a determination, to the extent dealers are uncertain about the applicability of such  laws  and
regulations to our business, we may lose, or  have difficulty  increasing  the number  of,  TrueCar Certified
Dealers in our network, which would affect  our future growth.

Several states in which we do business have laws and regulations that  strictly  regulate or  prohibit

the brokering of motor vehicles or the  making of so-called ‘‘bird-dog’’  payments  by  dealers to third

19

parties in connection with the sale of motor vehicles  through persons  other  than licensed salespersons.
If our products or services are determined to fall  within the scope of such laws or regulations, we may
be forced to implement new measures,  which could be costly, to reduce our exposure to those
obligations, including the discontinuation of certain  products or services in affected  jurisdictions.
Additionally, such a determination could  subject us or  our TrueCar Certified  Dealers to significant civil
or criminal penalties, including fines,  or the  award  of significant  damages in class  action or other civil
litigation.

In addition to generally applicable consumer protection laws,  many states in  which we do business

have laws and regulations that specifically regulate the advertising for sale of new or used motor
vehicles. These state advertising laws  and regulations  are frequently subject to multiple interpretations
and are not uniform from state to state, sometimes imposing inconsistent  requirements on the
advertiser of a new or used motor vehicle. If the  content displayed on the websites we operate is
determined or alleged to be inaccurate or misleading, under motor vehicle advertising laws, generally
applicable consumer protection laws, or  otherwise, we could be subject  to significant civil and criminal
penalties, including fines, or the award  of significant  damages  in class action or other civil litigation.
Moreover, such allegations, even if unfounded or decided in  our favor, could be extremely costly to
defend,  could require us to pay significant sums in settlements, and could interfere with our ability to
continue providing our products and  services in certain states.

From time to time, certain state authorities,  dealer associations, and others have taken the position

that aspects of our products and services  violate state brokering, bird-dog, or  advertising  laws.  When
such allegations have arisen, we have  endeavored to resolve the identified  concerns on a consensual
and expeditious basis, through negotiation and education efforts, without resorting to the judicial
process. In certain instances, we have nevertheless been obligated to suspend all or  certain aspects of
our  business operations in a state pending  the resolution of such issues, the resolution of  which
included the payment of fines in 2011  and  2012 in the  aggregate  amount of approximately $26,000. For
example, in the beginning of 2012, following implementation of our first nationwide television
advertising campaign, state regulatory inquiries  with respect  to  the  compliance of our products and
services with state brokering, bird-dog, and advertising laws intensified to a degree not previously
experienced by us. Responding to and resolving  these  inquiries, as well  as our efforts to ameliorate the
related adverse publicity and loss of TrueCar Certified Dealers from our network, resulted in decreased
revenues and increased expenses and, accordingly, increased our losses during much of 2012.

In October 2013, we received an Investigative Demand from  the Oregon  Attorney General (the

‘‘Oregon Inquiry’’) requesting information regarding potential noncompliance with the Oregon
Unlawful Trade Practices Act. We cooperated with the Oregon Department of Justice in an  effort to
reach  consensual resolution of the issues raised by the Oregon Inquiry without making material,
unfavorable adjustments to our business practices or user experience  in Oregon. We believe we have
responded fully to all information requests received in  connection with  the Oregon  Inquiry. No
material, unfavorable adjustments to  our business practices or  user experience  in Oregon have been
requested or made in connection with the  Oregon Inquiry. We currently consider the Oregon Inquiry to
be informally resolved, but we cannot  assure you  that  matters related to the Oregon Inquiry will  not
reemerge in the future.

In May 2014, we received a letter from  the Consumer Protection Division of the Mississippi
Attorney General’s Office (the ‘‘Mississippi AG  Inquiry’’) suggesting that we  may be acting unlawfully
as an auto broker  in Mississippi. We cooperated with  the Mississippi  Attorney General’s office in  an
effort to reach consensual resolution  of  the issues raised by the Mississippi AG Inquiry without  making
material unfavorable adjustments to  our business practices or  user experience  in Mississippi. We  believe
we have responded fully to all information requests received in  connection with  the Mississippi AG
Inquiry. No material, unfavorable adjustments  to  our business practices or  user experience in
Mississippi have been requested or made in  connection with the Mississippi  AG Inquiry. We currently

20

consider the Mississippi AG Inquiry to  be  informally resolved, but we cannot assure you that matters
related to the Mississippi AG Inquiry will not reemerge in  the future.

In November 2014, we learned that, on or around  November 17,  2014, the Mississippi Motor
Vehicle Commission (the ‘‘MMVC’’)  sent  a letter  to  Mississippi dealers suggesting  that  we may be
acting unlawfully as an auto broker in  Mississippi (the ‘‘MMVC Letter’’). We undertook a  dialogue
with the MMVC in an effort to reach  consensual resolution of the issues  raised by the MMVC  Letter.
Through that dialogue, we were able to achieve such a consensual resolution without making material,
unfavorable adjustments to our business practices or user experience  in Mississippi. We currently
consider the issues raised by the MMVC Letter to be informally resolved, but we  cannot assure you
that matters related to the MMVC Letter will not reemerge  in the future.

In May 2015, we were named as a defendant in a  lawsuit  filed in  the Superior Court  for the
County of Los Angeles (the ‘‘CNCDA  Litigation’’). The complaint, filed  by  the California New  Car
Dealers Association, seeks declaratory  and  injunctive relief  based on allegations that we  are operating
in the State of California as an unlicensed automobile dealer and  autobroker. For more information
concerning the CNCDA Litigation, refer to the risk factor below, ‘‘We face  litigation  and are party to
legal proceedings that could have a material adverse  effect on  our business, financial condition, results
of operations and  cash flows.’’

In July 2015, we were named as a defendant  in a lawsuit filed in  the California Superior Court  for

the County of Los Angeles (the ‘‘Participating Dealer Litigation’’). The complaint, filed  by  numerous
dealers participating on the TrueCar  Platform, and as subsequently amended, sought declaratory and
injunctive relief based on allegations that the  Company is engaging in  unfairly competitive practices and
is operating as an unlicensed automobile dealer and autobroker in contravention  of  various state  laws.
On September 29, 2015, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this  lawsuit ‘‘without  prejudice,’’  which
means that the Participating Dealer Litigation is  currently resolved, but that it could be re-filed  at a
later date. For more information concerning  this lawsuit, refer to the risk factor below, ‘‘We  face
litigation and are party to legal proceedings  that could  have a material  adverse effect  on our business,
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.’’

In September 2015, we received a letter from the Texas  Department  of  Motor Vehicles (the  ‘‘Texas

DMV Notice’’) asserting that certain  aspects of our advertising in Texas constitute  false, deceptive,
unfair, or misleading advertising within the  meaning of applicable  Texas law.  On September 24, 2015,
we responded to the Texas DMV Notice  in an effort  to  resolve  the concerns raised by the  Texas  DMV
Notice without making material, unfavorable  adjustments to our  business practices  or user experience
in Texas, but we cannot assure you that this effort  will  be  successful.

In December 2015, we were named  as a  defendant  in a putative  class action  lawsuit  filed by

Gordon Rose in the California Superior  Court for  the County of Los Angeles (the ‘‘California
Consumer Class Action’’). The complaint asserts claims for unjust enrichment,  violation of the
California Consumer Legal Remedies  Act, and violation of the  California  Business and Professions
Code, based in part on allegations that  we are operating in the  State  of  California  as an unlicensed
automobile dealer and autobroker. The plaintiff seeks to represent a class  of  California  consumers
defined as ‘‘[a]ll California consumers who purchased an  automobile by using TrueCar,  Inc.’s price
certificate during the applicable statute of  limitations.’’ For more information concerning  this lawsuit,
refer to the risk factor below, ‘‘We face  litigation and  are party to legal proceedings that could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results  of  operations and cash flows.’’

If state regulators or other third parties take  the position  in the future that our products  or
services violate applicable brokering,  bird-dog, or advertising laws or regulations, responding to such
allegations could be costly, could require  us to pay significant  sums in  settlements, could require  us to
pay civil and criminal penalties, including fines,  could  interfere  with our  ability  to  continue providing
our  products and services in certain states,  or could require us to make adjustments to our products
and services or the manner in which  we derive revenue  from our participating dealers, any or all of
which  could result in substantial adverse publicity, loss of TrueCar  Certified  Dealers  from our network,
decreased revenues, increased expenses, and decreased profitability.

21

Federal Advertising  Regulations

The Federal Trade Commission, or the FTC, has authority to take actions to remedy or prevent
advertising practices that it considers to be unfair or deceptive and that  affect commerce in the United
States. If the FTC takes the position  in  the future that any  aspect of our business constitutes  an unfair
or deceptive advertising practice, responding to such allegations could  require us to pay significant
damages, settlements, and civil penalties, or could require  us to make  adjustments  to  our  products and
services, any or all of which could result in  substantial adverse publicity, loss of participating dealers,
lost revenues, increased expenses, and decreased profitability.

In March 2015, we were named as a defendant in  a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District  Court in the

Southern District of New York (the ‘‘NY Lanham  Act Litigation’’). The complaint,  purportedly filed  on
behalf of numerous automotive dealers who are not on the  TrueCar platform, seeks injunctive relief in
addition to over $250 million in damages based  on allegations that we violated the Lanham Act  as well
as various state laws prohibiting unfair competition and deceptive acts or  practices related to our
advertising and promotional activities.  For more information concerning  the NY Lanham Act
Litigation, refer to the risk factor below, ‘‘We face litigation and are party to legal proceedings that
could have a material adverse effect  on  our business, financial condition, results of operations and  cash
flows.’’

Federal Antitrust Laws

The antitrust laws prohibit, among other things, any joint conduct among  competitors that would

lessen competition in the marketplace. Some of  the information  that we obtain from  dealers is
competitively sensitive and, if disclosed inappropriately, could potentially  be  used by dealers to impede
competition or otherwise diminish independent pricing activity. A governmental  or private  civil action
alleging  the improper exchange of information, or unlawful  participation  in price maintenance  or other
unlawful or anticompetitive activity, even if unfounded, could be costly to defend and  adversely impact
our  ability to maintain and grow our  dealer network.  For example, we were informed of an
investigation by the FTC’s Bureau of Competition to determine whether firms in  the retail  automotive
industry may have violated Section 5 of  the Federal  Trade  Commission Act by agreeing to refuse to
deal with us. We received a Civil Investigative  Demand dated  February 11, 2014 requesting that we
produce certain documents and information to the FTC related to the matters under  investigation by it.
We  responded to the request and consider  the matter  to  be closed.

In addition, governmental or private civil actions related to the  antitrust laws could result in orders

suspending or terminating our ability to do business or  otherwise altering or limiting certain of  our
business practices, including the manner in which  we handle or disclose  dealer pricing information,  or
the imposition of significant civil or criminal  penalties,  including fines  or the award of  significant
damages against us and our TrueCar Certified Dealers in class action or  other  civil  litigation.

Other

The foregoing description of laws and regulations  to  which we are or may be subject is not
exhaustive,  and the regulatory framework governing our  operations is subject to continuous change.
The enactment of new laws and regulations or the  interpretation of  existing laws and  regulations in an
unfavorable way may affect the operation of our  business, directly or indirectly, which could result in
substantial regulatory compliance costs, civil or criminal penalties, including fines,  adverse  publicity, loss
of participating dealers, lost revenues, increased expenses, and decreased profitability. Further,
investigations by government agencies,  including the  FTC, into allegedly anticompetitive, unfair,
deceptive or other business practices by  us or our  TrueCar  Certified Dealers, could cause us to incur
additional expenses and, if adversely  concluded, could result in substantial civil or criminal penalties
and significant legal liability.

22

We face litigation and are party to legal  proceedings  that could  have  a material adverse effect  on our business,
financial condition, results of operations and cash  flows.

In March 2015, we were named as a defendant in  the NY Lanham Act  Litigation.  The  complaint

in the NY Lanham Act Litigation, purportedly filed  on behalf  of  numerous  automotive dealers  who are
not on the TrueCar platform, alleges  that we  violated the Lanham Act as well  as various state laws
prohibiting unfair competition and deceptive acts  or practices related  to  our  advertising and
promotional activities. The complaint seeks injunctive  relief in addition to over  $250 million in damages
as a result of the alleged diversion of customers  from the plaintiffs’ dealerships to TrueCar  Certified
Dealers. On April  7, 2015, we filed an  answer to the complaint. Thereafter, the  plaintiffs  amended their
complaint, and on  July 13, 2015, we filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint.  On January 6,
2016, the Court granted in part and denied in part the Company’s  motion to dismiss. We believe that
the complaint is without merit, and we  intend to vigorously defend ourselves in this  matter. Based  on
the preliminary nature of the proceedings in this case,  the outcome of this legal  proceeding, including
the anticipated legal defense costs, remains  uncertain; however,  we  may incur significant legal fees,
settlements or damage awards resulting  from this or other  civil  litigation. If this matter  is not resolved
in our favor, losses arising from the results of litigation or settlements, as  well as ongoing defense costs,
could have a material adverse effect  on  our business, financial condition, results of operations and  cash
flows.

In May 2015, we were named as a defendant in the CNCDA  Litigation. The complaint in  the
CNCDA Litigation seeks declaratory and injunctive relief  based on  allegations that we are operating in
the State of California as an unlicensed  automobile dealer  and autobroker. On July 20, 2015, we filed a
‘‘demurrer’’ to the complaint, which is  a pleading that requests the court  to dismiss the case. The
plaintiffs subsequently amended their complaint, and on  September 11, 2015,  we filed a demurrer to
the amended complaint. On December 7, 2015, the Court  granted our demurrer in its entirety, but
afforded the CNCDA the opportunity  to file  a second amended  complaint.  The CNCDA  filed a  second
amended complaint on January 4, 2016.  On  February 3, 2016, we  filed a demurrer to the second
amended complaint. The second amended complaint reiterates the  claims in the prior complaints and
adds claims under theories based on  the federal  Lanham  Act and California unfair competition  law. We
believe that the second amended complaint is  without  merit, and we intend to vigorously defend
ourselves  in this matter. Based on the  preliminary nature of  the  proceedings in this  case, the outcome
of this legal proceeding, including the  anticipated  legal defense costs, remains  uncertain;  however, we
may incur significant legal fees, settlements or damage  awards resulting from  this  or other civil
litigation. If this matter is not resolved in our favor, losses  arising  from the results of litigation or
settlements, as well as ongoing defense  costs,  could  have a  material adverse  effect  on our business,
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In July 2015, we were named as a defendant  in the Participating Dealer Litigation. Both as

originally filed and as subsequently amended, the complaint in the Participating Dealer Litigation
sought declaratory and injunctive relief  based on allegations that the Company is engaging  in unfairly
competitive practices and is operating as an  unlicensed automobile dealer and autobroker in
contravention of various state laws. Neither the  original nor amended complaint sought an award of
money damages. On September 29, 2015, the plaintiffs voluntarily  dismissed this  lawsuit  ‘‘without
prejudice,’’ which means that the Participating Dealer Litigation is currently resolved, but  that  it could
be re-filed at a later date. If the Participating Dealer Litigation  is re-filed at a  later date or if similar
litigation is filed against us, we may incur significant  legal fees, adverse changes in our  dealer network,
settlements or damage awards as a result. If any such matters are not resolved  in our favor, losses
arising from the results of litigation or  settlements, as well as ongoing defense costs or adverse changes
in our dealer network, could have a  material  adverse  effect on  our business,  financial condition,  results
of operations and  cash flows.

23

In May 2015, a purported securities class action complaint  was filed in the U.S. District Court for

the Central District of California (the ‘‘Federal Securities Litigation’’) by Satyabrata Mahapatra  naming
TrueCar and two other individuals not affiliated with  TrueCar  as defendants.  On June 15, 2015,  the
plaintiff filed a Notice of Errata and  Correction  purporting  to  name Scott Painter and Michael Guthrie
as individual defendants in lieu of the two individual defendants named  in the  complaint.  On
October 5, 2015, the plaintiffs amended their complaint. As  amended,  the complaint in the  Federal
Securities Litigation seeks an award  of  unspecified  damages, interest and attorneys’ fees based  on
allegations that the defendants made  false and/or misleading  statements, and failed to disclose material
adverse facts about TrueCar’s business,  operations, prospects and performance. Specifically, the
amended complaint alleges that during  the putative class  period,  the  defendants made  false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to  disclose  that: (i) TrueCar’s business practices violated  unfair
competition and deceptive trade practice laws (i.e., the issues  raised  in the  NY Lanham Act Litigation);
(ii) TrueCar acts as a dealer and broker  in car sales transactions without proper licensing,  in violation
of various states’ laws that govern car sales  (i.e., the  issues raised in  the CNCDA  Litigation); and
(iii) as a result of the above, TrueCar’s  registration statements,  prospectuses,  quarterly and annual
reports, financial statements, SEC filings, press  releases, and other statements and documents were
materially false and misleading at times relevant to the amended complaint and  putative class  period.
The amended complaint asserts a putative class period  stemming  from May 16, 2014  to  July 23,  2015.
On October 19, 2015, we filed a motion  to dismiss  the amended complaint.  On December  9, 2015, the
Court granted our motion to dismiss and dismissed the  case in its entirety. On  January 8, 2016,  the
plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. We believe that the  amended complaint is without  merit and we
intend to vigorously defend ourselves in this matter. Based on  the current  status of  the proceedings in
this  case, the outcome of this legal proceeding,  including the  anticipated legal defense costs,  remains
uncertain; however, we may incur significant legal fees, settlements  or  damage awards resulting from
this  or  other civil litigation. If this matter  is not resolved in  our favor, losses arising from  the results of
litigation or settlements, as well as ongoing defense  costs, could have  a  material adverse effect on  our
business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In August 2015, the Company, certain  of its  executives  and directors, and the underwriters of the
Company’s initial public offering and  secondary offering were named  as defendants in a putative class
action lawsuit filed by Ning Shen and William Fitzpatrick in California  Superior Court under  the
federal securities laws (the ‘‘California  State Court Securities Litigation’’).  The complaint alleged that
TrueCar’s registration statements in connection  with the offerings contained false or misleading
statements of material facts, and failed  to disclose material adverse facts about the  Company’s business,
operations, prospects, and performance.  On September  2, 2015, following our removal  of the action
from California state court to the U.S. District Court  for the Central District  of California,  the
plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this lawsuit ‘‘without prejudice,’’ which  means that the California State
Court Securities Litigation is currently  resolved, but that it could  be  re-filed at a later date.  If the
California State Court Securities Litigation  is re-filed at  a later  date or if additional similar litigation,
such as the Federal Securities Litigation, is filed against us, we may incur significant legal fees,
settlements or damage awards as a result. If any such matters are not resolved  in our favor, losses
arising from the results of litigation or  settlements, as well as ongoing defense costs, could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results  of  operations and cash flows.

In December 2015, we were named  as a  defendant  in a putative  class action  lawsuit  filed by

Gordon Rose in the California Superior  Court for  the County of Los Angeles (the ‘‘California
Consumer Class Action’’). The complaint asserts claims for unjust enrichment,  violation of the
California Consumer Legal Remedies  Act, and violation of the  California  Business and Professions
Code, based principally on factual allegations similar  to  those  asserted in  the NY Lanham Act
Litigation and the CNCDA Litigation.  The plaintiff  seeks  to represent a class of California consumers
defined as ‘‘[a]ll California consumers who purchased an  automobile by using TrueCar,  Inc.’s price
certificate during the applicable statute of  limitations.’’ On  January 12, 2016, the Court entered an

24

order staying all proceedings in the case  pending an  initial status conference, which  is currently
scheduled for April 13, 2016. We believe that the complaint is  without  merit, and  we intend to
vigorously defend ourselves in this matter. Based on the preliminary nature of the  proceedings in  this
case, the outcome of this legal proceeding,  including the  anticipated  legal defense costs,  remains
uncertain; however, we may incur significant legal fees, settlements  or  damage awards resulting from
this  or  other civil litigation. If this matter  is not resolved in  our favor, losses arising from  the results of
litigation or settlements, as well as ongoing defense  costs, could have  a  material adverse effect on  our
business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

As a public company, we face the risk of shareholder  lawsuits,  particularly if we experience
declines in the price of our common stock.  In the  past, following periods  of volatility in the overall
market and the market prices of a particular company’s securities,  securities  class action  lawsuits  have
often been instituted against affected  companies, and as noted immediately  above, such  lawsuits have
been instituted against us in the form  of the  Federal Securities Litigation  and the  California State
Court Securities Litigation. Additional lawsuits of this type or  similar types, if instituted against us or
one or more of our officers or directors, whether arising from alleged facts the same  as, similar to, or
different from those alleged in the Federal Securities Litigation or  the  California  State  Court Securities
Litigation, could result in significant  legal fees, settlements, or damage  awards, as well  as the diversion
of our management’s attention and resources,  and thus  could  have a  material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

In August 2013, we filed a complaint  against Sonic  Automotive  and Sonic Divisional Operations

(collectively ‘‘Sonic’’) in the U.S. District  Court  for the  Central District of  California.  The  litigation
concerned Sonic’s commercial use of the ‘‘True Price’’ mark. In the  litigation, we  sought an  injunction
prohibiting Sonic from using the ‘‘True Price’’ mark, as well as monetary damages incurred  by  TrueCar
due to Sonic’s unlawful infringement. On July  29, 2015, we reached an agreement in  principle with
Sonic to settle the litigation and entered into a ‘‘Term  Sheet’’ reflecting the material terms of
settlement. On August 4, 2015, we entered  into  a settlement agreement with Sonic. Pursuant to the
settlement agreement, Sonic is required  to discontinue use of the ‘‘True Price’’ mark and  has
transferred all of its rights to that mark  to TrueCar, and  the lawsuit has  been dismissed.

We  will incur significant legal fees in  our defense of the NY Lanham Act  Litigation,  the CNCDA

Litigation, the Federal Securities Litigation, and  the California Consumer  Class  Action,  and we may
incur fees associated with additional  lawsuits that  may  be  filed against us or one  or more of our officers
or directors hereafter. The legal fees arising  from any or all of these matters could have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition, results of  operations and cash flows

We participate in a highly competitive market,  and pressure from existing  and new companies  may adversely
affect our business and operating results.

We  face significant competition from companies  that provide listings,  information, lead generation,

and car-buying services designed to reach consumers  and enable dealers to reach these consumers.

Our competitors offer various products  and  services that  compete with  us.  Some of these

competitors include:

(cid:129) Internet search engines and online automotive sites such as Google, AutoTrader.com  and eBay;

(cid:129) eBay Motors, Edmunds.com, KBB.com,  Autobytel.com and  Cars.com;

(cid:129) sites operated by automobile manufacturers such as General Motors  and Ford;

(cid:129) providers of offline, membership-based car-buying  services such as  the Costco Auto Program;

and

(cid:129) offline automotive classified listings, such as trade periodicals  and  local newspapers.

25

We  compete with many of the above-mentioned companies and other companies for a share of car
dealers’ overall marketing budget for  online and offline media  marketing spend. To the extent  that  car
dealers view alternative marketing and media strategies  to be superior to  TrueCar, we may  not  be  able
to maintain or grow the number of TrueCar Certified Dealers and our TrueCar Certified  Dealers may
sell fewer cars to users of our platform,  and our business, operating results and financial condition will
be harmed.

We  also expect that new competitors will continue  to  enter the online automotive retail industry
with competing products and services, which could have  an adverse effect on our revenue, business and
financial results.

Our competitors could significantly impede our ability to expand and optimize our network of
TrueCar Certified Dealers and to reach consumers. Our competitors may also develop and  market new
technologies that render our existing  or future products  and services less competitive, unmarketable  or
obsolete. In addition, if our competitors  develop products or services  with similar or superior
functionality to our solutions, we may  need to decrease the prices for our  solutions  in order to remain
competitive. If we are unable to maintain our current  pricing  structure due to competitive pressures,
our  revenue will be reduced and our  operating results will be negatively  affected.

Our current and potential competitors may have  significantly more  financial, technical,  marketing

and other resources than we have, and  the  ability  to  devote  greater resources to the development,
promotion, and support of their products  and  services. Additionally, they may have more extensive
automotive industry relationships than we  have, longer operating histories  and greater name
recognition. As a result, these competitors may be better able  to  respond  more quickly with new
technologies and to undertake more  extensive  marketing  or  promotional campaigns. In addition, to the
extent any of our competitors have existing relationships  with dealers  or  automobile  manufacturers  for
marketing or data analytics solutions, those dealers and automobile manufacturers may be unwilling to
continue to partner with us. If we are  unable to compete with these companies, the demand  for our
products and services could substantially decline.

In addition, if one  or more of our competitors  were to merge or partner with another of our
competitors, the change in the competitive landscape could adversely affect our ability to compete
effectively. Our competitors may also establish or  strengthen cooperative  relationships with our  current
or future third-party data providers, technology  partners, or other  parties with whom we have
relationships, thereby limiting our ability to develop, improve, and  promote  our  solutions.  We may not
be able to compete successfully against  current or future competitors, and competitive pressures may
harm our revenue, business and financial  results.

If our mobile products do not adequately  address the shift  to mobile technology by our users,  the number  of
transactions between our users and TrueCar Certified Dealers may not grow as quickly and our operating
results could be harmed and our growth  could be negatively affected.

Our future success depends in part on the continued growth in the  use of our mobile products  by
our  users and the number of transactions with TrueCar Certified Dealers that are completed  by  those
users. In the year ended December 31, 2015, approximately 50% of unique visitors  to  our TrueCar.com
website and the car buying sites we maintain  for  our  affinity group marketing partners were attributable
to mobile devices. The shift to mobile technology by our  users may harm our  business  in the following
ways:

(cid:129) the use of mobile technology may not continue  to  grow  at  historical  rates, and consumers  may

not continue to use mobile technology for automobile  research;

26

(cid:129) mobile technology may not be accepted as a viable long-term  platform for a  number of reasons,
including actual or perceived lack of security of information and possible disruptions of service
or connectivity;

(cid:129) we may not continue to innovate and introduce  enhanced  products on mobile platforms;

(cid:129) consumers may believe that our competitors offer superior mobile products; or

(cid:129) our mobile applications may become incompatible  with operating systems such as iOS or

Android or the devices they support.

If use of our mobile products does not continue to grow, our  business and operating  results could be
harmed.

We rely, in part, on  Internet search engines to drive traffic to our  website,  and if we fail to appear prominently
in  the search results, our traffic would  decline and our business would be adversely affected.

We  depend in part on Internet search engines such as Google, Bing, and  Yahoo! to drive  traffic to
our  website. For example, when a user types  an automobile  into  an Internet search engine,  we rely on a
high organic search ranking of our webpages in  these  search results to refer the user  to  our  website.
However, our ability to maintain high,  non-paid search result rankings is not within  our control.  Our
competitors’ Internet search engine optimization  efforts may result in their websites receiving a higher
search result page ranking than ours,  or Internet search engines  could revise  their methodologies in a
way that would adversely affect our search  result rankings. If Internet  search  engines modify  their
search algorithms in ways that are detrimental  to  us, or if our competitors’ efforts are more successful
than ours, overall growth in our user  base  could slow or our user base could decline. Internet  search
engine providers could provide automobile dealer and pricing information directly in search results,
align with our competitors or choose  to  develop  competing services.  Our website has experienced
fluctuations in search result rankings  in  the past,  and we anticipate similar  fluctuations in the  future.
Any reduction in the number of users directed to our website  through Internet search engines  could
harm our business and operating results.

The failure to maintain our brand would  harm our ability to  grow unique visitor traffic and  to expand  our
dealer network.

Maintaining and enhancing the TrueCar brand largely  depends on the success of our efforts to
maintain the trust of our users and TrueCar  Certified Dealers  and to deliver value to each of our users
and TrueCar Certified Dealers. If our existing or potential  users  perceive  that  we are  not  focused
primarily on providing them with a better  car-buying experience, our  reputation and the strength  of our
brand will be adversely affected.

Complaints or negative publicity about  our  business  practices,  our marketing  and advertising
campaigns, our compliance with applicable laws and regulations, the integrity of the data that we
provide to users, data privacy and security issues, and  other aspects of our business, irrespective of their
validity,  could diminish users’ and dealers’  confidence in and use  of  our products  and services and
adversely affect our brand. These concerns could  also diminish the  trust of existing and  potential
affinity group marketing partners. There  can be no assurance  that we will be able to maintain or
enhance our brand, and failure to do  so  would harm  our  business  growth prospects and  operating
results.

Our ability to grow our complementary product  offerings may be limited, which could negatively impact  our
growth rate, revenues and financial performance.

As we introduce or expand additional offerings for our platform we may incur losses or  otherwise
fail to enter these markets successfully. Our expansion into these markets will place us  in competitive

27

and regulatory environments with which we are unfamiliar and involves  various risks, including the
need to invest significant resources and the possibility that returns  on  such investments will not be
achieved for several years, if at all. In attempting to establish our new product  offerings  we expect to
incur significant expenses and face various other challenges,  such as  expanding  our sales force and
management personnel to cover these  markets and complying  with complicated  regulations that apply
to these markets. In addition, we may  not successfully demonstrate the value of these ancillary  products
to consumers, and failure to do so would  compromise  our ability  to  successfully expand into these
additional revenue streams.

Moreover, our affinity group marketing partners already offer products in many  of  these  adjacent

markets. For those affinity group marketing  partners that offer products in adjacent  markets  that  we
seek to enter, our ability to offer products in these markets to their members will be limited. If  we are
unable to successfully expand our ancillary product  offerings, our  growth rate, revenue  and operating
performance may be harmed.

Our business is subject to risks related to the  larger automotive  ecosystem, including  consumer demand, global
supply chain challenges and other macroeconomic issues.

Decreases in consumer demand could adversely affect the market for automobile purchases and, as

a result, reduce the number of consumers using  our platform.  Consumer purchases of new and  used
automobiles generally decline during  recessionary periods and other  periods in  which disposable income
is adversely affected. For example, the  number of new  vehicle sales in the United States decreased
from approximately 16.1 million in 2007 to approximately 10.4 million in 2009,  according to the Bureau
of Economic Analysis. Various economic  uncertainty in  the start of 2016, including stock market and
commodity pricing volatility, lead to  such  a downturn  that  may impact  our  business.  Purchases of new
and used automobiles are typically discretionary for consumers and have  been, and may continue  to  be,
affected by negative trends in the economy, including the cost of energy and gasoline, the availability
and cost of credit, reductions in business and consumer confidence, stock  market volatility and
increased unemployment. A reduction in the  number of  automobiles purchased by consumers could
adversely affect automobile dealers and car  manufacturers and lead  to  a reduction in other spending by
these constituents, including targeted incentive programs.  In addition, our business may be negatively
affected by challenges to the larger automotive ecosystem, including global supply  chain challenges,
such as those resulting from the Japanese tsunami in  2011 and other macroeconomic issues. The
foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our  business,  results of operations and financial
condition.

Our unique visitors, revenue and operating results fluctuate due to seasonality.

Our revenue trends are a reflection of consumers’ car buying patterns. Across the automotive
industry, consumers tend to purchase a  higher  volume of  cars in the  second and  third quarters  of  each
year, due in part to the introduction of  new  vehicle models  from manufacturers. In the past,  these
seasonal trends have not been pronounced due the overall  growth of our business, but  we expect that
in the future our revenues will be affected by these seasonal trends. Our business will also  be  impacted
by cyclical trends affecting the overall economy, specifically the retail automobile industry, as  well as by
actual or threatened severe weather events.

We may  require additional capital to pursue our business  objectives  and  respond to business opportunities,
challenges or unforeseen circumstances.  If  capital is  not  available to us,  our business,  operating results  and
financial condition may be harmed.

Since our founding, we have raised substantial  equity  and  debt financing  to  support the growth of

our  business. Because we intend to continue  to  make investments to support the growth of our
business, we may require additional capital to pursue our business  objectives and  respond to business

28

opportunities, challenges or unforeseen  circumstances, including to increase  our marketing expenditures
to improve our brand awareness, develop new products  or services or further improve existing  products
and services, enhance our operating infrastructure and acquire complementary  businesses and
technologies. Accordingly, we may need  to  engage in  equity or debt financings to secure  additional
funds.  However, additional funds may  not  be  available  when we need them, on terms that are
acceptable to us, or at all. In addition,  our current revolving  credit facility contains restrictive covenants
relating to our capital raising activities  and other financial  and operational  matters, and any debt
financing that we secure in the future could involve further restrictive covenants which  may make it
more difficult for us to obtain additional  capital and to pursue business opportunities.  Volatility in the
credit markets may also have an adverse effect on our  ability  to  obtain debt  financing.

If we  raise additional funds through further issuances of equity  or convertible  debt  securities, our

existing stockholders could suffer significant dilution, and any new equity securities we issue could have
rights, preferences and privileges superior  to  those of holders of our common stock. If we are unable to
obtain adequate financing or financing  on terms satisfactory  to  us, when we require it, our ability to
continue to pursue our business objectives  and to respond to business opportunities, challenges  or
unforeseen circumstances could be significantly limited, and our  business, operating results,  financial
condition and prospects could be adversely  affected.

We collect, process, store, share, disclose and  use  personal information and other data, and our actual or
perceived failure to protect such information and  data  could damage our reputation and brand and harm our
business and operating results.

We  collect, process, store, share, disclose  and  use personal information and other data provided by
consumers and dealers. We rely on encryption and authentication technology licensed from third parties
to effect secure transmission of such information. We may need to expend  significant resources to
protect against security breaches or to  address  problems caused by  breaches. Any failure  or perceived
failure to maintain the security of personal and other data that is provided  to  us by consumers and
dealers could harm our reputation and brand and expose us to a risk of loss or  litigation  and possible
liability, any of which could harm our  business and operating  results.

In addition, from time to time, concerns have been expressed about whether  our products, services,

or processes compromise the privacy of  our  users. Concerns about our practices with regard to the
collection, use or disclosure of personal  information or  other privacy related  matters, even if
unfounded, could harm our business  and  operating results.

There are numerous federal, state and local laws around the  world regarding  privacy and the

collection, processing, storing, sharing,  disclosing, using and protecting  of personal information  and
other data, the scope of which are changing, subject  to  differing interpretations, and which  may be
costly to comply with and may be inconsistent between countries and jurisdictions  or conflict with other
rules. We generally comply with industry standards and are subject to the terms of our privacy  policies
and privacy-related obligations to third parties. We strive to comply with all applicable laws, policies,
legal obligations and industry codes of  conduct relating to privacy and data  protection, to the  extent
possible. However, it is possible that  these obligations may  be  interpreted and applied in  new ways or
in a manner that is inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another and may conflict with other rules or
our  practices or that new regulations could be enacted. Any  failure or perceived failure by us  to  comply
with our privacy policies, our privacy-related obligations to  consumers or  other  third  parties, or our
privacy-related legal obligations, or any  compromise of security  that results in  the unauthorized release
or transfer of sensitive information, which may include personally identifiable information or other user
data, may result in governmental enforcement actions, litigation  or  public  statements against us  by
consumer advocacy groups or others and could  cause consumers and automobile dealers to lose trust in
us, which could have a material adverse  effect on our business.  Additionally, if vendors, developers or
other third parties that we work with violate applicable laws or our  policies, such violations may  also
put consumer or dealer information at  risk and could  in turn harm our reputation, business and
operating results.

29

A significant disruption in service on our website or  of our mobile  applications could  damage our reputation
and result in a loss of consumers, which  could harm our  business, brand, operating results, and financial
condition.

Our brand, reputation and ability to  attract  consumers, affinity groups and advertisers depend on

the reliable performance of our technology platform and content delivery.  We may experience
significant interruptions with our systems in the future. Although we intend to develop a  unified
architecture in the future, our systems  currently employ  multiple software  platforms.  Interruptions in
these systems, whether due to system  failures, computer viruses, or  physical or electronic break-ins,
could affect the security or availability of our  products on our website and  mobile application, and
prevent or inhibit the ability of consumers to access our products.  Problems with the reliability or
security of our systems or with the upgrading and architectural unification of those  system could harm
our  reputation, result in a loss of consumers,  dealers and affinity group marketing partners, and result
in additional costs. In addition, a significant disruption in  our billing systems could affect our  ability to
match automobile purchases with users that obtained a Guaranteed Savings Certificate and delay  or
prevent us from submitting invoices to TrueCar Certified Dealers, receiving payment  for such invoices
and recognizing revenue related to such purchases.

Substantially the entire computer hardware and communications and  network infrastructure  used

to operate our website, mobile applications and  billing systems  is located at  co-location facilities in  Los
Angeles and Chicago. Although we have two  locations, our systems are not fully redundant. In
addition, we do not own or control the  operation  of  these facilities.  Our systems and operations  are
vulnerable to damage or interruption from fire, flood, power loss, telecommunications  failure, terrorist
attacks, acts of war, electronic and physical break-ins,  computer  viruses, earthquakes, and  similar
events. The occurrence of any of these  events could result in damage to our  systems and hardware or
could cause them to fail.

Problems faced by our third-party web hosting providers could  adversely affect the  experience  of

our  consumers. Our third-party web hosting providers could close their  facilities without adequate
notice. Any financial difficulties, up to and including bankruptcy,  faced by  our  third-party web hosting
providers or any of the service providers with whom they contract may have negative effects on our
business, the nature and extent of which are  difficult to predict. If our third-party web  hosting providers
are unable to keep up with our growing  capacity needs, our business could be harmed.

Any errors, defects, disruptions, or other performance or reliability problems with  our  network
operations could cause interruptions  in  access to our products as well as delays and additional expense
in arranging new facilities and services and could harm  our reputation, business, operating  results, and
financial condition.

Failure to adequately protect our intellectual property could  harm our business and operating results.

Our business depends on our intellectual property,  the protection of which is  crucial to the success

of our business. We rely on a combination of patent, trademark, trade secret and copyright law and
contractual restrictions to protect our  intellectual  property. In addition,  we attempt to protect  our
intellectual property, technology, and  confidential  information by  requiring our employees  and
consultants to enter into confidentiality  and assignment of inventions agreements  and third parties  to
enter into nondisclosure agreements.  These agreements may not effectively prevent unauthorized use or
disclosure of our confidential information, intellectual  property,  or technology  and may  not  provide an
adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure  of our  confidential information,
intellectual property, or technology. Despite our efforts to protect  our proprietary rights, unauthorized
parties may attempt to copy aspects of our website features,  software, and functionality or obtain and
use information that we consider proprietary.

30

Competitors may adopt service names similar  to  ours,  thereby harming our ability to build brand

identity and possibly leading to user  confusion.  In addition, there could  be  potential trade name or
trademark infringement claims brought  by  owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that
incorporate variations of the term ‘‘TrueCar.’’

We  currently hold the ‘‘TrueCar.com’’ and ‘‘True.com’’ Internet domain names  as well as various
other related domain names. The regulation of domain names in  the United States  is subject to change.
Regulatory bodies  could establish additional top-level  domains, appoint additional domain name
registrars, or modify the requirements for holding domain names. As a result, we  may not be able  to
acquire or maintain all domain names  that use the name TrueCar.

We may  in the future be subject to intellectual  property  disputes,  which are costly to  defend and could  harm
our business and operating results.

We  may from time to time face allegations that we  have infringed the trademarks, copyrights,

patents and other intellectual property  rights of third parties, including from  our competitors  or
non-practicing entities.

Patent and other intellectual property litigation  may  be  protracted and expensive, and the results
are difficult to predict and may require  us to stop offering some features,  purchase  licenses or  modify
our  products and features while we develop  non-infringing substitutes or may  result in significant
settlement costs.

In addition, we use open source software in our products  and will use open  source software in the
future. From time to time, we may face  claims against  companies that incorporate open  source  software
into their products, claiming ownership  of,  or demanding release of, the source code, the open source
software or derivative works that were  developed using such  software, or  otherwise seeking to enforce
the terms of the applicable open source license. These claims  could also result  in litigation, require us
to purchase a costly license or require us to devote additional  research and development resources to
change our platform or services, any  of which  would have a negative effect on our business and
operating results.

Even if these matters do not result in litigation or are resolved in  our favor or without significant
cash settlements, these matters, and the  time and resources necessary to litigate or  resolve them, could
harm our business, our operating results and our reputation.

Complying with the laws and regulations affecting  public  companies has increased  our costs and the demands
on management and could harm our operating  results.

As a public company, we incur significant legal,  accounting, and  other expenses that we did not
incur as a private company and these  expenses will  increase after  we  cease to be an ‘‘emerging growth
company.’’ In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley  Act and  rules implemented by  the SEC and NASDAQ
impose various requirements on public  companies, including  requiring  changes in corporate governance
practices. Our management and other personnel  devote  a substantial amount of time  to  these
compliance initiatives. Moreover, these  rules and regulations  have increased and will continue to
increase our legal, accounting, and financial  compliance costs and have made and  will continue to make
some activities more time consuming  and costly.  For example, these rules  and regulations make it  more
difficult and more expensive for us to  obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be
required to accept reduced policy limits  and coverage  or to  incur substantial  costs to maintain the  same
or similar coverage. These rules and  regulations  could  also make it  more  difficult for us to attract and
retain qualified persons to serve on our  board of  directors or our  board  committees or  as executive
officers.

31

As an ‘‘emerging growth company’’ we  are currently exempt from the requirement to comply with
the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (‘‘Section 404’’). When
our  independent registered public accounting firm  is required  to  undertake an assessment  of our
internal control over financial reporting, the  cost of our compliance  with Section  404 will
correspondingly increase. Our compliance with  applicable provisions of Section  404 requires that we
incur substantial accounting expense and expend  significant management  time on compliance-related
issues as we implement additional corporate governance practices and comply with reporting
requirements. Moreover, if we or our  independent registered public accounting firm identifies
deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting  that are deemed to be material weaknesses,
the market price of our stock could decline  and  we could be subject to sanctions or investigations  by
the SEC or other regulatory authorities,  which would  require additional financial  and management
resources.

Furthermore, investor perceptions of  our  company  may suffer if, in  the future,  material  weaknesses

are found, and this could cause a decline in  the market price of our stock.  Irrespective of compliance
with Section 404, any failure of our internal control over financial reporting could have  a material
adverse effect on our stated operating  results  and  harm our reputation.  If we  are unable to implement
these changes effectively or efficiently, it could harm  our operations,  financial reporting,  or financial
results and could result in an adverse opinion on internal control from our independent registered
public accounting firm.

We may  acquire other companies or technologies, which could divert our  management’s attention, result in
additional dilution to our stockholders and  otherwise disrupt our operations and  harm  our  operating results.

Our success will depend, in part, on our ability to grow  our business in  response  to  the demands of

consumers, dealers and other constituents within the  automotive  industry as well as  competitive
pressures. In some circumstances, we may determine to do so through the  acquisition  of
complementary businesses and technologies rather  than  through internal development, such  as our
acquisition of ALG in 2011. The identification  of  suitable acquisition  candidates can be difficult,
time-consuming, and costly, and we may not be able to successfully complete identified acquisitions.
The risks we face in connection with  acquisitions  include:

(cid:129) diversion of management time and  focus from operating our  business  to  addressing acquisition

integration challenges;

(cid:129) coordination of technology, research  and development  and sales and marketing functions;

(cid:129) transition of the acquired company’s  users to our  website and mobile applications;

(cid:129) retention of employees from the acquired company;

(cid:129) cultural challenges associated with  integrating employees from the acquired  company into our

organization;

(cid:129) integration of the acquired company’s accounting, management information,  human resources,

and other administrative systems;

(cid:129) the need to implement or improve controls,  procedures, and  policies at a business that prior  to

the acquisition may have lacked effective controls, procedures, and policies;

(cid:129) potential write-offs of intangibles or  other  assets acquired in such transactions that may  have an

adverse effect our operating results in a  given period;

(cid:129) liability for activities of the acquired company  before  the acquisition, including patent and

trademark infringement claims, violations of laws, commercial  disputes, tax liabilities, and other
known and unknown liabilities; and

32

(cid:129) litigation or other claims in connection  with the acquired company, including claims  from

terminated employees, consumers, former  stockholders, or other third parties.

Our failure to address these risks or  other  problems  encountered in  connection with  our past  or
future acquisitions and investments could  cause us to fail to realize  the anticipated benefits of these
acquisitions or investments, cause us to incur  unanticipated liabilities, and harm our business generally.
Future acquisitions could also result  in dilutive  issuances  of our  equity securities,  the incurrence of
debt, contingent liabilities, amortization  expenses,  or the write-off of  goodwill, any of which  could  harm
our  financial condition. Also, the anticipated  benefits of any acquisitions may not materialize.

If our intangible assets and goodwill become impaired we may be required to record  a significant non-cash
charge to earnings which would materially and  adversely affect our results  of operations.

We  had goodwill and intangible assets of $77.1  million at December 31, 2015.  Under accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States, we review our goodwill for impairment annually in
the fourth quarter of each fiscal year, or  more frequently if events or  changes in circumstances indicate
the carrying value may not be fully recoverable.  We review our intangible assets for  impairment
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that  the  carrying amounts may  not  be
recoverable. While we have not recognized  any  impairment  charges since our inception, we may
recognize impairment charges in future periods in connection with  our acquisitions  or from other
businesses we may seek to acquire in  the future. The carrying  value  of our  goodwill and intangible
assets may not be recoverable due to  factors such  as a decline in our stock price and market
capitalization, reduced estimates of future  revenues  or cash  flows or slower growth  rates  in our
industry. Estimates of future revenues and cash flows are based on  a long-term financial outlook of our
operations. Actual performance in the near-term  or long-term could be materially  different from  these
forecasts, which could impact future  estimates and the  recorded value of the intangibles.  For example,
a significant, sustained decline in our  stock  price and market  capitalization may  result in  impairment of
our  intangible assets, including goodwill, and a significant  charge  to  earnings in  our consolidated
financial statements during the period in which an impairment  is determined to exist. In  the event we
had to reduce the carrying value of our  goodwill or intangible assets,  any  such impairment charge could
materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

If our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and  other  tax attributes is  limited, we may  not
receive the benefit of those assets.

We  had federal net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $221.2 million and state  net

operating loss carryforwards of approximately  $156.5 million at December 31, 2015. The federal and
state net operating loss carryforwards  begin  to  expire in  the years ending December 31, 2025 and  2016,
respectively. At December 31, 2015,  we  had federal and state research and development  credit
carryforwards of approximately $0.8 million  and  $0.4 million,  respectively. The federal credit
carryforwards begin to expire in the year ending December 31, 2028.  The state  credit carryforwards can
be carried forward indefinitely.

The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, imposes substantial restrictions on the  utilization
of net operating losses and other tax  attributes in  the event of  an  ‘‘ownership change’’ of a corporation.
Accordingly, our ability to use pre-change net operating loss  and research  tax credits may  be  limited  as
prescribed under Internal Revenue Code, or IRC, Sections  382 and 383.  Therefore, if we  generate
taxable income in the future, our ability to reduce our  Federal income  tax liability may be subject to
limitation.

Events which may cause limitation in the  amount  of the net operating losses and credits that we

utilize in any one year include, but are  not  limited  to,  a cumulative  ownership change of more than
50% over a three-year period. As a result of  historical  equity issuances, we have  determined that the

33

annual utilization of our net operating losses and credits  and tax credits may be limited pursuant  to
IRC  Sections 382 and 383. Future changes  in our stock ownership,  including future equity offerings, as
well as other changes that may be outside our  control could potentially result in further limitations  on
our  ability to utilize our net operating loss  and credit carryforwards.

Risks Related  to Ownership of Our Common Stock

We may  fail to meet our publicly announced guidance or other expectations  about our business and future
operating results, which would cause our stock price to decline.

We  have provided and may continue to  provide guidance about  our business and  future operating

results, including financial results for the  quarter ended March  31, 2016 as  well as the  year  ending
December 31, 2016, as part of our press  releases, investor conference calls  or otherwise. In developing
this  guidance, our  management must make certain assumptions and judgments  about our future
performance. For example, in the second quarter of 2015,  our business results varied significantly from
guidance for the quarter and the price  of  our  common stock declined. Our future business results may
vary significantly from management’s  guidance due  to  a number of factors,  many of which  are outside
of our control, and which could materially  and  adversely affect  our operations, financial condition and
operating results. If our publicly announced guidance of future operating  results fails to meet
expectations of securities analysts, investors  or other interested parties, the price of our common stock
could decline.

Concentration of ownership among our  existing executive officers,  directors, their affiliates,  and  holders of 5%
or more of our outstanding commons stock  may  prevent new investors from influencing significant  corporate
decisions.

As of December 31, 2015, our executive officers, directors, and holders of 5%  or more of our

outstanding common stock beneficially  own,  in the aggregate, approximately 79% of our outstanding
shares of common stock. Some of these  persons  or entities may have  interests  that  are different from
yours.  For example, these stockholders may support  proposals and actions with  which you may disagree
or which are not in your interests. These  stockholders  are able to exercise a significant level  of control
over all matters requiring stockholder approval, including  the election of  directors, amendment of our
certificate of incorporation, and approval  of significant  corporate  transactions. This control could have
the effect of delaying or preventing a  change of  control  of our  company or changes  in management  and
will make the approval of certain transactions difficult or impossible without  the support of these
stockholders, which in turn could reduce the price of our common stock.

The price of our common stock has been  and may  continue  to be volatile, and the  value of  your investment
could decline.

The trading price of our common stock has been  volatile since  our initial public offering and  is

likely to continue to fluctuate substantially.  The trading  price of our common stock depends on a
number of factors, including those described in this ‘‘Risk Factors’’ section, many  of which are  beyond
our  control and may not be related to  our operating performance. These fluctuations could cause you
to lose all or part of your investment in  our common stock since you might  be  unable to sell your
shares at or above the price you paid. Factors that could cause fluctuations in the trading price of our
common stock include the following:

(cid:129) price and volume fluctuations in the  overall stock  market from time to time;

(cid:129) volatility in the market prices and  trading volumes of high  technology stocks;

(cid:129) changes in operating performance and  stock market valuations of other technology companies

generally, or those in our industry in  particular;

34

(cid:129) sales  of shares of our common stock by us or our stockholders;

(cid:129) failure of securities analysts to maintain coverage of  us, changes in financial estimates by any
securities analysts who follow our company, or our failure to meet these  estimates  or the
expectations of investors;

(cid:129) announcements  by us or our competitors  of new products;

(cid:129) the public’s reaction to our press releases, other public announcements,  and filings with  the

SEC;

(cid:129) rumors and market speculation involving us or other companies in our  industry;

(cid:129) actual or anticipated changes in our  operating results or fluctuations in our operating results;

(cid:129) actual or anticipated developments in our  business,  our  competitors’ businesses, or the

competitive landscape generally;

(cid:129) our ability to control costs, including our operating expenses;

(cid:129) litigation involving us, our industry or both, or investigations by regulators into our operations or

those of our competitors;

(cid:129) developments or disputes concerning our intellectual property or other  proprietary rights;

(cid:129) announced or completed acquisitions of businesses  or technologies by  us  or our competitors;

(cid:129) new laws or regulations or new interpretations of existing  laws or regulations  applicable  to  our

business;

(cid:129) changes in accounting standards, policies, guidelines, interpretations,  or principles;

(cid:129) any significant change in our management;

(cid:129) conditions in the automobile industry; and

(cid:129) general economic conditions and slow  or negative growth  of  our markets.

The effect of such factors on the trading market for our stock may be enhanced by the  lack of a
large and established trading market  for our  stock.  In  addition, the  stock market  in general, and  the
market for technology companies in particular, have  experienced extreme  price and  volume fluctuations
that have often been unrelated or disproportionate  to  the operating performance of those companies.
Broad market and industry factors may seriously  affect the  market  price of our common stock,
regardless of our actual operating performance.  Additionally,  as a  public company,  we face the risk of
shareholder lawsuits, particularly if we experience declines  in the price of  our common  stock. In  the
past, following periods of volatility in the  overall market and  the  market  prices of a  particular
company’s securities, securities class action lawsuits have  often been instituted  against affected
companies. As described in the risk factor above entitled  ‘‘We  face litigation  and are  party to legal
proceedings that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results  of
operations and cash flows,’’ two such lawsuits  were instituted  against us in  the form of the  Federal
Securities Litigation and the California  State Court Securities Litigation. Additional lawsuits  of  this
type or similar types, if instituted against us  or one or  more of our  officers or directors, whether arising
from alleged facts  the same as, similar  to,  or different from those alleged in  the Federal  Securities
Litigation and the California State Court Securities Litigation, could result in significant legal fees,
settlements, or damage awards, as well  as the  diversion  of  our  management’s attention and resources,
and thus could have a material adverse  effect on our business, financial  condition,  results of operations
and cash flows.

35

Sales of substantial amounts of our common  stock in the  public markets, or  the perception that  such  sales
might occur, could depress the market price  of our common stock.

The market price for our common stock  could decline  as a result of the sale of substantial
amounts of our common stock, particularly sales  by  our directors,  executive officers  and significant
stockholders, a large number of shares of our common stock becoming available for sale or the
perception in the market that holders  of  a large number of  shares intend to sell  their shares. At
December 31, 2015, approximately 83.0 million shares of our common stock were outstanding.  In
addition, as of December 31, 2015, there were 24.3 million shares  underlying options and  3.7 million
shares underlying restricted stock units.  If  these  additional shares are sold, or  if it is  perceived that they
will be sold in the public market, the  trading price of our  stock  could decline.  Under  Rule 144, shares
held by non-affiliates for more than six months may generally  be  sold  without restriction, other than a
current public information requirement,  and may  be  sold  freely without any restrictions after one year.
Shares held by affiliates may also be  sold  under Rule 144,  subject to applicable  restrictions, including
volume and manner of sale limitations.

Stockholders owning a substantial portion of our total outstanding shares  are entitled, under

contracts providing for registration rights and  subject to some conditions, to require us to file
registration statements covering their  shares or  to  include their  shares in registration statements that we
may file for ourselves or our stockholders.

Anti-takeover provisions contained in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, as well  as  provisions of
Delaware law, could impair a takeover  attempt.

Our certificate of incorporation, bylaws, and Delaware  law  contain provisions  which could have the

effect of rendering more difficult, delaying, or preventing an acquisition deemed undesirable by our
board of directors. Our corporate governance documents  include provisions:

(cid:129) creating a classified board of directors whose members serve staggered three year terms;

(cid:129) authorizing ‘‘blank check’’ preferred stock, which could  be issued by our  board of directors

without stockholder approval and may  contain voting, liquidation,  dividend,  and other rights
superior to our common stock;

(cid:129) limiting the liability of, and providing indemnification to, our directors and  officers;

(cid:129) limiting the ability of our stockholders to call  and  bring  business  before  special meetings;

(cid:129) requiring advance notice of stockholder proposals for business  to  be  conducted  at meetings  of
our  stockholders and for nominations of candidates  for  election to our board  of  directors;

(cid:129) controlling the procedures for the conduct and  scheduling of board of directors and stockholder

meetings; and

(cid:129) providing our board of directors with the express power to  postpone  previously scheduled annual

meetings and to cancel previously scheduled special meetings.

These provisions, alone or together,  could  delay or prevent hostile takeovers and changes in

control or changes in our management.

As a Delaware corporation, we are also  subject to provisions of Delaware  law,  including

Section 203 of the Delaware General  Corporation law, which prevents some stockholders holding more
than 15% of our outstanding common  stock  from engaging in certain  business  combinations without
approval of the holders of substantially all of our outstanding common stock.

Any provision of our certificate of incorporation, bylaws or Delaware law that has  the effect of
delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the  opportunity  for our  stockholders  to  receive a

36

premium for their shares of our common stock, and could also affect the price that some  investors are
willing to pay for our common stock.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing  research or reports about us,  our business
or our  market, or if they change their recommendations  regarding our  stock adversely, our  stock price  and
trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common  stock is influenced by  the research and  reports that industry
or securities analysts may publish about  us, our business, our market, or our competitors. If  any of the
analysts who may cover us change their recommendation regarding  our stock  adversely, or provide
more favorable relative recommendations about  our competitors, our  stock price would  likely decline.
If any analyst who may cover us were  to cease coverage of  our company or fail  to  regularly publish
reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price
or trading volume to decline.

We do not expect to declare any dividends  in the  foreseeable  future.

We  do not anticipate declaring any cash dividends to holders of our  common  stock  in the
foreseeable future. In addition, the terms  of  our  credit facility  currently  prohibit  us  from paying cash
dividends on our capital stock. Consequently, investors may need to rely on  sales  of  their  common
stock after price appreciation, which  may never occur, as the  only way to realize  any future gains on
their investment. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2. Properties

We  maintain our principal offices in  Santa Monica, California. We currently lease approximately
38,000 square feet at 120 Broadway in  Santa Monica, under a lease  that expires  in December 2025, and
approximately 34,000 square feet at 1401 Ocean  Avenue in  Santa Monica  that  expires in 2029. We
maintain additional leased spaces in several  other Santa Monica locations  as well as spaces  in San
Francisco, California, Austin, Texas, and Denver,  Colorado. We believe that our facilities are adequate
to meet our needs for the immediate future,  and  that should it be needed, we will be able to secure
additional space to accommodate any  such expansion  of our operations.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

Refer to the disclosure under the heading ‘‘Legal Proceedings’’ in Note  7 ‘‘Commitments and
Contingencies’’ to our annual consolidated financial  statements included in  Part II, Item  8 of this
report for legal proceedings, which disclosure is incorporated by  reference into this Item 3 of Part I.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

37

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder  Matters  and Issuer Purchases

of Equity Securities

Market Information for Common Stock

Our common stock has been listed on The NASDAQ  Global Select  Market under the symbol

‘‘TRUE’’ since May 16, 2014. Our initial public offering was priced at $9.00  per  share. Prior to that
date,  there  was no public trading market for our common stock. The following table sets forth for the
periods indicated the high and low sale  prices per share  of our  common stock as reported  on The
NASDAQ Global Select Market:

Year Ended
December 31, 2015

Year Ended
December 31, 2014

High

Low

High

Low

First Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Second Quarter (2014 from May 16, 2014) . . . . .
Third Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fourth Quarter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$23.10
$17.99
$12.12
$ 9.88

$15.92
$11.85
$ 4.01
$ 4.97

$ — $ —
$ 9.05
$15.85
$11.93
$25.00
$15.71
$24.71

Holders of Record

As of March 3, 2016, there were 192 holders of  record of our common stock. The actual number

of stockholders is greater than this number  of record holders  and includes stockholders who are
beneficial owners but whose shares are  held  in street name by brokers  and other nominees.  This
number of holders of record also does not include stockholders whose shares may be held  in trust  by
other entities.

Dividend Policy

We  have never declared or paid cash dividends on our  common stock. We  currently  intend to
retain all available funds and any future  earnings  for use in the  operation of  our business and do not
anticipate paying any dividends on our  common  stock in the foreseeable future. Any future
determination to declare dividends will  be made  at the  discretion of our board  of directors  and will
depend  on our financial condition, operating results, capital  requirements, general business conditions,
any restrictions on paying dividends,  including the current  restriction on our ability to pay dividends
under our credit facility, and other factors  that our  board of  directors may  deem relevant.

Purchases of Equity Securities by the  Issuer and Affiliated  Purchasers

None.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity  Compensation Plans

See Note 9 of the consolidated financial statements herein regarding information  about securities

authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plans.

Sales of Unregistered Securities

In March 2015, we issued 959,676 shares of our common stock  to  an investor  upon the  exercise of
a warrant to purchase common stock at an exercise price  of  $6.02 per share.  The exercise was pursuant
to a cashless exercise provision and resulted in no proceeds to the Company.  The shares were offered
and sold in reliance on the exemption  from registration  provided  by Section  4(2) of the  Securities  Act
and Rule 506 of Regulation D promulgated thereunder.

38

Use of Proceeds from Public Offerings  of Common Stock

Our initial public offering of common stock was  effected  through a  Registration Statement on
Form S-1 (File No. 333-195036), which  was declared  or became effective  on May  15, 2014. There  has
been no material change in the planned use of proceeds  from our initial public  offering as  described in
our  final prospectus filed with the SEC  on May 15, 2014  pursuant to Rule 424(b) of the Securities Act
and other periodic reports previously  filed  with the  SEC.

On November 17, 2014, we closed a follow-on public offering of 7,362,991  shares of common
stock, which included 1,960,390 shares  of common stock sold by  us and 5,402,601  shares of common
stock sold by selling stockholders. The  public  offering price of the shares sold in  the follow-on  offering
was $17.00 per share. We received net proceeds  of  $30.8 million, after  deducting  underwriting discounts
and commissions and offering expenses  payable by us, from the sales of our shares. We did  not  receive
any proceeds from the sale of shares by  the  selling stockholders. The offer and sale of all of the shares
in the follow-on offering were registered under the Securities Act pursuant to a registration statement
on Form S-1 (File No. 333-199650). J.P.  Morgan, Goldman, Sachs &  Co., Morgan Stanley, RBC Capital
Markets, JMP Securities, and Cowen and  Company acted as the underwriters.  There has been  no
material change in the planned use of proceeds  from the follow-on offering as  described in  our final
prospectus filed with the SEC on November 11, 2014 pursuant to Rule 424(b).

Stock Performance Graph

The following shall not be deemed ‘‘soliciting  material’’  or to be ‘‘filed’’ for  purposes of Section 18
of the Exchange Act, or incorporated by reference into any of our  other filings under  the Exchange Act
or the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, except to the extent we  specifically  incorporate it by
reference into such filing. The following graph shows a comparison from May 16,  2014 (the date  our
common stock commenced trading on the  NASDAQ Global Select Market) through  December 31,
2015 of the cumulative total return for our common  stock,  the Nasdaq Composite Index (NASDAQ
Composite), and the RDG Internet Composite. The graph  assumes that $100 was invested at  the
market close on May 16, 2014 in our  common stock, the NASDAQ  Composite and the RDG Internet
Composite, and the data for the NASDAQ Composite and the  RDG Internet  Composite assumes
reinvestments of dividends. As discussed above,  we have  never declared or  paid a cash dividend on our
common stock and do not anticipate declaring  or paying a  cash dividend in the  foreseeable future. The
stock price  performance of the following graph is not necessarily indicative of future  stock  price
performance.

39

COMPARISON OF 19 MONTH CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Among TrueCar, Inc., the NASDAQ Composite  Index,  and the  RDG Internet  Composite Index

$250

$200

$150

$100

$50

$0
5/16/14

6/14

8/14

10/14

12/14

2/15

4/15

6/15

8/15

10/15

12/15

TrueCar, Inc.

NASDAQ Composite

RDG Internet Composite

18MAR201615105638

*

$100 invested on 5/16/14 in stock  or  4/30/14  in index,  including reinvestment of dividends.
Fiscal year ending December 31.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

We  have derived the following selected consolidated statement of operations data for the years

ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and  2013 and  the selected consolidated balance sheet data at
December 31, 2015 and 2014 from our  audited consolidated financial  statements  included elsewhere
herein. We have derived the selected  consolidated statement of  operations data for the years ended
December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the consolidated balance sheet data at December  31, 2013, 2012 and
2011 from our audited consolidated financial statements which  are not included in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K. Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of the  results that may  be  expected
in the future.

You should read the following selected consolidated financial and other data together with  the

section titled ‘‘Management’s Discussion and  Analysis  of Financial Condition and  Results of
Operations’’ and our consolidated financial statements, related notes  and  other financial information
included elsewhere in this Annual Report  on Form 10-K. The selected consolidated financial  data  in
this  section is not intended to replace the  consolidated  financial statements and  are qualified in  their
entirety by the consolidated financial statements and related  notes included elsewhere  in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K.

40

Consolidated Statements of Operations  Data:

Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cost and operating expenses:

Cost of revenue (exclusive of depreciation
and amortization presented separately
below)(3): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology and development(3) . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative(3) . . . . . . . . . . .
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . .

Total costs and operating expenses . . . . . . . . . .

Loss from operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income (expense) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in fair value of preferred stock warrant
liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Loss before (provision) benefit for income

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011(1)(2)

(in thousands, except share and per  share amounts)
$133,958

$206,649

$ 79,889

$259,838

$ 76,330

23,657
151,002
48,021
83,494
17,646

323,820

(63,982)
107
(443)
13

17,513
128,569
36,563
58,296
13,213

254,154

(47,505)
59
(380)
37

15,295
75,180
23,685
30,857
11,569

13,559
70,327
21,960
34,228
11,768

156,586

151,842

7,660
41,992
18,457
21,912
4,148

94,169

(22,628)
121
(1,988)
18

(71,953)
229
(3,359)
(18)

(17,839)
199
(66)
(20)

—

—

—

—

(1,882)

taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Benefit (provision) for income taxes . . . . . . . .

(64,305)
(606)

(47,789)
(640)

(24,477)
(579)

(75,101)
606

(19,608)
10,690

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ (64,911) $ (48,429) $ (25,056) $ (74,495) $ (8,918)

Cumulative dividends on Series B, Series C,

and Series D preferred stock . . . . . . . . . . . .

—

—

—

—

(2,370)

Net loss attributable to common stockholders

of TrueCar, Inc.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ (64,911) $ (48,429) $ (25,056) $ (74,495) $(11,288)

Net loss per share attributable to common

stockholders:
Basic and diluted(4)(5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Weighted average shares of common shares

outstanding used in computing net loss  per
share attributable to common stockholders:
Basic and diluted(4)(5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Other Financial Information:

$

(0.79) $

(0.68) $

(0.43) $

(1.33) $

(0.49)

81,914

70,837

58,540

55,828

22,823

Adjusted EBITDA(6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

7,572

$ 10,884

$

2,140

$ (46,523) $ (3,538)

Non-GAAP net (loss) income(7) . . . . . . . . .

$ (11,016) $ (3,290) $ (11,875) $ (60,815) $ 3,137

(1) During the preparation of the consolidated financial statements for the year ended  December 31,
2011, we identified adjustments relating to timing of revenue recognition, accrued sales taxes and
expenses on related party loans affecting 2010 and prior  periods. The  aggregate  amount  of these
adjustments would have reduced net  loss by $360,000 for  2009  and $420,000 for 2010. We
concluded these adjustments were not material individually or in the aggregate  to  any prior
reporting period. We also concluded that  recording the cumulative effect of these adjustments of
$780,000 during the year ended December 31,  2011 was not material to the  2011 financial
statements and accordingly, we recorded these adjustments during the  year ended December  31,
2011.

(2) In 2011, we completed the acquisitions of  Carperks, Honk, and  ALG.

41

(3) The following table presents stock-based compensation expense included in  each respective

expense category:

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

Cost of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology and development . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . .

$

792
4,493
4,294
32,984

Total stock-based compensation

$

(in thousands)
$ 141
2,561
1,762
4,882

454
4,743
5,013
19,123

$

122
1,571
1,428
7,199

$
47
1,076
1,096
3,989

expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$42,563

$29,333

$9,346

$10,320

$6,208

(4) See Note 11 to our audited consolidated financial statements for an explanation of the  calculations

of our basic and diluted net loss per share  attributable to common stockholders.

(5) All share, per-share and related  information has been retroactively adjusted, where applicable, to

reflect  the impact  of a 2-for-3 reverse  stock split, which  was effected on  May 2,  2014.

(6) Adjusted EBITDA is not a measure of our  financial  performance  under GAAP and  should not be
considered as an alternative to net income, operating income  or any other measures derived in
accordance with GAAP. For a definition  of Adjusted EBITDA and a reconciliation of  Adjusted
EBITDA to net loss, see ‘‘Non-GAAP Financial  Measures.’’

(7) Non-GAAP net (loss) income is  not a  measure of our financial performance under GAAP  and
should not be considered as an alternative to net (loss) income, operating  (loss)  income  or any
other measures derived in accordance with GAAP. For a definition of  Non-GAAP net (loss)
income and a reconciliation of Non-GAAP net  (loss)  income, see ‘‘Non-GAAP Financial
Measures.’’

Selected Consolidated Balance Sheet  Data
Cash and cash equivalents and short term

investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$112,371

$147,539

$ 43,819

$ 22,062

$ 42,881

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

At December 31,

(in thousands)

Working capital (deficit), excluding restricted

cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property and equipment, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total indebtedness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lease financing obligation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Convertible preferred stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contingently redeemable common stock . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

113,855
71,390
302,374
—
26,987
—
—
232,692

145,666
30,731
296,952
—
6,093
—
—
249,198

36,637
15,238
174,750
4,764
—
29,224
—
112,180

(9,290)
12,842
145,244
23,696
—
—
1,000
98,196

39,118
13,720
180,165
—
—
—
—
158,769

Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP net (loss) income are  financial measures that are not

calculated in accordance with generally  accepted accounting principles in the  United States, or  GAAP.
We  define Adjusted EBITDA as net loss  adjusted to exclude interest income, interest expense,
depreciation and amortization, change in the fair value of preferred stock  warrant liability, non-cash
warrant expense, transaction costs from  acquisitions, change  in fair value  of contingent  consideration,

42

stock-based compensation, IPO-related  expenses, ticker symbol  acquisition costs, certain litigation costs
and legal settlements, severance charges,  real estate exit costs, and  income taxes. We  define Non-GAAP
net (loss) as net loss adjusted to exclude stock-based  compensation, change in fair value  of  preferred
stock warrant liability, non-cash warrant  expense, transaction costs  from  acquisitions, change in  the fair
value of contingent consideration, IPO-related expenses,  ticker  symbol acquisition costs, certain
litigation costs and legal settlements,  severance  charges, and  real estate  exit costs. We have provided
below a reconciliation of each of Adjusted  EBITDA and Non-GAAP net (loss) income to net  loss, the
most directly comparable GAAP financial measure. Neither Adjusted EBITDA nor Non-GAAP net
(loss) income should be considered as an  alternative to net loss  or any other measure of financial
performance calculated and presented  in accordance with GAAP. In addition, our Adjusted EBITDA
and Non-GAAP net (loss) income measures  may  not be comparable to similarly titled measures  of
other organizations as they may not calculate Adjusted EBITDA  or Non-GAAP net (loss) income in
the same manner as we calculate these  measures.

We  have included Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP net (loss) income herein as  they are

important measures used by our management and board of directors  to  assess our operating
performance. We believe that using Adjusted  EBITDA and Non-GAAP net (loss) income facilitates
operating performance comparisons on  a period-to-period basis  because these measures exclude
variations primarily caused by changes  in  the excluded items noted above. In addition, we believe that
Adjusted EBITDA, Non-GAAP net (loss)  income  and  similar  measures are widely used by investors,
securities analysts, rating agencies and  other parties  in evaluating companies as a  measure  of financial
performance and debt service capabilities.

Our use of each of Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP net  (loss)  income  has limitations  as an
analytical tool, and you should not consider them in isolation or as  a substitute  for analysis of our
results as reported under GAAP. Some of  these limitations are:

(cid:129) Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect the  payment or  receipt of interest or the payment of income

taxes;

(cid:129) neither Adjusted EBITDA nor Non-GAAP net (loss) income reflects  changes in, or cash

requirements for, our working capital needs;

(cid:129) although depreciation and amortization are  non-cash charges, the  assets being depreciated  and
amortized may have to be replaced in the  future, and Adjusted EBITDA  does not reflect  cash
capital expenditure requirements for such  replacements or for new capital expenditures  or any
other contractual commitments;

(cid:129) neither Adjusted EBITDA nor Non-GAAP net (loss) income reflects  the cash  costs to advance
our  claims in respect of certain litigation or the  costs to defend ourselves  in various complaints
filed against us;

(cid:129) neither Adjusted EBITDA nor Non-GAAP net (loss) income reflect a non-recurring  legal

settlement in favor of the Company;

(cid:129) neither Adjusted EBITDA nor Non-GAAP net (loss) income reflects  the cash  severance costs

due to certain former executives upon separation;

(cid:129) neither Adjusted EBITDA non Non-GAAP net  (loss)  income reflects the real estate  exit costs
associated with consolidation of the Company’s office locations in Santa Monica, California.

(cid:129) neither Adjusted EBITDA nor Non-GAAP net (loss) income consider the potentially dilutive

impact of shares issued or to be issued in  connection with  share-based compensation or  warrant
issuances; and

43

(cid:129) other companies, including companies in our  own industry, may  calculate  Adjusted EBITDA  and

Non-GAAP net (loss) income differently from  how we do, limiting its usefulness as a
comparative measure.

Because of these limitations, you should consider Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP net (loss)
income alongside other financial performance measures, including various  cash flow metrics, net loss
and our other GAAP results. In addition, in evaluating Adjusted  EBITDA and Non-GAAP  net (loss)
income you should be aware that in the future  we will incur  expenses such as those that are the subject
of adjustments in deriving Adjusted EBITDA and  Non-GAAP  net (loss) income, and  you should not
infer from our presentation of Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP net  (loss) income that our  future
results will not be affected by these expenses or any unusual or non-recurring  items.

The following table presents a reconciliation of  net loss to Adjusted EBITDA for each of the

periods presented:

Reconciliation of Net Loss to Adjusted  EBITDA:
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Non-GAAP adjustments:
Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Warrant (reduction) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in fair value of preferred stock warrant

liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transaction costs from acquisitions . . . . . . . . . .
Change in fair value of contingent consideration
IPO-related expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ticker symbol acquisition costs . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Certain litigation costs(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Legal settlement(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Severance charges(4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lease exit costs(5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Provision (benefit) for income taxes . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

(in thousands)

$(64,911) $(48,429) $(25,056) $(74,495) $ (8,918)

(107)
443
17,646
42,563
(803)

(59)
380
13,213
29,333
9,808

(121)
1,988
11,569
9,346
3,740

(229)
3,359
11,768
10,320
1,990

—
—
—
—
—
6,171
—
3,732
2,232
606

—
—
—
3,717
803
2,270
(792)
—
—
640

—
—
95
—
—
—
—
—
—
579

—
—
1,370
—
—
—
—
—
—
(606)

(199)
66
4,148
6,208
2,112

1,882
1,853
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
(10,690)

Adjusted EBITDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 7,572

$ 10,884

$ 2,140

$(46,523) $ (3,538)

(1) Includes stock-based compensation of  $10.7 million  incurred  in the fourth quarter of 2015 related

to the departure of certain executives.

(2) The excluded amounts relate to legal costs incurred in  connection with  a claim we  filed against

Sonic Automotive  Holdings, Inc., complaints  filed by non-TrueCar dealers  and the  California  New
Car Dealers Association against TrueCar and securities class action lawsuits. We believe  that  their
exclusion is appropriate to facilitate period-to-period operating performance comparisons.

(3) Represents a non-recurring legal settlement in favor of the Company. We believe excluding the

impact of this non-recurring legal settlement  is appropriate to facilitate period-to-period  operating
performance comparisons.

(4) We incurred severance costs of $3.4 million for executive-level employees  who terminated  during

the second half of the year ended December 31,  2015. In addition,  we  also incurred  $0.3 million of

44

related recruiting fees for the placement of our new  CEO  in the fourth quarter of 2015. We
believe excluding the impact of these  terminations from 2015 is consistent with  our  use of these
non-GAAP measures as we do not believe  they are  a useful  indicator of ongoing operating  results.

(5) Represents lease termination costs  associated with  the consolidation of the Company’s office

locations in Santa  Monica, California.  We believe  that  their exclusion is  appropriate to facilitate
period-to-period operating performance comparisons.

The following table presents a reconciliation of  net loss to Non-GAAP  net (loss) income for each

of the periods presented:

Reconciliation of Net Loss to Non-GAAP Net

(Loss):

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Net loss
Non-GAAP adjustments:
Stock-based compensation(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Warrant (reduction) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in fair value of preferred stock warrant

liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transaction costs from acquisitions . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in fair value of contingent consideration .
IPO-related expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ticker symbol acquisition costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Certain litigation costs(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Legal settlement(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Severance charges(4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lease exit costs(5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

(in thousands)

$(64,911) $(48,429) $(25,056) $(74,495) $(8,918)

42,563
(803)

29,333
9,808

9,346
3,740

10,320
1,990

—
—
—
—
—
6,171
—
3,732
2,232

—
—
—
3,717
803
2,270
(792)
—
—

—
—
95
—
—
—
—
—
—

—
—
1,370
—
—
—
—
—
—

6,208
2,112

1,882
1,853
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

Non-GAAP net (loss) income . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(11,016) $ (3,290) $(11,875) $(60,815) $ 3,137

(1) Includes stock-based compensation of  $10.7 million  incurred  in the fourth quarter of 2015 related

to the departure of certain executives.

(2) The excluded amounts relate to legal costs incurred in  connection with  a claim we  filed against

Sonic Automotive  Holdings, Inc., complaints  filed by non-TrueCar dealers  and the  California  New
Car Dealers Association against TrueCar and securities class action lawsuits. We believe  that  their
exclusion is appropriate to facilitate period-to-period operating performance comparisons.

(3) Represents a non-recurring legal settlement in favor of the Company. We believe excluding the

impact of this non-recurring legal settlement  is appropriate to facilitate period-to-period  operating
performance comparisons.

(4) We incurred severance costs of $3.4 million for executive-level employees  who terminated  during

the second half of the year ended December 31,  2015. In addition,  we  also incurred  $0.3 million of
related recruiting fees for the placement of our new  CEO  in the fourth quarter of 2015. We
believe excluding the impact of these  terminations from 2015 is consistent with  our  use of these
non-GAAP measures as we do not believe  they are  a useful  indicator of ongoing operating  results.

(5) Represents lease termination costs  associated with  the consolidation of the Company’s office

locations in Santa  Monica, California.  We believe  that  their exclusion is  appropriate to facilitate
period-to-period operating performance comparisons.

45

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial  Condition and  Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis of our  financial condition and  results of  operations should be

read together with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes  to  those statements
included herein. In addition to historical financial information, the  following  discussion and analysis
contains forward-looking statements that  involve risks, uncertainties and  assumptions. Our actual results
and timing of selected events may differ  materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking
statements as a result of many factors, including  those discussed under ‘‘Risk Factors’’ and elsewhere
herein. See ‘‘Special Note Regarding  Forward-Looking Statements.’’

Overview

Our mission is to deliver the best car-buying experience for consumers and provide  dealers and

automakers with an excellent return on their  marketing dollars. We have established  an intelligent,
data-driven online platform operating  on  a common technology infrastructure,  powered  by  proprietary
data and analytics. We operate our company-branded platform on  the TrueCar website and  our
branded mobile experience. In addition, we customize  and operate  our platform on a co-branded basis
for our  many affinity group marketing partners, including financial  institutions like USAA and
American Express, membership-based  organizations like  Consumer Reports, AARP, Sam’s Club, and
AAA, and employee buying programs  for large  enterprises such as IBM and Walmart. We  enable users
to obtain market-based pricing data on  new  and  used  cars, and to connect with  our network of TrueCar
Certified Dealers.  We also allow automobile manufacturers, known in  the industry as OEMs, to connect
with TrueCar users in the purchase process  and efficiently deliver targeted incentives to consumers.

We  benefit consumers by providing information  related to what others have paid  for a  make and
model of car in their area and, where  available, estimated prices for that make and  model,  which we
refer to as upfront pricing information, from  our  network of  TrueCar Certified Dealers. This upfront
pricing information generally includes guaranteed savings off MSRP which the  consumer may then take
to the dealer in the form of a Guaranteed Savings Certificate and apply toward the purchase of the
specified make and model of car. We benefit our network  of TrueCar Certified Dealers by enabling
them to attract these informed, in-market  consumers in  a cost-effective, accountable  manner,  which we
believe helps them to sell more cars  profitably.  We  benefit OEMs by  allowing  them to more  effectively
target their incentive spending at deep-in-market  consumers during their purchase process.

Our subsidiary, ALG, Inc., provides forecasts and consulting services regarding determination of
the residual value of an automobile at given  future points in time. These residual values are  used  to
underwrite  automotive loans and leases to determine  payments by consumers.  In addition, financial
institutions use this information to measure exposure  and risk across loan, lease,  and fleet  portfolios.
We  also obtain automobile purchase  data from  a variety of sources and use this data to provide
consumers and dealers with highly accurate,  geographically specific, real-time  pricing  information.

During the year ended December 31, 2015,  we generated revenues of  $259.8 million and  recorded
a net loss of $64.9 million. Of the $259.8 million in revenues, 92.9% consisted of transaction revenues
with the remaining 7.1% derived primarily from the  sale of forecasts, consulting and  other  services to
the automotive and financial services industries. Revenues  from  the sale  of forecasts, consulting and
other services are derived primarily from the operations of our  ALG  subsidiary.  Transaction  revenues
primarily consist of fees paid to us by our  network of TrueCar Certified  Dealers under our
pay-for-performance business model  where  we generally earn a fee only  when a TrueCar  user purchases
a car from them.

46

Key Metrics

We  regularly review a number of key  metrics to evaluate our business, measure our  performance,
identify trends affecting our business, formulate financial projections  and  make operating and strategic
decisions.

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

Average Monthly Unique Visitors . . . . . . . . .
Units(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Monetization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Franchise Dealer Count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transaction Revenue Per Franchise Dealer . . .

5,999,606
750,108
322
9,094
27,439

$

$

4,296,650
610,620
310
8,501
24,994

$

$

2,780,849
399,919
297
6,651
19,857

$

$

(1) We issued full credits of the amount  originally invoiced  with respect  to  12,484, 8,779, and
17,664 units during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013,  respectively. The
number of units has not been adjusted  downwards related to units credited as discussed
in the description of the unit metric  below.

Average Monthly Unique Visitors

We  define a monthly unique visitor as an individual who  has visited our website, our landing page
on our affinity group marketing partner sites, or  our  mobile applications within  a calendar month. We
identify unique visitors through cookies  for browser-based visits  on either a  desktop computer or
mobile device and through device IDs  for mobile  application  visits. In addition, if  a TrueCar.com user
logs-in,  we supplement their identification  with their log-in credentials  to  attempt to avoid double
counting on TrueCar.com across devices, browsers  and  mobile applications. If  an individual accesses our
service using different devices or different browsers on the  same  device within a given month, the  first
access through each such device or browser is counted as  a separate  monthly  unique visitor, except
where  adjusted based upon TrueCar.com log-in information. We  calculate average monthly unique
visitors as the sum of the monthly unique visitors in  a given period, divided by the number of months
in that period. We view our average monthly unique visitors as a key indicator of the growth  in our
business and audience reach, the strength  of  our  brand, and the visibility  of car buying services to the
member base of our affinity group marketing  partners.

The number of average monthly unique visitors  increased 39.6% to approximately  6.0 million for
the year ended December 31, 2015 from approximately  4.3 million for the year ended December 31,
2014. We attribute the growth in our average monthly unique visitors principally to increased television
and digital marketing advertising campaigns that have led to increased  brand awareness, as well  as
increased traffic from our affinity group marketing partners.

Units

We  define units as the number of automobiles purchased by our users from TrueCar Certified
Dealers through TrueCar.com, our TrueCar  branded mobile applications or the car  buying sites  we
maintain for our affinity group marketing partners. A unit is counted following  such time as we have
matched the sale to a TrueCar user with one  of  TrueCar Certified  Dealers. We  view units as  a key
indicator  of the growth of our business, the effectiveness of our  product and the size and  geographic
coverage of our network of TrueCar  Certified Dealers.

On occasion we issue credits to our TrueCar  Certified  Dealers with  respect to units sold. However,

we do not adjust our unit metric for  these credits as we believe that in substantially all cases a  vehicle
has in fact been purchased through our platform given the high degree of  accuracy  of  our  sales

47

matching process. Credits are most frequently issued to a dealer  that claims it  had a  pre-existing
relationship with a purchaser of a vehicle, and we determine whether to issue a credit based on a
number of factors, including the facts and circumstances related  to  the dealer claim and  the level  of
claim activity at the dealership. In most  cases,  we issue credits  in order to maintain strong business
relations with the dealer and not because we have made an erroneous sales match or  billing error.

The number of units increased 22.8% to 750,108 for  the year  ended December 31, 2015  from
610,620 for the year ended December 31,  2014. We attribute this growth  in units  to  the effectiveness of
our  increased marketing activities, product enhancements, the growing number and geographic
coverage of TrueCar Certified Dealers in  our  network, and the overall  growth in new car sales in the
automotive industry.

Monetization

We  define monetization as the average  transaction revenue per unit, which we  calculate  by  dividing

all of our transaction revenue in a given period by the number of units in that period.  For the  year
ended December 31, 2015, our monetization  increased 3.9% to $322 from $310 for  the year  ended
December 31, 2014. The increase in monetization is primarily a result  of improved  subscription pricing
optimization and growth in used vs new mix, the  independent dealer channel,  and in revenue from
automobile manufacturers, known in  the industry as  OEMs. We expect our monetization  to  be  affected
in the future by changes in our pricing  structure, the  unit mix  between new  and used  cars, with used
cars providing higher monetization, and  by the  introduction of new  products and services.

Franchise Dealer Count

We  define franchise dealer count as the number  of franchise  dealers in the network of TrueCar
Certified Dealers at the end of a given  period.  This  number is calculated by counting the  number of
brands of new cars sold by dealers in the  TrueCar Certified Dealer network at  their  locations, and
includes both single-location proprietorships as well  as large consolidated dealer  groups. The network
comprises dealers with a range of unit  sales volume  per  dealer, with  dealers representing certain brands
consistently achieving higher than average unit sales volume.  We view our  ability to increase our
franchise dealer count, particularly dealers representing high volume brands, as  an indicator of our
market penetration and the likelihood of  converting  users of our platform into unit sales. Our TrueCar
Certified Dealer network includes non-franchised  dealers that primarily sell  used cars and are not
included in franchise dealer count. Our  franchise  dealer count increased to 9,094 at December  31, 2015
from 8,501 at December 31, 2014 and 6,651  at December 31,  2013. A disproportionate number of the
net franchise dealer additions in the second half of 2015  represented  relatively lower unit  volume
dealers. We intend to increase the number  of dealers representing high volume  brands in  our dealer
network generally, and in key geographies, by investing to improve the  dealer experience and  increasing
dealer satisfaction.

Transaction Revenue per Franchise Dealer

We  define transaction revenue per franchise dealer as the aggregate  transaction revenue we receive

in a given period divided by the average franchise  dealer count in that period. We calculate average
franchise dealer count in a given period as  the average of the franchise dealer  count  at the  beginning
of the period and the franchise dealer  count  at the  end of the period. Our transaction revenue  per
franchise dealer increased 9.8% to $27,439 during the year  ended  December 31, 2015 from $24,994 for
the year ended December 31, 2014. These increases primarily reflect an increase in units  which was
attributable to an increase in marketing  spend and an increase  in the number of TrueCar Certified
Dealers, platform and product enhancements, and the overall growth in sales of the automotive
industry.

48

Presentation of Financial Statements

Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts  of  our wholly  owned subsidiaries in
accordance with FASB ASC 810—Consolidation. Business  acquisitions are included in our consolidated
financial statements from the date of  the  acquisition.  Our purchase accounting  resulted in all assets and
liabilities of acquired businesses being  recorded at their estimated fair  values  on the  acquisition  dates.
All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

We  report our financial results as one operating segment, with two distinct service offerings:
transactions, and forecasts, consulting  and other. Our operating results are regularly reviewed  by  our
chief operating decision maker on a consolidated  basis, principally to make  decisions about  how we
allocate our resources and to measure  our consolidated operating  performance. Our chief  operating
decision maker regularly reviews revenue for each  of  our  transaction and  data and  other  offerings  in
order to gain more depth and understanding  of the factors driving our  business.

Components of Operating Results

Revenues

Our revenues are comprised of transaction revenues, and forecasts,  consulting and other revenue.

Transaction Revenue. Revenue consists of fees paid by dealers participating in our network  of
TrueCar Certified Dealers. Dealers pay  us these  fees  either on  a per vehicle basis for  sales to our users
or in the form of a subscription arrangement. Subscription arrangements fall into three  types: flat rate
subscriptions, subscriptions subject to  downward adjustment based  on a  minimum number  of  vehicle
sales (‘‘guaranteed sales’’) and subscriptions subject  to  downward adjustment based on  a minimum
number of introductions (‘‘guaranteed  introductions’’). Under flat rate subscription arrangements,  fees
are charged at a monthly flat rate regardless of the  number of sales made to users of  our platform by
the dealer. For flat rate subscription  arrangements, we recognize  the fees as revenue over the
subscription period on a straight line basis which  corresponds  to  the period  that  we are  providing the
dealer with access to our platform. Under guaranteed  sales subscription  arrangements, fees are charged
based on the number of guaranteed sales multiplied by a fixed amount per vehicle. To the  extent that
the actual number  of vehicles sold by  the dealers to users  of  our platform  is less than  the number  of
guaranteed sales, we provide a credit  to  the dealer. To the extent  that the actual number of vehicles
sold exceeds the number of guaranteed  sales, we  are not entitled to any  additional fees. Under
guaranteed introductions subscription arrangements, fees are  charged based on a periodically-updated
formula that considers, among other  things, the  introductions anticipated to be provided to the dealer.
To the extent that the number of actual introductions is  less  than the  number of guaranteed
introductions, we provide a credit to  the dealer. To the extent  that the actual number of introductions
provided exceeds the number guaranteed, we are not entitled to any additional  fees.  For guaranteed
sales and guaranteed introductions subscription arrangements,  we recognize revenue based  on the lesser
of (i) the actual number of sales generated or  introductions delivered  through  our  platform during  the
subscription period multiplied by the contracted price per sale/introduction or (ii) the guaranteed
number of sales or introductions multiplied by  the contracted price  per  sale/introduction.

In addition, we enter into arrangements with  automobile manufacturers to  promote the sale of
their vehicles through the offering of  additional consumer  incentives  to  members of our affinity group
marketing partners. These manufacturers  pay  us a per-vehicle  fee for promotion  of the incentive  and
we recognize the per-vehicle incentive fee when the vehicle sale has occurred  between the member of
our  affinity group marketing partner and the dealer.

Forecasts, Consulting and Other Revenue.

‘‘Data and other revenue’’ as disclosed  in periods  prior

to 2015 is now referred to as ‘‘forecasts,  consulting  and other revenue’’ as we believe this  description is
more accurate and reflective of the actual service offerings that we provide. We derive this  type of

49

revenue primarily  from the provision  of  forecasts and  consulting services to the automotive and
financial services industries through our ALG subsidiary. The forecasts and consulting services that
ALG provides typically relate to the  determination of the residual value of an automobile at  given
future points in time. These residual values are used to underwrite automotive loans and  leases to
determine payments by consumers. In addition, financial  institutions use  this  information to measure
exposure and risk across loan, lease and fleet portfolios. Our customers generally pay us for these
services as information is delivered to  them.

For a  description of our revenue accounting policies,  see ‘‘Critical Accounting Policies and

Estimates’’ below.

Costs and Operating Expenses

Cost of Revenue (exclusive of depreciation  and amortization). Cost of revenue includes expenses
related to the fulfillment of our services, consisting primarily of data  costs and licensing fees paid to
third party service providers and expenses related to operating  our website and mobile  applications,
including those associated with our data centers, hosting fees, data processing costs  required to deliver
introductions to our network of TrueCar Certified Dealers, employee costs related to dealer operations,
sales matching, and employee and consulting costs related to delivering data and consulting services to
our  customers. Cost of revenue excludes  depreciation  and amortization of software costs and  other
hosting and data infrastructure equipment  used  to  operate  our  platforms,  which are  included in  the
depreciation and amortization line item  on  our statement  of comprehensive loss.

Sales and Marketing. Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of: television and radio
advertising; affinity group partner marketing  fees,  which also includes loan subvention costs where  we
pay certain affinity group marketing partners a portion  of  consumers’ borrowing costs for  car loan
products offered by these affinity group  marketing  partners, and common stock warrants  issued to
USAA; marketing sponsorship programs; and digital customer acquisition. See Part III, Item 13
‘‘Certain Relationships, Related Party  and Other Transactions—Strategic Partnerships—United Services
Automobile Association’’ for a description of our arrangements with USAA. In addition, sales  and
marketing expenses include employee  related expenses for sales, customer support,  marketing  and
public relations employees, including  salaries, bonuses, benefits,  severance, and stock-based
compensation expenses; third-party contractor fees; and allocated overhead. Sales  and marketing
expenses also include costs related to common stock warrants  issued to a  third-party marketing firm
and a service provider as part of our  commercial arrangements  with them. Marketing  and advertising
costs promote our services and are expensed as incurred, except  for  media production costs  which are
expensed the first time the advertisement is aired.

Technology and Development. Technology and development expenses  consist primarily of employee

related expenses including salaries, bonuses, benefits,  severance and  stock-based compensation
expenses, third-party contractor fees, and allocated overhead primarily associated  with development of
our  platform, as well as our product  development, product  management, research and analytics  and
internal IT functions.

General and Administrative. General and administrative expenses  consist primarily of employee

related expenses including salaries, bonuses, benefits,  severance, and  stock-based compensation
expenses for executive, finance, accounting, legal,  human resources, and business intelligence personnel.
General and administrative expenses  also include legal, accounting, and other third-party  professional
service fees, bad debt, lease exit costs,  and allocated overhead.

Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation consists primarily of depreciation  expense recorded

on property and equipment. Amortization expense consists primarily of amortization recorded  on
intangible assets, capitalized software  costs and  leasehold improvements.

50

Interest Income.

Interest income consists of interest earned on our  cash and cash equivalents and

short-term investment balances.

Interest Expense.

Interest expense consists of interest on our built-to-suit  lease financing

obligation, on our outstanding short-term  debt obligations, and  for the  period from May 2012  to  May
2013, accretion of debt discount resulting from a  beneficial conversion feature  on our convertible  debt,
which  converted to equity in May 2013. In addition, beginning in August 2013, interest expense includes
interest on our credit facility and the amortization of the  discount on our  line of  credit. See Notes  5
and 6 of our consolidated financial statements included  herein for  more information  about our debt
obligations.

Benefit (Provision) for Income Taxes. We are subject to federal and state income taxes  in the

United States. We provided a full valuation allowance against our net deferred tax  assets as  of
December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 as  it is more likely  than  not  that  some or  all  of our
deferred tax assets will not be realized.  As a result of the valuation allowance, our income tax  benefit
(or expense) is significantly less than  the federal statutory  rate  of 34%. Our  provision for income taxes
in 2015, 2014, and  2013 primarily reflect a tax expense associated with  the amortization of tax
deductible goodwill that is not an available source of income to realize deferred tax assets.

We  have accumulated federal net operating loss carryforwards  of  approximately $221.2 million and

state net operating loss carryforwards  of approximately  $156.5 million at December 31, 2015.

See Note 10 of our consolidated financial statements included herein for more  information about

our  provision for income taxes.

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth our selected consolidated  statements of operations  data  for each of

the periods indicated.

Consolidated Statements of Operations  Data:
Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Costs and operating expenses:

Cost of revenue (exclusive of depreciation and  amortization

presented separately below) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

(in thousands)

$259,838

$206,649

$133,958

23,657
151,002
48,021
83,494
17,646

17,513
128,569
36,563
58,296
13,213

15,295
75,180
23,685
30,857
11,569

Total costs and operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

323,820

254,154

156,586

Loss from operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Loss before provision for income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Provision for income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(63,982)
107
(443)
13

(64,305)
606

(47,505)
59
(380)
37

(47,789)
640

(22,628)
121
(1,988)
18

(24,477)
579

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ (64,911) $ (48,429) $ (25,056)

51

The following table sets forth our selected consolidated  statements of operations  data  as a

percentage of revenues for each of the periods  indicated.

Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Costs and operating expenses:

Cost of revenue (exclusive of depreciation and  amortization presented

separately below) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Loss from operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in fair value of preferred stock warranty liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Loss before provision for income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Provision for income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

*

Less than 0.5% of revenues

Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014,  and 2013

Year Ended
December 31,

2015

2014

2013

100% 100% 100%

9
58
18
32
7
(25)
*
*
*
*
(25)
*

8
62
18
28
6
(23)
*
*
*
*
(23)
*
(25)% (23)% (19)%

11
56
18
23
9
(17)
*
(1)
*
*
(18)
*

Revenues

Revenues

Years Ended December 31,

% Change

2015

2014

2013

2015 vs. 2014

2014  vs.  2013

(dollars in thousands)

Transaction revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forecasts, consulting and other revenue .

$241,395
18,443

$189,353
17,296

$118,713
15,245

Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$259,838

$206,649

$133,958

27.5%
6.6%

25.7%

59.5%
13.5%

54.3%

Year ended December 31, 2015 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2014. The increase in our

revenues of $53.2 million or 25.7%, for 2015  as compared  to  2014 primarily reflected the increase  in
our  transaction revenue. Transaction revenue and forecasts, consulting and other revenue comprised
92.9% and 7.1%, respectively, of revenues  for 2015 as compared to 91.6% and 8.4%, respectively, for
2014. The increase in transaction revenue for 2015 primarily reflected a 22.8% increase  in units due to
an increase in marketing spend and an increase in  the number  of  TrueCar  Certified  Dealers,  platform
and product enhancements, and the  overall growth in sales of the automotive industry. Our average
monthly unique visitors grew 39.6% to  6.0 million during 2015 from 4.3 million during 2014, reflecting
our  increased advertising expenses which  improved brand awareness and the visibility of our car buying
services to our users. Our monetization increased 3.9% to $322 during  2015 from $310  for 2014,
primarily as a result of improved subscription pricing optimization and growth in  used  vehicle vs. new
vehicle mix, the independent dealer channel, and in revenue from OEMs. Monetization may fluctuate
from period to period as a result of changes in  our estimated sales allowance, pricing and the unit mix
between new and used cars. The 6.6%  increase in forecasts, consulting and other revenue for  2015 as

52

compared to 2014 primarily reflected an increase in  volume of portfolio  risk analyses  and residual value
forecasts provided to customers. We  expect revenues  to  grow modestly  in 2016.

During the second half of 2015, we experienced  a decline in the  proportion of dealers representing

high volume brands in our network and slowed quarter  over quarter revenue growth. A
disproportionate number of the net franchise dealer additions in  the second half  of  2015 represented
relatively lower unit volume dealers.  As  a result, our  close rates fell in  the fourth  quarter  of 2015, and
we were unable to generate unit growth commensurate with the  growth in  traffic. To increase  growth
rates, we intend to: (i) increase the rate at  which visitors to our  website and our affinity group
marketing partner sites, and users of our mobile applications, obtain a  Guaranteed  Savings Certificate
by investing in delivering a better experience to consumers  and  dealers; and (ii)  improve close rates by
investing in additional dealer support personnel. By  doing  so, we will  be  re-allocating  dollars from
marketing and advertising, which in the  past has driven revenue  growth, to make investments in our
dealer, product, technology, and research efforts in  order  to make the  changes that will improve the
consumer and dealer experiences and drive revenue growth  in the future.

Year ended December 31, 2014 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2013. The increase in our
revenues of $72.7 million for 2014 as  compared to 2013 primarily reflected the  substantial increase in
our  transaction revenue. Transaction revenue and forecasts, consulting and other revenue comprised
91.6% and 8.4%, respectively, of revenues  for 2014 as compared to 88.6% and 11.4%, respectively, for
2013. The increase in transaction revenue for 2014 primarily reflected the 52.7% increase  in units due
to the level of marketing spend and the  increase in  the number  of Certified TrueCar  Dealers,  platform
and product enhancements, and the  overall growth in sales of the automotive industry. Our average
monthly unique visitors grew 54.5% to  4.3 million during 2014 from 2.8 million during 2013, reflecting
our  increased advertising expenses which  improved brand awareness and the visibility of our car buying
services to our users. Our monetization increased 4.4% to $310 during  2014 from $297  for 2013, and
primarily reflected improved pricing with our  TrueCar Certified Dealers and lower sales credits charged
against revenue resulting from improved collection efforts. The 13.5% increase in  forecasts,  consulting,
and other for 2014 as compared to 2013 primarily reflected improved pricing of our renewal forecasts
and consulting service contracts and lead referral fees.

Costs and Operating Expenses

Cost of Revenue (exclusive of depreciation and amortization)

Years Ended December 31,

% Change

2015

2014

2013

2015 vs. 2014

2014  vs.  2013

(dollars in thousands)

Cost of revenue (exclusive of depreciation

and amortization) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$23,657

$17,513

$15,295

35.1%

14.5%

Cost of revenue (exclusive of depreciation
and amortization) as a percentage of
revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9.1%

8.5%

11.4%

Year ended December 31, 2015 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2014. The increase in cost
of revenue of $6.1 million or 35.1% for  2015 as compared  to 2014 was primarily due to a $4.4 million
increase in data costs and licensing fees to support the  growth of  our business and a $1.1  million
increase in employee related costs primarily due to increases in  headcount.  Although we expect  our
cost of revenue to increase in dollar amount as we  add  additional  data sources in the near term, we
believe that the nature of our cost structure will enable us  to  realize operating  leverage in our  business
over time.

53

Year ended December 31, 2014 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2013. The increase in cost
of revenue of $2.2 million or 14.5% for  2014 as compared  to 2013 was primarily due to a $1.8 million
increase in data costs and licensing fees to support the  growth of  our business and a $0.7  million
increase in employee related costs primarily due to increases in  headcount  partially offset by a decrease
of $0.2 million in consulting costs. The decrease  in cost  of  revenues as  a percentage of revenues  during
2014 from 2013 reflected operating leverage due to our increased level of transaction revenues during
2014 as compared to the prior year.

Sales and Marketing Expenses

Sales and marketing expense . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing expense as a

Years Ended December 31,

% Change

2015

2014

2013

2015 vs. 2014

2014  vs.  2013

(dollars in thousands)
$128,569

$151,002

$75,180

17.4%

71.0%

percentage of revenues . . . . . . . . . . . .

58.1%

62.2%

56.1%

Year ended December 31, 2015 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2014. The increase in sales

and marketing expenses of $22.4 million or  17.4% for 2015 as  compared to 2014  reflected  a
$19.3 million increase in advertising and  promotional activities primarily due to increased  television,
radio and online marketing spend, and  a $3.4 million increase in affinity partner marketing fees as  a
result of our increased level of unit sales and increased promotional activities,  such as loan subvention,
where  we pay certain affinity group marketing partners  a portion of customers’ borrowing costs for car
loan products offered by these affinity  group marketing partners to incentivize their customers to use
our  platform. The increase in sales and marketing expenses for  2015 also  reflected  a $7.2 million
increase in salaries and related expenses primarily  due to our  increased headcount. These increases in
sales and marketing expenses were partially offset by a  decrease of $5.1 million in  warrant expense
related to warrants issued to a third-party marketing firm and  a service provider and a decrease of
$1.9 million in consulting fees as we have brought some services in-house  that  were previously
performed by third parties. Although we plan  to  re-allocate a portion of our sales and  marketing
expenditures from advertising to make  investments in improving our dealer relationships, we expect
sales and marketing expenses to continue to increase in total due to increased headcount to better
serve our existing dealers as well as television and radio advertising, digital customer acquisition costs,
affinity group marketing partner fees,  and other marketing programs as  we grow our business.

Year ended December 31, 2014 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2013. The increase in sales

and marketing expenses of $53.4 million or  71.0% for 2014 as  compared to 2013  reflected  a
$35.9 million increase in advertising and  promotional activities primarily due to increased  television,
radio and online marketing spend to  grow the TrueCar.com brand,  and a $13.1 million  increase in
affinity partner marketing fees as a result of our increased level of unit sales and increased promotional
activities, such as loan subvention, where we pay certain  affinity  group marketing partners a portion of
customers’ borrowing costs for car loan products  offered by  these affinity  group marketing partners to
incentivize their customers to use our platform. The  increase in sales and marketing expenses  for 2014
also reflected a $4.9 million increase  in  salaries and related  expenses primarily due to our increased
headcount, an increase of $2.2 million in stock-based compensation due to additional stock-based
awards, an increase of $1.6 million in warrant expense related  to  warrants  issued to our  third-party
marketing firm and service provider, a  $0.8 million increase  associated  with the  purchase  of  our  ticker
symbol ‘‘TRUE’’, and an increase of $0.6 million associated with  a liquidity bonus  paid to a sales
executive in connection with our IPO.  These  increases in sales and marketing expenses  were partially
offset by a decrease of $5.6 million in our  corporate sponsorship  expense as a result of terminating
certain sponsorship agreements that we determined to be ineffective.

54

Technology and Development Expenses

Technology and development expenses . . . .
Technology and development expenses  as a
percentage of revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Capitalized software costs . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Years Ended December 31,

% Change

2015

2014

2013

2015 vs. 2014

2014  vs.  2013

(dollars in thousands)
$36,563

$23,685

$48,021

31.3%

54.4%

18.5%

17.7%

17.7%

$15,645

$13,818

$ 6,692

13.2%

106.5%

Year ended December 31, 2015 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2014. The increase in

technology and development expenses of $11.5 million or  31.3% for  2015 as compared to 2014
reflected an increase of $10.6 million in increased salaries and  related expenses due to our  increased
headcount, a $1.6 million increase in software  license and hosting expenses, a $1.4 million increase  in
overhead related to facilities, reflecting extra space  needed to accommodate increased headcount,  and a
$1.2 million increase in write-offs of  capitalized  software that  we determined not to place in service.
These increases were partially offset by  a  $2.8 million increase in  the amount of salaries capitalized for
the development of internal use software costs which reduced  technology  and  development expenses
during the period. Capitalized software  costs  increased  $1.8 million for 2015 as  compared to 2014
primarily due to the increase in the amount of salaries  capitalized  for the  development of internal use
software of $2.8 million, which was partially offset by a decrease in capitalized third-party software
costs of $1.0 million. We expect our  technology  and  development expenses to increase in dollar  amount
as we continue to increase our developer headcount  to  upgrade  and enhance our technology
infrastructure, invest in our products, expand the  functionality of our platform and  provide new product
offerings. We also expect technology and development expenses to continue  to  be  affected by variations
in the amount of capitalized internally developed software.

Year ended December 31, 2014 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2013. The increase in

technology and development expenses of $12.9 million or  54.4% for  2014 as compared to 2013
reflected an increase of $7.9 million in increased salaries and  related expenses  due  to  our  increased
headcount, an increase in stock-based  compensation  due to additional stock-based awards of
$3.9 million, a $1.8 million increase in software license and  hosting  expenses, and a $0.7  million
increase in overhead related to facilities, reflecting  extra  space  needed to accommodate increased
headcount. These increases were partially  offset by a  $1.4 million  increase in the  amount  of salaries
capitalized for the development of internal use  software costs which reduced technology  and
development expenses during the period.  Capitalized  software costs increased  $7.1 million for  2014 as
compared to 2013 primarily due to the  costs for a perpetual software  license of $5.0 million  during
2014, an increase in the amount of salaries capitalized for the development  of  internal use software of
$1.4 million, and increases in other third-party software costs of  $0.7 million.

General and Administrative Expenses

Years Ended December 31,

% Change

2015

2014

2013

2015 vs. 2014

2014  vs.  2013

General and administrative expense . . . . . .
General and administrative expense as a

(dollars in thousands)
$58,296

$30,857

$83,494

43.2%

88.9%

percentage of revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32.1%

28.2%

23.0%

Year ended December 31, 2015 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2014. General and
administrative expenses increased $25.2  million or 43.2%  for  2015 as compared to 2014. The increase
reflected $13.9 million in increased stock-based compensation due primarily to the acceleration and

55

modification of equity awards related  to certain terminated executives of  $10.7 million, additional stock-
based compensation expense of $2.1 million associated  with the surrender and  forfeiture  of  unvested
options held by our former president  and additional stock-based compensation of $1.1 million primarily
related to awards granted in 2015. Other increases in  general and administrative expenses  include an
increase of $5.3 million in professional fees, which  includes an increase of $4.5 million in  legal fees
related to ongoing litigation, an increase of $3.6 million  in overhead related to facilities, which  includes
$2.2 million in real estate exit costs associated with  certain leased facilities  that  we exited  in the fourth
quarter of 2015, and an increase of $2.1 million in  salaries and  related  expenses, primarily due to
executive severance. For further discussion  of executive severance, refer to  Note 7  to  our  consolidated
financial statements contained herein.  We  expect to continue to incur significant  legal fees related  to
ongoing litigation.

Year ended December 31, 2014 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2013. The increase in
general and administrative expenses  of  $27.4 million or 88.9%  for 2014 as compared  to  2013 reflected
$14.2 million in increased stock-based compensation due to additional stock-based  awards, $7.6 million
in increased salaries and related expenses due to our increased headcount, and  $2.8 million in
increased professional fees, comprised  primarily of $2.3 million in legal  fees related to a claim we filed
against Sonic Automotive Holdings, Inc.  (‘‘Sonic’’). The  remaining  increase related  to  a $2.0 million
liquidity bonus paid to an executive in  connection  with our IPO and $0.6  million increased insurance
costs.

Depreciation and Amortization Expenses

Years Ended December 31,

% Change

2015

2014

2013

2015 vs. 2014

2014  vs.  2013

Depreciation and amortization expenses . . . . .

$17,646

(dollars in thousands)
$13,213

$11,569

33.6%

14.2%

Year ended December 31, 2015 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2014. The increase in

depreciation and amortization expenses  of $4.4  million  or 33.6% for 2015 as compared to 2014
reflected a growth in capitalized software costs and higher investments in property and equipment. We
expect our depreciation and amortization expenses to continue to be affected by the amount of
capitalized internally developed software costs, property and  equipment  and the  timing of placing
projects in service. Further, as we invest in and upgrade our technology infrastructure, depending on
the timing of these upgrades, we may  shorten  the useful lives of some of our  existing assets  and
accelerate related  amortization expense.

Year ended December 31, 2014 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2013. The increase in

depreciation and amortization expenses  of $1.6  million  or 14.2% for 2014 as compared to 2013
reflected a growth in capitalized software costs and higher investments in property and equipment.

Interest Expense

Years Ended December 31,

% Change

2015

2014

2013

2015 vs. 2014

2014  vs.  2013

Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(dollars in thousands)
$380

$1,988

$443

16.6%

(80.9)%

Year ended December 31, 2015 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2014. The increase in
interest expense of $0.1 million or 16.6% for 2015  as compared to 2014  primarily  reflect  the interest
expense incurred on our lease financing  obligation in  2015, partially offset  by  a decrease in  the interest
on our outstanding balance of our short-term borrowings in 2014.

56

Year ended December 31, 2014 compared to  year  ended December 31, 2013. The decrease in
interest expense of $1.6 million or 80.9% for 2014  as compared to 2013  primarily  reflected  a decrease
in interest on our convertible debt and  a decrease in the accretion of debt discount  resulting from a
beneficial conversion feature on our convertible debt, which converted to equity  in May 2013.

Provision for Income Taxes

Years Ended December 31,

% Change

2015

2014

2013

2015 vs. 2014

2014  vs.  2013

Provision for income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(dollars in thousands)
$640

$606

$579

(5.3)%

10.5%

Years ended December 31, 2015, December 31,  2014 and December 31,  2013. Our provision for

income taxes for 2015 2014, and 2013 primarily  reflected tax  expense due to amortization of tax
deductible goodwill that is not an available source of income to realize our deferred tax assets.

Quarterly Key Metrics and Results of Operations

The following tables set forth selected key metrics and unaudited quarterly consolidated statements
of comprehensive loss data for each of the quarters indicated. The consolidated  financial  statements for
each  of these quarters have been prepared on  the same basis  as the audited consolidated financial
statements included herein and, in the opinion of  management, include all adjustments,  consisting only
of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for the  fair statement of the  consolidated  results of
operations for these periods. You should read  this information together  with our consolidated financial
statements and related notes included herein.  These quarterly  operating results are not necessarily
indicative of the results for any future  period.

Dec. 31,
2015

Sept. 30,
2015

Jun. 30,
2015

Mar. 31,
2015

Dec. 31,
2014

Sept.  30,
2014

Jun. 30,
2014

Mar. 31,
2014

Three Months Ended

Average  Monthly

Unique  Visitors . . .
Units(1) . . . . . . . . . .
Monetization . . . . . . $
Franchise Dealer

5,897,417
183,157

6,634,659
208,034

5,953,061
190,358

5,520,235
168,559

4,428,721
163,338

4,632,183
171,775

4,189,926
149,527

324 $

324 $

317 $

322 $

314 $

303 $

308 $

3,935,770
125,980
317

Count  (Ending) . . .

9,094

8,702

9,300

9,108

8,501

8,149

7,682

7,210

Transaction Revenue

Per  Franchise
Dealer . . . . . . . . . $

6,662 $

7,493 $

6,563 $

6,164 $

6,156 $

6,567 $

6,195 $

5,770

57

Dec. 31,
2015

Sept. 30,
2015

Jun. 30, Mar. 31, Dec.  31, Sept. 30,

Jun.  30, Mar.  31,

2015

2015

2014

2014

2014

2014

Three Months Ended

(in thousands)

Revenues:

Transaction revenues . . . . . . . . . . . $ 59,278 $ 67,441 $ 60,408 $ 54,268 $51,249 $ 51,985 $ 46,127
Forecasts, consulting,  and other

$39,992

revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4,310

4,964

4,883

4,286

4,222

4,766

4,370

3,938

Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

63,588

72,405

65,291

58,554

55,471

56,751

50,497

43,930

Costs and operating expenses:

Cost  of  revenue (exclusive of

depreciation and amortization
presented  separately below) . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology  and development . . . . . .
General and  administrative . . . . . . .
Depreciation and amortization . . . . .

Total costs and expenses . . . . . . .

5,987
34,867
14,942
29,851
5,125

90,772

5,952
43,969
12,340
16,467
4,477

83,205

5,927
40,457
10,979
18,407
4,119

79,889

5,791
31,709
9,760
18,769
3,925

4,989
31,111
9,814
15,422
3,739

69,954

65,075

4,666
36,399
10,906
14,919
3,388

70,278

4,138
33,292
8,513
16,438
2,972

3,720
27,767
7,330
11,517
3,114

65,353

53,448

Loss from  operations

. . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest  expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income(expense) . . . . . . . . . .

Loss before  provision for income taxes .
Provision for  income taxes . . . . . . . . .

(27,184)
36
(121)
(1)

(27,270)
174

(10,800)
27
(159)
—

(10,932)
173

(14,598)
24
(118)
3

(14,689)
50

(11,400)
20
(45)
11

(11,414)
209

(9,604)
18
(52)
7

(9,631)
203

(13,527)
14
(27)
20

(13,520)
120

(14,856)
10
(131)
10

(14,967)
67

(9,518)
17
(170)
—

(9,671)
250

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $(27,444) $(11,105) $(14,739) $(11,623) $ (9,834) $(13,640) $(15,034) $ (9,921)

Net loss  per  share:
Basic  and diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $

Other  Financial Information(2):
Adjusted  EBITDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $

(0.33) $

(0.13) $

(0.18) $

(0.14) $ (0.13) $

(0.18) $

(0.22) $ (0.17)

159 $ 2,651 $

477 $ 4,285 $ 4,253 $ 3,860 $ 1,773

$

998

Non-GAAP net income  (loss) . . . . . . . $ (5,225) $ (2,131) $ (3,786) $

126 $

277 $

339 $ (1,387) $ (2,519)

(1) We  issued full credits  of the amount originally invoiced with respect to 3,604, 3,319, 2,802, 2,759, 2,507, 2,074, 2,054,

and 2,145, units  during the  three  months  ended December 31, 2015, September 30, 2015, June 30, 2015, March 31,
2015, December 31, 2014,  September  30, 2014, June 30, 2014, and March 31, 2014, respectively. The number of
units has  not  been adjusted downwards  related to units credited.

(2) Adjusted EBITDA  and  Non-GAAP  net  income (loss) are not measures of our financial performance under GAAP
and should not  be considered as alternatives to net income, operating income or any other measures derived in
accordance with GAAP. For definitions of Adjusted EBITDA and Non-GAAP net income (loss) and a reconciliation
of net  loss  to Adjusted EBITDA and  Non-GAAP net income (loss), see ‘‘Non-GAAP Financial Measures.’’

58

The following table presents a reconciliation of  net loss to Adjusted EBITDA for each of the

periods presented:

Dec. 31,
2015

Sept. 30,
2015

Jun. 30, Mar. 31, Dec.  31, Sept. 30,

Jun.  30, Mar.  31,

2015

2015

2014

2014

2014

2014

Three Months Ended

(in thousands)

Reconciliation of Net Loss  to  Adjusted

EBITDA

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $(27,444) $(11,105) $(14,739) $(11,623) $(9,834) $(13,640) $(15,034) $(9,921)
Non-GAAP Adjustments:

Interest  income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest  expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Depreciation and  amortization . . . . .
Stock-based  compensation(1) . . . . . .
Warrant (reduction) expense . . . . . .
IPO-related expenses . . . . . . . . . . .
Ticker symbol acquisition costs . . . . .
Certain litigation costs(2) . . . . . . . .
Legal Settlement(3) . . . . . . . . . . . .
Severance charges(4) . . . . . . . . . . .
Lease exit charges(5) . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
Provision for income taxes.

(36)
121
5,125
16,412
(15)
—
—
429
—
3,161
2,232
174

(27)
159
4,477
7,531
(308)
—
—
1,180
—
571
—
173

(24)
118
4,119
9,167
(333)
—
—
2,119
—
—
—
50

(20)
45
3,925
9,453
(147)
—
—
2,443
—
—
—
209

(18)
52
3,739
8,353
1,518
—
—
1,032
(792)
—
—
203

(14)
27
3,388
9,440
3,675
—
—
864
—
—
—
120

(10)
131
2,972
7,396
2,280
3,717
—
254
—
—
—
67

(17)
170
3,114
4,144
2,335
—
803
120
—
—
—
250

Adjusted EBITDA(6) . . . . . . . . . . . . $

159 $ 2,651 $

477 $ 4,285

$ 4,253

$ 3,860 $ 1,773

$

998

(1)

Includes  stock-based compensation  of  $10.7 million incurred in the fourth quarter of 2015 related to the departure
of certain executives.

(2) The excluded  amounts relate to  legal costs incurred in connection with a claim we filed against Sonic Automotive

Holdings, Inc., complaints filed by non-TrueCar dealers and the California New Car Dealers Association against
TrueCar and securities class  action lawsuits. We believe that their exclusion is appropriate to facilitate
period-to-period operating performance comparisons.

(3) Represents a non-recurring legal settlement in favor of the Company. We believe excluding the impact of this
non-recurring  legal settlement is appropriate to facilitate period-to-period operating performance comparisons.

(4) We  incurred severance costs of  $0.6  million and $2.8 million for executive-level employees who terminated during
the  quarters ended September  30, 2015  and December 31, 2015, respectively. In addition, we also incurred
$0.3 million of related  recruiting fees for the placement of our new CEO in the fourth quarter of 2015. We believe
excluding the impact of these  terminations from 2015 is consistent with our use of these non-GAAP measures as we
do  not believe  they are a useful indicator  of ongoing operating results.

(5) Represents lease termination costs associated with the consolidation of the Company’s office locations in Santa
Monica, California. We believe that  their  exclusion is appropriate to facilitate period-to-period operating
performance comparisons.

(6) Adjusted EBITDA  is not a measure  of our financial performance under GAAP and should not be considered as an
alternative to net income, operating income or any other measures derived in accordance with GAAP. For a
definition of Adjusted  EBITDA, see ‘‘Non-GAAP Financial Measures.’’

59

The following table presents a reconciliation of  net loss to Non-GAAP  net (loss) income for each

of the periods presented:

Dec. 31,
2015

Sept. 30,
2015

Jun. 30, Mar. 31, Dec.  31, Sept. 30,

Jun.  30, Mar.  31,

2015

2015

2014

2014

2014

2014

Three Months Ended

(in thousands)

Reconciliation of Net Loss  to

Non-GAAP Net (Loss)  Income

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $(27,444) $(11,105) $(14,739) $(11,623) $(9,834) $(13,640) $(15,034) $(9,921)
Non-GAAP Adjustments:

Stock-based compensation(1) . . . . . .
Warrant  (reduction) expense . . . . . .
IPO-related expenses . . . . . . . . . . .
Ticker symbol acquisition costs . . . . .
Certain  litigation costs(2) . . . . . . . .
Legal Settlement(3) . . . . . . . . . . . .
Severance charges(4) . . . . . . . . . . .
Lease exit charges(5) . . . . . . . . . . .

16,412
(15)
—
—
429
—
3,161
2,232

7,531
(308)
—
—
1,180
—
571
—

9,167
(333)
—
—
2,119
—
—
—

9,453
(147)
—
—
2,443
—
—
—

8,353
1,518
—
—
1,032
(792)
—
—

9,440
3,675
—
—
864
—
—
—

7,396
2,280
3,717
—
254
—
—
—

4,144
2,335
—
803
120
—
—
—

Non-GAAP net (loss) income(6) . . . . . $ (5,225) $ (2,131) $ (3,786) $

126

$

277

$

339 $ (1,387) $(2,519)

(1)

Includes  stock-based compensation  of  $10.7 million incurred in the fourth quarter of 2015 related to the departure
of certain executives.

(2) The excluded  amounts relate to  legal costs incurred in connection with a claim we filed against Sonic Automotive

Holdings, Inc., complaints filed by non-TrueCar dealers and the California New Car Dealers Association against
TrueCar and securities class  action lawsuits. We believe that their exclusion is appropriate to facilitate
period-to-period operating performance comparisons.

(3) Represents a non-recurring legal settlement in favor of the Company. We believe excluding the impact of this
non-recurring  legal settlement is appropriate to facilitate period-to-period operating performance comparisons.

(4) We  incurred severance costs of  $0.6  million and $2.8 million for executive-level employees who terminated during
the  quarters ended September  30, 2015  and December 31, 2015, respectively. In addition, we also incurred
$0.3 million of related  recruiting fees for the placement of our new CEO in the fourth quarter of 2015. We believe
excluding the impact of these  costs from 2015 is consistent with our use of these non-GAAP measures as we do not
believe they are a useful indicator of  ongoing operating results.

(5) Represents lease termination costs associated with the consolidation of the Company’s office locations in Santa
Monica, California. We believe that  their  exclusion is appropriate to facilitate period-to-period operating
performance comparisons.

(6) Non-GAAP net income (loss) is  not  a  measure of our financial performance under GAAP and should not be

considered as an alternative to net  income, operating income or any other measures derived in accordance with
GAAP. For a  definition of Non-GAAP  net income (loss) see ‘‘Non-GAAP Financial Measures.’’

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At December 31, 2015, our principal sources of  liquidity  were cash and cash equivalents  totaling

$112.4 million. Since inception, our operations have been financed primarily by net proceeds from the
sales of shares of our capital stock and proceeds from  the issuance of indebtedness.

We  have incurred  cumulative losses of $275.9  million from our  operations  through December  31,

2015, and expect to incur additional  losses in the future. We  believe that  our existing  sources  of
liquidity will be sufficient to fund our  operations for at  least  the next 12  months. However, our future
capital requirements will depend on many factors,  including  our rate  of  revenue growth,  the expansion
of our sales and marketing activities, and  the timing and extent of our  spending to support our
technology and development efforts.  To the extent that  existing cash  and cash equivalents, and cash
from operations are insufficient to fund  our future  activities, we may need to raise  additional funds
through public or private equity or debt financing.  Additional funds  may not be available  on terms
favorable to us or at all.

60

Credit Facility

We  previously entered into a credit facility with a financial institution that provided  for advances

under a formula-based revolving line  of  credit  and had no  amounts outstanding at December  31, 2015.

On February 18, 2015, we amended our credit facility to provide advances of up to $35.0 million.

This amended credit facility provides  a $10.0  million  subfacility for the issuance of letters of credit and
contains an increase option permitting us, subject to the  lenders consent, to increase the  revolving
credit facility by up to $15.0 million,  to  an aggregate maximum of $50  million. The  credit facility has  a
three-year term and matures on February 18,  2018. See Note 6  of our consolidated financial statements
herein for more information about our  amended credit facility.

Cash Flows

The following table summarizes our cash flows:

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

(in thousands)

Consolidated Cash Flow Data:
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash used in investing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash provided by financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(11,369) $
(29,836)
6,037

3,104
(9,823)
110,439

$ (3,911)
(5,483)
31,151

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(35,168) $103,720

$21,757

Operating Activities

Our net  loss and cash flows used in operating activities  are significantly influenced by our
investments in headcount and infrastructure to support our growth,  and marketing, advertising and
sponsorship expenses. Our net loss has  been  significantly  greater than  cash used in or provided by
operating activities due to the inclusion  of non-cash  expenses and charges.

Cash used in operating activities in 2015 was $11.4  million. This was primarily due to our net loss

of $64.9 million, which, adjusted for  non-cash items, including  depreciation and amortization expense of
$17.3 million, stock-based compensation expense of  $42.6 million, and loss on disposal  of  fixed  assets of
$1.6 million, resulted in $2.7 million in cash used in operations.  This use  of cash  was  also due to
$8.6 million in changes to operating assets and liabilities,  which primarily reflected a decrease  of
$6.5 million in accrued employee expenses primarily related to lower accrued bonuses, an increase of
$5.9 million in accounts receivable primarily related  to  increased revenues, a  decrease of $1.8 million in
accrued expenses and other current liabilities primarily due to decreased  marketing  fees.  These were
partially offset by a $5.3 million increase in  accounts payable primarily due to increased affinity group
marketing fees and growth in our business and a decrease  of $1.1 million in other current assets
primarily due to a decrease in a receivable from a legal  settlement in our favor.

Cash provided by operating activities in  2014 was $3.1 million. This was primarily due to our net

loss of $48.4 million, which, adjusted  for non-cash  items, including depreciation and amortization
expense of $13.0 million, stock-based  compensation  expense of $29.3  million, common  stock warrant
expense of $9.9 million, and other non-cash adjustments of $1.3 million, resulted  in $5.1 million in cash
provided by operations. This was offset by a decrease  of  $2.0 million in changes  to  operating assets  and
liabilities, which reflected a decrease  in accrued  expenses and other  liabilities  of  $4.3 million, primarily
related to increases in accrued marketing expenses, legal costs, and  construction  costs;  a decrease in
accrued employee expenses of $3.9 million related to increased accrued bonuses driven by growth in
headcount; and a decrease in accounts  payable of $3.4 million, primarily related to affinity group

61

marketing fees. These were partially  offset  by a $10.4 million increase in accounts receivable  as a result
of our increased revenues, $1.7 million  increase in  prepaid  expenses related  to  media production,
insurance, and software costs, and a $1.3  million increase in other assets related  to  amounts  receivable
from a legal settlement in our favor.

Cash used in operating activities in 2013 was $3.9  million, primarily as  a  result of  our net  loss of

$25.1 million and a $6.7 million use of  cash as a  result of changes in operating assets and  liabilities,
which  was largely offset by $27.9 million of non-cash operating  expenses. The $6.7  million  use of cash
as a result of changes in operating assets  and  liabilities reflected an $8.2  million increase in accounts
receivable as a result of our increased  revenues, a $2.0  million  increase in prepaid expenses primarily
associated with our increased media advertising spend, a decrease  of $1.2 million in accrued  expenses
primarily associated with the modification of the marketing arrangement with Yahoo!  in 2012, partially
offset by a $4.0 million increase in accrued employee expenses due  to  an increase  in accrued bonuses
driven by our improved financial results, and a  $1.4 million increase in  accounts payable associated with
the growth in our business.

Investing Activities

Our investing activities consist primarily of  capital expenditures for  capitalized software

development costs and property and  equipment and changes in restricted cash requirements associated
with our modified marketing arrangement  with Yahoo!.

Cash used in investing activities of $29.8 million for 2015 resulted primarily  from $13.8 million of
investments in software, $12.7 million  of investments  in furniture, leasehold,  and facility improvements
primarily associated with our San Francisco and  Santa Monica  office spaces, and $3.3 million of
investment in computer hardware.

Cash used in investing activities of $9.8 million for 2014 primarily resulted  from investments in

capitalized software development and  property and equipment of  $15.5 million  and a  purchase  of
$0.4 million related to the True.com  domain name,  which was partially offset by $4.1 million of
repayments on notes receivable from related parties  and the  release of $2.0  million of  restricted cash
under our modified marketing arrangement  with Yahoo!.

Cash used in investing activities of $5.5 million in 2013  primarily  resulted from the  investment in

capitalized software development and  property and equipment of  $8.4 million  which was partially offset
by the release of $2.5 million in restricted  cash under our modified  marketing arrangement with
Yahoo!, and $0.4 million of payments  on  notes receivable  from related  parties.

Financing Activities

Cash provided by financing activities  of $6.0 million for 2015  primarily  reflects $5.4 million of

proceeds from the exercise of stock options, net  of  taxes paid for the net  share settlement  of certain
equity awards, and a $0.6 million tenant  improvement  reimbursement related to a build-to-suit
capitalized lease.

Cash provided by financing activities  of $110.4 million for 2014  reflects $69.7 million of proceeds
from our initial public offering, $30.9 million of proceeds from  our follow-on offering, approximately
$9.4 million of proceeds from the exercise  of  warrants, $5.3 million of proceeds from the exercise of
stock options, net of taxes paid for the  net share settlement of certain equity awards, and $5.0 million
of proceeds from borrowings under our  credit  facility, which was partially offset by repayment  of
$10.0 million under our credit facility.

Cash provided by financing activities  of $31.2 million in 2013 reflects net proceeds  of  $29.9 million

from the issuance of 2,857,143 shares of Series A  Preferred  Stock  in a private placement, and
$5.0 million from a draw down under  our Credit Facility. These increases  were partially offset by a

62

$2.0 million repurchase of vested option awards pursuant to a settlement agreement entered  into  with a
former executive, a $1.0 million repurchase  of outstanding common  stock  pursuant to an employment
agreement with our Chief Executive Officer, $0.6 million for payments of costs related to our initial
public offering, and $0.4 million of payments of contingent  consideration related  to  the Carperks
acquisition. The remaining contingent consideration related to the Carperks acquisition of $1.9 million
was paid in 2014. Of this total, $0.4 million was part of the  estimated  purchase  price and  has been
classified as a financing cash out flow. The additional $1.5  million has  been classified as  an operating
cash outflow.

Contractual Obligations and Known Future  Cash Requirements

Contractual Obligations

Set forth below is information concerning  our  known  contractual  obligations at December  31, 2015

that are fixed and determinable.

Total

Less Than
1 Year

1 - 3 Years

3 - 5 Years

More Than
5 Years

Lease obligations . . . . . . . . .
Purchase obligations . . . . . . .

$85,394
5,543

$ 8,399
3,655

(in thousands)
$27,513
1,886

$22,335
2

$27,147
—

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$90,937

$12,054

$29,399

$22,337

$27,147

Our lease obligations consist of various leases for office space. We also have purchase obligations
for data information, software related licenses and support services. For  further  discussion, see  Note 7
of our consolidated financial statements included  herein.  Contingent obligations arising from
unrecognized tax benefits are not included in the contractual obligations because it is  expected that the
unrecognized benefits would only result in an insignificant amount of cash payments.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We  do not engage in transactions that  generate relationships with  unconsolidated entities  or
financial partnerships, such as entities often  referred  to  as structured finance  or special  purpose
entities, as part of our ongoing business. Accordingly,  our operating results,  financial  condition,  and
cash flows are not subject to off-balance sheet risks.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance  with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles, or GAAP. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires us
to make estimates and assumptions that  affect  the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue,
expenses and related disclosures. We  evaluate our estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis.  Our
estimates are based on historical experience and  various other assumptions on an ongoing basis  and
that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Our  actual  results could differ from these
estimates.

We  believe that the assumptions and estimates associated with revenue  recognition, sales
allowances and allowances for doubtful accounts,  the fair value of  assets and liabilities assumed  in
business combinations, the recoverability  of goodwill  and  long-lived assets,  valuation allowances with
respect to deferred tax assets, the expensing and capitalization  of  software and website development
costs, and the valuation and assumptions underlying  stock-based compensation  and other  equity
instruments have the greatest potential impact on our consolidated financial statements.  Therefore, we
consider these to be our critical accounting policies and estimates. For further  information on all of our
significant accounting policies, see Note  2 of our consolidated financial  statements included herein.

63

Revenue Recognition

We  recognize revenue when all of the following criteria have  been met:

(cid:129) Persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists.

(cid:129) Delivery has occurred or services have been rendered.

(cid:129) The fees are fixed or determinable.

(cid:129) Collectability is reasonably assured.  We assess collectability based primarily on the

creditworthiness of the customer as determined by credit checks and analysis, as well  as the
customer’s payment history.

Deferred revenue is recognized on the accompanying  consolidated  balance  sheets  when payments

are received in advance of us meeting  all of the  revenue recognition criteria described  above.

Transaction Revenue

We  recognize revenue for fee arrangements based on a  per vehicle basis when the vehicle  sale has
occurred between the automotive buying  website program user and dealer. Under the  contractual  terms
and conditions with our network of TrueCar Certified Dealers, the dealer  is required to pay us upon
the sale of a vehicle to a user that has been provided to the dealer by us. Revenue recognition is  not
contingent on verification or acceptance of the transaction  by the dealer.

Upon a user deciding to proceed with  the user’s vehicle purchase through  us, the user provides his
or her name, address, e-mail, and phone  number during the  process of obtaining  a Guaranteed Savings
Certificate, which gives us the identity and source  of  a TrueCar lead provided to a specific dealer prior
to an actual sale occurring. After a sale  occurs, we receive real-time  information regarding the sale,
including the identity of the purchaser, via the  Dealer  Management System,  ‘‘DMS’’,  used by the dealer
that made the sale. To the extent that  a sale is  not  matched via  comparison  of user information we
have to sale information provided by the  DMS,  we also establish matches via one or  more of the over
20 different data feeds provided to the  Company by third party data aggregators, loan and insurance
files provided by our affinity group marketing partners  and  other publicly available  sources.  This
process often results in overlapping sales matches  between  the DMS and  multiple data feeds, resulting
in a high degree of certainty with respect to our ability to identify user leads that we provide to the
dealers. This data is also used to invoice dealers shortly after  the completion of the sales transactions.
As a result of the various data sources  available to us, it is  unusual  for us  to  have difficulty in
reconciling  introductions provided to our  network  of  dealers to actual  vehicle sales  under our platform.

Revenue is recognized net of estimated sales allowances. We establish sales allowances at the time

of revenue recognition based on our  history  of adjustments and  credits  provided to our TrueCar
Certified Dealers.  Sales allowances relate primarily to credits  issued where  a dealer claims that an
introduction was previously identified  by  the dealer from  a  source other than  us. While the dealer is
contractually obligated to pay the invoice,  we may issue a credit against the invoice to maintain overall
dealer relations. In assessing the adequacy of the sales allowance, we evaluate our history of
adjustments and credits made through the  date of  the issuance of the financial statements. While
estimated sales adjustments and credits  and ultimate  losses  may  vary  from actual  results, and could be
material to the financial statements, actual sales allowances have been materially consistent with our
estimates.

We  also recognize revenue from dealers under subscription arrangements. Subscription fee
arrangements are short-term in nature  with  terms ranging from  one  to  six months and  are cancellable
by the dealer or us at any time. Subscription arrangements fall into  three types: flat rate  subscriptions,
subscriptions subject to downward adjustment based  on a  minimum number  of vehicle sales
(‘‘guaranteed sales’’) and subscriptions subject  to  downward adjustment  based on  a minimum number

64

of introductions (‘‘guaranteed introductions’’). Under flat rate subscription  arrangements, fees are
charged at a monthly flat rate regardless  of the number of sales made to  users of our platform by the
dealer. For flat rate subscription arrangements,  we recognize the fees as revenue over the  subscription
period on a straight line basis which  corresponds to the period that we are providing the dealer  with
access to our platform. Under guaranteed sales subscription  arrangements fees are  charged based on
the number of guaranteed sales multiplied by a fixed amount per vehicle. To the extent that the  actual
number of vehicles sold by the dealers to users  of our platform is less than  the number  of guaranteed
sales, we provide a credit to the dealer.  To the  extent that the actual number  of  vehicles sold exceeds
the number of guaranteed sales, we are  not entitled to any  additional fees. Under guaranteed
introductions subscription arrangements,  fees  are charged based on a periodically-updated  formula that
considers, among other things, the introductions anticipated to be provided to the  dealer. To the extent
that the number of actual introductions  is  less  than the  number of guaranteed introductions, we provide
a credit to the dealer. To the extent that the actual  number of introductions  provided exceeds the
number guaranteed, we are not entitled to any additional  fees. For guaranteed sales and guaranteed
introductions subscription arrangements,  we recognize  revenue based on the  lesser of (i)  the actual
number of sales generated or introductions delivered  through our platform during the subscription
period multiplied by the contracted price  per  sale/introduction  or  (ii) the guaranteed number of sales
or introductions multiplied by the contracted  price per sale/introduction.

In addition, some automobile manufacturers promote the  sale of their vehicles through the

offering of additional consumer incentives to members  of our  affinity group  marketing partners. These
manufacturers pay a per-vehicle fee to  us for  promotion of the incentive and we recognize  as revenue
the per-vehicle incentive fee at the time  the sale of the vehicle  has occurred between the  Automotive
Website Program user and the dealer.

Forecasts, Consulting and Other Revenue

We  also derive revenue from providing forecasts, consulting  and other services to the automotive
and financial services industries. Additional revenue sources  include lead referral fees, advertising  fees
earned from display advertisements on  the TrueCar.com website, and data licensing fees earned for
licensing certain proprietary data to third parties. We generally recognize revenue  upon delivery  of such
services.

Sales of forecasts, consulting and other services may  include multiple deliverables  including sale of

lease residual data, guidebooks and consulting services.  We therefore recognize revenues for these
arrangements in accordance with FASB ASC 605-25, Revenue Recognition—Multiple-Element
Arrangements (‘‘ASC 605-25’’). ASC 605-25 was updated  by Accounting Standards Update
(‘‘ASU’’) 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605)—Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements—a
Consensus of the Emerging Issues Task Force (‘‘ASU 2009-13’’).

For multiple deliverable revenue arrangements, we first assess whether each deliverable has  value
to the customer on a standalone basis  and  performance  is considered  probable and  substantially in our
control. Forecasts and consulting services  are sold both on a standalone basis  and as part  of  multiple
deliverable arrangements. Accordingly, the services have standalone value to the customer. Based on
that standalone value of the deliverables, we allocate our revenues among the separate deliverables in
the arrangement using the relative selling price  method hierarchy established in ASU 2009-13. This
hierarchy requires the selling price of  each deliverable in  a  multiple  deliverable  revenue arrangement to
be based on, in descending order: (i)  vendor-specific objective  evidence, or VSOE,  (ii) third-party
evidence of selling price, or TPE, or (iii) management’s best estimated selling  price, or BESP.

We  have not established VSOE or TPE  for our  forecasts,  consulting and  other  services because the

deliverables are not sold separately within a  sufficiently narrow price range or third party pricing for
comparable services is not available;  therefore, we  apply judgment to determine  BESP.  The objective  of

65

BESP is to determine the price at which we would  transact  a sale if  the service were  sold on a  stand-
alone basis. The determination of BESP requires us to make significant estimates and  judgments and
we consider numerous factors in this determination,  including the  nature of the deliverables, market
conditions and our competitive landscape,  internal costs, and  our pricing  and discounting practices
associated with actual transactions. We update our  estimates of  BESP  on  a periodic basis  as events and
as circumstances may require.

Revenue from the sale of lease residual  value data  and  guidebooks is recognized in the  period that

the data  or report is delivered. Revenue in connection with consulting services  is recognized in the
period the report is completed and delivered  to  the customer.

Allowances for Doubtful Accounts

We  determine our allowance for doubtful accounts based  on our historical write-off experience and

when specific circumstances make it  likely  that recovery will not occur.  We review  the allowance  for
doubtful accounts periodically and assesses  the aging of account balances, with  an emphasis on  those
that are past due over ninety days. Account  balances are charged off against the  allowance when we
determine that it is probable the receivable  will  not  be  recovered.

Business Combinations

The results of businesses acquired in a business combination  are included in our consolidated

financial statements from the date of  the  acquisition.  Purchase accounting results in assets and
liabilities of an acquired business being  recorded at their estimated fair  values  on the acquisition date.
Any excess consideration over the fair  value of assets  acquired  and  liabilities  assumed is  recognized as
goodwill.

We  perform valuations of assets acquired and liabilities assumed for  an acquisition and allocate the

purchase price to the respective net tangible and intangible assets. Determining the fair  value of  assets
acquired and liabilities assumed requires management  to  use significant judgment  and estimates
including the selection of valuation methodologies,  estimates of  future revenues and  cash flows and
discount rates. We engage the assistance of valuation  specialists in arriving at fair value measurements
in connection with fair values of assets and liabilities assumed  in a  business combination.

Transaction costs associated with business combinations  are expensed as  incurred, and are included

in general and administrative expenses in our consolidated statement of  comprehensive loss.

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of the aggregate purchase price paid over  the fair value of the
identifiable assets and liabilities acquired in our  business  combinations.  Goodwill is not amortized and
is tested for impairment at least annually  or whenever events or changes  in circumstances  indicate  that
the carrying value may not be recoverable. Events  or changes  in circumstances which  could  trigger an
impairment review include a significant  adverse change in business climate, an adverse action  or
assessment by a regulator, unanticipated competition, a loss of key personnel, significant changes in the
manner of our use of the acquired assets or the  strategy for our overall business, significant negative
industry or economic trends, or significant underperformance relative to expected historical  or
projected future results of operations.

We  have the option to assess goodwill for  possible impairment by  performing a  qualitative analysis

to determine it is more likely than not  that the fair  value of  a  reporting unit  is less than  its  carrying
amount or perform the first step in an impairment test.

The first step (‘‘Step 1’’) involves comparing the  estimated  fair value of a  reporting unit with  its
respective book value, including goodwill. If the estimated fair value  exceeds book value,  goodwill  is

66

considered not to be impaired and no  additional steps are  necessary. If, however,  the fair value of the
reporting unit is less than book value,  then the  second step  is to compare the carrying amount of  the
goodwill to its implied fair value. The  estimate  of  implied fair  value of goodwill may  require valuations
of certain internally generated and unrecognized intangible assets. If the carrying amount of  goodwill
exceeds the implied fair value of that  goodwill, an impairment loss  is recognized in an  amount  equal to
the excess.

We  test for goodwill impairment annually at  December 31.  During  the years ended December 31,

2015, 2014 and 2013, there were no impairment charges  recorded on  our  goodwill. We  elected  to
conduct a quantitative goodwill assessment of our reporting  units at  December 31, 2015. The fair  value
of the reporting units significantly exceeded their  carrying value and accordingly, we concluded that
there was no impairment of goodwill.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

We  assess the impairment of long-lived  assets, consisting primarily of property and  equipment and

intangible assets resulting from business combinations, whenever events or changes in  circumstances
indicate that the carrying amount of such assets  may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be
held and used is measured first by a  comparison of the carrying amount of an asset  to  the future
undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated  by  the assets. If such assets  are considered to be
impaired, an impairment loss equal to the excess of the  asset’s carrying  value over  its  fair value  is
recorded. When measuring the recoverability of these assets, we  make assumptions regarding our
estimated future cash flows expected  to  be  generated by the assets.  If our estimates  or related
assumptions change in the future, we  may be required to impair these  assets. We have not recognized
any impairment of long-lived assets to date.

Software and Website Development Costs

Costs incurred in the preliminary project and post-implementation stages  of  development and

maintenance of our platform are expensed  as incurred.  Certain costs  incurred in  the application
development stage of a new product  or  projects to provide significant additional functionality to
existing products are capitalized if certain criteria are  met. Maintenance  and enhancement costs are
typically expensed as incurred. Such costs are amortized on a straight-line basis over the estimated
useful lives of the related assets, which  are estimated to be three years. Amortization expense  is
included in depreciation and amortization  in the statements  of  comprehensive loss.

Stock-Based Compensation

We  recognize stock-based compensation expense for  stock-based  compensation  awards granted to

our  employees, consultants and other service providers that can be settled  in shares  of our  common
stock. We estimate the grant date fair  value of option grants, and the resulting stock-based
compensation using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. For  restricted stock awards and restricted
stock units, we use the market value  of  the Company’s  common  stock on the  date of grant  to
determine the fair value of the award.  Stock-based compensation for employee awards is recognized  on
a straight-line basis over the requisite  period, except  for performance-based awards, which  are
recognized using the graded-vesting model. As stock-based compensation expense recognized is  based
on awards ultimately expected to vest, such expense is reduced for estimated forfeitures.

67

Determining the fair value of awards using the Black-Scholes option-pricing  model  requires the use

of highly subjective assumptions, including the  expected term  and the price volatility of the  underlying
stock, which are key inputs in the determination  of  the fair value of  stock-based  awards. These
assumptions include:

(cid:129) Risk-free interest rate. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in
effect at the time of grant with maturities approximately equal to the expected term  of  the
options;

(cid:129) Expected  term. We use the simplified method under  the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin

No. 107, Share-Based Payment, to calculate expected term for plain vanilla  share options. For
performance-based option awards and out-of-the  money  option grants,  we  determine the
expected term based upon historical  exercise and post-vesting cancellations,  adjusted for
expected future exercise behavior;

(cid:129) Expected  volatility. As we do not have a significant trading history  for our common stock,

expected volatility is derived from the historical stock volatilities of  several comparable  publicly
listed peers over a period approximately equal to the  expected term  of the options. When
making the selections of our comparable industry peers to be used in the volatility calculation,
we considered the size, operational and economic similarities to our principal business
operations; and

(cid:129) Dividend yield. The expected dividend yield is assumed to be zero as we have never paid

dividends and have no current plans to pay any dividends on our common stock.

In addition to the assumptions used in the Black-Scholes  option-pricing  model,  we must also
estimate a forfeiture rate to calculate  the stock-based  compensation for  our  awards.  Our forfeiture rate
is based upon an analysis of our actual  forfeitures. We will continue  to  evaluate the appropriateness of
the forfeiture rate based on actual forfeiture  experience,  analysis of employee turnover,  and other
factors. Quarterly changes in the estimated  forfeiture rate  can have a significant  impact  on our stock-
based compensation expense as the cumulative effect of  adjusting the  rate is recognized  in the period
the forfeiture estimate changed. If a  revised forfeiture rate is higher than the previously estimated
forfeiture rate, an adjustment is made that will result  in a  decrease to the stock-based compensation
expense recognized in our financial statements.  If a revised  forfeiture rate is lower than the previously
estimated forfeiture rate, an adjustment is made that will result  in an increase  to  the stock-based
compensation expense recognized in our  financial statements.

We  will continue to use judgment in evaluating  the expected volatility, expected terms, and
forfeiture rates utilized for our stock-based compensation calculations  on a prospective basis.  As we
continue to accumulate additional data  related to our common stock, we may have refinements to the
estimates of our expected volatility, expected  term, and forfeiture rate  assumptions,  which could
materially impact our future stock-based  compensation  expense.

At December 31, 2015 total remaining stock-based compensation expense for  unvested awards was

$56.6 million, which is expected to be  recognized over  a weighted-average period  of 3.13 years.

Prior to the date our common stock began trading on  The  NASDAQ  Global Select Market,  the

fair value of our common stock had been approved by the  board of  directors at each grant date based
on a variety of factors, including periodic valuations of our common stock,  our financial position,
historical financial performance, projected financial performance, valuations of publicly  traded peer
companies arm’s-length sales of our  common stock, and the illiquid  nature of common stock.  Since our
initial public offering, we determine the fair value of our common  stock  based on the closing price as
quoted on The NASDAQ Global Select  Market of our common stock on the grant date.

68

Income Taxes

We  use the liability method of accounting for  income taxes. Deferred  tax  assets and  liabilities  are

recognized for the future tax consequences  attributable to the differences between the financial
statement carrying amounts of existing  assets and liabilities  and their respective tax basis. Deferred tax
assets and liabilities are measured using  enacted  tax rates expected to be in effect when such  assets and
liabilities are recovered or settled. The  effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities  of a change in  tax
rates is recognized in the year that includes the enactment date.  We determine deferred  tax assets
including net operating losses and liabilities, based on temporary  differences between the  book and tax
bases of assets and liabilities. A valuation  allowance  is established to reduce  net deferred  tax assets to
amounts that are more likely than not  to be realized. We consider all available evidence, both positive
and negative, in assessing the need for  a  valuation  allowance.  We have  a  full valuation allowance,  and
have concluded, based on the weight  of all available evidence, that it is  more likely  than not that our
net deferred tax assets will not be realized, primarily  due to our  historical net  operating losses.

We  utilize a two-step approach for evaluating uncertain tax positions. Step one, recognition,
requires us to determine if the weight of  available evidence indicates that a tax position is  more likely
than not to be sustained upon audit, including resolution of  related appeals  or litigation processes, if
any. If  a tax position is not considered ‘‘more likely than not’’ to be sustained, no benefits of  the
position are recognized. If we determine  that  a position is ‘‘more likely than not’’ to be sustained, then
we proceed to step two, measurement,  which  is based on the largest amount of benefit  which is  more
likely than not to be realized on effective settlement. This process  involves estimating our actual
current tax exposure, including assessing the  risks  associated  with tax audits, together with  assessing
temporary differences resulting from  the different treatment of items for  tax  and financial reporting
purposes. If actual results differ from  our estimates,  our  net operating loss and credit  carryforwards
could be materially impacted.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 2 to our consolidated financial  statements  included herein.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market  Risk

Market risk represents the risk of loss that may  affect our financial  position due to adverse
changes in financial market prices and  rates.  We  are exposed to market risks  related to changes  in
interest rates.

Interest Rate Risk

We  had cash and cash equivalents of $112.4 million at December 31, 2015,  which consists entirely
of bank deposits and short-term money  market funds. Such interest-earning  instruments carry  a degree
of interest rate risk. To date, fluctuations in interest  income have not been  significant.

We  do not enter into investments for trading or speculative purposes and have not used any

derivative financial instruments to manage  our interest rate risk exposure.

To the extent we borrow funds under our credit facility,  we would be subject to fluctuations  in
interest rates. See Part II, Item 7, ‘‘Management’s  Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition  and
Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources.’’ As of  December 31, 2015, we had  no
borrowings under the credit facility. We  believe that  we do not have  a material exposure  to  changes in
the fair value as a result of changes in interest rates.

69

Inflation Risk

We  do not believe that inflation has  had a material  effect on  our business, financial condition or

results of operations. However, if our  costs  were to become subject  to  significant inflationary pressures,
we may not be able to fully offset such higher costs through price increases. Our inability  or failure to
do so could harm our business, operating results and financial condition.

Foreign Currency Exchange Risk

Historically, as our operations and sales have been primarily in the United States, we have not

faced any significant foreign currency risk. If we  plan for international expansion,  our risks associated
with fluctuation in currency rates will become greater,  and we will  continue to reassess our  approach to
managing this risk.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

The information required by this item appears in a separate section of this annual  report on

Form 10-K beginning on page F-1 and is  incorporated herein by reference.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with  Accountants on Accounting  and Financial Disclosure

None.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and  Procedures

The phrase ‘‘disclosure controls and procedures’’ refers to controls  and procedures designed to
ensure that information required to be  disclosed  in our reports filed or submitted  under the  Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or  the Exchange Act,  such as this Annual Report on  Form 10-K, is
recorded, processed, summarized and  reported  within the  time periods specified in  the rules and forms
of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. Disclosure controls and procedures are  also
designed to ensure that such information is  accumulated and  communicated  to  our  management,
including our chief executive officer, or  CEO,  and  chief financial officer, or CFO, as appropriate to
allow timely decision regarding required disclosure.

Our management, with the participation of our CEO and  CFO has evaluated the  effectiveness of

our  disclosure controls and procedures (as defined  in Rules 13a- 5(e)  and 15d- 15(e) under  the
Exchange Act), as of December 31, 2015, the end  of  the period covered by this Annual Report  on
Form 10-K. Based  on such evaluation, our CEO and CFO have concluded  that  as of December 31,
2015, our disclosure controls and procedures were designed  at a  reasonable  assurance level  and were
effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that
we file or submit under the Exchange  Act is recorded,  processed, summarized, and reported within the
time periods specified in the rules and forms  of  the SEC, and that such  information is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our CEO and  CFO,  as appropriate, to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosure.

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial  Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal  control over
financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of the Exchange Act. Internal  control over financial
reporting is a process to provide reasonable assurance regarding the  reliability of our financial
reporting for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted  in the
United States of America. Management  conducted an evaluation  of  the effectiveness of our internal
control over financial reporting based  on  the criteria for  effective control over financial reporting

70

described in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on  this evaluation, management has concluded that,
as of  December 31, 2015, the Company’s internal control  over  financial reporting was effective.
Management has reviewed its assessment with the  Audit Committee.

Changes  in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified in  management’s
evaluation pursuant to Rules 13a-15(d) or 15d-15(d) of  the Exchange Act  during  the fourth  quarter of
2015 that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control  over
financial reporting.

Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls and  Procedures

In designing and evaluating the disclosure controls  and  procedures and internal control over
financial reporting, management recognizes that any  controls and  procedures, no matter how well
designed and operated, can provide only reasonable  assurance of achieving the desired control
objectives. In addition, the design of  disclosure  controls and procedures  and internal control over
financial reporting must reflect the fact  that there are resource constraints and  that  management is
required to apply judgment in evaluating the benefits of possible controls and procedures relative to
their costs.

Item 9B. Other Information

Item 5.02 Departure of Directors or Certain  Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain

Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.

On March 7, 2016, the Compensation  Committee  of  the Company’s Board of Directors  approved

discretionary bonuses to certain of the  Company’s executive officers, including Mike Guthrie, Chief
Financial Officer, and John E. Stephenson,  Chief  Risk  Officer.  Messrs.  Guthrie and Stephenson were
granted bonuses of $74,372 and $50,000,  respectively.

71

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers  and  Corporate Governance

The information required by this Item  is incorporated by reference from  our definitive Proxy
Statement for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders  to be filed with the SEC  within 120  days of
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

Our board of directors has adopted a  Code of Business Conduct  and Ethics applicable to all

officers, directors, and employees, which  is available on our website (ir.true.com) under ‘‘Corporate
Governance—Documents and Charters.’’ We  intend to satisfy the disclosure  requirement under
Item 5.05 of Form 8-K regarding amendment to, or waiver from, a provision of our Code of Business
Conduct and Ethics and by posting such information on the website address  and location  specified
above.

Item 11. Executive Compensation

The information required by this Item  is incorporated by reference from  our definitive Proxy
Statement for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders  to be filed with the SEC  within 120  days of
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management  and Related Stockholder

Matters

The information required by this Item  is incorporated by reference from  our definitive Proxy
Statement for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders  to be filed with the SEC  within 120  days of
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

Item 13. Certain Relationships and  Related Transactions, and Director Independence

The information required by this Item  is incorporated by reference from  our definitive Proxy
Statement for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders  to be filed with the SEC  within 120  days of
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees  and Services

The information required by this Item  is incorporated by reference from  our definitive Proxy
Statement for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders  to be filed with the SEC  within 120  days of
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

72

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

(a) The following documents are filed as part of this report:

1.

Financial Statements:

Index: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-1
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting  Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-2
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31,  2015 and  December  31, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-3
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss for each of the years in the three-year period

ended December 31, 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-4

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders  Equity  for each  of the years in the  three-year period

ended December 31, 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-5

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows  for  each of the years in  the three-year  period ended

December 31, 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-6
Notes to the Consolidated Financial  Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-8

2.

Financial Statements Schedule

All schedules have been omitted because  they  are not required, not applicable,  not  present  in
amounts sufficient to require submission  of the schedule, or the  required information is  otherwise
included in our consolidated financial statements and related notes.

3. Exhibits

The following exhibits are filed as part of, or are incorporated by reference in, this annual  report

on Form 10-K:

Exhibit

Exhibit Title

Filed
Herewith

Incorporated
by
Reference

Form

Exhibit
No.

Date Filed

3.1

3.2

4.1

Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation of the Registrant.

Bylaws of the Registrant.

Seventh Amended and Restated
Investors’ Rights Agreement, dated
November 22, 2013, by and among
the Registrant and certain of its
stockholders.

4.2

Specimen Common Stock Certificate
of the Registrant.

4.3 Warrant to Purchase Shares of

Common Stock, dated May 1, 2014,
by and between the Registrant and
United Services Automobile
Association.

X

X

X

X

X

S-1

3.2

May 5, 2014

S-1

S-1

3.4

4.1

May 5, 2014

April 4, 2014

S-1

4.2

May 5, 2014

S-1

4.16

May 5, 2014

4.4 Warrant to Purchase Shares of

X

S-1

4.17

May 5, 2014

Common Stock, dated April 21,
2014, by and between the Registrant
and 8020 Consulting.

73

Exhibit

Exhibit Title

Filed
Herewith

Incorporated
by
Reference

Form

Exhibit
No.

Date Filed

4.5 Warrant to Purchase Shares of

X

S-1

4.18

May 15, 2014

Common Stock, dated May 15, 2014,
by and between the Registrant and
Avis-Davis Productions, Inc.

4.6 Warrant to Purchase Shares of

X

S-1

4.3

April  4, 2014

Common Stock, dated February 25,
2011, by and between the Registrant
and GR Match, LLC.

4.7 Warrant to Purchase Shares of

X

S-1

4.10

April  4, 2014

Common Stock, dated November 22,
2013, by and between the Registrant
and Vulcan Capital Growth
Equity LLC.

4.8 Warrant to Purchase Shares of

X

S-1

4.12

April  4, 2014

Common Stock, dated March 12,
2014, by and between the Registrant
and Centrue Financial Corporation.

4.9 Warrant to Purchase Shares of

X

S-1

4.13

April  4, 2014

Common Stock, dated February 11,
2014, by and between the Registrant
and Venture Lending &
Leasing VI, LLC.

4.10 Warrant to Purchase Shares of

X

S-1

4.14

April  4, 2014

Common Stock, dated February 11,
2014, by and between the Registrant
and Venture Lending &
Leasing VII, LLC.

10.1# Form of Indemnification Agreement
between the Registrant and each of
its directors and executive officers.

10.2# 2005 Stock Plan, as amended, and

forms of agreements thereunder.

10.3# 2008 Stock Plan, as amended, and

forms of agreements thereunder.

10.4# 2014 Equity Incentive Plan and

forms of agreements thereunder.

10.5# Employment Agreement, dated

December 20, 2012, by and between
the Registrant and Scott Painter, as
amended.

10.6# Employment Agreement, dated

October 25, 2013, by and between
the Registrant and Michael Guthrie.

10.7# Employment Agreement, dated

May 1, 2010, by and between the
Registrant and Bernard Brenner.

74

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

S-1

10.1

April  4, 2014

S-1

10.2

April  4, 2014

S-1

10.3

April  4, 2014

S-1

10.4

May 15, 2014

S-1

10.5

April  4, 2014

S-1

10.6

April  4, 2014

S-1

10.7

April  4, 2014

Exhibit

Exhibit Title

Filed
Herewith

Incorporated
by
Reference

Form

Exhibit
No.

Date Filed

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

S-1

10.8

April 4, 2014

S-1

10.10

April  4, 2014

S-1

10.11

April  4, 2014

S-1

10.12

April 4, 2014

S-1

10.13

April  4, 2014

S-1

10.14

May 5, 2014

S-1

10.15

May 5, 2014

S-1

10.16

May 5, 2014

S-1

10.14

April 4, 2014

S-1

10.15

April 4, 2014

10-K 10.18 March  12, 2015

10.8# Offer Letter, dated September 28,

2011, by and between the Registrant
and Lawrence Dominique.

10.9# Employment Agreement, dated

September 15, 2008, by and between
the Registrant and Stewart Easterby.

10.10# Employment Agreement, dated

September 15, 2008, by and between
the Registrant and James Nguyen, as
amended.

10.11# Offer Letter, dated November 1,

2010, by and between the Registrant
and Thomas Taira.

10.12# Employment Agreement, dated

January 17, 2014, by and between
the Registrant and Lucas Donat.

10.13# Employment Agreement, dated

April 21, 2014, by and between the
Registrant and Troy Foster.

10.14# Employment Agreement, dated

May 1, 2014, by and between the
Registrant and John Krafcik.

10.15# Employment Agreement, dated

May 1, 2014, by and between the
Registrant and John Stephenson.

10.16# Clock Tower Building Office Lease,
dated May 10, 2010, by and between
the Registrant and Clock
Tower, LLC, as amended by the
Amendment to Lease Re Additional
Space  and Term Extension dated
November 20, 2010 and the Second
Amendment to Lease, dated
September 19, 2013, by and between
the Registrant and SaMo Clock
Tower, LLC (successor in interest to
Clock Tower, LLC).

10.17# Office Lease, dated October  15,

10.18

2010, by and between the Registrant
and Douglas Emmett 1995, LLC.

Second Amendment, dated
February 11, 2015, to Office Lease,
dated October 15, 2010, by and
between the Registrant and Douglas
Emmett 1995, LLC.

75

Exhibit

10.19

10.20

10.21

10.22

Exhibit Title

1540 Second Street Office Lease,
dated September 30, 2013, by and
between the Registrant and
RBE 1540 Second Street LLC.

1401 Ocean Avenue Office Lease
Agreement, dated July 10, 2014, by
and between the Registrant and
Mani Brothers Portofino Plaza (DE),
LLC.

Loan and Security Agreement, dated
May 15, 2009, by and between the
Registrant and Silicon Valley Bank,
as amended by the Amended and
Restated Loan and Security
Agreement dated November 12,
2010, the First Amendment to
Amended and Restated Loan and
Security  Agreement dated
December 31, 2010, the Second
Amendment to Amended and
Restated Loan and Security
Agreement dated November 11,
2011, the Third Amendment to
Amended and Restated Loan and
Security  Agreement dated
February 9, 2012, the Second
Amended and Restated Loan and
Security  Agreement dated June 13,
2012, the First Amendment to the
Second Amended and Restated
Loan and Security Agreement, dated
October 11, 2012, the Second
Amendment to the Second Amended
and Restated Loan and Security
Agreement dated June 13, 2013, and
the Third Amendment to the Second
Amended and Restated Loan and
Security  Agreement, dated
August  11, 2014, but effective as of
June 13, 2014.

Third Amended & Restated Loan
and Security Agreement, dated
February 18, 2015, by and between
the Registrant and Silicon Valley
Bank.

Filed
Herewith

Incorporated
by
Reference

Form

Exhibit
No.

Date Filed

X

S-1

10.16

April  4, 2014

X

10-Q 10.15 August 14,  2014

X

S-1

10.21 October  28, 2014

X

10-K 10.22 March 12, 2015

76

Exhibit

Exhibit Title

Filed
Herewith

Incorporated
by
Reference

Form

Exhibit
No.

Date Filed

10.23+ Zag Services & Maintenance

X

S-1

10.21

May 5, 2014

Agreement, dated February  13, 2007,
by and between the Registrant and
United Services Automobile
Association, as amended by
Amendment #1 dated September 22,
2008, Amendment #2 dated May 12,
2009, Amendment #4 dated June 25,
2010, Amendment #5 dated
October 26, 2010, Amendment #7
dated June 1, 2011, Amendment #9
dated March 13, 2012,
Amendment #11 dated May 17,
2012, Amendment #12 dated
May 17, 2012, Amendment #14
dated October 16, 2012, Amended
and Restated Amendment #15 dated
November 12, 2012,
Amendment #16 dated
December 12, 2012,
Amendment #17 dated May 17,
2012, Amendment #18 dated
January 17, 2013, Amendment #20
dated April 2, 2013,
Amendment #22 dated July 22,
2013, Amendment #23 dated
September 10, 2013,
Amendment #24 dated August 30,
2013, Amendment #26 dated
April 4, 2014, and Amendment #27
dated May 1, 2014.

10.24# 2014 Incentive Plan.

10.25# Executive Incentive Compensation

Plan.

10.26# 2015 Inducement Equity Incentive

Plan.

10.27# 2015 Inducement Equity Incentive

Plan—Form of Stock Option
Agreement.

10.28# Separation Agreement and Release,

X

dated November 20, 2015, by and
between the Registrant and Scott
Painter.

10.29# Separation Agreement and Release,

X

dated December 22, 2015, by and
between the Registrant and Troy
Foster.

77

X

X

X

X

S-1

S-1

10.22

10.23

May 5,  2014

May 5, 2014

8-K 10.1 December 16, 2015

8-K 10.2 December 16, 2015

Filed
Herewith

Incorporated
by
Reference

Form

Exhibit
No.

Date Filed

X

8-K 10.1

January 4, 2016

X

S-1

21.1

April 4, 2014

X

X

X

X

X

X

Exhibit

Exhibit Title

10.30# Option Forfeiture Agreement, dated
December 28, 2015, by and between
the Registrant and John Krafcik.

10.31# Employment Agreement, dated

November 16, 2015, by and between
the Registrant and Chip Perry.

21.1

23.1

24.1

31.1

31.2

32.1

List of Subsidiaries of the Registrant.

Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP, Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm.

Power of Attorney (included on
signature page).

Certification of the Principal
Executive Officer Pursuant to
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and
15d-14(a), as adopted pursuant to
Section  302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.

Certification of the Principal
Financial Officer Pursuant to
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and
15d-14(a), as adopted pursuant to
Section  302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.

Certification of the Principal
Executive Officer and Principal
Financial Officer Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

101.INS

XBRL Instance Document.

101.SCH XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema

Document.

101.CAL

101.DEF

101.LAB

101.PRE

XBRL Taxonomy Extension
Calculation Linkbase Document.

XBRL Taxonomy Extension
Definition Linkbase Document.

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label
Linkbase Document.

XBRL Taxonomy Extension
Presentation Linkbase Document.

# Indicates a management contract or  compensatory plan.

+ Portions of this exhibit have been  granted  confidential treatment by the Securities and Exchange

Commission.

78

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,  the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its  behalf  by  the undersigned thereunto duly authorized, in the  City
of Santa Monica, State of California,  on March 10,  2016.

SIGNATURES

TRUECAR, INC.

By:

/s/ CHIP PERRY

Chip Perry
President and Chief Executive Officer

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person  whose signature appears
below constitutes and appoints Michael Guthrie,  John  E. Stephenson and John Pierantoni, jointly and
severally, as his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution  and
resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign  any
amendments to this Annual Report on Form 10-K  and to file  the same, with exhibits thereto and other
documents in connection therewith, with the  Securities and  Exchange Commission, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that each of said attorneys-in-fact, or  his substitute or substitutes,  may do or cause to be
done by virtue hereof.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,  this report has been signed
by the following persons on behalf of  the Registrant and in the  capacities and  on the  dates indicated.

Signature

Title

Date

/s/ CHIP PERRY

Chip Perry

President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)

March 10, 2016

/s/ MICHAEL GUTHRIE

Michael Guthrie

Chief Financial Officer (Principal
Financial Officer)

March 10, 2016

/s/ JOHN PIERANTONI

John Pierantoni

Chief Accounting Officer (Principal
Accounting Officer)

March 10, 2016

/s/ ABHISHEK AGRAWAL

Abhishek Agrawal

/s/ TODD BRADLEY

Todd Bradley

Director

Director

79

March 10,  2016

March 10,  2016

Signature

Title

Date

/s/ ROBERT BUCE

Robert Buce

/s/ CHRISTOPHER CLAUS

Christopher Claus

/s/ STEVEN DIETZ

Steven Dietz

/s/ THOMAS GIBSON

Thomas Gibson

/s/ JOHN KRAFCIK

John Krafcik

/s/ ION YADIGAROGLU

Ion Yadigaroglu

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

March 10,  2016

March 10,  2016

March 10,  2016

March 10,  2016

March 10,  2016

March 10,  2016

80

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting  Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Balance Sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’  Equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page

F-2
F-3
F-4
F-5
F-6
F-8

F-1

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders  of TrueCar, Inc.:

In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheets  and the related  consolidated
statements of comprehensive loss, stockholders’  equity  and cash flows present fairly, in all material
respects, the financial position of TrueCar, Inc.  and its subsidiaries (the ‘‘Company’’) at December 31,
2015 and 2014 and the results of their operations and their cash flows  for each of the  three years in the
period ended December 31, 2015 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted  in the
United States of America. These consolidated financial  statements are the  responsibility of the
Company’s management. Our responsibility  is to express  an opinion on these consolidated financial
statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits  of  these statements in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight  Board (United  States). Those  standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain reasonable assurance  about whether  the consolidated
financial statements are free of material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis,
evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures  in the consolidated financial statements,  assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made  by  management, and evaluating the overall
consolidated financial statement presentation. We believe  that our  audits provide a reasonable basis for
our  opinion.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 10, 2016

F-2

TrueCar, Inc.

Consolidated Balance Sheets

(in thousands, except par value and share  data)

December 31,

2015

2014

Assets
Current assets

Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $2,720 and $2,069 at  December 31,
2015 and 2014, respectively (includes  related party receivables of $328  and
$1,865 at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Prepaid expenses (includes related party prepaid expenses of $0  and $906  at

December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property and equipment, net
Goodwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intangible assets, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 112,371

$ 147,539

33,761

28,748

6,048
779

152,959
71,390
53,270
23,815
940

5,193
3,040

184,520
30,731
53,270
27,949
482

Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 302,374

$ 296,952

Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Current liabilities

Accounts payable (includes related party payables of $7,490 and $4,954  at

December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued employee expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued expenses and other current  liabilities  (includes  related  party accrued
expenses of $318 and $0 at December 31,  2015 and 2014, respectively) . . .

Total current liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lease financing obligation, net of current portion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 18,880
7,799

$ 12,826
14,245

12,425

39,104
2,413
26,987
1,178

69,682

11,783

38,854
2,245
6,093
562

47,754

Commitments and contingencies (Note  7)
Stockholders’ Equity

Preferred stock—$0.0001 par value; 20,000,000  shares authorized at
December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively; no shares  issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2015 and 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Common stock—$0.0001 par value; 1,000,000,000 shares  authorized  at

December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively; 83,016,735  and 79,811,769
shares issued and outstanding at December 31,  2015 and 2014, respectively
Additional paid-in capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated deficit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—

—

8
508,584
(275,900)

8
460,179
(210,989)

Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

232,692

249,198

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 302,374

$ 296,952

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial  statements.

F-3

TrueCar, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss

(in thousands except per share data)

Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Costs and operating expenses:

Cost of revenue (exclusive of depreciation and  amortization

presented separately below; includes related party expenses  of  $0,
$405, and $2,738, for 2015, 2014 and  2013, respectively) . . . . . . .

Sales and marketing (includes related party expenses of $20,852,
$19,443, and $10,164, for the years ended  December 31,  2015,
2014 and 2013, respectively) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

$259,838

$206,649

$133,958

23,657

17,513

15,295

151,002
48,021
83,494
17,646

128,569
36,563
58,296
13,213

75,180
23,685
30,857
11,569

Total costs and operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

323,820

254,154

156,586

Loss from operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Loss before provision for income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Provision for income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(63,982)
107
(443)
13

(64,305)
606

(47,505)
59
(380)
37

(47,789)
640

(22,628)
121
(1,988)
18

(24,477)
579

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ (64,911) $ (48,429) $ (25,056)

Net loss per share, basic and diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$

(0.79) $

(0.68) $

(0.43)

Weighted average common shares outstanding, basic and diluted . . . .

81,914

70,837

58,540

Other comprehensive loss:
Comprehensive loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ (64,911) $ (48,429) $ (25,056)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial  statements.

F-4

TrueCar, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity

(in thousands except share data)

Common Stock

Shares

Amount

APIC

Notes
Receivable
from
Related
Parties

Accumulated
deficit

Stockholders’
Equity

Balance at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . .

56,207,579

$ 6

$237,021

$(1,327)

$(137,504)

$ 98,196

Net  loss
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of  warrants in connection with marketing
agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of restricted stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercise  of  options  to purchase common  stock . .
Repurchase  of vested  common stock  awards . . . .
Imputed  interest on notes  receivable . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of  common stock, net of issuance  costs
.
Interest  income on notes receivable . . . . . . . . .
Repayment  of notes receivable . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment of contingently redeemable common

—
—

—
20,874
98,878
—
—
57,760
—
—

stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13,840

Issuance of  warrants in connection with Series A

convertible preferred stock . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Issuance of  warrants in connection with revolving

line  of  credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Balance  at conversion of convertible note payable
to  common  stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—

—

3,556,412

Balance at December 31, 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . .

59,955,343

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Net  loss
Issuance of  common stock in connection with
initial public offering, net of underwriting
discounts  and offering costs . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Conversion of  Series A convertible preferred

—

8,941,250

stock in  connection with initial public  offering .

2,857,143

Issuance of  common stock in follow-on offering,

net of  underwriting discounts and offering costs
Stock-based compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Issuance of warrants in connection with marketing
agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercise  of  warrants to purchase common stock . .
Shares  issued  in connection with employee stock

plans,  net of shares withheld for employee taxes
Recovery  of short swing profits . . . . . . . . . . . .
Imputed  interest on notes receivable . . . . . . . . .
Interest  income on notes receivable . . . . . . . . .
Repayment  of notes receivable . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,960,390
—

—
3,357,867

2,739,776
—
—
—
—

—
—

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

—

—

—

—

$ 6

—

1

—

—
—

—
1

—
—
—
—
—

—
9,463

3,740
423
171
(2,000)
127
326
—
—

—

677

408

25,447

—
—

—
—
58
—
—
—
(28)
228

—

—

—

—

(25,056)
—

(25,056)
9,463

—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—

—

—

—

—

3,740
423
229
(2,000)
127
326
(28)
228

—

677

408

25,447

$275,803

$(1,069)

$(162,560)

$112,180

—

69,150

29,224

30,762
30,582

9,861
9,460

5,313
14
10
—
—

—

—

—

—
—

—
—

—
—
—
(3)
1,072

(48,429)

(48,429)

—

—

—
—

—
—

—
—
—
—
—

69,151

29,224

30,762
30,582

9,861
9,461

5,313
14
10
(3)
1,072

Balance  at  December 31, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . .

79,811,769

$ 8

$460,179

$ —

$(210,989)

$249,198

Net  loss
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based  compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Repurchase of common stock awards . . . . . . . .
Issuance of warrants and change in fair value of

unvested warrants relating to marketing
agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Net  exercise  of warrants to purchase common

—
—
—

—

stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

959,676

Shares issued in connection with employee stock

plans,  net of shares withheld for employee taxes

2,245,290

—
—
—

—

—

—

—
43,888
(100)

(803)

—

5,420

—
—
—

—

—

—

(64,911)
—
—

(64,911)
43,888
(100)

—

—

—

(803)

—

5,420

Balance  at  December 31, 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . .

83,016,735

$ 8

$508,584

$ —

$(275,900)

$232,692

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial  statements.

F-5

TrueCar, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(in thousands)

Cash flows from operating activities
Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net  cash provided by (used in)

operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred income taxes
Bad debt expense and other reserves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Legal settlement paid in stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Increase in fair value of contingent consideration liability . . . . . . . .
Common stock warrant (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Imputed interest on notes receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest income on notes receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense on note payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accretion of beneficial conversion feature on convertible notes

For the Year Ended
December 31,

2015

2014

2013

$(64,911) $(48,429) $(25,056)

17,267
581
925
42,563
—
—
(803)
—
—
—

12,979
577
300
29,333
—
—
9,861
(3)
(4)
—

10,835
579
280
9,346
326
95
3,740
127
(107)
805

payable and discount on revolving line of credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Loss on disposal of fixed assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—
1,631

236
233

1,117
734

Changes in operating assets and liabilities:

Accounts receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prepaid expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other current assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued employee expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued expenses and other liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(5,938)
(855)
1,087
(458)
5,312
(6,510)
(1,781)
521

(10,372)
(1,643)
(1,316)
(26)
3,399
3,883
4,253
(157)

Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(11,369)

3,104

Cash flows from investing activities
Change in restricted cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Purchase of property and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Purchase of intangible assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notes receivable from related parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Repayment of notes receivable from related parties . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—
(29,836)
—
—
—

2,000
(15,531)
(365)
(60)
4,133

Net cash used in investing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(29,836)

(9,823)

(8,196)
(1,955)
(29)
(281)
1,382
3,973
(1,204)
(422)

(3,911)

2,500
(8,404)
—
—
421

(5,483)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial  statements.

F-6

TrueCar, Inc.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Continued)

(in thousands)

For the Year Ended
December 31,

2015

2014

2013

—

69,702

—

Cash flows from financing activities
Proceeds from initial public offering,  net of underwriting  discounts

and offering costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from follow-on public offering, net of underwriting discounts
and offering costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from short swing profits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from borrowings under credit agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Repayments under credit agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from the issuance of preferred  stock and common stock

warrants, net of issuance costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Payments of initial public offering costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Payment  of contingent consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Repurchase of common stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Repurchase of common stock awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from exercise of common stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Taxes paid related to net share settlement of equity awards . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from exercise of warrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from financing obligation drawdown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Payments for lease financing obligation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30,950
—
14
—
5,000
—
— (10,000)

—
—
—
—
—
6,328
(908)
—
622
(5)

—
—
—
—
—
5,851
(539)
9,461
—
—

Net cash provided by financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6,037

110,439

Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(35,168)
147,539

103,720
43,819

Cash and cash equivalents at end of  period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$112,371

$147,539

$ 43,819

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow  information
Cash paid during the year for:
Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Supplemental disclosures of non-cash activities
Conversion of Series A convertible preferred stock in  connection with
initial public offering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Initial public offering costs paid in the prior year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conversion of convertible note payable  and  accrued interest  to

common stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Deferred offering costs included in accounts payable  and  accrued

expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tenant incentive for purchase of leasehold improvements . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation capitalized  for software development . . . . .
Recognition of leased facility asset and  lease  financing obligation . . . .
Accrued offering costs included in accounts payable and  accrued

$

$

617
48

$

139
20

—

25,447

—
—

—

—
—
1,325
23,683

29,224
551

—
—
1,249
6,591

expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

—

(188)

Capitalized assets included in accounts  payable, accrued employee

expenses and other accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,635

795

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial  statements.

F-7

—
—
5,000
—

29,901
(551)
(428)
(1,000)
(2,000)
229
—
—
—
—

31,151

21,757
22,062

64
—

—
—

1,143
519
540
—

—

109

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

1. Organization and Nature of Business

TrueCar, Inc. (‘‘TrueCar’’) is an Internet-based information, technology, and communication
services company.  Hereinafter, TrueCar, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries TrueCar.com, Inc. and
ALG, Inc. are collectively referred to  as ‘‘TrueCar’’ or  the ‘‘Company’’;  TrueCar.com, Inc.  is referred to
as ‘‘TrueCar.com’’ and ALG, Inc. is referred  to  as ‘‘ALG’’. TrueCar was incorporated in the  state of
Delaware in February 2005 and began business operations in  April 2005.  Its principal corporate offices
are located in Santa Monica, California.

TrueCar is a digital automotive marketplace  that (i) provides pricing transparency  about what  other

people paid for their cars and enables  consumers to engage with TrueCar  Certified  Dealers  who are
committed to providing a superior purchase experience;  (ii) empowers Certified Dealers to attract  these
informed, in-market consumers in a cost-effective, accountable manner; and (iii)  allows  automobile
manufacturers (‘‘OEMs’’) to more effectively  target their  incentive spending at deep-in-market
consumers during their purchase process. TrueCar has  established a diverse software ecosystem on a
common technology infrastructure, powered by proprietary data and  analytics. Consumers access
TrueCar’s platform through the TrueCar.com  website and TrueCar mobile  applications  or through the
car buying websites and mobile applications  that TrueCar operates for its affinity group  marketing
partners (‘‘Auto Buying Programs’’).  An  affinity group is  comprised of a network of members  or
employees that provides discounts to  its  members.

ALG provides forecasts, consulting, and other services  regarding determination of the  residual
value of an automobile at future given  points in  time, which are used to underwrite automotive loans
and leases and by financial institutions to measure exposure and risk across loan,  lease, and  fleet
portfolios. ALG also obtains automobile  purchase  data  from a  variety of sources and uses this data to
provide consumers and dealers with highly  accurate, geographically  specific, real-time  pricing
information.

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation

The Company’s accounting and financial  reporting policies  conform to accounting principles

generally accepted in the United States of  America (‘‘GAAP’’).

Reclassification

Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified  for  consistency  with the current  period

presentation. These reclassifications were not material to the  financial  statements.

Principles of Consolidation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of  TrueCar and  its
wholly owned subsidiaries. Business acquisitions are  included in the Company’s  consolidated  financial
statements from the date of the acquisition. The  Company’s purchase accounting resulted in all assets
and liabilities of acquired businesses  being recorded at their estimated fair  values on the acquisition
dates. All intercompany balances and  transactions  have been  eliminated in  consolidation.

F-8

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Use of Estimates

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP  requires
management to make estimates and  assumptions that affect the reported  amounts  of assets and
liabilities and the disclosure of contingent  assets and liabilities at  the dates  of the consolidated financial
statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during  the reporting period. Actual
results could differ from those estimates. Assets and liabilities  which are subject to judgment  and use of
estimates include sales allowances and allowances for doubtful accounts, the fair value of assets  and
liabilities assumed in business combinations, fair value of  the capitalized  facility  lease, the recoverability
of goodwill and long-lived assets, valuation allowances with respect to deferred tax  assets, useful  lives
associated with property and equipment and intangible assets, lease  exit liabilities, contingencies, and
the valuation and assumptions underlying stock-based compensation and other equity  instruments. On
an ongoing basis, the Company evaluates its  estimates compared to historical  experience  and trends,
which  form the basis for making judgments about the  carrying value of assets  and liabilities.  In
addition, the Company engaged valuation specialists to assist with management’s determination of the
valuation of its capitalized facility lease,  fair values of assets and  liabilities  assumed in  business
combinations, the fair value of reporting units in connection  with annual goodwill impairment testing,
and in periods prior to the Company’s initial  public offering, valuation of common  stock.

Segments

The Company has one operating segment.  The Company’s chief operating  decision maker

(‘‘CODM’’) is the President and Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, who  manage
the Company’s operations based on consolidated financial information  for purposes of evaluating
financial performance and allocating  resources.

The CODM reviews financial information  on a  consolidated basis, accompanied by information
about transaction revenue and forecasts, consulting and other revenue (Note  14).  All of the Company’s
principal operations, decision-making  functions and assets  are  located in the  United States.

Fair  Value Measurements

Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a

liability (an exit price) in the principal or most  advantageous market for  the asset or  liability  in an
orderly  transaction between market participants  on the measurement date.

Valuation techniques used to measure fair value must  maximize the use of observable inputs and

minimize the use of unobservable inputs.  Accounting  standards describe a fair  value hierarchy based on
three levels of inputs, of which the first two are considered observable and the last unobservable, that
may be used to measure fair value which are the  following:

(cid:129) Level 1—Quoted prices in active markets  for  identical  assets  or liabilities or  funds.

(cid:129) Level 2—Inputs other than Level 1 that are observable, either  directly or  indirectly, such as
quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted  prices in  markets that  are not active; or
other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for
substantially the full term of the assets  or liabilities.

F-9

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

(cid:129) Level 3—Unobservable inputs that  are supported by little or no  market  activity and that are

significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.

Fair  Value Methods

Fair value is based on quoted market  prices, if available. If listed prices  or quotes are  not

available, fair value is based on internally  developed models  that primarily use market-based or
independently sourced market parameters  as inputs.

For assets and liabilities measured at fair  value,  the following section describes the valuation

methodologies, key inputs and significant  assumptions.

Cash equivalents, consisting primarily  of money market instruments and  debt securities represent
highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less at purchase. Generally, market prices
are used to determine the fair value of money market instruments and debt securities.

The carrying amounts of cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts  receivable, prepaid and other

current assets, accounts payable, and accrued  liabilities approximate fair  value  because of the  short
maturity of these items. The fair value of  the Company’s revolving line of credit approximates carrying
value based on the Company’s current incremental borrowing rate for similar types  of  borrowing
arrangements.

Certain assets, including long-lived assets, goodwill and  intangible assets are also subject  to

measurement at fair value on a non-recurring basis  if  they  are  deemed to be impaired as a  result of an
impairment review. For the years ended  December 31,  2015, 2014, and 2013,  no impairments  were
identified on those assets required to be measured at  fair value on a non-recurring basis.

Contingent Consideration Liability

The Company recorded a contingent consideration liability upon the acquisition of  American

Transportation Marketing Group, LTD (operating as Carperks) in 2011. Contingent consideration is
measured at fair value and is based on  significant inputs not observable in  the market,  which represents
a Level 3 measurement within the fair value  hierarchy. The valuation of contingent consideration  used
assumptions the Company believed would be made by a market participant. The Company  assessed
these estimates on an on-going basis  as additional  data  impacting  the assumptions  was  obtained.
Changes in the fair value of contingent  consideration related to updated assumptions  and estimates
were recognized within the consolidated statements of comprehensive loss. The Company determined
the fair value of the contingent consideration using  the probability adjusted discounted cash  flow
method. The significant unobservable  inputs used in the fair value measurement of contingent
consideration were (i) probability of achieving the sales milestone,  (ii) period in which the milestone
was expected to be achieved, and (iii) discount rates. The Company paid Carperks  approximately
$1.9 million through December 31, 2013  as the sales milestone  was  achieved  during  2013.

The following table summarizes the Company’s assets at  fair value on  a  recurring  basis at

December 31, 2015 and 2014 by level within the  fair value hierarchy. There  were no liabilities measure
at fair value on a recurring basis at December 31, 2015 and 2014. These assets are classified in their

F-10

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant  to  the fair  value measurement  (in
thousands):

At December 31, 2015

At December  31, 2014

Level 1

Level 2 Level 3

Total Fair
Value

Level 1

Level 2 Level 3

Total Fair
Value

Assets:
Cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $112,131

$— $— $112,131 $145,284

$— $— $145,284

Total Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $112,131

$— $— $112,131 $145,284

$— $— $145,284

See Note 7 for the change in the fair value of the Level  3 lease exit  liability  during  the year ended

December 31, 2015.

The following table summarizes the changes in fair value of the  contingent consideration liability

during the year ended December 31, 2013 (in thousands):

Fair value at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Changes in fair value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Payments on contingent consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 1,798
95
(1,893)

Fair value at December 31, 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ —

Contingent
Consideration

Concentrations of Credit and Business Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject  the Company  to  credit risk consist  principally of cash

and cash equivalents and accounts receivable.

The Company, at times, maintains cash  balances at  financial institutions  in excess of amounts

insured  by United States government  agencies  or payable by  the  United States government directly.
The Company places its cash and cash equivalents  with high  credit quality financial institutions.

Each  reporting period, the Company reevaluates each customer’s ability to satisfy credit obligations

and maintains an allowance for doubtful accounts based on the  evaluations. No single customer
comprised more than 10% of the Company’s  total  revenues for the years ended December 31, 2015,
2014 and 2013. No single customer comprised more than 10% of  the Company’s  accounts receivable
balance at December 31, 2015 and 2014.

The Company’s single largest source of unique visitors  to  its Auto Buying Programs comes from its
affinity group marketing partner relationship  with United Services  Automobile Association (‘‘USAA’’), a
related party (Note 13). Changes in the Company’s relationship with  USAA  and its promotion and
marketing of the Company’s Auto Buying Programs  may  have a  material adverse  effect  on the
Company’s business, financial condition, results  of operations  and cash flows.

F-11

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid investments  purchased with  an original or remaining
maturity at the date of purchase of three  months or less to be cash equivalents.  At  December 31, 2015
and 2014, cash and cash equivalents were  comprised of cash held  in money market funds and  checking
accounts.

Accounts Receivable, Allowance for Doubtful  Accounts, and Sales Allowances

The Company extends credit in the normal  course of business  to  its customers and performs credit
evaluations on a case-by-case basis. The Company does not obtain collateral or other security related  to
its  accounts receivable.

Accounts receivable are recorded based on  the amount due from the customer and do not bear

interest. The Company reduces accounts receivable  by  sales allowances  and allowance for  doubtful
accounts.

The Company establishes sales allowances at  the time  of  revenue recognition based on its history

of adjustments and credits provided to its network of dealers. Sales allowances  relate  primarily  to
credits issued where a dealer claims  that an introduction was  previously identified by the  dealer from a
source other than the Company. While  contractually  obligated  to  pay the invoice, the Company may
issue a credit against the invoice to maintain  overall  dealer relations. In assessing the  adequacy of the
sales allowance, the Company evaluates its history of adjustments and credits  made through  the date  of
the issuance of the financial statements.  Estimated sales adjustments and credits  and ultimate losses
may vary from actual results which could  be  material to the financial statements; however, to date,
actual sales allowances have been materially consistent  with the Company’s estimates.

The Company determines its allowance for doubtful accounts based on  its historical write-off
experience and when specific circumstances make it likely  that recovery will not occur.  The  Company
reviews the allowance for doubtful accounts each reporting period  and assesses  the aging of account
balances, with an emphasis on those that are  past  due over ninety days. Account balances are charged
off against the allowance when the Company determines  that it  is probable the receivable  will not be
recovered. The Company does not have  any off-balance sheet credit exposure  related to its customers.

The following table summarizes the changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts  and sales

allowances (in thousands):

Allowances, at beginning of period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Charged as a reduction of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Charged to bad debt expense in general  and

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

$ 2,069
6,716

$ 2,184
4,797

$ 1,621
6,985

administrative expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Write-offs, net of recoveries

925
(6,990)

373
(5,285)

153
(6,575)

Allowances, at end of period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 2,720

$ 2,069

$ 2,184

F-12

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Property and Equipment, net

Property and equipment are stated at  cost, less accumulated  depreciation. Depreciation is

computed using the straight-line method over  the estimated useful  lives of the assets, which is generally
three years for computer hardware and  software,  five  years  for furniture  and  equipment, and over the
shorter of lease term or useful life of the assets  for leasehold improvements. Buildings are  depreciated
over a useful life of forty years. Maintenance and repairs are expensed as  incurred. When assets are
retired or otherwise disposed of, the cost  and  related accumulated depreciation are removed from the
accounts and any resulting gain or loss is reflected in the  Company’s results of operations.

Build-to-Suit Leases

The Company establishes assets and  liabilities for the  fair value of the building and  estimated
construction costs  incurred under lease arrangements when it  is considered the owner  (for accounting
purposes  only), or build-to-suit leases, to the extent it is involved in  the construction  of structural
improvements or takes on construction  risk. Upon completion of construction of facilities under
build-to-suit leases, the Company assesses whether these arrangements qualify for sales recognition
under the sale-leaseback accounting guidance, and if so, the leased  facility and  lease financing
obligation are removed from the balance sheet.  If the Company  does not  qualify for sale-leaseback
accounting, then the facilities are accounted for as financing leases.

Software and Website Development Costs

The Company accounts for the costs of computer  software obtained or  developed for internal use
in accordance with FASB ASC 350, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other. Computer software development
costs and website development costs  are expensed as incurred, except for  internal use software or
website development costs that qualify for capitalization as  described below, and include employee
related expenses, including salaries, bonuses, benefits  and stock-based compensation expenses;  costs of
computer hardware and software; and  costs incurred  in developing features and  functionality.  These
capitalized costs are included in property and equipment on the  consolidated  balance  sheets.

The Company expenses costs incurred in  the preliminary project and post  implementation stages of

software development and capitalizes  costs incurred  in the application development  stage and  costs
associated with significant enhancements  to  existing internal use software  applications.

Software costs are amortized using the  straight-line  method over  an  estimated  useful life  of  three

years commencing when the software  project is ready  for its intended use.

Costs incurred related to less significant modifications and enhancements as well as  maintenance

are expensed as incurred.

At December 31, 2015 and 2014, capitalized software costs  were $43.9 million and $29.7  million,
respectively, before accumulated amortization of  $20.6 million  and $11.9 million, respectively.  During
2015, the Company wrote off capitalized software costs of $1.2  million  relating to the  Company’s
decision to abandon additional development  activities relating to specific software projects. As these
capitalized assets had never been placed  in service, the write-off was recorded in technology  and
development expense and there was no accumulated amortization  and  no acceleration of amortization.
During  2014, the Company wrote off capitalized software costs  that were  previously placed in  service

F-13

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

and no longer in use of $0.3 million  and accumulated amortization of  $0.1 million,  which resulted  in
acceleration of amortization of $0.2 million.

Expected amortization expense with respect  to  capitalized software costs at December 31, 2015  for

each  of the three years through December 31, 2018  is as  follows  (in  thousands):

Years ended December 31,

2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$11,024
8,240
4,041

Total amortization expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$23,305

Intangible Assets Acquired in Business  Combinations

The Company performs valuations of assets acquired  and  liabilities assumed on each acquisition
accounted for as a business combination,  and allocates the purchase price  to  the tangible and  intangible
assets acquired and liabilities assumed  based on its best  estimate of fair  value.  Acquired intangible
assets include: trade names, customer  relationships,  and  developed  technology. The Company
determines the appropriate useful life  of intangible assets  by performing an  analysis of  cash flows based
on historical experience of the acquired  businesses. Intangible assets are amortized over  their  estimated
useful lives based on the pattern in which  the economic  benefits associated with the asset  are expected
to be consumed, which to date has approximated the  straight-line  method of amortization. The
estimated useful lives for trade names,  customer  relationships, and technology are generally, one to
fifteen years, five to ten years, and three to ten years, respectively.

Long-Lived Assets

The Company evaluates the recoverability of its long-lived assets with finite useful lives for

impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts may  not  be
recoverable. Such triggering events or changes  in circumstances may include: a significant decrease in
the market price of a long-lived asset,  a  significant adverse  change in  the extent or manner in  which a
long-lived asset is  being used, significant adverse change in  legal factors  or in  the business climate,  the
impact of competition or other factors  that could  affect the  value of a long-lived  asset, a significant
adverse deterioration in the amount of  revenue or cash flows  expected to  be  generated from an asset
group, an accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount originally  expected for the
acquisition or development of a long-lived asset,  current or future operating or cash flow losses that
demonstrate continuing losses associated with the use  of a long-lived asset, or a  current expectation
that, more likely than not, a long-lived asset  will  be  sold  or otherwise disposed of significantly before
the end of its previously estimated useful life. The Company performs impairment testing  at the  asset
group level that represents the lowest level for which  identifiable cash flows are largely independent of
the cash  flows of other assets and liabilities. If events or  changes  in circumstances  indicate  that  the
carrying  amount of an asset group may not  be  recoverable and  the expected undiscounted future cash
flows attributable to the asset group are less than the carrying  amount  of the asset group, an
impairment loss equal to the excess of the  asset’s carrying  value over its fair value is recorded.  Fair
value is determined based upon estimated discounted future cash flows.  During the  years  ended

F-14

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, there were no  impairment charges  recorded on the Company’s
long-lived assets.

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of the aggregate purchase price paid over  the fair value of the
identifiable assets and liabilities acquired in the Company’s  business combinations.  Goodwill is not
amortized and is tested for impairment at least annually or whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying value  may not be recoverable. Events or  changes in
circumstances which could trigger an impairment  review include a  significant adverse change in business
climate, an adverse action or assessment by a regulator, unanticipated competition,  a loss  of  key
personnel, significant changes in the manner of use of the acquired assets  or the Company’s  overall
business strategy, significant negative  industry or economic trends,  or significant  underperformance
relative to expected historical or projected future results  of  operations.

The Company has the option to assess goodwill  for possible impairment  by  performing a

qualitative analysis to determine if it is more likely than  not  that the fair  value of a  reporting unit is
less  than its carrying amount or perform the first step on  an impairment test.

The first step involves comparing the  estimated  fair value of a reporting unit with its  respective
book value, including goodwill. If the estimated fair value exceeds book value, goodwill is  considered
not to be impaired and no additional  steps are necessary. If, however, the fair  value of  the reporting
unit is less than book value, then the second step is  to  compare  the carrying amount of the  goodwill  to
its  implied fair value. The estimate of implied fair  value of goodwill may  require valuations of certain
internally generated and unrecognized intangible assets. If the  carrying amount of goodwill exceeds the
implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment  loss is  recognized in an amount equal  to  the excess.

The Company tests for goodwill impairment annually at December  31. During the years ended

December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, there were no  impairment charges  recorded on goodwill.  The
Company conducted a quantitative goodwill assessment of its reporting  units at December  31, 2015.
The fair value of the reporting units  exceeded their carrying  values and  accordingly, the Company
concluded there was no impairment of  its  goodwill.

Revenue Recognition

The Company recognizes revenue, net  of sales  allowances,  when (i) persuasive evidence of an
arrangement exists, (ii) delivery has occurred or  services have been rendered, (iii)  the fees are fixed or
determinable, and (iv) collectability is  reasonably  assured. Deferred revenue  is recognized on  the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets when payments  are  received in advance of the  Company
meeting  all of the revenue recognition criteria described above. The Company recorded deferred
revenue (included in other accrued expenses) of $0.5 million and $0.5 million at December  31, 2015
and 2014, respectively.

Transaction Revenues

Auto Buying Program Revenues

Revenues consist of fees paid by dealers participating in the Company’s dealer network  with which
the Company has an agreement (‘‘TrueCar  Certified  Dealers’’ or ‘‘Dealers’’). TrueCar Certified Dealers

F-15

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

pay the Company fees either on a per-vehicle  basis for sales to Auto  Buying Program users or in the
form of a subscription arrangement.

The Company recognizes revenue for fee arrangements based on a per-vehicle basis when the

vehicle sale has occurred between the  Auto Buying  Program  user and the Dealer. Under the
contractual terms and conditions of arrangements with  its  network of participating TrueCar  Certified
Dealers, the dealer is required to pay  the Company  upon the sale of  a  vehicle to an Auto Buying
Program user that has been provided  to  the dealer by  the Company. Recognition of  revenue from the
sale is not contingent upon verification  or acceptance of the  transaction by the dealer.

Upon a user deciding to proceed with  the user’s vehicle purchase through  the Company, the  user

provides his or her name, address, e-mail, and a phone number  during  the process of obtaining a
Guaranteed Savings Certificate, which  gives  the Company the  identity and source of a TrueCar
introduction provided to a specific dealer  prior to an actual sale  occurring. After a  sale occurs, the
Company receives information regarding the sale, including the identity of the purchaser, via  the
Dealer  Management System used by  the  dealer that made the sale. The Company also receives
information regarding vehicle sales from  a variety  of data sources,  including  third  party car sales
aggregators, car dealer networks, and other publicly  available  sources (collectively, ‘‘sales data’’) and
uses this sales data to further verify that a sale has  occurred  between an Auto Buying Program user
and a TrueCar Certified Dealer, as well  as a  means to invoice the Dealer  shortly  after the completion
of the sales transaction. Actual vehicle  sales data is reported on a daily  basis shortly following the  date
of sale.

The Company also recognizes revenue from dealers  under subscription  agreements. Subscription

fee arrangements are short-term in nature with  terms ranging from one  to  six months and  are
cancellable by the dealer or the Company  at any time. Subscription  arrangements fall into three types:
flat rate subscriptions, subscriptions subject to downward adjustment based on a minimum number  of
vehicle sales (‘‘guaranteed sales’’), and  subscriptions subject to downward adjustment  based on  a
minimum number of introductions (‘‘guaranteed introductions’’).  Under  flat  rate subscription
arrangements, fees are charged at a monthly flat  rate regardless of the number of sales made  to  users
of the Company’s platform by the dealer. For flat rate subscription  arrangements, the Company
recognizes the fees as revenue over the  subscription  period on a straight line basis which corresponds
to the period that the Company is providing the dealer access to the Auto Buying Program. Under
guaranteed sales subscription arrangements, fees are charged based on  the number  of  guaranteed sales
multiplied by a fixed amount per vehicle. To the  extent that the actual number  of  vehicles sold by the
dealers to users of the Company’s platform is  less  than the  number of guaranteed  sales,  the Company
provides a credit to the dealer. To the extent  that  the actual  number of vehicles sold exceeds the
number of guaranteed sales, the Company is not entitled to any additional  fees.  Under guaranteed
introductions subscription arrangements,  fees  are charged based on a periodically-updated  formula that
considers, among other things, the introductions anticipated to be provided to the  dealer. To the extent
that the number of actual introductions  is  less  than the  number of guaranteed introductions, the
Company provides a credit to the dealer. To the  extent that the actual number  of  introductions
provided exceeds the number guaranteed, the Company is not entitled to any additional  fees.  For
guaranteed sales and guaranteed introductions subscription arrangements,  the Company recognizes
revenue based on the lesser of (i) the  actual  number of  sales generated or introductions delivered
through the Auto Buying Program during  the subscription period multiplied by the contracted

F-16

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

price-per-sale/introduction or (ii) the  guaranteed number of  sales or introductions  multiplied  by  the
contracted price per sale/introduction.

OEM Incentives

The Company enters into arrangements with automobile  manufacturers (‘‘OEM’’) to promote the

sale of their vehicles through the offering of additional consumer incentives. These manufacturers pay a
per-vehicle fee to the Company for promotion of the incentive and the Company  recognizes as revenue
the per-vehicle incentive fee at the time  the sale of the vehicle  has occurred between the  Auto Buying
Program user and the dealer.

Forecasts, Consulting and Other Revenues

Revenues are generated from the sale of forecasts of lease residual value data for  new and used

leased automobiles, guidebooks, and  consulting services. Sales are principally  made to vehicle
manufacturers, vehicle financing companies,  investment banks, automobile dealers, and insurance
companies. Forecasts and consulting services customers  typically prepay annually  in the form  of  a
subscription agreement for lease residual value data and  guidebooks.

Forecasts and consulting services sales  arrangements may include multiple deliverables, such as sale

of lease residual forecasts from guidebooks and consulting services. For  multiple deliverable revenue
arrangements, the Company first assesses  whether each deliverable has value  to  the customer  on a
standalone basis and performance is  considered  probable and substantially  in its control. Forecasts and
consulting services can be sold both on a standalone basis or as  part of  multiple deliverable
arrangements. The deliverables constitute separate units of accounting because the  deliverables have
standalone value to the customer and  as such, the total arrangement consideration is  allocated  to  each
unit of accounting using the relative  selling price hierarchy.  This hierarchy requires the selling price of
each  deliverable in a multiple deliverable revenue arrangement to be based on, in descending order:
(i) vendor-specific objective evidence,  or VSOE, (ii) third-party evidence  of selling  price, or TPE,  or
(iii) management’s best estimated selling price,  or BESP.

The Company cannot establish VSOE or TPE because the  deliverables are  not  sold  separately
within a sufficiently narrow price range or third party pricing for comparable services is  not  available;
therefore, it applies judgment to determine BESP. The objective of BESP  is to determine the price  at
which  the Company would transact a  sale if the  service  were sold on a stand-alone basis.  The
determination of BESP requires the Company to make significant estimates and  judgments and the
Company considers numerous factors in  this determination, including the nature  of the deliverables,
market conditions and the competitive  landscape, internal costs, and its pricing and  discounting
practices. The Company updates its estimates  of  BESP on a periodic basis as events  and as
circumstances may require.

Revenue allocated to each element from the  sale of lease residual  value forecasts, guidebooks, and

consulting services is recognized when  the basic recognition  criteria are met for  each  element. Sales
attributed to residual value data and  guidebooks  are recognized when  the data or guidebooks  are
delivered, and consulting services are recognized when the  project is completed.

F-17

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Lead Referral Fees

Lead referral fees revenues consist of fees earned through  an online process that refers consumers

to out-of-network auto dealers for new and used vehicles when the Company  is unable  to  identify a
dealer with a vehicle in the Company’s dealer network for which  a  prospective car  buyer is searching.
Fees are recognized at the time the lead referral is transmitted to, and accepted by, the lead-buying
entities and are not contingent on the  sale of  a vehicle. The Company is not a party  to  the
arrangement with, and is not the primary obligor  to,  the lead-buyer’s  dealer; accordingly,  revenue is
recognized for the net fee received for  the lead from the  lead-buyer.

Cost of Revenue (exclusive of depreciation and  amortization)

Cost of revenue includes expenses related  to  the fulfillment of  the  Company’s services, consisting
primarily of data costs and licensing  fees paid  to  third party  service providers and  expenses related to
operating the Company’s website and  mobile applications, including those associated with its data
centers, hosting fees, data processing  costs required to deliver introductions  to  its  network of TrueCar
Certified Dealers,  employee costs related to dealer operations, sales matching, and  employee and
consulting costs related to delivering data and consulting  services to the Company’s  customers.  Cost of
revenue excludes depreciation and amortization of software development costs  and other  hosting  and
data infrastructure equipment used to  operate the Company’s  platforms,  which are included in  the
depreciation and amortization line item  on  its  statement of comprehensive loss.

Sales and Marketing

Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily  of: television, digital, and radio advertising;  affinity

group partner marketing fees, which  also includes loan subvention  costs where the Company  pays
certain affinity group marketing partners  a portion of  consumers’ borrowing costs for  car loan products
offered by these affinity group marketing partners, and common stock warrants issued to USAA;
marketing sponsorship programs; and digital customer acquisition. In addition, sales  and marketing
expenses include employee related expenses for sales, customer support,  marketing and public relations
employees, including salaries, bonuses,  benefits,  severance, and stock-based compensation expenses;
third-party contractor fees; and allocated overhead. Sales and marketing expenses also include  costs
related to common stock warrants issued  to  a third-party  marketing  firm and a  service  provider  as part
of our commercial arrangements with  them.

Marketing and advertising costs promote our services and  are expensed as  incurred, except for
media production costs which are expensed the first time the advertisement is aired. Marketing  and
advertising expenses were $79.6 million,  $58.1  million, and $27.5 million for the years ended
December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Prepaid expenses include prepaid media costs of
$1.8 million and $2.3 million at December 31,  2015 and 2014, respectively. Accrued marketing and
advertising expenses were $2.0 million  and $4.9 million at December  31, 2015 and 2014,  respectively,
and were included within accrued expenses and other current liabilities on the consolidated balance
sheet.

Technology and Development

Technology and development expenses consist  primarily of employee related  expenses for
technology and development staff, including salaries, benefits, bonuses, severance, and stock-based

F-18

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

compensation; the cost of certain third-party service providers;  and  allocated overhead. Technology and
development expenses are expensed as incurred.

General and Administrative

General and administrative expenses  consist primarily of employee related expenses for

administrative, legal, finance, and human resource staffs, including  salaries, benefits,  bonuses,
severance, and stock-based compensation; professional fees; insurance premiums;  other  corporate
expenses; lease exit charges, and allocated overhead.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company recognizes stock-based  compensation  expense related to employee stock option,

restricted stock awards, and restricted stock  units based on the fair  value of the awards on the grant
date  in accordance with the relevant standards. The Company estimates the grant  date fair  value of
option grants, and the resulting stock-based compensation expense, using the Black-Scholes  option
pricing model. Stock-based compensation for  employee awards is  recognized  on a straight-line basis
over the requisite period, except for performance-based awards which are  recognized using the  graded-
vesting model.

Compensation expense for non-employee  stock-based awards  is recognized in  accordance  with

FASB ASC 505, Equity—Equity-Based Payments to Non-Employees. Under this standard, stock option
awards issued to non-employees are accounted for at fair value using the  Black-Scholes option-pricing
model. Management believes that the fair value of the stock options is  more reliably  measured than the
fair value of the services received. The  Company records  compensation  expense based  on the
then-current fair values of the stock  options  at each  financial  reporting date. Compensation recorded
during the service period is adjusted in subsequent  periods for changes in the stock options’ fair  value
until the earlier of the date at which the non-employee’s  performance is  complete or a  performance
commitment is reached, which is generally when  the stock option  vests.

For issuances of restricted stock awards or restricted stock units,  the Company  determines  the fair

value of the award based on the market value of its common stock  at the  date of grant.

Income Taxes

The Company accounts for income taxes under  the asset and liability method. Under the  asset and
liability method, deferred tax assets and  liabilities are determined based on  the differences between  the
financial reporting and income tax bases of assets and liabilities and  are  measured using the tax rates
that will be in effect when the differences  are expected to reverse. A valuation allowance is recorded
when it is more likely than not that some of the  deferred tax assets will  not be realized.

The Company determines whether a  tax  position is  more likely than  not  to  be  sustained upon

examination based on the technical merits of  the position.  For tax positions meeting the
more-likely-than-not threshold, the tax  amount recognized in the  financial  statements is reduced by the
largest benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon  ultimate settlement  with
the relevant tax authority. The Company recognizes  interest and penalties accrued  related to
unrecognized tax benefits, if any, in its income tax provision in the accompanying statements of
comprehensive loss.

F-19

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

Comprehensive Loss

Comprehensive loss encompasses all changes in equity other than those  arising from transactions
with stockholders and consists of net  loss and unrealized gains on marketable  securities. For the years
ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, the Company had no other comprehensive income (loss)
items and accordingly, net loss equaled  comprehensive loss.

Recent  Accounting Pronouncements

Under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act  (‘‘JOBS Act’’), the Company meets  the definition

of an emerging growth company. The Company has irrevocably elected to opt  out of the  extended
transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards  pursuant to Section  107(b) of
the JOBS Act.

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting  Standards Board (the ‘‘FASB’’)  issued  guidance related to

revenue from contracts with customers. Under this guidance, revenue  is recognized when  promised
goods or services are transferred to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration that is
expected to be received for those goods  or  services.  The updated standard will replace  all  existing
revenue recognition guidance under GAAP when it becomes effective and  permits  the use of  either the
retrospective or cumulative effect transition  method. In August  2015, the FASB deferred  the effective
date  to January 1, 2018, with early adoption beginning January 1, 2017. The Company  is evaluating the
impact of adopting this guidance on its consolidated financial  statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued new guidance related to the customer’s accounting for fees paid in

a cloud computing arrangement, which provides guidance to customers about whether a cloud
computing arrangement includes a software license. If a cloud  computing arrangement  includes a
software license, then the customer should account for the software  license  element of the  arrangement
consistent with the acquisition of other  software licenses. If a  cloud computing arrangement  does not
include a software license, the customer should account for the  arrangement as a  service  contract. The
new guidance is effective for annual and  interim reporting  periods beginning after  December 15,  2015.
Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of this guidance is  not expected  to  have a material impact
on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued new guidance related to the presentation of debt issuance costs,
which  requires debt issuance costs to  be presented in the  balance  sheet  as a direct deduction for the
associated debt liability. The new guidance is effective  for  annual  and interim  reporting periods
beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption is  permitted for financial  statements  that  have not
been previously issued. The adoption of  this guidance  is not expected to have a material impact on the
Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In September 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards  Board (‘‘FASB’’)  issued new  guidance
regarding business combinations to simplify measurement-period adjustments. Under this guidance, an
acquirer must recognize adjustments to provisional amounts that  are  identified  during  the measurement
period in the reporting period in which  the adjustment  amounts are determined. This guidance also
requires acquirers to present separately  on the face of the income statement, or disclose  in the notes,
the portion of the amount recorded in  current period earnings by  line item that would have  been
recorded  in previous reporting periods. The new  guidance is effective for  annual and interim reporting

F-20

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)

periods beginning after December 15,  2015 and must be applied prospectively. The adoption of this
guidance is not expected to have a material impact on  the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In November 2015, the FASB issued new guidance to simplify the presentation of deferred income
tax assets liabilities. This guidance establishes that deferred  tax assets  and  deferred tax liabilities should
be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial  position. The new guidance is  effective
for financial statements issued for annual  periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim
periods within those annual periods.  Earlier application is  permitted  for all entities as of  the beginning
of an interim or annual reporting period,  applied  retrospectively  or prospectively. The Company  elected
to early adopt this  guidance in 2015  and prospectively applied  the provisions. Had the Company
adopted this guidance retrospectively,  other  current assets would have  decreased by $0.4  million  and
deferred tax liabilities would have decreased by  a corresponding amount at  December 31, 2014.

In February 2016, the FASB issued guidance amending the existing  accounting standards for lease

accounting, including requiring lessees to recognize most leases on their balance sheets and making
targeted changes to lessor accounting.  The new guidance will  be  effective  for public entities  for annual
periods beginning after December 15,  2018 and interim  periods therein. Early adoption is permitted.
The new leases standard requires a modified  retrospective  transition  approach for  all  leases existing at,
or entered into after, the date of initial application,  with an  option to use certain transition relief. The
Company is evaluating the methods and  impact of adopting this guidance on its consolidated financial
statements.

3. Property and Equipment, net

Property and equipment consisted of the following at December 31, 2015  and 2014 (in thousands):

December 31,

2015

2014

Computer equipment, software, and internally developed

software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Furniture and fixtures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Leasehold improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Capitalized facility leases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 53,862
3,575
4,410
39,154

$ 37,110
2,335
4,611
6,599

Less: Accumulated depreciation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

101,001
(29,611)

50,655
(19,924)

Total property and equipment, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 71,390

$ 30,731

The Company is considered the owner, for accounting  purposes only, of one of its Santa Monica,
California leased office spaces and of  its  San Francisco,  California  leased  office space (collectively, the
‘‘Premises’’) as it had taken on certain risks  of construction  build cost  overages above normal tenant
improvement allowances. Accordingly,  at December 31, 2015 and 2014,  the Company  has capitalized
$39.2 million and $6.6 million, respectively,  related to the  Premises, which  represents the estimated fair
value of the leased properties, additions  for capitalized  interest incurred during the construction
periods, and capitalized costs related  to  improvements to the buildings. For the year ended
December 31, 2015, the Company capitalized  approximately $2.0  million  of interest  costs related to the
Premises. No interest costs related to the  Premises were capitalized for the year ended  December 31,

F-21

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

3. Property and Equipment, net (Continued)

2014. As of December 31, 2015, the  Company had recorded accumulated amortization of $0.2  million
for capitalized facility leases. Additionally, at  December  31, 2015 and 2014,  the Company recognized a
corresponding lease financing obligation  of  approximately  $28.9 million and  $6.6 million, respectively.
Refer to Note 7 for additional information.

Included in the table above are property and  equipment of $5.3 million and $8.1 million as  of
December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, which  are capitalizable, but had  not  yet been placed in
service. The $5.3 million balance at December  31, 2015 was comprised primarily of capitalized software
not ready for its intended use. The $8.1  million  balance  at  December 31,  2014 was comprised primarily
of the San Francisco capitalized facility lease of $6.6  million.

Total depreciation and amortization expense  of  property and equipment was $13.5 million,
$8.9 million and $6.4 million for the  years ended December 31, 2015,  2014, and 2013, respectively.

Amortization of internal use capitalized software development costs was $8.8 million, $5.7  million

and $3.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively.

Amortization of capitalized facility leases was  $0.2 million  for  the year ended December 31, 2015.

4. Intangible Assets

Intangible assets consisted of the following at  December 31,  2015 and  December  31, 2014 (in

thousands, except years):

Acquired technology and domain name . . . . . . . . . . . .
Customer relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tradenames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

At December 31, 2015

Gross
Carrying
Value

$31,090
6,300
4,900

Accumulated
Amortization

$(13,835)
(3,252)
(1,388)

Net
Carrying
Value

$17,255
3,048
3,512

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$42,290

$(18,475)

$23,815

Acquired technology and domain name . . . . . . . . . . . .
Customer relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tradenames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

At December 31, 2014

Gross
Carrying
Value

$31,090
6,300
4,900

Accumulated
Amortization

$(10,788)
(2,491)
(1,062)

Net
Carrying
Value

$20,302
3,809
3,838

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$42,290

$(14,341)

$27,949

Weighted
average  useful
life  in  years

9.70
8.97
15.00

10.20

Weighted
average  useful
life  in  years

9.70
8.97
15.00

10.20

F-22

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

4. Intangible Assets (Continued)

Amortization expense by asset type for the years ended  December  31, 2015, 2014, and 2013  is

shown below (in thousands):

Acquired technology and domain name . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Customer relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Trade names

$3,047
760
327

$3,164
760
327

$3,318
760
327

Total amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$4,134

$4,251

$4,405

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

Expected amortization expense with respect  to  intangible assets at  December  31, 2015 for each of

the five years through December 31, 2020 and thereafter is as follows (in thousands):

Years ended December 31,

2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thereafter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 4,041
3,862
3,861
3,791
3,787
4,473

Total amortization expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$23,815

5. Debt Financing

On May 8, 2012, the Company received cash proceeds  of $23.1 million by issuing subordinated
secured convertible promissory notes  to  investors. The convertible promissory  notes bore interest at
10% per annum and were due on May 7,  2013. Principal  and  interest under the notes was due at
maturity, unless earlier converted into shares  of the Company’s  common stock.

Principal and accrued interest under the promissory notes was  automatically  convertible into shares

of the Company’s common stock issued  and sold at  the Company’s next financing yielding  gross
proceeds of at least $25.0 million (the ‘‘Qualified Financing’’).  The  conversion  price upon  automatic
conversion was equivalent to the lower of 85% of the price per share paid  by  the purchasers  in the
Qualified Financing or $12.08 per share. Principal and  accrued interest under  the promissory  notes was
convertible at the option of the holders  if  a change in  control  or an  initial public offering  occurred
prior to the maturity date of the note. The  conversion  price per share  was equivalent  to  the greater of
85% of the price per share as reflected  in the  change in control or initial public offering, or $7.95  per
share.

Principal and accrued interest under the promissory notes was  convertible at the option of the
holders  if a Qualified Financing, change in control or initial  public  offering  did not occur  prior to
maturity, at a price per share of $7.16.

As the convertible promissory notes allowed the holders to convert the  notes at a price less than
the estimated fair value of the Company’s common stock  on the date of issuance, the  notes contained a
beneficial conversion feature (‘‘BCF’’). The  BCF was  valued  on  the issuance date of  the notes as the

F-23

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

5. Debt Financing (Continued)

difference between the fair value of the Company’s common stock and the conversion price  of $7.16
per  share multiplied by the number of shares that the notes were  convertible  into.  The  Company
recorded  the BCF of $2.7 million as a discount  on the  notes and  an adjustment to additional paid-in
capital. The discount was amortized as additional  interest expense over  the  period of  the notes using
the effective interest method.

For the year ended December 31, 2013,  the Company recorded interest  expense of $0.8  million

and amortization of debt discount of  $0.9 million.

In May 2013, the holders of the secured convertible promissory notes converted all the  principal
and interest on the notes to 3,556,412 shares of common stock at a conversion price of $7.16 per share.

6. Credit Facility

June 2013 Amended Credit Facility

On June 13, 2013, the Company entered into a second amended and restated loan and security
agreement (‘‘Second Amended Credit  Facility’’) with  a financial institution  with which  the Company
had previous credit arrangements. The Second  Amended  Credit Facility provided for  advances under a
formula-based revolving line of credit and pledged substantially all of the  Company’s assets  as
collateral. In addition, the Company entered into a  warrant  agreement that allowed the financial
institution to purchase 26,666 shares of  the Company’s common stock  at an  exercise  price of $7.92 per
share if the Company drew on the credit facility at any  time after  the issuance date  (Note 8). For  the
year ended December 31, 2013, the Company recorded a  debt  discount of $0.4 million upon the
issuance of the warrants.

August 2014 Amendment to the Second  Amended Credit Facility

In August 2014, the Company entered into an amendment to the Second  Amended Credit  Facility

with the same financial institution, effective  as of June 13,  2014, that provided for  advances  of up to
$25.0 million under a formula-based  revolving line of credit that  expires  on June 13, 2016.

This amended credit facility bore interest  at either  (i)  the London  Interbank  Offered Rate
(‘‘LIBOR’’) plus 2.25% if net cash, as defined, was greater than or equal  to $1.00 (ii) LIBOR  plus
3.75% if net cash, as defined, was less  than $1.00, (iii) the bank’s  prime rate if net cash was greater
than or equal to $1.00 , or (iv) the bank’s prime rate plus  1.5% if net cash was less than  $1.00. The
Company could select whether its borrowings  would fall  under a LIBOR  or  prime rate interest  rate and
also committed to pay an annual commitment  fee of $50,000 to the financial  institution.

This amended credit facility also required the Company to maintain an adjusted quick ratio of  at

least 1.5 to 1 on the last day of each  month during periods when the Company  had drawn down at
least 75% of the lesser of the Borrowing Base or $25.0 million. The  credit facility required the
Company to pledge substantially all of its assets as collateral and  contained acceleration clauses that
could accelerate any borrowings in the  event of default. The credit facility restricted the Company’s
ability to pay dividends. At December 31,  2014, the Company  was in compliance with  the financial
covenants.

In September 2014, the Company borrowed $5.0  million under this amended  credit facility. In

December 2014, the Company repaid all amounts then outstanding. At December 31, 2014, the

F-24

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

6. Credit Facility (Continued)

Company had no outstanding amounts under the credit facility and the amount available  was
$15.1 million.

February 2015 Amended Credit Facility

In February 2015, the Company further  amended its credit facility  and entered into a third
amended and restated loan and security agreement (‘‘Third Amended  Credit  Facility’’)  with the same
financial institution, effective as of February 18, 2015, for a  $35.0 million  secured revolving credit
facility that expires on February 18, 2018. The  Third Amended Credit Facility provides a $10.0 million
subfacility for the issuance of letters  of credit and contains an increase  option permitting the  Company,
subject to the lenders consent, to increase the  revolving  credit facility by up  to  $15.0 million, to an
aggregate maximum of $50 million.

This amended credit facility bears interest, at the Company’s option,  at either  (i) the prime rate

published by The Wall Street Journal, plus  a spread of (cid:4)0.25% to 0.50%, or (ii) a LIBOR rate
determined in accordance with the terms of the credit facility, plus  a  spread of 1.75%  to  2.50%. In
each  case, the spread is based on the  Company’s adjusted quick  ratio, which is  a ratio of the
Company’s cash and cash equivalents  plus  net billed accounts  receivable to current liabilities plus all
borrowings under the credit facility.

Interest is due and payable quarterly in  arrears for prime  rate loans and on  the earlier of the  last
day of each quarter or the end of an interest  period, as  defined in the Third Amended Credit Facility,
for LIBOR rate loans. The Company  is  also obligated to pay an  unused revolving line  facility fee of
0.0% to 0.20% per annum based on  the  Company’s  adjusted quick ratio.

This amended credit facility requires the Company  to  maintain an adjusted quick ratio  of  at least
1.5 to 1 on the last day of each quarter.  At December 31, 2015, the Company was  in compliance  with
the financial covenant. If the adjusted  quick  ratio is not maintained,  then the facility requires  the
Company to maintain, as measured at each quarter end,  a maximum consolidated leverage ratio 3.00 or
2.50 to 1.00, and a fixed charge coverage  ratio of at least 1.25  to  1.00.

Consolidated leverage ratio is a ratio  of  all funded indebtedness, including all capital lease
obligations, plus all letters of credit under  the facility to the Company’s  Adjusted EBITDA for  the
trailing  twelve months. Fixed charge  coverage ratio  is the ratio of our Adjusted  EBITDA minus cash
income taxes to our cash interest payments plus  capital expenditures for the trailing twelve months.
This credit facility also limits the Company’s  ability  to  pay dividends.

The Company’s future material domestic subsidiaries  are required, upon  the lender’s request,  to

become  co-borrowers under the credit facility.  The  credit facility  contains acceleration clauses that
accelerate any borrowings in the event  of default. The obligations  of  the Company and its future
material domestic  subsidiaries are collateralized  by  substantially  all of their  respective assets,  subject to
certain exceptions and limitations.

At December 31, 2015, the Company had no outstanding amounts under  the credit  facility.  The

amount available was $30.4 million, reduced for letters  of  credit issued  and outstanding under  the
subfacility of $4.6 million at December  31,  2015.

F-25

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

7. Commitments and Contingencies

Office  Lease Commitments

At December 31, 2015, the Company had various non-cancellable leases related to the Company’s

office facilities which expire through 2030.

At December 31, 2015, future minimum payments for obligations under non-cancellable lease

obligations are as follows (in thousands):

Years ended December 31,

2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thereafter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 8,399
8,956
9,149
9,409
8,416
41,065

Total minimum lease payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$85,394

The Company recorded rent expense of $6.3  million, $2.8  million,  and  $2.7 million  for the  years

ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and  2013, respectively.

In connection with one of the Company’s office  facilities  leases, the Company has an irrevocable

standby letter of credit, in the amount of $0.2 million for the benefit of its landlord.  This letter of
credit was posted by the financial institution which  provides  the Credit Facility (Note 6).

San Francisco Office Lease

In May 2014, the Company entered into a facility lease in San  Francisco (the  ‘‘San Francisco
Office’’) with total future minimum lease commitments  over  10 years, beginning August 1, 2014  of
$7.0 million. The remaining future minimum lease commitments as of  December 31, 2015 are  included
in the table above. In conjunction with this lease, the  Company was required to obtain an irrevocable
standby letter of credit in the amount of $0.8 million for the benefit of the landlord. Beginning
August 1, 2017 through August 1, 2020,  the letter of credit  is subject  to  an  annual reduction to as little
as $0.2 million.

The Company had concluded that it was deemed the  owner  (for accounting purposes only)  of  the

San Francisco Office during the construction period  under build-to-suit lease accounting. As the
Company assumed control of the construction project in the  third  quarter  of 2014, the Company
recorded  the fair value of the leased property in ‘‘Property and equipment, net’’ and a corresponding
liability in ‘‘Lease financing obligations’’ on the accompanying  consolidated  balance  sheets.  The
Company recognized increases in the  asset as  additional building costs were incurred  during the
construction period. Additionally, imputed interest during the  construction period was capitalized. At
December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the  Company has capitalized $8.5  million  and $6.6  million,
respectively, in ‘‘Property and equipment, net’’ and a corresponding  current and non-current lease
financing obligation of $6.8 million and $6.6  million,  respectively.

Upon completion of the construction during the first quarter of  2015, the Company retained  the
fair value of the San Francisco Office  lease property and the  obligation on its balance sheet as  it did
not qualify for sales and leaseback accounting due to requirements to maintain collateral in the  lease.

F-26

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

7. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)

The Company records the rent payments  as a reduction of the lease  financing obligation and imputed
interest expense and ground rent as  an operating  expense. The fair  value of the lease property  will be
depreciated over the building’s estimated useful life of  forty years. At the conclusion of the  lease term,
the Company will  de-recognize both the  then carrying values of the  asset and financing obligation.

Santa Monica Office Lease

In July 2014, the Company entered into a facility lease in  Santa Monica (the  ‘‘Santa  Monica

Office’’) with total future minimum lease commitments  over  fifteen years, beginning in January 2015, of
$36.0 million. The remaining future minimum lease commitments as of  December 31, 2015 are  included
in the future minimum lease payments table  above. In connection  with this lease, the  Company
obtained an irrevocable standby letter of credit in the  amount  of  $3.5 million for the benefit of  the
landlord. Beginning October 1, 2019  through October 1, 2025,  the letter of credit  is subject to an
annual reduction to as little as $1.2 million.

The Company had concluded that it was deemed the  owner  (for accounting purposes only)  of  the

Santa Monica Office during the construction period under  build-to-suit lease  accounting. As the
Company assumed control of the construction project in the  first quarter  of 2015, the  Company
recorded  the fair value of the leased property in ‘‘Property and equipment, net’’ and a corresponding
liability in ‘‘Lease financing obligations’’ on the accompanying  consolidated  balance  sheets.  The
Company recognized increases in the  asset as  additional building costs were incurred  during the
construction period. Additionally, imputed interest during the  construction period was capitalized. At
December 31, 2015, the Company has  capitalized $30.4 million in  ‘‘Property  and equipment, net’’ and a
corresponding current and non-current lease financing obligation  of  $22.1 million.

Upon completion of the construction during the fourth quarter of 2015,  the Company  retained the

fair value of the Santa Monica Office lease property and the obligation  on its balance sheet as it did
not qualify for sales leaseback accounting  due to requirements  to  maintain  collateral in the lease. The
Company records the rent payments  as  a reduction  of the lease financing obligation and  imputed
interest expense; ground rent is recorded as an operating expense. The  fair value of the lease  property
will be depreciated over the building’s estimated useful  life of forty years. At the  conclusion of the
lease term, the Company will de-recognize both the then carrying values of the asset  and financing
obligation.

Lease Exit Costs

In December 2015, the Company consolidated its Santa Monica, California office locations. In
accordance with accounting for exit and disposal activities, the Company recognized a  liability  for lease
exit costs  incurred when it no longer  derived  economic benefit from the related leases. The liability was
recognized and measured based on a discounted cash flow model when the cease use  date occurred.
The liability was determined based on the  remaining  lease rental due,  reduced  by  estimated  sublease
rental income that could be reasonably  obtained  for the  properties. The liability is  recorded in accrued
expenses and other current liabilities (current portion) and other liabilities (non-current  portion)  within
the consolidated balance sheets. The  costs  are recorded in  general  and  administrative expense  in the
consolidated statement of comprehensive  loss. The Company does  not expect to incur significant
additional charges in future periods related to these exits.

F-27

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

7. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)

The following table presents a roll forward of the  lease exit liability for the year ended

December 31, 2015 (in thousands):

Accrual at December 31, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash Payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Lease
Exit Costs

$ —
2,232
(244)

Accrual at December 31, 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$1,988

Legal Proceedings

From time to time, the Company may  become subject  to  legal proceedings, claims, and  litigation
arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company is not currently a  party to any  material  legal
proceedings, other than as described  below.

The Company filed a complaint against Sonic Automotive and  Sonic Divisional Operations

(collectively ‘‘Sonic’’) on August 9, 2013 in  the U.S.  District Court  for the Central District  of California.
The litigation concerned Sonic’s commercial  use of the  ‘‘True Price’’ mark. The Company was  seeking
an injunction prohibiting Sonic from  using the  ‘‘True  Price’’ mark,  as well  as monetary damages
incurred by the Company due to Sonic’s  unlawful infringement. On July 29, 2015,  the Company and
Sonic reached an agreement in principle  to  settle the litigation and entered  into  a ‘‘Term Sheet’’
reflecting the material terms of settlement. On  August 4,  2015, the Company  entered into a settlement
agreement with Sonic. Pursuant to the settlement agreement,  Sonic is required to discontinue use of
the ‘‘True Price’’ mark and has transferred  all  of  its  rights to that mark  to the  Company, and the
lawsuit has been dismissed.

On March 9, 2015, the Company was named  as a defendant  in a lawsuit filed in the  U.S. District
Court in the Southern District of New  York (the  ‘‘NY Lanham Act  Litigation’’).  The complaint in the
NY Lanham Act Litigation, purportedly  filed on behalf of numerous automotive dealers who  are not
participating on the TrueCar platform,  alleges  that  the Company has violated the  Lanham Act  as well
as various state laws prohibiting unfair competition and deceptive acts or  practices related to the
Company’s advertising and promotional activities. The  complaint  seeks  injunctive  relief in addition to
over $250 million in damages as a result  of  the alleged  diversion of customers from  the plaintiffs’
dealerships to TrueCar Certified Dealers.  On April  7, 2015, the  Company filed an answer to the
complaint. Thereafter, the plaintiffs amended their complaint, and on  July 13, 2015, the Company filed
a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On January 6, 2016, the Court granted the  Company’s
motion to dismiss with respect to some,  but not all, of  the advertising and  promotional  activities
challenged in the amended complaint. The Company  believes that the portions of the amended
complaint that survived the Company’s motion to dismiss  are without merit, and it  intends to vigorously
defend  itself in this matter. Based on the preliminary nature of the proceedings  in this case, the
outcome of this legal proceeding, including the anticipated  legal defense costs, remains uncertain;
accordingly, the Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome, or reasonably estimate the probability
of or the range of loss, if any, for this action.  As a  result, no  loss accrual has been recorded  in the
Company’s consolidated financial statements related to this matter. If this  matter is not resolved in the
Company’s favor, losses arising from  the results of litigation or settlements, as  well as ongoing defense

F-28

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

7. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)

costs, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s  business, financial condition,  results of
operations and cash flows.

On May 20, 2015, the Company was named as  a defendant in a lawsuit  filed  by  the California  New

Car Dealers Association in the Superior  Court  for  the County  of  Los Angeles  (the  ‘‘CNCDA
Litigation’’). The complaint in the CNCDA Litigation seeks declaratory and injunctive relief based on
allegations that the Company is operating  in the State of  California as an unlicensed automobile dealer
and autobroker. The complaint does  not seek monetary relief. On July 20, 2015, the  Company filed a
‘‘demurrer’’ to the complaint, which is  a pleading that requests the court  to dismiss the case.
Thereafter, the plaintiffs amended their complaint, and on  September 11, 2015, the Company  filed a
demurrer to the amended complaint.  On December 7, 2015, the Court granted the Company’s
demurrer in its entirety, but afforded the  CNCDA the opportunity to file a second amended complaint.
The CNCDA filed a second amended  complaint  on January 4, 2016.  The  second  amended complaint
reiterates the claims in the prior complaints and adds claims under theories based on the federal
Lanham Act and California unfair competition law. On February 3,  2016, the Company  filed a
demurrer to the second amended complaint.  The Company believes that  the second amended
complaint is without merit, and it intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter. Based  on the
preliminary nature of the proceedings in this case, the outcome of this legal proceeding,  including the
anticipated legal defense costs, remains uncertain;  accordingly, the Company cannot predict  the
ultimate outcome or reasonably estimate the  probability of or the range  of  loss, if any, for this  action.
As a result, no loss accrual has been  recorded  in the Company’s  consolidated  financial statements
related to this matter. If this matter is not resolved  in the Company’s  favor, losses arising from  the
results of litigation or settlements, as well as ongoing  defense costs, could have a material adverse
effect on the Company’s business, financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows.

On May 27, 2015, a purported securities class action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court

for the Central District of California (the ‘‘Federal  Securities Litigation’’) by Satyabrata  Mahapatra
naming the Company and two other individuals not affiliated  with the  Company as  defendants. On
June 15, 2015, the  plaintiff filed a Notice  of Errata and  Correction purporting  to  name Scott Painter,
the Company’s then Chief Executive Officer, and Michael Guthrie, the Company’s  Chief  Financial
Officer, as individual defendants in lieu of  the two individual defendants  named in the complaint.  On
October 5, 2015, the plaintiffs amended their complaint. As  amended,  the complaint in the  Federal
Securities Litigation seeks an award  of  unspecified  damages, interest and attorneys’ fees based  on
allegations that the defendants made  false and/or misleading  statements, and failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company’s business,  operations,  prospects and  performance. Specifically,  the
amended complaint alleges that during  the putative class  period,  the  defendants made  false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to  disclose  that: (i) the Company’s  business  practices  violated unfair
competition and deceptive trade practice laws (i.e., the issues  raised  in the  NY Lanham Act Litigation);
(ii) the Company acts as a dealer and broker in  car sales transactions  without proper  licensing, in
violation of various states’ laws that govern car  sales (i.e., the issues  raised in the  CNCDA Litigation);
and (iii) as a result of the above, the Company’s registration  statements, prospectuses,  quarterly and
annual reports, financial statements, SEC filings, press releases, and other  statements and  documents
were materially false and misleading  at times relevant  to  the amended  complaint  and putative  class
period. The amended complaint asserts a putative class  period stemming from  May 16, 2014 to July 23,
2015. On October 19, 2015, the Company filed a  motion to dismiss  the amended complaint. On
December 9, 2015, the Court granted the  Company’s motion to dismiss  and dismissed the case in its

F-29

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

7. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)

entirety. On January 8, 2016, the plaintiff filed  a notice of appeal. The  Company believes  that  the
amended complaint is without merit and it intends to vigorously  defend  itself in  this matter. Based on
the current status of the proceedings  in this  case, the outcome of  this legal proceeding,  including the
anticipated legal defense costs, remains uncertain;  accordingly, the Company cannot predict  the
ultimate outcome or reasonably estimate the  probability of or the range  of  loss, if any, for this  action.
As a result, no loss accrual has been  recorded  in the Company’s  consolidated  financial statements
related to this matter. If this matter is not resolved  in the Company’s  favor, losses arising from  the
results of litigation or settlements, as well as ongoing  defense costs, could have a material adverse
effect on the Company’s business, financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows.

On July 30, 2015, the Company was named as  a defendant in a lawsuit  filed in the Superior Court

for the County of Los Angeles by numerous  automotive dealers  who are  participating on the TrueCar
platform (the ‘‘Participating Dealer Litigation’’). On September  9, 2015, the  plaintiffs amended  their
complaint. Both as originally filed and as subsequently amended,  the complaint in the  Participating
Dealer  Litigation sought declaratory  and injunctive relief  based on allegations that the Company is
engaging in unfairly competitive practices  and  is operating  as an unlicensed automobile dealer and
autobroker in contravention of various state  laws. Neither the  original nor amended complaint sought
an award of money damages. On September 29, 2015, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this  lawsuit
‘‘without prejudice,’’ which means that the  Participating Dealer Litigation is currently resolved, but that
it could be re-filed at a later date. Because this case  is currently  resolved, no  loss accrual has been
recorded  in the Company’s consolidated financial statements related to this matter. If the Participating
Dealer  Litigation is re-filed at a later date or  if  additional  similar litigation is filed against the
Company, and if such litigation is not  resolved in  the Company’s favor, losses arising from the  results
of litigation or settlements, as well as  related  defense  costs or  adverse changes in our dealer network,
could have a material adverse effect  on  the Company’s business, financial condition, results  of
operations and cash flows.

On August 11, 2015, the Company, certain  of its  executives  and directors, and the underwriters of

the Company’s initial public offering  and  secondary  offering  were named  as defendants  in a putative
class action lawsuit filed in California Superior Court  under the  federal  securities laws. The complaint
filed by Ning Shen and William Fitzpatrick,  alleged that the  Company’s registration statements in
connection with the offerings contained  false or misleading statements  of material facts,  and failed to
disclose material adverse facts about  the Company’s business,  operations,  prospects, and performance.
The complaint sought an award of unspecified damages, interest, and attorneys’  fees.  On September  2,
2015, following the Company’s removal of the action from California state court to the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed  this  lawsuit  ‘‘without
prejudice,’’ which means that the California State Court  Securities Litigation is currently resolved,  but
that it could be re-filed at a later date. Because  this case is currently resolved, no loss  accrual  has been
recorded  in the Company’s consolidated financial statements related to this matter. If the California
State Court Securities Litigation is re-filed at  a later date, or  if additional similar litigation,  such as the
Federal Securities Litigation, is filed  against  the Company, and if such  litigation is not resolved  in the
Company’s favor, losses arising from  the results of litigation or settlements, as  well as ongoing defense
costs, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s  business, financial condition,  results of
operations and cash flows.

On December 23, 2015, the Company was named as  a defendant in a putative  class action  lawsuit
filed by Gordon Rose in the California  Superior  Court  for the  County of Los Angeles (the ‘‘California

F-30

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

7. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)

Consumer Class Action’’). The complaint asserts claims for unjust enrichment,  violation of the
California Consumer Legal Remedies  Act, and violation of the  California  Business and Professions
Code, based principally on factual allegations similar  to  those  asserted in  the NY Lanham Act
Litigation and the CNCDA Litigation.  The complaint  seeks an award of unspecified damages, interest,
disgorgement, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees. The  plaintiff  seeks  to  represent a class of California
consumers defined as ‘‘[a]ll California consumers  who purchased an automobile  by  using TrueCar, Inc.’s
price certificate during the applicable statute  of limitations.’’ On January 12, 2016, the  Court entered
an order staying all proceedings in the  case pending  an initial status conference, which is presently
scheduled for April 13, 2016. The Company  believes that the complaint  is without merit, and it  intends
to vigorously defend itself in this matter.  Based  on the  preliminary nature  of  the proceedings  in this
case, the outcome of this legal proceeding,  including the  anticipated  legal defense costs,  remains
uncertain; accordingly, the Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome or reasonably estimate the
probability of or the range of loss, if any, for this action. As  a result,  no loss accrual has been recorded
in the Company’s consolidated financial statements related  to  this  matter. If this matter is not resolved
in the Company’s favor, losses arising  from the results  of litigation or settlements, as well as ongoing
defense costs, could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s  business,  financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows.

Employment Contracts

The Company has entered into employment contracts with certain executives of  the Company.

Employment under these contracts is  at-will  employment. However, under the provisions of the
contracts, the Company would incur  severance obligations  of  up to twelve months  of  the executive’s
annual base salary for certain events, such  as involuntary terminations. In addition, upon the
consummation of the IPO, certain executives earned  liquidity bonuses totaling $2.6 million, which  were
recorded  in sales and marketing and general  and administrative expenses  in the Company’s
consolidated statements of comprehensive  loss during the  year ended December 31, 2014.

In December 2015, pursuant to an executed separation  agreement with  the Company’s former

CEO, the Company will pay its former  CEO: (i) a 2015  bonus of $0.1  million; (ii) severance of
approximately $0.5 million to be paid in approximately equal semi-monthly payments  through
December 31, 2016; and (iii) an annual fee of $0.1 million for limited advisory services to the Company
during the period from his termination  date to May 2018. Additionally,  the Company will continue to
provide its former CEO health insurance benefits through the end  of  May 2018. For  the year  ended
December 31, 2015, the Company recorded as severance costs of $0.9 million in general and
administrative expenses in the Company’s consolidated statements of comprehensive loss for  these
obligations to the former CEO. At December 31, 2015,  the remaining severance liability related to the
former CEO was $0.9 million.

For the year ended December 31, 2015,  in addition to its  former CEO, the  Company incurred

severance costs totaling $2.5 million for  several  executive-level employees who terminated their
employment during the period. Of the  total, the Company recorded  $0.4 million in  sales and marketing,
$0.4 million in technology and development and $1.7 million in general and administrative expenses in
the Company’s consolidated statements of  comprehensive loss during the year ended  December 31,
2015. At December 31, 2015, the remaining severance liability related to these former executive-level
employees was $1.9 million.

F-31

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

7. Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)

Indemnifications

In the ordinary course of business, the Company may  provide indemnifications of varying scope
and terms to customers, vendors, lessors,  investors, directors, officers,  employees, and other parties with
respect to certain matters, including, but not limited to, losses  arising out of the Company’s breach of
such agreements, services to be provided by the  Company, or from intellectual property  infringement
claims made by third-parties. These indemnifications may survive  termination  of  the underlying
agreement and the maximum potential amount  of future payments the  Company could be required to
make under these  indemnification provisions may not be subject  to  maximum loss provisions.  The
maximum potential amount of future  payments  the Company could be required to make under  these
indemnification provisions is indeterminable. To date,  there has  not  been a material claim paid  by  the
Company, nor has the Company been sued in connection with these indemnification arrangements. At
December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company has not accrued a liability for these  guarantees,  because
the likelihood of incurring a payment  obligation, if any, in connection with  these guarantees is not
probable or reasonably estimable.

Software Subscription License Agreement

In August 2014, the Company entered into an agreement  to  purchase  a  perpetual  software

subscription license totaling $4.9 million, which was fully  paid in the  third quarter of  2014. In addition
to the software license agreement, the  Company purchased a support services package for a three year
term totaling $2.4 million payable quarterly. The  remaining  future commitments for the support
services package at December 31, 2015 are included in  the purchase obligations table below.

Purchase Obligations

At December 31, 2015, the Company had the following purchase obligations (in thousands):

Total

Less Than
1 Year

1 - 3 Years

3 - 5 Years

More Than
5 Years

Purchase obligations . . . . . . . .

$5,543

$3,655

$1,886

$2

$—

Purchase obligations include long-term  agreements to purchase data information, software related

licenses and support services, and other obligations that are enforceable and legally binding as of
December 31, 2015. Purchase obligations exclude agreements  that are cancelable without penalty.

8. Stockholders’ Equity

Reverse Stock Split

The Company’s board of directors and stockholders approved a 2-for-3 reverse split of its common

stock and its Series A convertible preferred stock,  or preferred stock,  which was effected on May  2,
2014. All share data and per share data, and related  information  presented  in the consolidated financial
statements and accompanying notes have been  retroactively adjusted, where applicable, to reflect the
reverse  stock split of its common stock and preferred  stock.

F-32

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

8. Stockholders’ Equity (Continued)

Initial Public Offering

In May 2014, the Company completed its initial public offering (‘‘IPO’’) in  which the Company
sold an aggregate of 8,941,250 shares of  its common  stock,  including 1,166,250 shares sold  pursuant to
the exercise by the underwriters of their option to purchase such shares, at a public offering  price of
$9.00 per share. The Company received  net proceeds of $69.2 million, after  deducting underwriting
discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable  by the Company, from  sales of  its shares in
the IPO. Immediately prior to the completion of the  IPO, all shares of the then-outstanding  Series A
convertible preferred stock automatically  converted into  2,857,143 shares of common stock.

Follow-on Public Offering

In November 2014, the Company completed  a follow-on public  offering in which  the Company

sold 1,960,390 shares of common stock and selling stockholders sold 5,402,601 shares  at a  price of
$17.00 per share. The Company received net proceeds of $30.8 million, after  deducting underwriting
discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable  by the Company, from  sales of  its shares. The
Company did not receive any proceeds  from  the sale  of  shares  by selling stockholders.

Series A Preferred Stock

At December 31, 2012, the Company was authorized to issue  147.0 million shares  of  common
stock. In November 2013, the Company  increased the number of  authorized shares of common stock to
150.0 million shares. Additionally, the  Company authorized the issuance of 4.5  million  shares of
preferred stock, designated as Series  A  Preferred Stock (‘‘Series A’’).

In November 2013, the Company sold an  aggregate of 2,857,143 shares of Series A and warrants to

purchase 666,666 shares of common  stock at an exercise price  of  $15.00 per share  to  Vulcan Capital
Growth Equity LLC (‘‘Vulcan’’), in a private placement at  a price of $10.50 per share,  for an  aggregate
purchase price of $30.0 million.

In May 2014, immediately prior to the completion  of the Company’s  IPO, all of the  outstanding
shares of Series A preferred stock automatically converted into 2,857,143 shares of common stock  on a
one-to-one  basis.

Stock Repurchases

During the year ended December 31, 2013,  the Company repurchased  a total of 112,422 shares of
common stock at a price of $8.90 per  share  for  an aggregate amount of $1.0 million  in cash. All shares
were repurchased from the Company’s former CEO in December  2013 in  connection with  his executed
employment agreement. Pursuant to  the employment agreement, the  Company’s former  CEO was
provided the right to sell $1.0 million  shares  of common stock that were owned  for at least six  months
to the Company during December 2013  at the  fair value per share  at  the  time of  sale upon certain
performance conditions being met. The  repurchased shares  were retired and have been recorded as a
reduction of common stock and additional paid-in capital.

Warrants Issued to USAA

On March 12, 2009, June 25, 2010, January 1,  2012, and May  1, 2014, the  Company entered  into
agreements with USAA, an affinity partner  and significant stockholder of the Company,  which provided

F-33

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

8. Stockholders’ Equity (Continued)

for the issuance of warrants to purchase shares  of  the Company’s common  stock  upon achievement of
minimum performance milestones based  on the  level of vehicle  sales. The  warrants were issued to
USAA in exchange for marketing services  performed by USAA under the  Company’s affinity group
marketing program. The purpose of  the marketing services  performed by  USAA is to create  awareness
of, acquire traffic for, and drive users to, the Company’s auto buying  platforms.  For that reason
expense recognized related to warrants issued to USAA is recorded as  sales  and marketing expense in
the Company’s consolidated statements of  comprehensive loss.

On November 24, 2009, the minimum performance milestones  related to the March  12, 2009
agreement were reached and a fully vested warrant was issued by the Company which allows  for the
purchase of up to 961,482 shares of common stock at $0.83 per share.  These warrants were  outstanding
at December 31, 2013.

On June 25, 2010, an additional warrant to purchase up to  1,653,333 shares of the Company’s
common stock at $2.12 per share was issued to USAA. The warrant became  exercisable  based on  the
achievement of performance milestones  based on the level of vehicle sales. During 2011, the
performance milestones were fully achieved and the affinity partner received  a warrant to purchase the
full 1,653,333 shares of common stock.  The  warrant  was  fully vested at December 31, 2011.  These
warrants were outstanding at December  31, 2013.

On January 1, 2012, the Company issued another warrant to USAA  which allowed USAA to
purchase up to 1,042,666 shares of the  Company’s common stock at $7.95  per  share if minimum
performance milestones were reached.  The  warrant  expired at the  earlier of (i) eight (8)  years  from
issuance, (ii) ninety (90) days after the expiration  of  the affinity-agreement with  USAA, or
(iii) immediately prior to the close of  an  initial public offering of the Company’s common stock.

In May 2014, the Company and USAA agreed to an extension of the  affinity group marketing
agreement. As part of the agreement, on May 1, 2014, the  Company issued to USAA a warrant  to
purchase 1,458,979 shares of the Company’s  common stock, which  will be exercisable in two  tranches.
The first tranche of 392,313 shares has an exercise price  of  $7.95 per share and  the second tranche of
1,066,666 shares has an exercise price of $15.00 per share. The warrant becomes exercisable based on
the achievement of performance milestones based on the level  of vehicle sales of USAA members
through the Company’s auto buying platforms. The warrant terminates on the earlier  of  (i) the  eighth
anniversary of the date of issuance, (ii) the first anniversary of the termination of the USAA car-buying
program, or (iii) the date on which the  Company  no longer  operates the USAA car-buying  program. In
addition, the agreement provides for the  Company to spend  marketing program  funds with the  actual
level  of  marketing spend to be mutually agreed upon by USAA  and the Company, subject to limits
based on the number of actual vehicle sales generated  through the affinity group marketing program
(Note 13).

For the years ended December 31, 2015,  2014 and 2013, the  Company recognized expense of
$0.2 million, $5.7 million and $1.1 million related  to  warrants to purchase  71,330 shares,  631,449 shares,

F-34

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

8. Stockholders’ Equity (Continued)

and 415,349 shares of common stock  that have  been earned and are vested,  respectively. The fair value
of the warrants was based on the following  assumptions using the  Black-Scholes option-pricing model:

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

Risk-free interest rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contractual life (years) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expected volatility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividend yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6.3 to 7.2

1.51% to 2.03% 0.02% to 2.33% 0.29% to 0.52%
0.3 to 8.0
47.8% to 54.2% 48.5% to 57.5% 47.4% to 52.8%
—

2.0 to 2.9

—

—

Warrants to purchase 3,265,168 shares  of the Company’s  common stock earned from  agreements

entered into prior  to May 2014 were  exercised in  connection with  the Company’s  IPO in  May 2014  for
an aggregate purchase price of $9.5 million.

At December 31, 2015, there were 498,976 warrants that were earned and outstanding with an
additional 960,003 remaining warrants that  is available for issuance upon  achievement of minimum
performance milestones.

Warrants Issued to Third Party Marketing  Firm

On February 25, 2011, the Company entered into a media and marketing services agreement with

a direct marketing firm. Under the arrangement, the  marketing  firm will  provide media  purchasing,
production, advertising, and marketing  services in  connection with the advertising and  marketing  of the
Company’s services. In addition to cash consideration, the Company agreed to issue a warrant  to  the
marketing firm to purchase up to 1,433,333  shares of the  Company’s common stock  at a price of $6.02
per  share. The warrant expires eight  years from the  issuance  date and as of  December 31, 2014, all
warrants have been earned and issued to the marketing firm. In March 2015, the warrant  to  purchase
1,433,333 shares of the Company’s common stock was exercised  through a net  settlement election. The
Company issued 959,676 shares of its  common stock  to  the third  party marketing firm.

In 2014, the Company recorded the fair  value  of  the warrants based on the following assumptions
using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model: expected life  of 4.8 to 5.1 years, risk free  rate of  1.51%
to 1.70%, and volatility of 46.6% to 48.1%.  In  2013, the Company recorded the fair  value of  the
warrants based on  the following assumptions  using  the Black-Scholes option-pricing model:  contractual
life of 5.2 to 6.5 years, risk free rate  of 0.63%  to  1.81%, and volatility of 51.5% to 59.5%.

For the years ended December 31, 2014  and  2013, the Company recognized expense of

$2.3 million related to 343,665 warrants  earned and $2.5 million related  to 604,266 warrants earned,
respectively. The expense has been reflected as  sales and marketing expense on the  accompanying
consolidated statements of comprehensive  loss.

Warrants Issued to Financial Institution

On June 13, 2012, in connection with the  execution of the amended credit  facility  (Note 6), the
Company entered into a warrant agreement with a  financial  institution to purchase 26,666 shares of  the
Company’s common stock, at an exercise  price of $11.51 per share if the Company draws on the credit
facility at any time after the issuance date. If  at any time,  the advances to the Company in aggregate
principal amount are greater than $4.0 million, the number of  shares increases  to  66,666. The warrants

F-35

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

8. Stockholders’ Equity (Continued)

are immediately vested upon drawing on the line and expire on the earlier  of June  13, 2022, or  an
acquisition of the Company consisting solely  of cash  and  or marketable securities. The warrant is
automatically net exercised on the expiration date,  if  the fair  market  value per share  of the Company’s
common stock at expiration date is greater  than the  warrant  exercise  price. On June 13,  2013, the
Company entered into a second amendment and  restated loan and security agreement which  reduced
the exercise price of the warrants to $7.92. On  August 29,  2013, the Company  drew down $5.0  million
on the credit facility, triggering the issuance of warrants to purchase 66,666  shares of TrueCar’s
common stock at an exercise of $7.92 per share. In 2013,  the Company  recorded  the relative  fair value
of the warrants based on the following assumptions using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model: life
of 10  years, risk free rate of 2.78% and volatility of 64.8%. For the year  ended  December 31, 2013, the
Company recorded the fair value of the warrants to additional paid-in capital, offset by a debt discount,
reducing the carrying value of the line  of  credit.  The  debt discount is amortized over the  life of the
loan as  interest expense using the effective  interest  method.

In June 2014, warrants to purchase 66,666 shares of the Company’s  common  stock were  exercised

through a net settlement election. The  Company issued 27,526 shares of its common stock  to  the
financial institution.

Warrants Issued to Vulcan

In November 2013, in the Vulcan private  placement, the  Company issued to Vulcan  a warrant to
purchase 666,666 shares of its common stock at  an exercise price  of $15.00 per share.  The  Company
allocated the $30.0 million aggregate  proceeds from the issuance of Series A  and the  warrant based on
their relative fair values. Approximately  $0.7 million and  $29.2 million were  allocated  to  the warrant
and Series A, respectively, net of issuance  costs. The warrant is classified in equity  and the  relative fair
value of the warrant was recorded as additional paid-in capital at December  31, 2013. The  fair value of
the warrant was based on the following  assumptions using the Black-Scholes  option-pricing  model:
expected life of 2 years, risk free rate of 0.31%, and  volatility of 49.4%. The warrant expired
unexercised in November 2015.

Warrants Issued to Service Provider

In May 2014, the Company entered into a consulting agreement  with an  individual to provide

marketing services to the Company. The  Company agreed  to  issue a warrant to the individual  to
purchase up to 333,333 shares of the Company’s common stock at a price  of $12.81 per share.  All
shares under the warrant agreement  become exercisable in accordance  with the vesting schedule over a
four  year period. The warrant expires five years from  the issuance date  or, if  earlier, twelve months
following the termination of the consulting agreement. In  December 2015, the Company  terminated the
consulting agreement and the unvested warrants to purchase an aggregate of 187,500  shares of common
stock were canceled. Upon termination, 145,833 of  the warrants had  vested and were outstanding at
December 31, 2015.

For the year ended December 31, 2015,  the Company recorded the fair value of the  warrant based

on the following assumptions using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model: contractual life  of 1.0 to
4.0 years, risk free rate of 0.52% to 1.28%, and volatility of 44.1%  to  48.9%. For the year ended
December 31, 2014, the Company recorded the fair value  of the warrant based  on the following

F-36

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

8. Stockholders’ Equity (Continued)

assumptions: contractual life of 4.4 to 5.0 years, risk free  rate  of 1.48% to 1.55%, and volatility of
54.8% to 56.8%.

For the year ended December 31, 2015,  the Company recorded a reduction  in warrant expense of

$1.0 million due to the remeasurement  to  fair value of the  unvested shares  through the vesting date,
which  was primarily related to the reduction in the Company’s stock price. The  reduction in  expense
has been reflected as a reduction to  sales and marketing  expense on the accompanying consolidated
statements of comprehensive loss. For the year ended December 31,  2015, warrants earned under this
agreement totaled 112,500 shares. For  the  year  ended December 31, 2014, the  Company recognized
expense of $1.7 million related to warrants to purchase 33,333  shares of common  stock that have been
earned and are vested.

Other Equity Awards

In December 2012, pursuant to an amendment to the Company’s former CEO’s employment
agreement, the former CEO was provided  with the right to sell $1.0  million  of common stock to the
Company during December 2012 and  December 2013, respectively, at the then fair  value of the
Company’s common stock. In the event  of the  repurchases  of common stock by the  Company, the
former CEO was also entitled to receive  options  to  purchase  the equivalent number of shares of
common stock at the then fair value  of common stock. The former CEO exercised his right to have  the
Company repurchase 130,080 and 112,422  shares of  common  stock in December 2012 and 2013,
respectively, and the Company subsequently issued the  former CEO options to purchase the equivalent
number of shares of common stock at  the fair value of common  stock  on the  respective grant dates.
The options associated with the December 2013 repurchase were contingently  issuable based upon the
achievement of certain performance conditions related to specified  cash balances or  adjusted earnings
before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization during the allotted time period and
continued service of the CEO. As the  performance conditions were  probable and the performance
conditions were achieved during the  year  ended December  31, 2013, the Company recognized
$0.2 million of compensation expense  related to these awards. For the years ended December 31, 2015
and 2014, the Company recognized $0.1  million and $0.5 million of compensation  expense related to
these awards, respectively.

Reserve for Unissued Shares of Common Stock

The Company is required to reserve and keep available  out  of  its  authorized but unissued  shares

of common stock such number of shares sufficient for the exercise of  all outstanding warrants,  plus
shares granted and available for grant  under the Company’s stock option plan.

F-37

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

8. Stockholders’ Equity (Continued)

The amount of such shares of the Company’s common stock reserved for  these purposes at

December 31, 2015 is as follows:

Outstanding stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Outstanding restricted stock units
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Outstanding common stock warrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Additional shares available for grant under equity  plan . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of
Shares

24,277,901
3,747,340
1,631,478
3,095,368

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32,752,087

Shares Issued for Legal Settlement

In November 2013, the Company entered  into  a fully executed settlement agreement with  one  of

its  marketing sponsorship partners. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, the Company  paid
$0.3 million in cash and issued 36,666 shares of common stock to the  marketing  sponsorship partner in
November 2013 and recorded a total expense  of  $0.6 million.

9. Stock-based Awards

The Company has four equity incentive plans: the  Amended and Restated 2005 Stock  Plan  (the
‘‘2005 Plan’’), the 2008 Stock Plan (the  ‘‘2008 Plan’’), the 2014 Equity Incentive Plan (the ‘‘2014 Plan’’),
and the 2015 Inducement Equity Incentive Plan (the ‘‘Inducement Plan’’). Under the 2005  Plan,
604,093 shares of common stock were reserved for the  issuance  of incentive or  nonqualified stock
options and stock purchase rights as of December 31, 2013. Under the 2008  Plan,  there were  no shares
available for future issuance as of December  31, 2013. In connection  with the  Company’s IPO in May
2014, the 2005 Plan and the 2008 Plan were terminated. Upon the  Company’s IPO in May 2014, the
shares reserved for issuance under the 2014  Plan  include (i) shares that  have  been reserved but not
issued pursuant to any awards granted  under the 2005 Plan, plus (ii)  shares subject  to  stock options or
similar awards granted under the 2005 Plan or the 2008 Plan that,  after the  registration  date, expire or
terminate without  having been exercised in full and shares  issued pursuant to awards granted under the
2005 Plan or the 2008 Plan are forfeited  to  or repurchased by the  Company. In addition, the shares
available for issuance under the 2014  Plan  include an annual increase on January 1 of each year equal
to the least of: (i) 10,000,000 shares; (ii)  5% of the total outstanding shares of TrueCar common stock
as of  the last day of the previous fiscal  year; or, (iii) such  other amount as determined  by  the
Company’s Board of Directors. As of December 31,  2015, the total  number of shares available  under
the 2014 Plan is 3,095,368 shares. Under  the Inducement Plan, there  were 1,840,000  shares of common
stock reserved for the issuance of nonqualified stock options. In December  2015, in conjunction with
the hiring of the Company’s new president and CEO, the Company granted a stock  option to purchase
1,840,000 shares of the Company’s common stock under  the Inducement Plan that vest  over a four year
period and expire ten years from the  date of  grant. There are no shares available for future issuance as
of December 31, 2015 under the Inducement Plan.

Under the 2014 Plan, the Company has the ability  to  issue incentive  stock options, nonstatutory

stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock  units, stock  appreciation  rights, performance units, and
performance shares. Stock options granted  under the  2014 Plan must at least  equal to the fair  market

F-38

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

9. Stock-based Awards (Continued)

value of the Company’s common stock on  the date of grant. Stock  options granted  generally vest
monthly over a four year period and  expire ten years from the  date of  grant.  Restricted stock  units
generally vest quarterly over a four to  five year period.

Stock Options

A summary of the Company’s stock option activity  for the  year ended December  31, 2015 is as

follows:

Number of
Options

Weighted-Average
Exercise
Price

Outstanding at December 31, 2014 . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Canceled/forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25,589,876
4,983,099
(1,724,604)
(4,570,470)

Outstanding at December 31, 2015 . . . . . . .

24,277,901

Vested and expected to vest at

December 31, 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23,741,347

Exercisable at December 31, 2015 . . . . . . . .

16,674,660

$ 9.79
9.98
3.67
21.19

$ 8.12

$ 8.08

$ 7.01

Weighted-Average
Remaining
Contractual
Life

(in years)
7.55

Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value(1)

(in millions)

5.62

5.54

4.22

$63.2

$62.4

$55.5

(1) The aggregate intrinsic value represents the excess of  the  closing  price of the Company’s common
stock of $9.54 on December 31, 2015  over the exercise price  of  in-the-money stock  option awards.

At December 31, 2015, total remaining stock-based compensation expense for  unvested option

awards, including performance-based stock option awards, was $32.8 million, which is expected to be
recognized over a weighted-average period  of  2.84 years.

The weighted-average grant-date fair value per share of options granted for the years ended
December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $4.76, $6.32  and $4.79, respectively. The  Company recorded
stock-based compensation expense for stock option awards of  $34.0 million,  $27.2 million and
$8.9 million, for the years ended December 31,  2015, 2014 and 2013,  respectively.

The total intrinsic value of options exercised  in 2015, 2014  and 2013  was $19.2 million,

$57.1 million, and $0.6 million, respectively.

There were no excess tax benefits realized for  the tax  deductions from  stock  options  exercised

during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013.

From time to time, the Company grants stock options  that contain performance conditions. During

2012, the Company granted certain executives stock options to purchase 166,665  shares of common
stock at a weighted average exercise  price  of $11.51 per share. These awards contain performance
conditions based on achieving certain  revenue and earnings targets.  During  2013, the Company  granted
stock options to purchase 1,765,875 shares  of common stock at  a weighted average  exercise  price was
$8.85. Of the awards granted in 2013,  82,327 stock options  granted vest upon achieving certain  revenue
and earnings targets and 1,683,548 shares which  include a two-step performance and  service  vesting

F-39

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

9. Stock-based Awards (Continued)

condition. The first step was based on  achieving certain revenue and earnings targets,  which were met
at December 31, 2013. Stock options  awarded vest over  the 48 month  requisite service period  beginning
on January 1, 2014. During 2014, the  Company  granted 2,776,114 stock  options at a weighted average
exercise price of $12.81, which include  a two step performance and service vesting condition. The first
step is based upon achieving certain  revenue and earnings targets.  Stock options eligible for time-based
vesting are calculated based on the Company’s performance against  these  metrics  and vest over
48 months beginning February 1, 2015.  Based on the achievement levels  of  the performance  criteria, as
of December 31, 2014, there were 2,241,796 outstanding  stock  options with a weighted average  exercise
price of $12.81 that were eligible for  vesting over the requisite service period. Stock options granted  in
excess of the achievement level totaling  288,406 shares were forfeited and  returned  to  the 2014 Plan in
the first quarter of 2015.

The grant date fair values of these awards  for the  years  ended December  31, 2014 and 2013  were
$20.1 million and $8.8 million, respectively,  as determined using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
The Company recognizes compensation cost for stock options with  performance conditions  using  a
graded vesting model, based on the probability of the performance condition being met, net of
estimated pre-vesting forfeitures.

Restricted Stock Awards

In prior years, the Company had issued restricted stock awards.  As of December 31, 2014,  all
outstanding awards were fully vested.  The total fair  value of shares of restricted stock awards vested for
the years ended December 31, 2014  and  2013 was $0.8 million and $0.7 million, respectively.

For the years ended December 31, 2014  and  2013, the Company recorded $0.2 million and

$0.4 million, respectively, in compensation expense in connection  with the vesting of shares of restricted
stock awards.

Restricted Stock Units

Activity in connection with restricted  stock  units (‘‘RSUs’’)  is as follows for the year ended

December 31, 2015:

Non-vested—December 31, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Canceled/forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number of
Shares

827,997
3,980,079
(607,330)
(453,406)

Non-vested—December 31, 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3,747,340

Weighted-
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value

$12.36
8.17
12.45
9.99

$ 8.18

The total fair value of vested restricted  stock units for the years ended  December 31, 2015 and

2014 was $6.5 million and $0.3 million, respectively.

F-40

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

9. Stock-based Awards (Continued)

The weighted-average grant-date fair value of RSUs granted for the years ended December 31,
2015 and 2014 was $8.17 and $12.35, respectively.  For the years ended  December 31, 2015 and 2014,
the Company recorded $8.6 million and  $2.0 million  in compensation expense,  respectively. At
December 31, 2015, total remaining stock-based compensation expense for  non-vested RSUs is
$23.9 million, which is expected to be  recognized over  a weighted-average period  of 3.54 years.

During 2014, the Company granted 720,146 RSUs with a weighted average  grant date fair value of

$10.04, which include a two-step performance and service  vesting  condition.  The first step  is based
upon achieving certain revenue and earnings  targets. RSUs  eligible for time-based vesting are
calculated based on the Company’s performance against these metrics and vest over 16  quarters
beginning January 1, 2015. Based on the achievement  levels of the performance  criteria, as  of
December 31, 2014, there were 583,537 non-vested RSUs  with a  weighted average  grant date  fair value
of $10.07 that were eligible to vest over  the requisite service period. RSUs  granted in excess of  the
achievement level totaling 73,939 shares  were forfeited and returned to the  2014 Plan in the first
quarter of 2015.

Modifications

In November 2015, the Compensation Committee  of the Board of Directors  authorized the
modification of equity awards in connection with the separation of the Company’s former CEO. In
accordance with the terms of the separation agreement, the Company will pay  $0.1 million for  the
surrender and cancellation of options the former  CEO  holds  to  purchase  1,333,332 shares  of  the
Company’s common stock with a weighted-average exercise price  of $45.00. Additionally, under a
limited advisory services arrangement,  the former CEO will also continue to vest  in his  remaining
options, covering 1,401,553 shares, and  154,088 remaining restricted stock units until  May 2018.
Although these awards continue to vest, no substantive  additional service is  required by the  former
CEO. As a result of this modification, the Company recognized $7.7 million in additional stock-based
compensation expense for the year ended  December  31, 2015.

In the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company accelerated the vesting of  stock options to purchase

337,111 shares of common stock and  48,113 RSUs to four former executives. Additionally, the
Company extended the exercise period of all  vested  stock options  to  these former  executives.  As a
result of these modifications, the Company recognized additional stock compensation expense of
$3.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015.

In December 2015, the Company’s former President  and  current member of its Board  of Directors
agreed to surrender and forfeit unvested options to purchase 309,722 shares of the Company’s common
stock with a weighted-average exercise  price of $13.17. The  Company’s former  President will continue
to vest in his remaining unvested options covering  252,431 shares and 57,679 remaining  RSUs,  subject
to his continued service as a member  of the Company’s Board of  Directors. As a result  of this
forfeiture, the Company recognized additional stock compensation expense  of $2.1 million for the year
ended December 31, 2015.

Valuation Assumptions and Stock-based Compensation  Cost

The fair value of stock options granted  to  employees is  estimated on the grant  date using the
Black-Scholes option-pricing model. This  valuation model requires  the Company to make assumptions
and judgments about the variables used in  the calculation, including  the expected  term, the volatility of

F-41

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

9. Stock-based Awards (Continued)

the Company’s common stock, risk-free interest  rate, and expected  dividends. The Company uses the
simplified method under the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107, Share-Based Payment,  to
calculate expected term for plain vanilla  share options. For performance-based  option awards and out
of the money option grants, the Company determines the expected term based upon  historical exercise
and post-vesting cancellations, adjusted for  expected future exercise behavior.  The  Company’s
computation of volatility is based on  an average of the historical volatilities  of  the common stock of
several entities with characteristics similar to those of the Company.  The risk-free  interest  rate is based
on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at  the time of grant for periods corresponding with the
expected life of the option. The Company  uses an expected dividend  of zero, as it  does not anticipate
paying  any dividends in the foreseeable future.

The fair value of each stock option award  was estimated at  the date of grant using a Black-Scholes

option-pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions:

Year Ended
December 31,

2015

2014

2013

Risk-free interest rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expected term (years) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expected volatility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividend yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . —

1.66% 1.93% 1.41%
6.24
6.03

6.06

49% 58% 61%
—

—

As stock-based compensation expense  recognized  is based  on award ultimately expected to vest,
the amount has been reduced for estimated  forfeitures. Forfeitures are estimated  at the time of grant
and revised, if necessary, in subsequent  periods if  actual forfeitures differ  from those estimates.
Forfeitures were estimated based on the Company’s  historical experience  and future expectations.

The Company recorded stock-based compensation cost relating  to  stock options,  restricted stock

awards, and RSUs in the following categories on the accompanying consolidated statements of
comprehensive loss (in thousands):

Cost of revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sales and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Technology and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General and administrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total stock-based compensation expense . . . . . . . . . .
Amount capitalized to internal-use software . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

$

792
4,493
4,294
32,984

42,563
1,325

$

454
4,743
5,013
19,123

29,333
1,249

$ 141
2,561
1,762
4,882

9,346
540

Total stock-based compensation cost . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$43,888

$30,582

$9,886

F-42

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

10. Income Taxes

The components of the Company’s income tax provision are as follows  (in thousands):

Year Ended
December 31,

2015

2014

2013

Current:

Federal
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ — $ — $ —
7

63

25

Total current provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25

63

7

Deferred:
Federal
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total deferred provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

547
34

581

540
37

577

504
68

572

Total income tax provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$606

$640

$579

As described below, the Company has  established a valuation allowance against its net deferred  tax

assets as the Company has determined that it is more likely than not that the deferred tax  assets will
not be realized. The Company’s 2015,  2014, and  2013 income tax provisions  of $0.6 million primarily
reflect the amortization of tax deductible goodwill that is not an available source of income to realize
deferred tax assets.

The overall effective income tax rate  differs from the statutory federal rate  of 34% as  follows:

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

Income tax benefit based on the federal statutory rate . . . . .
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nondeductible expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

34.0% 34.0% 34.0%
2.0
2.4
(0.7)
(0.3)
(34.7)
(30.7)
(2.0)
(6.4)
0.1
0.1

(0.9)
(1.5)
(26.3)
(8.3)
0.6

Overall effective income tax rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(0.9)% (1.3)% (2.4)%

F-43

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

10. Income Taxes (Continued)

The components of deferred tax assets (liabilities) are as  follows  (in  thousands):

December 31,

2015

2014

Deferred income tax assets:

Net operating loss carryforwards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Research and development tax credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 70,358
25,057
4,160
610
298

$ 56,957
18,648
1,932
610
277

Gross deferred tax assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

100,483
(84,167)

78,424
(64,449)

Net deferred tax assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16,316

13,975

Deferred tax liabilities:

State taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property, equipment and software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intangible assets and goodwill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(4,589)
(6,974)
(7,166)

(3,802)
(3,985)
(8,020)

Gross deferred tax liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(18,729)

(15,807)

Total net deferred tax liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ (2,413) $ (1,832)

The net deferred tax liability at December 31, 2015 and 2014 relates to amortization of tax

deductible goodwill that is not an available source of income to realize deferred tax assets. Accordingly,
the net deferred tax liability does not reduce the need for a valuation allowance related  to  the
Company’s net deferred tax assets.

At December 31, 2015, the Company had federal  and  state net operating loss carryforwards of
$221.2 million and $156.5 million, respectively.  The  Company’s federal and state  net operating loss
carryforwards begin to expire in the years ending December 31, 2025  and  2016, respectively. At
December 31, 2015, the Company had  federal and state research and  development tax credit
carryforwards of approximately $0.8 million  and  $0.4 million,  respectively. The federal tax credit
carryforwards begin to expire in the year ending December 31, 2028.  The state  tax credit carryforward
can be carried forward indefinitely.

The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, imposes substantial restrictions on the  utilization
of net operating losses and other tax  attributes in  the event of  an  ‘‘ownership change’’ of a corporation.
Accordingly, a company’s ability to use pre-change net operating loss and research tax credits may be
limited as prescribed under IRC Sections  382 and 383. Events which may cause limitation  in the
amount of the net operating losses and credits that the Company utilizes in  any one year include,  but
are not limited to, a cumulative ownership change  of more than 50% over  a three-year period. As a
result of historical equity issuances, the Company has determined that annual limitations  on the
utilization of its net operating losses  and credits do exist pursuant  to  IRC Sections  382 and 383,
however, such limitations are not expected  to  impact the Company’s ability  to  utilize these deferred  tax
assets prior to their statutory expiration dates.

F-44

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

10. Income Taxes (Continued)

Management assesses the available positive and negative evidence  to  estimate if sufficient future

taxable income will be generated to use  the existing deferred tax assets. A  significant piece  of  objective
negative evidence evaluated was the  cumulative loss incurred over the three-year period  ended
December 31, 2015. Such objective evidence limits the  ability  to  consider  other subjective evidence such
as its projections for future growth. On the basis of this evaluation, at December  31, 2015, a  valuation
allowance of $84.2 million has been recorded since it is more  likely than not that the  deferred tax
assets will not be realized.

The change in the valuation allowance  for the  years  ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and  2013 is

as follows (in thousands):

Valuation allowance, at beginning of year . . . . . . . . . .
Increase in valuation allowance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$64,449
19,718

$47,858
16,591

$41,412
6,446

Valuation allowance, at end of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$84,167

$64,449

$47,858

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

As a result of certain realization requirements of ASC 718, Compensation—Stock Compensation,

the table of deferred tax assets and liabilities shown  above does not include certain deferred tax  assets
at December 31, 2015 and 2014 that arose directly from (or the  use of which was postponed by) tax
deductions related to stock-based compensation that are greater than the compensation  recognized for
financial reporting purposes. The gross and tax-effected amount of unrealized net operating loss
carryforwards resulting from excess stock-based compensation tax benefits was $49.0 million and
$18.0 million, respectively, at December 31, 2015.  Additional paid-in capital  will  be  increased by
$18.0 million if and when such deferred tax assets are ultimately realized. The Company uses the
with-and-without approach when determining when  excess  tax benefits have been realized.

The following is a reconciliation of the total amounts  of  unrecognized tax benefits (in thousands):

Unrecognized tax benefit, beginning  of  year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Additions based on current year tax  positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Additions for prior years’ tax positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Settlements with tax authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reductions for prior years’ tax positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Year Ended
December 31,

2015

2014

2013

$ 46

$ (4) $ (4)
— 21 —
— 29 —
(13) — —
(30) — —

Unrecognized tax benefit, end of year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$ 3

$46

$ (4)

Since there is a full valuation allowance  recorded against  the deferred tax assets, any  subsequent
reductions of the valuation allowance and recognition of the  associated tax benefit would  impact  the
effective tax rate.

The Company’s policy is to recognize interest and  penalties related to uncertain tax positions, if

any, in the income tax provision. At  December 31, 2015,  accrued  interest and  penalties  related to

F-45

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

10. Income Taxes (Continued)

uncertain tax positions were insignificant. The Company  does not anticipate  that  the amount of
unrecognized tax benefits will significantly increase or decrease  within the next 12 months.

The Company is subject to United States federal  and  state taxation.  Due  to the  presence of net
operating loss carryforwards, all income  tax  years  remain open for examination by the Internal Revenue
Service (‘‘IRS’’) and various state taxing  authorities. During 2015, the Company concluded its IRS  and
state tax examinations for the 2011 and  2012 tax  years,  and the 2010 through  2012 tax  years,
respectively. These tax examinations did not result  in material tax assessments,  and the  Company
believes its income tax accruals as of  December 31,  2015 are reasonable.

11. Net Loss Per Share

The Company applies the two-class method for calculating basic earnings  per  share. Under the
two-class method, net income (loss) is reduced  by  cumulative  preferred stock dividends and  the residual
amount is allocated between common stock  and other participating  securities based  on their
participation rights. Participating securities comprised of restricted common  stock,  which participate  in
dividends, if declared, by the Company. As  the Company has reported a net  loss for all periods, and
the participating securities were not contractually obligated to share in the losses of  the Company,
accordingly, no losses were allocated  to  the participating securities.

Basic earnings per share is calculated  by dividing net  income (loss) attributable  to  common
stockholders by the weighted average  number of shares of common stock outstanding, net of the
weighted average unvested restricted stock subject to repurchase  by the Company, if any, during the
period. Diluted earnings per share is calculated by dividing the net income (loss) attributable  to
common stockholders by the weighted  average  number of  common  shares outstanding, adjusted  for the
effects of potentially dilutive common stock,  which are comprised  of  stock  options,  restricted stock
units and stock warrants, using the treasury-stock  method, and convertible preferred  stock, using the
if-converted method. Because the Company reported losses attributable to common stockholders for all
periods presented, all potentially dilutive  common  stock are antidilutive for those periods.

The following table sets forth the computation of basic  and diluted  net loss per share attributable

to common stockholders during the years ended  December 31,  2015, 2014  and 2013  (in  thousands,
except per share data):

Net loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$(64,911) $(48,429) $(25,056)

Weighted-average common shares outstanding . . . . .

81,914

70,837

58,540

Net loss per share—basic and diluted . . . . . . . . . . .

$

(0.79) $

(0.68) $

(0.43)

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

F-46

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

11. Net Loss Per Share (Continued)

The following table presents the number of anti-dilutive shares excluded from the  calculation of
diluted net loss per share attributable to common stockholders at  December 31, 2015, 2014  and 2013
(in thousands):

December 31,

2015

2014

2013

Options to purchase common stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Common stock warrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conversion of convertible preferred stock . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unvested restricted stock awards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24,278
1,631
—
3,747

25,590
3,926

18,363
5,931
— 2,857
55
828

Total shares excluded from net loss per share

attributable to common stockholders . . . . . . . . . . . . .

29,656

30,344

27,206

12. Employee Benefit Plan

The Company has a 401(k) Savings Retirement Plan that  covers substantially all full-time
employees who meet the plan’s eligibility requirements and provides for an employee  elective
contribution. The Company made matching contributions  to the plan of $1.7 million, $1.2 million and
$0.9 million for the years ended December 31,  2015, 2014, and 2013,  respectively.

13. Related Party Transactions

Transactions with Stockholders

In October 2011, as part of the acquisition of ALG, the Company entered into various data
licensing and transition services agreements with Dealertrack, a  former  significant stockholder of the
Company. In the first quarter of 2014,  Dealertrack divested  its  holdings in the Company  and was  no
longer a related party. Costs under these  agreements included in cost of revenue were $0.4  million and
$2.0 million for the years ended December 31,  2014 and 2013, respectively.  Costs under these
agreements included in sales and marketing  expense were $0.3 million for the year ended  December
2013. There were no costs recorded in  sales and  marketing expense  for the  year ended December  31,
2014.

Notes Receivable from Related Parties

From 2007 to 2011, the Company issued  notes to executives  of  the Company totaling $4.1  million
of which $2.9 million were exchanged  for cash and $1.2 million were in  consideration for  the purchase
of common stock. The notes bear interest at rates between 1.2% and 6.0%. Principal  and interest
payments are due at maturity. The loans had maturity dates ranging from 2011 to 2016, and were
repaid in full by February 2014, except  for $0.3 million which was repaid in full in  December 2014.

In September 2010, the Company issued a note to a former employee of the  Company for
$0.2 million in connection with the exercise of options to purchase common stock. The note bore
interest at 0.5% and there were no principal and interest payments due  until maturity in  August 2013,
and was paid in full.

F-47

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

13. Related Party Transactions (Continued)

In October 2012, an executive resigned  from the Company and became a consultant. At his
separation date, the former executive had two notes outstanding with original principal balances of
$0.1 million and $0.1 million, due November 2013  and  August 2014,  respectively. As  part of  this
separation, the notes were amended such that the principal  and  accrued  interest  were due and payable
upon the earlier of November 2013 or  45 days following the termination as a service provider to the
Company. At December 31, 2012, the  aggregate principal and  interest outstanding was $0.2 million.
The principal and  interest on the notes  were paid in  full on  December 27, 2013.

In May 2014, the Company advanced $0.1 million to an  employee  in exchange for a promissory

note. The note was repaid in full in December 2014.

Loans issued for the purchase of the  Company’s capital  stock have been  classified in stockholders’
equity on the accompanying consolidated  balance  sheets. Loans issued for cash have been  classified as
notes receivable from related parties on the  accompanying consolidated balance sheets.

Service Provider

From October 2013 to October 2015, an  executive officer of the Company was an officer of  a firm

that provided marketing services to the Company. For the years ended  December 31,  2015, 2014 and
2013, the Company recorded sales and  marketing  expense of $6.8  million,  $4.2 million and  $1.1 million,
respectively. At December 31, 2014,  the Company recorded $0.9  million  in prepaid expenses  related to
this  marketing firm. Additionally, the Company has  amounts due  to  this marketing firm at
December 31, 2014 of $0.2 million.

Advances to an Officer

In prior years, the Company paid business  and  personal expenses, which were  charged to a
corporate card or paid directly to third parties, of the  Company’s former  CEO  and the  former CEO
reimbursed the Company for personal expenses paid by  the Company. During 2013,  the Company paid
personal expenses of $0.1 million. The  advances made to the former  CEO  were paid  in full in  February
2014.

Stock Repurchase Arrangement with  Officer

In December 2013, pursuant to an executed employment  agreement with  a stock repurchase
provision  with the Company’s former  CEO, the  Company repurchased 112,422 shares  of common stock
at a price of $8.90 per share which was  the fair value  of the shares  on  the date of  repurchase  (Note 8).

Transactions with USAA

USAA is the largest stockholder and  most significant affinity marketing partner of the Company.

The Company has entered into arrangements with USAA  to  operate its Auto Buying Program.  The
Company has amounts due from USAA  at December 31, 2015 and 2014 of $0.3  million  and
$1.9 million, respectively. In addition,  the  Company has amounts due to USAA  at December 31, 2015
and 2014 of $7.8 million and $4.7 million, respectively. The Company recorded sales  and marketing
expense of $14.0 million, $15.2 million, and $8.8 million for  the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014
and 2013, respectively, related to service arrangements  entered into with USAA, including  non-cash
expense associated with warrants to purchase shares  of common stock (Note 8).

F-48

TrueCar, Inc.

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements  (Continued)

14. Revenue Information

The CODM reviews financial information  on a  consolidated basis, accompanied by information

about transaction revenue and forecasts, consulting and other revenue. Data and other revenue  as
disclosed in periods prior to 2015 is now referred to as forecasts, consulting  and other  revenue as  the
Company believes this description is more  accurate and reflective of the actual service offerings  that
the Company provides. The following table presents the Company’s revenue  categories  during  the
periods presented (in thousands):

Transaction revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forecasts, consulting and other revenue . . . . . . . . .

$241,395
18,443

$189,353
17,296

$118,713
15,245

Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

$259,838

$206,649

$133,958

Year Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

15. Subsequent Events

In January and February 2016, the Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of  Directors

(the ‘‘Compensation Committee’’) granted 763,470 restricted  stock units with  a weighted-average grant
date  fair value of $6.44, which vest quarterly over  four years. Additionally,  the Compensation
Committee granted stock options to purchase 100,706 shares  of the Company’s common stock at a
weighted-average exercise price of $6.03 per share. The stock options vest over an  approximate period
of four years.

F-49

TrueCar, Inc.

Michael Guthrie
Chief Financial Officer 

John Stephenson
Executive Vice President 

and Chief Risk Officer

Executive Officers

Chip Perry
President and 

Chief Executive Officer 

Board of Directors 

Chip Perry
President and 

Abhishek Agrawal
Managing Director

Chief Executive Officer 

Vulcan Capital

TrueCar, Inc.

Christopher Claus
Chairman of the Board

TrueCar, Inc.

John Krafcik
Chief Executive Officer

Todd Bradley 
Chief Executive Officer 

Google Inc. Self-Driving Car Project

Mozido

Thomas Gibson
Founder and Former Chairman, 

President and Chief Executive Officer

Asbury Automotive Group, Inc.

Steven Dietz
Partner

Upfront Ventures

Robert Buce
Chairman 

Palisades Holdings

Ion Yadigaroglu
Managing Principal 

Capricorn Investment Group LLC

Corporate Address

TrueCar, Inc.

120 Broadway, Suite 200

Santa Monica, CA 90401

Ticker Symbol

NASDAQ: TRUE

Transfer Agent

Computershare

Telephone: 877.373.6374

Fax: 866.519.8563

International: 781.575.2879

Mail

Computershare

P.O. Box 30170

College Station, TX 77842

Courier

Computershare

211 Quality Circle, Suite 210

College Station, TX 77845

Contact Us

Alison Sternberg

Vice President, Investor Relations

and Adminis tration

424.258.8771

3/14/16   5:27 PM

2015 
Annual Report

© 2016 TrueCar, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

45586cvr.indd   1-3

2
0
1
5
A
n
n
u
a

l

R
e
p
o
r
t