10-Q: Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)
Published on August 17, 2009
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION
13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the
quarterly period ended: June 30,
2009
Commission
File Number: 0-22175
EMCORE
Corporation
(Exact
name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
New
Jersey
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
22-2746503
(IRS
Employer Identification No.)
10420 Research Road SE,
Albuquerque, NM 87123
(Address
of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
(505)
332-5000
(Registrant's
telephone number, including area code)
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes [X] No
[ ]
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
definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller
reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
one):
[
] Large accelerated
filer [X] Accelerated
filer [
] Non-accelerated filer [ ]
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 [
] No
[X]
The
number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s no par value common stock as of
August 11, 2009 was 80,704,650.
EMCORE
Corporation
FORM
10-Q
For
the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2009
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
PAGE
|
|||
3
|
|||
33
|
|||
54
|
|||
55
|
|||
56
|
|||
58
|
|||
58
|
|||
58
|
|||
59
|
|||
59
|
|||
60
|
|||
61
|
|||
EMCORE
CORPORATION
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Loss
For
the three and nine months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008
(in
thousands, except loss per share)
(unaudited)
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Nine
Months Ended
June
30,
|
||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||
Product
revenue
|
$
|
37,190
|
$
|
72,027
|
$
|
129,076
|
$
|
169,713
|
|||||
Service
revenue
|
1,299
|
3,475
|
6,753
|
8,955
|
|||||||||
Total
revenue
|
38,489
|
75,502
|
135,829
|
178,668
|
|||||||||
Cost
of product revenue
|
39,880
|
60,727
|
138,666
|
143,439
|
|||||||||
Cost
of service revenue
|
1,037
|
1,129
|
5,007
|
4,832
|
|||||||||
Total
cost of revenue
|
40,917
|
61,856
|
143,673
|
148,271
|
|||||||||
Gross
(loss) profit
|
(2,428
|
)
|
13,646
|
(7,844
|
)
|
30,397
|
|||||||
Operating
expenses:
|
|||||||||||||
Selling,
general, and administrative
|
10,914
|
13,906
|
35,039
|
36,032
|
|||||||||
Research
and development
|
5,654
|
11,382
|
20,655
|
28,132
|
|||||||||
Impairments
|
27,000
|
-
|
60,781
|
-
|
|||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
43,568
|
25,288
|
116,475
|
64,164
|
|||||||||
Operating
loss
|
(45,996
|
)
|
(11,642
|
)
|
(124,319
|
)
|
(33,767
|
)
|
|||||
Other
(income) expense:
|
|||||||||||||
Interest
income
|
(3
|
)
|
(124
|
)
|
(83
|
)
|
(778
|
)
|
|||||
Interest
expense
|
105
|
-
|
443
|
1,580
|
|||||||||
Impairment
of investment
|
-
|
-
|
366
|
-
|
|||||||||
Loss
from conversion of subordinated notes
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
4,658
|
|||||||||
Stock–based
expense from tolled options
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
4,316
|
|||||||||
Gain
from sale of investments
|
-
|
(3,692
|
)
|
(3,144
|
)
|
(3,692
|
)
|
||||||
Loss
on disposal of equipment
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
86
|
|||||||||
Foreign
exchange (gain) loss
|
(745
|
)
|
(104
|
)
|
635
|
(302
|
)
|
||||||
Total
other (income) expense
|
(643
|
)
|
(3,920
|
)
|
(1,783
|
)
|
5,868
|
||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(45,353
|
)
|
$
|
(7,722
|
)
|
$
|
(122,536
|
)
|
$
|
(39,635
|
)
|
|
Foreign
exchange translation adjustment
|
(131
|
)
|
82
|
353
|
(5
|
)
|
|||||||
Comprehensive
loss
|
$
|
(45,484
|
)
|
$
|
(7,640
|
)
|
$
|
(122,183
|
)
|
$
|
(39,640
|
)
|
|
Per
share data:
|
|||||||||||||
Basic
and diluted per share data:
|
|||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(0.57
|
)
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
$
|
(1.56
|
)
|
$
|
(0.62
|
)
|
|
Weighted-average
number of basic and diluted shares outstanding
|
79,700
|
76,582
|
78,632
|
64,155
|
|||||||||
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements.
EMCORE
CORPORATION
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets
As
of June 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008
(In
thousands)
(unaudited)
June
30, 2009
|
September
30, 2008
|
||||||
ASSETS
|
|||||||
Current
assets:
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
9,386
|
$
|
18,227
|
|||
Restricted
cash
|
366
|
1,854
|
|||||
Available-for-sale
securities
|
1,400
|
2,679
|
|||||
Accounts
receivable, net of allowance of $7,320 and $2,377,
respectively
|
41,892
|
60,313
|
|||||
Inventory,
net
|
39,503
|
64,617
|
|||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
4,424
|
7,100
|
|||||
Total
current assets
|
96,971
|
154,790
|
|||||
Property,
plant, and equipment, net
|
57,695
|
83,278
|
|||||
Goodwill
|
20,384
|
52,227
|
|||||
Other
intangible assets, net
|
13,539
|
28,033
|
|||||
Investments
in unconsolidated affiliates
|
-
|
8,240
|
|||||
Available-for-sale
securities, non-current
|
-
|
1,400
|
|||||
Long-term
restricted cash
|
163
|
569
|
|||||
Other
non-current assets, net
|
802
|
741
|
|||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
189,554
|
$
|
329,278
|
|||
LIABILITIES
and SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|||||||
Current
liabilities:
|
|||||||
Line
of credit
|
$
|
4,984
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Short-term
debt
|
889
|
-
|
|||||
Accounts
payable
|
21,861
|
52,266
|
|||||
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities
|
23,909
|
23,290
|
|||||
Total
liabilities
|
51,643
|
75,556
|
|||||
Commitments
and contingencies (Note 13)
|
|||||||
Shareholders’
equity:
|
|||||||
Preferred
stock, $0.0001 par, 5,882 shares authorized, no shares
outstanding
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Common
stock, no par value, 200,000 shares authorized, 80,647 shares issued and
80,488 outstanding at June 30, 2009; 77,920 shares issued and 77,761
shares outstanding at September 30, 2008
|
686,392
|
680,020
|
|||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(547,300
|
)
|
(424,764
|
)
|
|||
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
902
|
549
|
|||||
Treasury
stock, at cost; 159 shares as of June 30, 2009 and September 30,
2008
|
(2,083
|
)
|
(2,083
|
)
|
|||
Total
shareholders’ equity
|
137,911
|
253,722
|
|||||
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ equity
|
$
|
189,554
|
$
|
329,278
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements.
EMCORE
CORPORATION
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For
the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008
(in
thousands)
(unaudited)
Nine
Months Ended June 30,
|
|||||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(122,536
|
)
|
$
|
(39,635
|
)
|
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used for operating
activities:
|
|||||||
Impairments
|
60,781
|
-
|
|||||
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
4,975
|
8,705
|
|||||
Depreciation
and amortization expense
|
12,862
|
8,992
|
|||||
Provision
for obsolete and excess inventory
|
14,934
|
2,427
|
|||||
Provision
for doubtful accounts
|
4,818
|
167
|
|||||
Provision
for losses on firm commitments
|
6,524
|
-
|
|||||
Impairment
of investment
|
366
|
-
|
|||||
Loss
on disposal of equipment
|
152
|
86
|
|||||
Compensatory
stock issuances
|
438
|
1,648
|
|||||
Gain
from sale of investments
|
(3,144
|
)
|
(3,692
|
)
|
|||
Reduction
of note receivable due for services received
|
-
|
390
|
|||||
Accretion
of loss from convertible subordinated notes
|
-
|
41
|
|||||
Loss
from convertible subordinated notes
|
-
|
1,169
|
|||||
Total
non-cash adjustments
|
102,706
|
19,933
|
|||||
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities, net of effect of
acquisitions:
|
|||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
13,472
|
(30,135
|
)
|
||||
Inventory
|
10,201
|
8,132
|
|||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
2,577
|
(1,674
|
)
|
||||
Other
assets
|
(684
|
)
|
(542
|
)
|
|||
Accounts
payable
|
(30,494
|
)
|
14,066
|
||||
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities
|
(5,761
|
)
|
(6,004
|
)
|
|||
Total
change in operating assets and liabilities
|
(10,689
|
)
|
(16,157
|
)
|
|||
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(30,519
|
)
|
(35,859
|
)
|
|||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|||||||
Purchase
of plant and equipment
|
(1,182
|
)
|
(15,028
|
)
|
|||
Proceeds
from insurance recovery on equipment
|
-
|
1,189
|
|||||
Proceeds
from sale of unconsolidated affiliates
|
11,017
|
6,540
|
|||||
Investment
in unconsolidated affiliates
|
-
|
(1,503
|
)
|
||||
Purchase
of business
|
-
|
(75,779
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from (funding of) restricted cash
|
1,893
|
(874
|
)
|
||||
Purchase
of available-for-sale securities
|
-
|
(7,000
|
)
|
||||
Sale
of available-for-sale securities
|
2,679
|
32,806
|
|||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
14,407
|
(59,649
|
)
|
||||
EMCORE
CORPORATION
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows - continued
For
the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008
(in
thousands)
(unaudited)
Nine
Months Ended June 30,
|
|||||||
2009
|
2008
|
||||||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|||||||
Proceeds
from borrowings from credit facility
|
$
|
88,771
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Payments
on borrowings from credit facility
|
(83,787
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Proceeds
from borrowing - long-term and short-term debt
|
911
|
-
|
|||||
Payments
on borrowings - long-term and short-term debt
|
(22
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Proceeds
from private placement of common stock and warrants,
net
of issuance costs
|
-
|
93,692
|
|||||
Payments
on capital lease obligations
|
-
|
(11
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from exercise of stock options
|
32
|
6,960
|
|||||
Proceeds
from employee stock purchase plan
|
894
|
723
|
|||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
6,799
|
101,364
|
|||||
Effect
of foreign currency
|
472
|
176
|
|||||
Net
(decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
(8,841
|
)
|
6,032
|
||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
18,227
|
12,151
|
|||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of period
|
$
|
9,386
|
$
|
18,183
|
|||
SUPPLEMENTAL
DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION
|
|||||||
Cash
paid during the period for interest
|
$
|
511
|
$
|
3,314
|
|||
Cash
paid for income taxes
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
|||
NON-CASH
DISCLOSURE
|
|||||||
Issuance
of common stock for purchase of business
|
1,183
|
36,085
|
|||||
Issuance
of common stock for conversion of subordinated notes
|
-
|
85,428
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements.
EMCORE
Corporation
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(unaudited)
NOTE
1. Basis of Presentation
The
accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include the
accounts of EMCORE Corporation and its subsidiaries (the “Company” or “EMCORE”).
All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in
consolidation.
These
statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) for interim information,
and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X of the
Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Accordingly, they do not include all
of the information and footnotes required by U.S. GAAP for annual financial
statements. In the opinion of management, the interim financial statements
reflect all normal adjustments that are necessary to provide a fair presentation
of the financial results for the interim periods presented. Operating
results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of results that may
be expected for an entire fiscal year. The condensed consolidated balance sheet
as of September 30, 2008 has been derived from the audited consolidated
financial statements as of such date. For a more complete understanding of the
Company’s financial position, operating results, risk factors and other matters,
please refer to the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended September 30, 2008.
We have
evaluated subsequent events, as defined by Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 165, Subsequent Events, through
the date that the financial statements were issued on August 17,
2009.
Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S.
GAAP requires management of the Company to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities, as of the date of the financial
statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reported
period. The accounting estimates that require our most
significant, difficult, and subjective judgments include the valuation of
inventory, goodwill, intangible assets, and stock-based compensation and the
assessment of recovery of long-lived assets.
Management
develops estimates based on historical experience and on various assumptions
about the future that are believed to be reasonable based on the best
information available. The Company’s reported financial position or results of
operations may be materially different under changed conditions or when using
different estimates and assumptions, particularly with respect to significant
accounting policies. In the event that estimates or assumptions prove
to differ from actual results, adjustments are made in subsequent periods to
reflect more current information.
Earnings
(Loss) Per Share
Earnings
(loss) per share (“EPS”) are calculated by dividing net earnings (loss)
applicable to common stock by the weighted average number of common stock shares
outstanding for the period. For the three and nine months ended June
30, 2009, stock options representing 8,005,209 and 7,757,597 shares of common
stock, respectively, and 1,400,003 warrants for both periods were excluded from
the computation of diluted earnings per share since the Company incurred a net
loss for these periods and any effect would have been
anti-dilutive. For the three and nine months ended June 30, 2008,
stock options representing 3,800,327 and 5,134,376 shares of common stock,
respectively, and 1,400,003 warrants for both periods were excluded from the
computation of diluted earnings per share since the Company incurred a net loss
for these periods and any effect would have been anti-dilutive.
Impairment
of Long-lived Assets
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company performed an evaluation of its
Fiber Optics segment assets for impairment. The impairment test was
triggered by a determination that it was more likely than not that certain
assets would be sold or otherwise disposed of before the end of their previously
estimated useful lives. As a result of the evaluation, it was
determined that an impairment existed, and a charge of $27.0 million was
recorded to write down the long-lived assets to estimated fair value, which was
determined based on a combination of guideline public company comparisons and
discounted estimated future cash flows.
The
current adverse economic conditions had a significant negative effect on the
Company’s assessment of the fair value of the Fiber Optics segment
assets. The impairment charge primarily resulted from the combined
effect of the current slowdown in product orders and lower pricing exacerbated
by currently high discount rates used in estimating fair values and the effects
of recent declines in market values of debt and equity securities of comparable
public companies. This impairment charge in combination with other non-cash
charges will not cause the Company to be in default under any of its financial
covenants associated with its credit facility nor will it have a material
adverse impact on the Company’s liquidity position or cash flows.
See Note
9, Goodwill and Intangible Assets, for more information on the impairment
charges recorded by the Company in response to unfavorable macroeconomic
conditions.
Liquidity
Matters
The
Company incurred a net loss of $122.5 million for the nine months ended June 30,
2009, which included a non-cash impairment charge of $60.8 million related to
the write-down of fixed assets, goodwill and intangible assets associated with
the Company’s Fiber Optics segment. The Company’s operating results
for future periods are subject to numerous uncertainties and it is uncertain if
the Company will be able to reduce or eliminate its net losses for the
foreseeable future. Although total revenue has increased sequentially
over the past several years, the Company has not been able to sustain historical
revenue growth rates in 2009 due to material adverse changes in market and
economic conditions. If management is not able to increase revenue
and/or manage operating expenses in line with revenue forecasts, the Company may
not be able to achieve profitability.
As of
June 30, 2009, cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash totaled approximately
$9.9 million and working capital totaled $45.3 million. Historically,
the Company has consumed cash from operations. During the nine months
ended June 30, 2009, it consumed approximately $30.5 million in cash from
operations.
These
matters raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a
going concern.
Management Actions and
Plans
Historically,
management has addressed liquidity requirements through a series of cost
reduction initiatives, capital markets transactions and the sale of
assets. Management anticipates that the recession in the United
States and internationally may continue to impose formidable challenges for the
Company’s businesses in the near term. Recently, the Company amended the terms
of its asset-backed revolving credit facility with Bank of America that included
the granting of waivers for prior covenant violations. Although the
total amount of available credit under the credit facility has been reduced from
$25 million at September 30, 2008 to $14 million, the amendments addressed a
modification of the borrowing base calculation which generally has resulted in
higher borrowing capacity against any given schedule of accounts
receivable. The Company has also continued to take steps to lower
costs and to conserve and generate cash. Over the past year,
management has implemented a series of measures and continues to evaluate
opportunities intended to align the Company’s cost structure with its current
revenue forecasts which has included several workforce reductions, salary
reductions, the elimination of executive and employee merit increases, and the
elimination or reduction of certain discretionary expenses.
With
respect to measures taken to generate cash, the Company sold its minority
ownership positions in Entech Solar, Inc. and Lightron Corporation earlier in
the fiscal year. The Company has also significantly lowered its
quarterly capital expenditures and improved the management of its working
capital. During the third fiscal quarter, the Company lowered its net
inventory by approximately 17% and achieved positive operating income within the
Company’s space solar business.
In
addition, the Company continues to pursue and evaluate a number of capital
raising alternatives including debt and/or equity financings, product
joint-venture opportunities and the potential sale of certain
assets.
Conclusion
These
initiatives are intended to conserve or generate cash in response to the
deterioration in the global economy so that we can be assured of adequate
liquidity through the next twelve months. However, the full effect of
many of these actions may not be realized until late in calendar year 2009, even
if they are successfully implemented. We are committed to exploring all of
the initiatives discussed above but there is no assurance that capital market
conditions will improve within that time frame. Our ability to continue as a
going concern is substantially dependent on the successful execution of many of
the actions referred to above. The accompanying condensed consolidated
financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the
outcome of this uncertainty.
Since
cash generated from operations and cash on hand are not sufficient to satisfy
the Company’s liquidity requirements, we will seek to raise additional cash
through equity financing, additional debt, asset sales or a combination
thereof. Due to the unpredictable nature of the capital markets,
additional funding may not be available when needed, or on terms acceptable to
us. If adequate funds are not available or not available on
acceptable terms, our ability to continue to fund expansion, develop and enhance
products and services, or otherwise respond to competitive pressures may be
severely limited. Such a limitation could have a material adverse effect
on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash
flow.
Restatements
The
Company identified an error in the classification of service and product
revenues and related costs of revenue in the condensed consolidated statements
of operations for the quarters ended in fiscal 2008. The following
table reflects the effects of the restatement on the condensed consolidated
statements of operations for the quarter and nine-month period ended June 30,
2008. These misclassifications did not have an impact on the Company’s
consolidated gross profit, operating loss, or net loss.
(in
thousands)
|
Three
Months Ended June 30, 2008
|
Nine
Months Ended June 30, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||||
As
previously
reported
|
Adjustment
|
As
restated
|
As
previously reported
|
Adjustment
|
As
restated
|
||||||||||||||
Product
revenue
|
$
|
71,934
|
$
|
93
|
$
|
72,027
|
$
|
164,695
|
$
|
5,018
|
$
|
169,713
|
|||||||
Service
revenue
|
3,568
|
(93
|
)
|
3,475
|
13,973
|
(5,018
|
)
|
8,955
|
|||||||||||
Total
revenue
|
75,502
|
-
|
75,502
|
178,668
|
-
|
178,668
|
|||||||||||||
Cost
of product revenue
|
61,767
|
(1,040
|
)
|
60,727
|
139,212
|
4,227
|
143,439
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of service revenue
|
89
|
1,040
|
1,129
|
9,059
|
(4,227
|
)
|
4,832
|
||||||||||||
Total
cost of revenue
|
61,856
|
-
|
61,856
|
148,271
|
-
|
148,271
|
|||||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
$
|
13,646
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
13,646
|
$
|
30,397
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
30,397
|
The
Company also identified errors in the condensed consolidated statements of cash
flows for the quarters ended in fiscal 2008. In particular, provision for
obsolete and excess inventory was not appropriately classified as a reconciling
item to reconcile net loss to net cash used for operating
activities. In addition, certain other assets and accounts receivable
were improperly classified as reconciling items to reconcile net loss to net
cash used for operating activities. The following table reflects the effects of
the restatement on the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows for the
nine-month period ended June 30, 2008. These misclassifications did not have an
impact on net cash used in operating activities.
June
30, 2008
|
|||||||||||||
As
previously reported
|
Adjustment
|
As
restated
|
|||||||||||
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used for operating
activities:
|
|||||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization expense
|
$
|
9,509
|
$
|
(517
|
)
|
$
|
8,992
|
||||||
Provision
for obsolete and excess inventory
|
-
|
2,427
|
2,427
|
||||||||||
Provision
for doubtful accounts
|
204
|
(37
|
)
|
167
|
|||||||||
Total
non-cash adjustments
|
18,061
|
1,873
|
19,933
|
||||||||||
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities, net of effect of
acquisitions:
|
|||||||||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
(30,172
|
)
|
37
|
(30,135
|
)
|
||||||||
Inventory
|
10,559
|
(2,427
|
)
|
8,132
|
|||||||||
Other
assets
|
(1,059
|
)
|
517
|
(542
|
)
|
||||||||
Total
change in operating assets and liabilities
|
(14,284
|
)
|
(1,873
|
)
|
(16,157
|
)
|
|||||||
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
(35,859
|
)
|
-
|
(35,859
|
)
|
NOTE
2. Recent Accounting Pronouncements
SFAS 141(R) -
In December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (“SFAS”) 141(R), Business Combinations.
This statement replaces SFAS 141, Business Combinations,
and requires an acquirer to recognize the assets acquired, the liabilities
assumed, including those arising from contractual contingencies, any
contingent consideration, and any noncontrolling interest in the acquiree
at the acquisition date, measured at their fair values as of that date,
with limited exceptions specified in the statement. SFAS 141(R) also
requires the acquirer in a business combination achieved in stages
(sometimes referred to as a step acquisition) to recognize the
identifiable assets and liabilities, as well as the noncontrolling
interest in the acquiree, at the full amounts of their fair values (or
other amounts determined in accordance with SFAS 141(R)). In addition,
SFAS 141(R)'s requirement to measure the noncontrolling interest in the
acquiree at fair value will result in recognizing the goodwill
attributable to the noncontrolling interest in addition to that
attributable to the acquirer. SFAS 141(R) amends SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes, to require the acquirer to recognize changes in the amount
of its deferred tax benefits that are recognizable because of a business
combination either in income from continuing operations in the period of
the combination or directly in contributed capital, depending on the
circumstances. It also amends SFAS 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets, to, among other things, provide guidance on the impairment
testing of acquired research and development intangible assets and assets
that the acquirer intends not to use. SFAS 141(R) applies prospectively to
business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the
beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after
December 15, 2008. Management is currently assessing the potential impact
that the adoption of SFAS 141(R) could have on the Company’s financial
statements in fiscal 2010.
|
SFAS 160 - In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements. SFAS 160 amends Accounting Research
Bulletin 51, Consolidated
Financial Statements, to establish accounting and reporting standards for
the noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a
subsidiary. It also clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary is
an ownership interest in the consolidated entity that should be reported as
equity in the consolidated financial statements. SFAS 160 also changes the way
the consolidated income statement is presented by requiring consolidated net
income to be reported at amounts that include the amounts attributable to both
the parent and the noncontrolling interest. It also requires disclosure, on the
face of the consolidated statement of income, of the amounts of consolidated net
income attributable to the parent and to the noncontrolling interest. SFAS 160
requires that a parent recognize a gain or loss in net income when a subsidiary
is deconsolidated and requires expanded disclosures in the consolidated
financial statements that clearly identify and distinguish between the interests
of the parent owners and the interests of the noncontrolling owners of a
subsidiary. SFAS 160 is effective for fiscal periods, and interim periods within
those fiscal years, beginning on or after December 15, 2008. Management is
currently assessing the potential impact that the adoption of SFAS 160 could
have on the Company’s financial statements in fiscal 2010.
SFAS 168 - In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS 168, FASB Accounting Standards
Codification and the Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles, which replaces SFAS No. 162, The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles. SFAS 168 establishes the FASB Accounting Standards
Codification as the sole source of authoritative accounting principles
recognized by the FASB to be applied by all nongovernmental entities in the
preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP. SFAS 168 is
prospectively effective for financial statements for fiscal years ending on or
after September 15, 2009, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The
adoption of SFAS 168 on October 1, 2009 will not impact the Company’s results of
operations or financial condition, but it will affect the reference of
accounting pronouncements in future disclosures.
FSP 142-3 - In April
2008, the FASB issued FSP No. 142-3, Determination of the Useful Life of
Intangible Assets. FSP 142-3 amends the factors an entity
should consider in developing renewal or extension assumptions used in
determining the useful life of recognized intangible assets under FASB Statement
No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets and the period of expected cash flows used to measure
the fair value of intangible assets under FASB Statement No. 141, Business
Combinations. FSP 142-3 is effective for financial statements
issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods
within those fiscal years. Management is currently assessing the
potential impact that the adoption of FSP 142-3 could have on the Company’s
financial statements in fiscal 2010.
FSP APB 14-1 - In May
2008, the FASB issued FSP APB 14-1, Accounting for Convertible Debt
Instruments That May Be Settled in Cash upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash
Settlement). FSP APB 14-1 requires the proceeds from the issuance of such
convertible debt instruments to be allocated between a liability component
(issued at a discount) and an equity component. The resulting debt discount is
amortized over the period the convertible debt is expected to be outstanding as
additional non-cash interest expense. The change in accounting treatment is
effective for the Company beginning in fiscal 2010, and will be applied
retrospectively to prior periods. Management is currently assessing the
potential impact that the adoption of FSP APB 14-1 could have on the Company’s
financial statements in fiscal 2010.
Recently Adopted Accounting
Pronouncement:
SFAS 165 - In June
2009, the FASB issued SFAS 165, Subsequent Events, to
establish general standards of accounting for and disclosure of events that
occur after the balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued or
available to be issued. In particular, SFAS 165 sets forth: (1) the
period after the balance sheet date during which management of a reporting
entity should evaluate events or transactions that may occur for potential
recognition or disclosure in the financial statements; (2) the circumstances
under which an entity should recognize events or transactions occurring after
the balance sheet date in its financial statements; and (3) the disclosures that
an entity should make about events or transactions that occurred after the
balance sheet date. SFAS 165 is prospectively effective for financial statements
issued for interim or annual periods ending after June 15, 2009. The adoption of
SFAS 165 on June 30, 2009 did not impact the Company’s results of operations or
financial condition. See Note 1, Basis of Presentation, for related
footnote disclosure.
NOTE
3. Equity
Stock
Options
The Company provides long-term incentives to
eligible officers, directors, and employees in the form of
stock options. Most of the stock options vest and become exercisable over
four to five years and have a contractual life of ten years. The Company
maintains two stock option plans: the 1995 Incentive and Non-Statutory Stock
Option Plan (“1995 Plan”) and the 2000 Stock Option Plan
(“2000 Plan” and, together with the
1995 Plan, the “Option Plans”).
The 1995 Plan authorizes the grant of options up to 2,744,118 shares of
the
Company's common
stock. On April
30, 2009, the Company’s shareholders approved an increase in the number of
shares reserved for issuance under the 2000 Plan from 12,850,000 to
15,850,000 shares of the Company’s common stock. As of June 30, 2009, no options were available
for issuance under the 1995 Plan and 4,100,776 options were available for
issuance under the 2000 Plan. Certain options under the
Option Plans are intended to qualify as incentive stock options pursuant to
Section 422A of the Internal Revenue Code. The Company issues new
shares of common stock to satisfy the issuance of shares under this stock-based
compensation plan.
The following table
summarizes the activity under the Option Plans for the nine months ended June 30, 2009:
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
Weighted
Average
Remaining
Contractual Life
(in
years)
|
|||||||||||
Outstanding
as of September 30, 2008
|
8,929,453
|
$
|
6.57
|
8.22
|
|||||||||
Granted
|
615,439
|
1.25
|
|||||||||||
Exercised
|
(10,675
|
)
|
3.02
|
||||||||||
Forfeited
|
(902,539
|
)
|
7.19
|
||||||||||
Cancelled
|
(526,673
|
)
|
4.51
|
||||||||||
Outstanding
as of June 30, 2009
|
8,105,005
|
$
|
6.28
|
7.53
|
|||||||||
Exercisable
as of June 30, 2009
|
3,747,079
|
$
|
5.81
|
6.26
|
As of
June 30, 2009 there was approximately $9.0 million of total unrecognized
compensation expense related to non-vested stock-based compensation arrangements
granted under the Option Plans. This expense is expected to be recognized over
an estimated weighted average life of 2.9 years.
Intrinsic
value for stock options represents the “in-the-money” portion or the positive
variance between a stock option’s exercise price and the underlying stock
price. There were no stock options exercised during the three months
ended June 30, 2009. The total intrinsic value related to stock
options exercised during the nine months ended June 30, 2009 was approximately
$10,000. The total intrinsic value related to stock options exercised
during the three and nine months ended June 30, 2008 was approximately $0.3
million and $11.5 million, respectively. There was no intrinsic value
related to fully vested and expected to vest stock options as of June 30, 2009
and no intrinsic value related to exercisable stock options as of June 30,
2009.
Number
of Stock Options Outstanding
|
Options
Exercisable
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise
Price of Stock Options
|
Number
Outstanding
|
Weighted
Average Remaining Contractual Life (years)
|
Weighted-
Average Exercise Price
|
Number
Exercisable
|
Weighted-
Average Exercise Price
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
>=$1.00
to <$5.00
|
2,326,974
|
6.21
|
$
|
2.89
|
1,625,748
|
$
|
2.96
|
||||||||||||||||||||
>=$5.00
to <$10.00
|
5,643,111
|
8.17
|
7.40
|
2,024,211
|
7.41
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
>$10.00
|
134,920
|
3.71
|
17.74
|
97,120
|
20.18
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
TOTAL
|
8,105,005
|
7.53
|
$
|
6.28
|
3,747,079
|
$
|
5.81
|
Stock-based
compensation expense is measured at the stock option grant date, based on the
fair value of the award, over the requisite service period. As
required by SFAS 123(R),
Share-Based Payment (revised 2004), management has made an estimate of
expected forfeitures and is recognizing compensation expense only for those
equity awards expected to vest.
The
effect of recording stock-based compensation expense during the three and nine
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 was as follows:
(in
thousands, except per share data)
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Nine
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||
Stock-based
compensation expense by award type:
|
|||||||||||||
Employee
stock options
|
$
|
1,072
|
$
|
1,555
|
$
|
4,413
|
$
|
4,035
|
|||||
Employee
stock purchase plan
|
206
|
186
|
562
|
354
|
|||||||||
Former
employee stock options tolled
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
4,316
|
|||||||||
Total
stock-based compensation expense
|
$
|
1,278
|
$
|
1,741
|
$
|
4,975
|
$
|
8,705
|
|||||
Net
effect on net loss per basic and diluted share
|
$
|
(0.02
|
)
|
$
|
(0.02
|
)
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
Tolled Stock
Options
Under the
terms of the Company’s stock option agreements issued under the Option Plans, employees that
have vested and exercisable stock options have 90 days subsequent to the date of
their termination to exercise their stock options. In November 2006,
the Company announced that it was suspending its reliance on previously issued
financial statements, which in turn caused the Company’s Form S-8 registration
statements for shares of common stock issuable under the Option Plans not to be
available. Therefore, employees and terminated employees were
precluded from exercising stock options until the Company became compliant with
its SEC filings and the registration of the stock option shares was once again
effective (the “Blackout Period”). In April 2007, the Company’s Board
of Directors approved a stock option grant “modification” for terminated
employees by extending the normal 90-day exercise period after date of
termination to a date after which the Blackout Period was lifted. The
Company communicated the terms of the stock option grant modification with its
terminated employees in November 2007. The Company’s Board of
Directors approved an extension of the stock option expiration date equal to the
number of calendar days during the Blackout Period before such stock option
would have otherwise expired (the “Tolling Period”). Terminated
employees were able to exercise their vested stock options beginning on the
first day after the lifting of the Blackout Period for a period equal to the
Tolling Period. Approximately 50 terminated employees were impacted
by this modification. All tolled stock options were either exercised
or expired by January 29, 2008.
To
account for a stock option grant modification, when the rights conveyed by a
stock-based compensation award are no longer dependent on the holder being an
employee, the award ceases to be accounted for under SFAS 123(R) and becomes
subject to the recognition and measurement requirements of EITF 00-19, Accounting for Derivative Financial
Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own
Stock, which results in liability classification and measurement of the
award. On the date of modification, stock options that receive
extended exercise terms are initially measured at fair value and expensed as if
the stock options awards were new grants. Subsequent changes in
fair value are reported in earnings and disclosed in the financial statements as
long as the stock options remain classified as liabilities.
During
the three months ended December 31, 2007, the Company incurred a non-cash
expense of $4.4 million associated with the modification of stock options issued
to terminated employees which was calculated using the Black-Scholes option
valuation model. The modified stock options were 100% vested at the
time of grant with an estimated life of no greater than 90 days. When
the stock options classified as liabilities were ultimately settled in stock,
any gains or losses on those stock options were included in additional paid-in
capital. For unexercised stock options that ultimately expired, the
liability was relieved with an offset to income included in current earnings,
which totaled approximately $58,000 in January 2008.
Since
these modified stock options were issued to terminated employees of the Company,
and therefore no services were required to receive this grant and no contractual
obligation existed at the Company to issue these modified stock options, the
Company concluded it was more appropriate to classify this non-cash expense
within “other income and expense” in the Company’s statement of
operations.
Tender
Offer
As a
result of the Company's previously announced voluntary inquiry into its
historical stock option granting practices, which was concluded in 2007, the
Company determined that an incorrect grant date was used in the granting of
certain stock options. As a result, certain stock options were determined to be
granted at an exercise price below the fair market value of the Company's common
stock as of the correct measurement grant date. Consequently, employees holding
these stock options faced a potential tax liability under Section 409A of the
Internal Revenue Code and similar sections of certain state tax codes, unless
remedial action was taken to adjust the exercise price of these stock options
prior to December 31, 2008.
In
November 2008, the Company announced that it had commenced a tender offer for
164,088 stock options outstanding under its 2000 Plan which was held by 91 of
its then current non-officer employees. Under the terms of the tender
offer, employees holding such stock options were given the opportunity to amend
these options to increase the exercise price to a higher price that is equal to
the fair market value on the date which has been determined to be the correct
date of issuance for these stock options in return for a cash payment for each
tendered stock option equal to the difference between the original exercise
price and the new exercise price. The tender offer remained open
until 11:59 p.m. Mountain Time on December 17, 2008. As a result of
the tender offer, a total of 163,838 stock options were tendered, approximately
$44,000 in cash payments were paid in January 2009, and the non-cash stock-based
SFAS 123(R) expense due to the modification of stock options was determined to
be immaterial. Further details regarding the tender can be obtained
from the filing on Schedule TO which the Company filed on December 18, 2008 with
the SEC.
Valuation
Assumptions
The fair
value of each stock option grant is estimated on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes option valuation model and the straight-line attribution approach
using the following weighted-average assumptions. The option-pricing
model requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, including the
option’s expected life and the price volatility of the underlying
stock. The weighted-average grant date fair value of stock options
granted during the three and nine months ended June 30, 2009 was $1.30 and
$1.25, respectively. The weighted-average grant date fair value of
stock options granted during the three and nine months ended June 30, 2008 was
$8.23 and $7.79, respectively.
Black-Scholes
Weighted-Average Assumptions
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Nine
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||
Stock
Options:
|
|||||||||||||
Expected
dividend yield
|
-
|
%
|
-
|
%
|
-
|
%
|
-
|
%
|
|||||
Expected
stock price volatility
|
147.7
|
%
|
72.3
|
%
|
187.6
|
%
|
80.8
|
%
|
|||||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
2.4
|
%
|
2.9
|
%
|
2.4
|
%
|
2.9
|
%
|
|||||
Expected
term (in years)
|
6.2
|
6.2
|
5.8
|
5.6
|
|||||||||
Estimated
pre-vesting forfeitures
|
31.9
|
%
|
23.3
|
%
|
31.9
|
%
|
23.3
|
%
|
Jan
1, 2009 –
Jun
30, 2009
|
Jul
1, 2008 –
Dec
31, 2008
|
Jan
1, 2008 –
Jun
30, 2008
|
|||||||||||
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan:
|
|||||||||||||
Expected
dividend yield
|
-
|
%
|
-
|
%
|
-
|
%
|
|||||||
Expected
stock price volatility
|
112.0
|
%
|
74.1
|
%
|
66.4
|
%
|
|||||||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
0.3
|
%
|
2.1
|
%
|
3.3
|
%
|
|||||||
Expected
term
|
6
months
|
6
months
|
6
months
|
Expected Dividend
Yield: The Black-Scholes valuation model calls for a single
expected dividend yield as an input. The Company has not issued any
dividends.
Expected Stock Price
Volatility: The fair values of stock-based payments were
valued using the Black-Scholes valuation method with a volatility factor based
on the Company’s historical stock price.
Risk-Free Interest
Rate: The Company bases the risk-free interest rate used in
the Black-Scholes valuation method on the implied yield that was currently
available on U.S. Treasury zero-coupon notes with an equivalent remaining term.
Where the expected term of stock-based awards do not correspond with the terms
for which interest rates are quoted, the Company performed a straight-line
interpolation to determine the rate from the available maturities.
Expected Term: Expected term
represents the period that the Company’s stock-based awards are expected to be
outstanding and was determined based on historical experience of similar awards,
giving consideration to the contractual terms of the stock-based awards, vesting
schedules and expectations of future employee behavior as influenced by changes
to the terms of its stock-based awards.
Estimated Pre-vesting Forfeitures:
When estimating forfeitures, the Company considers voluntary termination
behavior as well as workforce reduction programs.
Preferred
Stock
The
Company’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation authorizes the Board of
Directors to issue up to 5,882,352 shares of preferred stock upon such terms and
conditions having such rights, privileges, and preferences as the Board of
Directors may determine. As of June 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008,
no shares of preferred stock were issued or outstanding.
Warrants
As of
June 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008, the Company had 1,400,003 warrants
outstanding from the private placement transaction that closed on February 15,
2008. The warrants grant the holder the right to purchase one
share of the Company’s common stock at a price of $15.06 per
share. The warrants are immediately exercisable and remain
exercisable for a period of 5 years from the closing date.
Employee Stock Purchase
Plan
In fiscal
2000, the Company adopted an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”). The ESPP
provides employees of the Company an opportunity to purchase common stock
through payroll deductions. The ESPP is a 6-month duration plan with new
participation periods beginning the first business day of January and July of
each year. The purchase price is set at 85% of the average high and low market
price of the Company's common stock on either the first or last day of the
participation period, whichever is lower, and contributions are limited to the
lower of 10% of an employee's compensation or $25,000. In November
2006 through December 2007, the Company suspended the ESPP due to its review of
historical stock option granting practices. The Company reinstated
the ESPP on January 1, 2008. On April 30, 2009, the
Company’s shareholders approved an increase in the number of
shares reserved for issuance under the ESPP from 2.0 million to 4.5
million shares. The Company issues new shares of common stock
to satisfy the issuance of shares under this stock-based compensation
plan. The amounts of shares issued for the ESPP are as
follows:
Number
of Common Stock Shares
|
Purchase
Price per Share of
Common
Stock
|
|||||||
Amount
of shares reserved for the ESPP
|
4,500,000
|
|||||||
Number
of shares issued for calendar years 2000 through
2006
|
(1,000,000
|
)
|
$1.87
- $40.93
|
|||||
Number
of shares issued for the first half of calendar year
2007
|
(123,857
|
)
|
$6.32
|
|||||
Number
of shares issued for the first half of calendar year
2008
|
(120,791
|
)
|
$5.62
|
|||||
Number
of shares issued for the second half of calendar year
2008
|
(471,798
|
)
|
$0.88
|
|||||
Number
of shares issued for the first half of calendar year
2009
|
(522,924
|
)
|
$0.92
|
|||||
Remaining
shares reserved for the ESPP
|
2,260,630
|
Future
Issuances
As
of June 30, 2009, the Company had reserved a total of 15.9 million shares
of its common stock for future issuances as follows:
Number
of Common Stock Shares Available
|
||||
For
exercise of outstanding common stock options
|
8,105,005
|
|||
For
future issuances to employees under the ESPP
|
2,260,630
|
|||
For
future common stock option awards
|
4,100,776
|
|||
For
future exercise of warrants
|
1,400,003
|
|||
Total
reserved
|
15,866,414
|
Subsequent
event
On July
27, 2009, the Company’s Compensation Committee approved a retention grant for
eligible employees which totaled 3,004,000 stock options. The stock
option exercise price for this grant was $1.25, which was based on the fair
market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant.
NOTE
4. Acquisitions
Intel’s Optical Platform
Division
On
February 22, 2008, the Company acquired assets of the telecom portion of Intel
Corporation’s Optical Platform Division (“OPD”). The telecom assets acquired
include inventory, fixed assets, intellectual property, and technology comprised
of tunable lasers, tunable transponders, 300-pin transponders, and integrated
tunable laser assemblies. The purchase price was $75.0 million in
cash and $10.0 million in the Company’s common stock, priced at a
volume-weighted average price of $13.84 per share. Under the terms of
the asset purchase agreement, the purchase price of $85 million was subject to
adjustment based on an inventory true-up, plus specifically assumed
liabilities. Direct transaction costs totaled approximately $0.8
million. This acquisition was financed through proceeds received from
the $100 million private placement of common stock and warrants that closed on
February 15, 2008.
On April
20, 2008, the Company acquired the enterprise and storage assets of Intel
Corporation’s OPD business, as well as Intel’s Connects Cables
business. The assets acquired include inventory, fixed assets,
intellectual property, and technology relating to optical transceivers for
enterprise and storage customers, as well as optical cable interconnects for
high-performance computing clusters. As consideration for the
purchase of assets, the Company issued 3.7 million restricted shares of the
Company’s common stock to Intel.
On April
20, 2009, the Company issued an additional 1.3 million shares of unrestricted
common stock to Intel, valued at $1.2 million using the closing share price of
$0.91, as consideration for the final purchase price adjustment related to this
asset acquisition. This contingency payment was based solely on
performance of the Company’s stock price subsequent to the
transaction. Accordingly, under SFAS 141, Business Combinations,
resolution of a stock price-based contingency does not result in additional
purchase price consideration.
The final
purchase price was allocated as follows:
(in
thousands)
Intel’s
Optical Platform Division
|
||||
Net
purchase price
|
$
|
111,792
|
||
Net
assets acquired
|
(79,444
|
)
|
||
Excess
purchase price allocated to goodwill
|
$
|
32,348
|
Net
assets acquired in the acquisition were as follows:
Inventory
|
$
|
33,287
|
||
Fixed
assets
|
19,878
|
|||
Intangible
assets
|
26,279
|
|||
Net
assets acquired
|
$
|
79,444
|
The $26.3
million of acquired intangible assets have a weighted average life of
approximately eight years. The intangible assets that make up that
amount include customer lists of $7.5 million (8 to 10 year useful life) and
developed and core technology of $18.8 million (6 to 10 year useful
life).
In
connection with this acquisition, Intel and the Company entered into a
Transition Services Agreement (the “TSA”), which facilitated Intel’s ability to
carve-out the business and deliver those assets to the Company. Intel also
provided certain transition services to the Company, including financial
services, supply chain support, data extraction, conversion services, facilities
and site computing support, and office space services. Operating
expenses associated with the TSA were expensed as incurred and the TSA was
substantially completed as of August 2008.
See Note
9, Goodwill and Intangible Assets, for information on impairment charges
recorded by the Company in connection with assets acquired from this
acquisition.
NOTE
5. Investments
Auction Rate
Securities
Historically,
the Company has invested in securities with an auction reset feature (“auction
rate securities”). In February 2008, the auction market failed for
the Company’s auction rate securities, which resulted in the Company being
unable to sell its investments in auction rate securities. As of
September 30, 2008, the Company had approximately $3.1 million invested in
auction rate securities.
During
the three months ended December 31, 2008, the Company entered into agreements
with its investment brokers for the settlement of auction rate securities at
100% par value, of which $1.7 million was settled at 100% par value in November
2008. The remaining $1.4 million of auction rate securities should be
settled by June 2010 and it is classified as a current asset based on its
expected settlement date. In December 2008, the Company borrowed $0.9
million from its investment broker, using its remaining $1.4 million in auction
rate securities as collateral, which is classified as short-term
debt. Since the Company believes that it will receive full value of
its remaining $1.4 million securities, we have not recorded any impairment on
these investments as of June 30, 2009.
Lightron Equity
Securities
In April
2008, the Company invested approximately $1.5 million in Lightron Corporation, a
Korean company that is publicly traded on the Korean Stock
Market. The Company initially accounted for this investment as an
available-for-sale security. Due to the decline in the market value
of this investment and the expectation of non-recovery of this investment beyond
its current market value, the Company recorded a $0.5 million “other than
temporary” impairment loss on this investment as of September 30, 2008 and
another $0.4 million “other than temporary” impairment loss on this investment
as of December 31, 2008. During the quarter ended March 31, 2009, the
Company sold its interest in Lightron Corporation, via several
transactions, for a total of $0.5 million in cash. The Company
recorded a gain on the sale of this investment of approximately $21,000, after
consideration of impairment charges recorded in previous periods, and the
Company also recorded a foreign exchange loss of $0.1 million due to the
conversion from Korean Won to U.S. dollars.
Entech Solar,
Inc. (formerly
named WorldWater and Solar Technologies Corporation)
In
January 2009, the Company announced that it completed the closing of a two step
transaction involving the sale of its remaining interests in Entech Solar, Inc.
The Company sold its remaining shares of Entech Solar Series D Convertible
Preferred Stock and warrants to a significant shareholder of both the Company
and Entech Solar, for approximately $11.6 million, which included additional
consideration of $0.2 million as a result of the termination of certain
operating agreements between the Company and Entech Solar. During the
three months ended March 31, 2009, the Company recognized a gain on the sale of
this investment of approximately $3.1 million.
In June
2008, the Company sold one million shares of Series D Preferred Stock and
100,000 warrants of Entech Solar and recognized a gain on the sale of this
investment of approximately $3.7 million.
NOTE
6. Accounts Receivable
The
components of accounts receivable consisted of the following:
(in
thousands)
|
June
30,
2009
|
September
30, 2008
|
|||||
Accounts
receivable
|
$
|
44,724
|
$
|
57,703
|
|||
Accounts
receivable – unbilled
|
4,488
|
4,987
|
|||||
Accounts
receivable, gross
|
49,212
|
62,690
|
|||||
Allowance
for doubtful accounts
|
(7,320
|
)
|
(2,377
|
)
|
|||
Total
accounts receivable, net
|
$
|
41,892
|
$
|
60,313
|
The
Company regularly evaluates the collectibility of its accounts receivable and
accordingly maintains allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses
resulting from the inability of our customers to meet their financial
obligations to us. The allowance is based on the age of receivables and a
specific identification of receivables considered at risk. The Company
classifies charges associated with the allowance for doubtful accounts as
SG&A expense. If the financial condition of our customers were to
deteriorate, impacting their ability to pay us, additional allowances may be
required.
§
|
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded $2.2 million in
bad debt expense, of which $(0.1) million related to the Fiber Optics
segment and $2.3 million related to the Photovoltaics
segment.
|
§
|
During
the nine months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded $4.8 million in
bad debt expense, of which $0.4 million related to the Fiber Optics
segment and $4.4 million related to the Photovoltaics
segment.
|
NOTE
7. Inventory
Inventory
is stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost being determined using the
standard cost method that includes material, labor, and manufacturing overhead
costs. The components of inventory consisted of the
following:
(in
thousands)
|
June
30,
2009
|
September
30, 2008
|
|||||
Raw
materials
|
$
|
29,983
|
$
|
38,304
|
|||
Work-in-process
|
8,144
|
7,293
|
|||||
Finished
goods
|
15,030
|
32,010
|
|||||
Inventory,
gross
|
53,157
|
77,607
|
|||||
Less:
allowance for excess and obsolescence
|
(13,654
|
)
|
(12,990
|
)
|
|||
Total
inventory, net
|
$
|
39,503
|
$
|
64,617
|
§
|
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded $2.1 million in
inventory write-downs, of which $1.9 million related to the Fiber Optics
segment and $0.2 million related to the Photovoltaics
segment.
|
§
|
During
the nine months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded $14.9 million in
inventory write-downs, of which $9.1 million related to the Fiber Optics
segment and $5.8 million related to the Photovoltaics
segment.
|
We have
incurred, and may in the future incur charges to write-down our
inventory.
NOTE
8. Property, Plant, and Equipment
The
components of property, plant, and equipment consisted of the
following:
(in
thousands)
|
June
30,
2009
|
September
30, 2008
|
|||||
Land
|
$
|
1,502
|
$
|
1,502
|
|||
Building
and improvements
|
34,922
|
44,607
|
|||||
Equipment
|
99,599
|
106,536
|
|||||
Furniture
and fixtures
|
3,065
|
3,127
|
|||||
Computer
hardware and software
|
2,665
|
2,687
|
|||||
Leasehold
improvements
|
1,126
|
478
|
|||||
Construction
in progress
|
2,946
|
4,395
|
|||||
Property,
plant and equipment, gross
|
145,825
|
163,332
|
|||||
Less:
accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
(88,130
|
)
|
(80,054
|
)
|
|||
Total
property, plant and equipment, net
|
$
|
57,695
|
$
|
83,278
|
The
Company reclassified $2,687 as of September 30, 2008 to computer hardware and
software from furniture and fixtures and equipment to conform to the current
period presentation.
As of
June 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008, the Company did not have any significant
capital lease agreements.
During
the nine months ended June 30, 2009, the Company wrote-off approximately $1.2
million of fully amortized fixed assets, related to the Company’s Photovoltaics
segment, that were no longer in use.
Depreciation
expense was $3.2 million and $9.6 million for the three and nine months ended
June 30, 2009, respectively. Depreciation expense was $2.9 million and $6.7
million for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2008,
respectively.
See Note
9, Goodwill and Intangible Assets, for information on impairment charges
recorded by the Company in connection with plant and equipment related to the
Fiber Optics segment.
NOTE
9. Goodwill and Intangible Assets
Goodwill
The
following table sets forth changes in the carrying value of goodwill by
reporting segment:
(in
thousands)
|
Fiber
Optics
|
Photovoltaics
|
Total
|
|||||||||
Balance
at September 30, 2008
|
31,843
|
20,384
|
52,227
|
|||||||||
Goodwill
impairment
|
(31,843
|
)
|
-
|
(31,843
|
)
|
|||||||
Balance
at June 30, 2009
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
20,384
|
$
|
20,384
|
Valuation of
Goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price
of an acquired business over the fair value of the identifiable assets acquired
and liabilities assumed. As required by SFAS 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets, the Company evaluates its goodwill for impairment on an annual
basis, or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying
value of a reporting unit may exceed its fair value. Management has
elected December 31st as the
annual assessment date. Circumstances that could trigger an interim
impairment test include but are not limited to: a significant adverse change in
the market value of the Company’s common stock, the business climate or legal
factors; an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; unanticipated
competition; loss of key personnel; the likelihood that a reporting unit or
significant portion of a reporting unit will be sold or otherwise disposed;
results of testing for recoverability of a significant asset group within a
reporting unit; and recognition of a goodwill impairment loss in the financial
statements of a subsidiary that is a component of a reporting unit.
In
performing goodwill impairment testing, the Company determines the fair value of
each reporting unit using a weighted combination of a market-based approach and
a discounted cash flow (“DCF”) approach. The market-based approach
relies on values based on market multiples derived from comparable public
companies. In applying the DCF approach, management forecasts cash flows over a
five year period using assumptions of current economic conditions and future
expectations of earnings. This analysis requires the exercise of
significant judgment, including judgments about appropriate discount rates based
on the assessment of risks inherent in the amount and timing of projected future
cash flows. The derived discount rate may fluctuate from period to
period as it is based on external market conditions.
All of
these assumptions are critical to the estimate and can change from period to
period. Updates to these assumptions in future periods, particularly
changes in discount rates, could result in different results of goodwill
impairment tests.
§
|
As
disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, as a result of the
unfavorable macroeconomic environment and a significant reduction in our
market capitalization since the completion of the asset acquisitions from
Intel Corporation (the “Intel Acquisitions”), the Company reduced its
internal revenue and profitability forecasts and revised its operating
plans to reflect a general decline in demand and average selling prices,
especially for the Company’s recently acquired telecom-related fiber
optics component products. The Company also performed an
interim test as of September 30, 2008 to determine whether there was
impairment of its goodwill. The fair value of each of the
Company’s reporting units was determined by using a weighted average of
the Guideline Public Company, Guideline Merged and Acquired Company, and
the DCF methods. Due to uncertainty in the Company’s business
outlook arising from the ongoing financial liquidity crisis and the
current economic recession, management believed the most appropriate
approach would be an equally weighted approach, amongst the three methods,
to arrive at an indicated value for each of the reporting
units. The indicated fair value of each of the reporting units
was then compared with the reporting unit’s carrying value to determine
whether there was an indication of impairment of goodwill under SFAS
142. As a result, the Company determined that the goodwill
related to one of its Fiber Optics reporting units may be
impaired. Since the second step of the Company’s goodwill
impairment test was not completed before the fiscal year-end financial
statements were issued and a goodwill impairment loss was probable and
could be reasonably estimated, management recorded a non-cash goodwill
impairment charge of $22.0 million, as a best estimate, during the three
months ended September 30, 2008.
|
§
|
During
the three months ended December 31, 2008, there was further deterioration
of the Company’s market capitalization, significant adverse changes in the
business climate primarily related to product pricing and profit margins,
and an increase in the discount rate. The Company performed its
annual goodwill impairment test as of December 31, 2008 and management
weighted the market-based approach heavier than the DCF method using
information that was available at the
time.
|
§
|
Based
on this analysis, the Company determined that goodwill related to its
Fiber Optics reporting units was fully impaired. As a result,
the Company recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $31.8 million and the
Company’s balance sheet no longer reflects any goodwill associated with
its Fiber Optics reporting units.
|
§
|
The
Company’s annual impairment test as of December 31, 2008, indicated that
there was no impairment of goodwill for the Photovoltaics reporting
unit. Based upon revised operational and cash flow forecasts,
the Photovoltaics reporting unit’s fair value exceeded carrying value by
over 15%.
|
§
|
The
Company continues to report goodwill related to its Photovoltaics
reporting unit and the Company believes the remaining carrying amount of
goodwill is recoverable. However, if there is further erosion
of the Company’s market capitalization or the Photovoltaics reporting unit
is unable to achieve its projected cash flows, management may be required
to perform additional impairment tests of its remaining
goodwill. The outcome of these additional tests may result in
the Company recording additional goodwill impairment
charges.
|
Intangible
Assets
The
following table sets forth changes in the carrying value of intangible assets by
reporting segment:
(in
thousands)
|
June 30,
2009
|
September 30,
2008
|
|||||||||||||||||
Gross
Assets
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
Net
Assets
|
Gross
Assets
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
Net
Assets
|
||||||||||||||
Fiber
Optics
|
$
|
24,419
|
$
|
(11,679
|
)
|
$
|
12,740
|
$
|
35,991
|
$
|
(8,502
|
)
|
$
|
27,489
|
|||||
Photovoltaics
|
1,370
|
(571
|
)
|
799
|
956
|
(412
|
)
|
544
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
25,789
|
$
|
(12,250
|
)
|
$
|
13,539
|
$
|
36,947
|
$
|
(8,914
|
)
|
$
|
28,033
|
Valuation of Long-lived
Assets and Other Intangible Assets. Long-lived assets consist
primarily of our property, plant, and equipment. Our intangible
assets consist primarily of intellectual property that has been internally
developed or purchased. Purchased intangible assets include existing
and core technology, trademarks and trade names, and customer
contracts. Intangible assets are amortized using the straight-line
method over estimated useful lives ranging from one to fifteen
years. Because all of the Company’s intangible assets are subject to
amortization, the Company reviews these intangible assets for impairment in
accordance with the provisions of FASB Statement No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment of
Long-Lived Assets and Long-Lived Assets to be Disposed
Of. As part of internal control procedures, the Company
reviews long-lived assets and other intangible assets for impairment on an
annual basis or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that its
carrying amount may not be recoverable. Our impairment testing of
intangible assets consists of determining whether the carrying amount of the
long-lived asset (asset group) is recoverable, in other words, whether the sum
of the future undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and
eventual disposition of the asset (asset group) exceeds its carrying
amount. The determination of the existence of impairment
involves judgments that are subjective in nature and may require the use of
estimates in forecasting future results and cash flows related to an asset or
group of assets. In making this determination, the Company uses
certain assumptions, including estimates of future cash flows expected to be
generated by these assets, which are based on additional assumptions such as
asset utilization, the length of service that assets will be used in our
operations, and estimated salvage values.
§
|
As
disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, as a result of
reductions to our internal revenue and profitability forecasts, changes to
our internal operating forecasts and a significant reduction in our market
capitalization since the completion of the Intel Acquisitions, the Company
tested for impairment of its long-lived assets and other intangible
assets. The sum of future undiscounted cash flows exceeded the
carrying value for each of the reporting units’ long-lived and other
intangible assets. Accordingly, no impairment existed under
SFAS 144 at September 30, 2008. As the long-lived asset (asset
group) met the recoverability test, no further testing was required or
performed under SFAS 144.
|
§
|
During
the three months ended December 31, 2008, the Company recorded a non-cash
impairment charge totaling $1.9 million related to certain intangible
assets that were acquired from the Intel Acquisitions that were
subsequently abandoned.
|
As of
December 31, 2008, due to further changes in estimates of future operating
performance and cash flows that occurred during the quarter, the Company tested
for impairment of its long-lived assets and other intangible assets and based on
that analysis, determined that no impairment existed.
§
|
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company performed an evaluation
of its Fiber Optics segment assets for impairment. The
impairment test was triggered by a determination that it was more likely
than not that certain assets would be sold or otherwise disposed of before
the end of their previously estimated useful lives. As a result
of the evaluation, it was determined that an impairment existed, and a
charge of $27.0 million was recorded to write down the long-lived assets
to estimated fair value, which was determined based on a combination of
guideline public company comparisons and discounted estimated future cash
flows. Of the total impairment charge, $17.2 million related to
plant and equipment and $9.8 million related to intangible
assets.
|
The
current adverse economic conditions had a significant negative effect on the
Company’s assessment of the fair value of the Fiber Optics segment
assets. The impairment charge primarily resulted from the combined
effect of the current slowdown in product orders and lower pricing exacerbated
by currently high discount rates used in estimating fair values and the effects
of recent declines in market values of debt and equity securities of comparable
public companies. This impairment charge in combination with other non-cash
charges will not cause the Company to be in default under any of its financial
covenants associated with its credit facility nor will it have a material
adverse impact on the Company’s liquidity position or cash flows.
The
determination of enterprise value involved a number of assumptions and
estimates. The Company uses a combination of two fair value inputs to estimate
enterprise value of its reporting units: internal discounted cash flow analyses
(income approach) and comparable company equity values. Recent
pending and/or completed relevant transactions method was not used due to lack
of recent transactions. The income approach involved estimates of future
performance that reflected assumptions regarding, among other things, sales
volumes and expected margins. Another key variable in the income approach was
the discount rate, or weighted average cost of capital. The determination of the
discount rate takes into consideration the capital structure, debt ratings and
current debt yields of comparable companies as well as an estimate of return on
equity that reflects historical market returns and current market volatility for
the industry. Enterprise value estimates based on comparable company equity
values involve using trading multiples of revenue of those selected companies to
derive appropriate multiples to apply to the revenue of the reporting units.
This approach requires an estimate, using historical acquisition data, of an
appropriate control premium to apply to the reporting unit values calculated
from such multiples. Critical judgments include the selection of comparable
companies and the weighting of the two value inputs in developing the best
estimate of enterprise value.
§
|
The
Company believes the carrying amount of its long-lived assets and
intangible assets at June 30, 2009 is recoverable. However, if
there is further erosion of the Company’s market capitalization or the
Company is unable to achieve its projected cash flows, management may be
required to perform additional impairment tests of its remaining
long-lived assets and intangible assets. The outcome of these
additional tests may result in the Company recording additional impairment
charges.
|
Amortization
expense related to intangible assets is generally included in SG&A on the
statements of operations. Amortization expense was $1.2 million and
$3.3 million for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2009,
respectively. Amortization expense was $1.2 million and
$2.3 million for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2008,
respectively.
Based on
the carrying amount of the intangible assets as of June 30, 2009, the estimated
future amortization expense is as follows:
(in
thousands)
|
Estimated
Future Amortization
Expense
|
|||
Three-months
ended September 30, 2009
|
$
|
715
|
||
Fiscal
year ended September 30, 2010
|
2,788
|
|||
Fiscal
year ended September 30, 2011
|
2,400
|
|||
Fiscal
year ended September 30, 2012
|
2,076
|
|||
Fiscal
year ended September 30, 2013
|
1,740
|
|||
Thereafter
|
3,820
|
|||
Total
future amortization expense
|
$
|
13,539
|
NOTE
10. Accrued Expenses and Other Current Liabilities
The
components of accrued expenses and other current liabilities consisted of the
following:
(in
thousands)
|
June
30, 2009
|
September
30, 2008
|
||||||
Compensation-related
|
$
|
5,565
|
$
|
6,640
|
||||
Loss
on firm commitments
|
6,524
|
-
|
||||||
Warranty
|
4,333
|
4,640
|
||||||
Professional
fees
|
1,913
|
2,099
|
||||||
Royalty
|
1,792
|
1,414
|
||||||
Self
insurance
|
1,251
|
1,044
|
||||||
Deferred
revenue and customer deposits
|
1,031
|
1,422
|
||||||
Income
and other taxes
|
506
|
3,555
|
||||||
Inventory
obligation
|
-
|
982
|
||||||
Accrued
program loss
|
180
|
843
|
||||||
Restructuring
accrual
|
89
|
331
|
||||||
Other
|
725
|
320
|
||||||
Total
accrued expenses and other current liabilities
|
$
|
23,909
|
$
|
23,290
|
See Note
13, Commitments and Contingencies, for information regarding the loss on firm
commitments recorded by the Company.
During
the three months ended March 31, 2009, the Company recorded $1.1 million in
product warranty reserves in its Photovoltaics segment, which was primarily
related to new CPV-related product launches.
NOTE
11. Restructuring Charges
In
accordance with SFAS 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with
Exit or Disposal Activities, SG&A expenses recognized as
restructuring charges include costs associated with the integration of business
acquisitions and overall cost-reduction efforts.
The
Company has undertaken several cost cutting initiatives intended to conserve
cash including recent reductions in force, employee furloughs, temporary
reduction of salaries, the elimination of fiscal 2009 merit increases, a
significant reduction in discretionary expenses and capital expenditures and a
greater emphasis on improving its working capital management. These
initiatives are intended to conserve or generate cash in response to the
uncertainties associated with the recent deterioration in the global
economy. Restructuring charges consisted of the
following:
(in
thousands)
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Nine
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||
Employee
severance-related expense
|
$
|
57
|
$
|
4
|
$
|
968
|
$
|
313
|
|||||
Other
restructuring-related expense
|
-
|
8
|
-
|
101
|
|||||||||
Total
restructuring charges
|
$
|
57
|
$
|
12
|
$
|
968
|
$
|
414
|
The
following table sets forth changes in the severance and restructuring-related
accrual accounts as of June 30, 2009:
(in
thousands)
|
Severance-related
Accrual
|
Restructuring-related
Accrual
|
Total
|
||||||||||
Balance
as of September 30, 2008
|
$
|
152
|
$
|
331
|
$
|
483
|
|||||||
Additional
accruals
|
911
|
-
|
911
|
||||||||||
Cash
payments or otherwise settled
|
(1,063
|
)
|
(242
|
)
|
(1,305
|
)
|
|||||||
Balance
as of June 30, 2009
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
89
|
$
|
89
|
The
severance-related and restructuring–related accruals are recorded as accrued
expenses within current liabilities since they are expected to be settled with
the next twelve months. We may incur additional restructuring charges
in the future for employee severance, facility-related or other exit
activities.
NOTE
12. Debt
Line of
Credit
In
September 2008, the Company closed a $25 million asset-backed revolving credit
facility with Bank of America which can be used for working capital, letters of
credit and other general corporate purposes. Subsequently, the credit
facility was amended resulting in a reduction in the total loan availability to
$14 million. The credit facility matures in September 2011 and is
secured by virtually all of the Company’s assets. The credit facility
is subject to a borrowing base formula based on eligible accounts receivable and
provides for prime-based borrowings.
As of
June 30, 2009, the Company had a $5.0 million prime rate loan outstanding, with
an interest rate of 8.25%, and approximately $2.8 million in outstanding standby
letters of credit under this credit facility.
The
facility is also subject to certain financial covenants which management
believes the Company is in compliance with for the three months ended June 30,
2009.
For the
three months ended December 31, 2008, the Company did not meet the requirements
under the EBITDA financial covenant and for the three months ended March 31,
2009, the Company did not meet the requirements under the Fixed Charge Coverage
Ratio and EBITDA financial covenants. Over the last several months,
the Company has entered into several amendments to the credit facility with Bank
of America which has, among other things: (i) increased the amount of eligible
accounts receivable under the borrowing base formula, (ii) waived certain events
of default of financial covenants by the Company, (iii) decreased the
total maximum loan availability amount to $14 million, (iv) increased applicable
interest rates with respect to loans and letters of credit, and (v) adjusted
certain financial covenants. Adjustments were also made to the borrowing
base formula and the calculation of eligible accounts receivable which ,
generally resulted in greater loan availability against accounts receivable
subject to the $14 million overall loan limit.
Short-term
Debt
In
December 2008, the Company borrowed $0.9 million from UBS that is collateralized
with $1.4 million of auction rate securities. The average interest
rate on the loan is approximately 1.4% and the term of the loan is dependent
upon the timing of the settlement of the auction rate securities with UBS which
is expected to occur by June 2010 at 100% par value.
NOTE
13. Commitments and Contingencies
The
Company leases certain land, facilities, and equipment under non-cancelable
operating leases. The leases typically provide for rental adjustments for
increases in base rent (up to specific limits), property taxes, insurance and
general property maintenance that would be recorded as rent expense. Net
facility and equipment rent expense under such leases totaled approximately $0.6
million and $1.9 million for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2009,
respectively and approximately $0.5 million and $1.1 million for the three and
nine months ended June 30, 2008, respectively.
Estimated
future minimum rental payments under the Company's non-cancelable operating
leases with an initial or remaining term of one year or more as of June 30, 2009
are as follows:
(in
thousands)
|
Estimated
Future Minimum Lease Payments
|
|||
Three
months ended September 30, 2009
|
$
|
506
|
||
Fiscal
year ended September 30, 2010
|
1,958
|
|||
Fiscal
year ended September 30, 2011
|
1,814
|
|||
Fiscal
year ended September 30, 2012
|
1,068
|
|||
Fiscal
year ended September 30, 2013
|
796
|
|||
Thereafter
|
2,774
|
|||
Total
minimum lease payments
|
$
|
8,916
|
As of
June 30, 2009, the Company had eleven standby letters of credit issued and
outstanding which totaled approximately $3.3 million, of which $2.8 million was
issued against the Company’s credit facility with Bank of America and the
remaining $0.5 million in standby letters of credit are collateralized with
other financial institutions and are listed on the Company’s balance sheet as
restricted cash.
Loss on firm
commitments
Recently,
the Company has been challenged with higher than expected inventory positions of
product in its Fiber Optics segment as quarterly sales were lower than internal
projections of many of our customers, which has had a significant adverse effect
on results of operations in fiscal 2009. Management performed an
analysis of the Company’s inventory position, including a review of open
purchase and sales commitments, and determined that certain inventory was
impaired which resulted in a $6.5 million loss on purchase and sales commitments
specifically related to inventory. These impairment charges were
recognized in cost of revenues.
Legal
Proceedings
The
Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that are discussed
below. The Company is also subject to certain other legal proceedings and claims
that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and which have not been
fully adjudicated. The Company does not believe it has a potential
liability related to current legal proceedings and claims that could
individually, or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on its
financial condition, liquidity or results of operations. However, the results of
legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. Should the Company fail to
prevail in any legal matters or should several legal matters be resolved against
the Company in the same reporting period, then the operating results of that
particular reporting period could be materially adversely
affected. During fiscal 2008, the Company settled certain matters
that did not individually, or in the aggregate, have a material impact on the
Company’s results of operations.
a)
Intellectual Property Lawsuits
We
protect our proprietary technology by applying for patents where appropriate
and, in other cases, by preserving the technology, related know-how and
information as trade secrets. The success and competitive position of our
product lines are significantly impacted by our ability to obtain intellectual
property protection for our R&D efforts.
We have,
from time to time, exchanged correspondence with third parties regarding the
assertion of patent or other intellectual property rights in connection with
certain of our products and processes. Additionally, on September 11, 2006, we
filed a lawsuit against Optium Corporation, currently part of Finisar
Corporation (Optium) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania for patent infringement of certain patents associated with our
Fiber Optics segment. In the suit, the Company and JDS Uniphase Corporation
(JDSU) allege that Optium is infringing on U.S. patents 6,282,003 and 6,490,071
with its Prisma II 1550nm transmitters. On March 14, 2007, following denial of a
motion to add additional claims to its existing lawsuit, the Company and JDSU
filed a second patent suit in the same court against Optium alleging
infringement of JDSU's patent 6,519,374 ("the '374 patent"). On March
15, 2007, Optium filed a declaratory judgment action against the Company and
JDSU. Optium sought in this litigation a declaration that certain products of
Optium do not infringe the '374 patent and that the patent is invalid, but the
District Court dismissed the action on January 3, 2008 without addressing the
merits. The '374 patent is assigned to JDSU and licensed to the
Company.
On
December 20, 2007, the Company was served with a complaint in another
declaratory relief action which Optium had filed in the Federal District Court
for the Western District of Pennsylvania. This action seeks to have
U.S. patents 6,282,003 and 6,490,071 declared invalid or unenforceable because
of certain conduct alleged to have occurred in connection with the grant of
these patents. These allegations are substantially the same as those
brought by Optium by motion in the Company’s own case against Optium, which
motion had been denied by the Court. On August 11, 2008, both actions
pending in the Western District of Pennsylvania were consolidated before a
single judge, and a trial date of October 19, 2009 was set. On
February 18, 2009, the Company’s motion for a summary judgment dismissing
Optium’s declaratory relief action was granted, and on March 11, 2009, the
Company was notified that Optium intended to file an appeal of this
order.
b)
Avago-related Litigation
On July
15, 2008, the Company was served with a complaint filed by Avago Technologies
and what appear to be affiliates thereof in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California, San Jose Division (Avago Technologies U.S.,
Inc., et al., Emcore
Corporation, et al.,
Case No.: C08-3248 JW). In this complaint, Avago asserts
claims for breach of contract and breach of express warranty against Venture
Corporation Limited (one of the Company’s customers) and asserts a tort claim
for negligent interference with prospective economic advantage against the
Company
On
December 5, 2008, EMCORE was also served with a complaint by Avago Technologies
filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, San Jose Division alleging infringement of two patents by the
Company’s VCSEL products. (Avago Technologies Singapore et al., Emcore Corporation,
et al., Case
No.: C08-5394 EMC). This matter has been stayed pending
resolution of the International Trade Commission matter described
immediately below.
On March
5, 2009, the Company was notified that, based on a complaint filed by Avago
alleging the same patent infringement that formed the basis of the complaint
previously filed in the Northern District of California, the U.S. International
Trade Commission had determined to begin an investigation titled “In the Matter
of Certain Optoelectronic Devices, Components Thereof and Products Containing
the Same”, Inv. No. 337-TA-669.
The
Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations of all of the Avago
complaints.
c)
Green and Gold related litigation
On
December 23, 2008, Plaintiffs Maurice Prissert and Claude Prissert filed a
purported stockholder class action (the “Prissert Class Action”) pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 allegedly on behalf of a class of Company
shareholders against the Company and certain of its present and former directors
and officers (the “Individual Defendants”) in the United States District Court
for the District of New Mexico captioned, Maurice Prissert and Claude Prissert
v. EMCORE Corporation, Adam Gushard, Hong Q. Hou, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., David
Danzilio and Thomas Werthan, Case No. 1:08cv1190 (D.N.M.). The
Complaint alleges that Company and the Individual Defendants violated certain
provisions of the federal securities laws, including Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, arising out of the Company’s disclosure
regarding its customer Green and Gold Energy (“GGE”) and the associated backlog
of GGE orders with the Company’s Photovoltaics business segment. The
Complaint in the Class Action seeks, among other things, an unspecified amount
of compensatory damages and other costs and expenses associated with the
maintenance of the Action.
On or
about February 12, 2009, a second purported stockholder class action (Mueller v. EMCORE Corporation et
al., Case No. 1:09cv 133 (D.N.M.)) was filed in the United States
District Court for the District of New Mexico against the same defendants named
in the Prissert Class Action, based on the substantially the same facts and
circumstances, containing substantially the same allegations and seeking
substantially the same relief. Plaintiffs in both class actions have
moved to consolidate the matters into a single action, and several alleged
EMCORE shareholders have moved to be appointed lead class plaintiff of the to-be
consolidated action. The Court has not yet consolidated the two class
actions or selected the lead plaintiff for these class actions
On
January 23, 2009, Plaintiff James E. Stearns filed a purported stockholder
derivative action (the “Stearns Derivative Action”) on behalf of the Company
against certain of its present and former directors and officers (the
“Individual Defendants”), as well as the Company as nominal defendant in the
Superior Court of New Jersey, Atlantic County, Chancery Division (James E. Stearns, derivatively on
behalf of EMCORE Corporation v. Thomas J. Russell, Robert Bogomolny,
Charles Scott, John Gillen, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., Hong Q. Hou, Adam Gushard,
David Danzilio and Thomas Werthan, Case No. Atl-C-10-09). This
action is based on essentially the same factual contentions as the Class Action,
and alleges that the Individual Defendants engaged in improprieties and
violations of law in connection with the reporting of the GGE
backlog. The Derivative Action seeks several forms of relief,
allegedly on behalf of the Company, including, among other things, damages,
equitable relief, corporate governance reforms, an accounting of, rescission of,
restitution of, and costs and disbursements of the lawsuit.
On March
11, 2009, Plaintiff Gary Thomas filed a second purported shareholder derivative
action (the “Thomas Derivative Action”; together with the Stearns Derivative
Action, the “Derivative Actions”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of
New Mexico against the Company and certain of the Individual
Defendants (Gary Thomas, derivatively on behalf
of EMCORE Corporation v. Thomas J. Russell, Robert Bogomolny, Charles
Scott, John Gillen, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., Hong Q. Hou, and EMCORE
Corporation, Case No. 1.09-cv-00236, (D.N.M.)). The Thomas
Derivative Action makes the same allegations as the Stearns Derivative Action
and seeks essentially the same relief.
The
Stearns Derivative Action has recently been transferred to Somerset County, New
Jersey. The plaintiff in the Thomas Derivative Action has recently
voluntarily dismissed the action in U.S. District Court for the District of New
Mexico. The parties have stipulated that the statute of limitations
in the Thomas Derivative Action will be tolled until December 31,
2009. Plaintiff’s counsel has indicated that if the Thomas Derivative
Action is re-filed, it would be filed in New Jersey state court in the County of
Somerset, New Jersey, so that both derivative actions can be consolidated before
a single judge.
The
Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations of both the Class
Actions and the Derivative Action.
d)
Securities Matters
§
|
SEC
Communications. On or about August 15, 2008, the Company
received a letter from the Denver office of the Enforcement Division of
the Securities and Exchange Commission wherein it sought EMCORE's
voluntary production of documents relating to, among other things, the
Company's business relationship with Green and Gold Energy, Inc., its
licensees, and the Photovoltaics segment backlog the Company reported to
the public. Since that time, the Company has provided documents
to the staff of the SEC and met with the staff on December 12, 2008 to
address this matter. On June 10, 2009, the SEC staff requested
that the Company voluntarily provide documentary backup for certain
information presented at the December 2008 meeting, which was provided on
July 17, 2009, and arrange for a telephone interview with one former
employee, which has not yet been
scheduled.
|
§
|
NASDAQ
Communication. On or about November 13, 2008, the Company
received a letter from the NASDAQ Listings Qualifications group (“NASDAQ”)
concerning the Company's removal of $79 million in backlog attributable to
GGE which the Company announced on August 8, 2008 and the remaining
backlog exclusive of GGE. The Company advised NASDAQ that it would
cooperate with its inquiry. To date, the Company has received
three additional requests for information from NASDAQ (the latter 2 of
which requested updates on the SEC matter). The Company has
complied with each of NASDAQ’s
requests.
|
NOTE
14. Income Taxes
On
October 1, 2007, the Company adopted Interpretation No. 48 (FIN 48), Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes, an interpretation of SFAS 109. As a result of the adoption
of FIN 48, the Company recorded an increase in accumulated deficit and an
increase in the liability for unrecognized state tax benefits of approximately
$326,000 (net of the federal benefit for state tax liabilities). All
of this amount, if recognized, would reduce future income tax provisions and
favorably impact effective tax rates. During the three and nine
months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, there were no material increases or
decreases in unrecognized tax benefits. Management expects that over
the next twelve months, the liability for unrecognized state tax benefits will
substantially decrease and does not anticipate any material increases over the
next twelve months. As of June 30, 2009, the Company had
approximately $139,000 of interest and penalties accrued as tax liabilities on
the balance sheet.
The
Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal, state and local
jurisdictions and, currently, no federal, state, and local income tax returns
are under examination. Certain income tax returns for fiscal years 2006 through
2008 remain open to examination by U.S. federal, state and local tax
authorities.
NOTE
15. Segment Data and Related Information
The
Company has two reporting segments: Fiber Optics and
Photovoltaics. Our Fiber Optics segment offers optical components,
subsystems and systems that enable the transmission of video, voice and data
over high-capacity fiber optic cables for high-speed data and
telecommunications, cable television (“CATV”) and fiber-to-the-premises (“FTTP”)
networks. Our Photovoltaics segment provides solar products for
satellite and terrestrial applications. For satellite applications, we offer
high-efficiency compound semiconductor-based multi-junction solar cells, covered
interconnect cells (“CICs”) and fully integrated solar panels. For
terrestrial applications, we offer concentrating photovoltaic (“CPV”) systems
for utility scale solar applications as well as high-efficiency multi-junction
solar cells and CPV components for use in solar power concentrator
systems. We periodically evaluate our reportable segments in
accordance with SFAS 131, Disclosures about Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information. The Company’s Chief Executive Officer
is the Chief Operating Decision Maker pursuant to SFAS 131, and he allocates
resources to segments based on their business prospects, competitive factors,
revenue, operating results and other non-GAAP financial ratios.
The
following table sets forth the revenue and percentage of total revenue
attributable to each of the Company’s reporting segments.
Segment
Revenue
(in
thousands)
|
Three
Months Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Revenue
|
% of Revenue
|
Revenue
|
% of Revenue
|
|||||||||||||
Fiber
Optics
|
$
|
22,399
|
58
|
%
|
$
|
53,589
|
71
|
%
|
||||||||
Photovoltaics
|
16,090
|
42
|
21,913
|
29
|
||||||||||||
Total
revenue
|
$
|
38,489
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
75,502
|
100
|
%
|
Segment
Revenue
(in
thousands)
|
Nine
Months Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Revenue
|
% of Revenue
|
Revenue
|
% of Revenue
|
|||||||||||||
Fiber
Optics
|
$
|
89,979
|
66
|
%
|
$
|
125,179
|
70
|
%
|
||||||||
Photovoltaics
|
45,850
|
34
|
53,489
|
30
|
||||||||||||
Total
revenue
|
$
|
135,829
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
178,668
|
100
|
%
|
The
following table sets forth the Company’s consolidated revenue by geographic
region with revenue assigned to geographic regions based on our customers’ or
contract manufacturers’ billing address.
Geographic
Revenue
(in
thousands)
|
Three
Months Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Revenue
|
% of Revenue
|
Revenue
|
% of Revenue
|
|||||||||||||
United
States
|
$
|
23,466
|
61
|
%
|
$
|
47,586
|
63
|
%
|
||||||||
Asia
|
9,427
|
24
|
19,359
|
26
|
||||||||||||
Europe
|
1,733
|
5
|
8,306
|
11
|
||||||||||||
Other
|
3,863
|
10
|
251
|
-
|
||||||||||||
Total
revenue
|
$
|
38,489
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
75,502
|
100
|
%
|
Geographic
Revenue
(in
thousands)
|
Nine
Months Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||||
Revenue
|
% of Revenue
|
Revenue
|
% of Revenue
|
|||||||||||||
United
States
|
$
|
80,562
|
59
|
%
|
$
|
114,656
|
64
|
%
|
||||||||
Asia
|
41,473
|
31
|
42,823
|
24
|
||||||||||||
Europe
|
6,906
|
5
|
20,624
|
12
|
||||||||||||
Other
|
6,888
|
5
|
565
|
-
|
||||||||||||
Total
revenue
|
$
|
135,829
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
178,668
|
100
|
%
|
The
following table sets forth our significant customer, defined as customers that
represented greater than 10% of total consolidated revenue, by reporting
segment.
Significant
Customer
As
a percentage of total consolidated revenue
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Nine
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|||||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
||||||||||||
Photovoltaics
– related customer:
|
|||||||||||||||
Space
Systems / Loral
|
12%
|
-
|
14%
|
-
|
The
following table sets forth operating losses attributable to each of the
Company’s reporting segments.
Operating
Loss by Segment
(in
thousands)
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Nine
Months Ended
June
30,
|
||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||
Fiber
Optics
|
$
|
(45,380
|
)
|
$
|
(4,234
|
)
|
$
|
(110,578
|
)
|
$
|
(11,735
|
)
|
Photovoltaics
|
(616
|
)
|
(7,213
|
)
|
(13,739
|
)
|
(20,549
|
)
|
||||
Corporate
|
-
|
(195
|
)
|
(2)
|
(1,483
|
)
|
||||||
Operating
loss
|
$
|
(45,996
|
)
|
$
|
(11,642
|
)
|
$
|
(124,319
|
)
|
$
|
(33,767
|
)
|
The
following table sets forth the depreciation and amortization attributable to
each of the Company’s reporting segments.
Segment
Depreciation and Amortization
(in
thousands)
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Nine
Months Ended
June
30,
|
||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||
Fiber
Optics
|
$
|
2,859
|
$
|
2,920
|
$
|
8,475
|
$
|
5,917
|
||||
Photovoltaics
|
1,494
|
1,230
|
4,387
|
2,998
|
||||||||
Corporate
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
77
|
||||||||
Total
depreciation and amortization
|
$
|
4,354
|
$
|
4,150
|
$
|
12,862
|
$
|
8,992
|
The
following table sets forth long-lived assets (consisting of property, plant and
equipment, goodwill and intangible assets) for each of the Company’s reporting
segments.
Long-lived
Assets
(in
thousands)
|
As
of
June
30, 2009
|
As
of
September
30, 2008
|
|||||
Fiber
Optics
|
$
|
39,270
|
$
|
107,684
|
|||
Photovoltaics
|
51,520
|
55,232
|
|||||
Corporate
|
828
|
622
|
|||||
Total
long-lived assets
|
$
|
91,618
|
$
|
163,538
|
NOTE
16. Fair Value Accounting
Accounting
Pronouncements
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 157, Fair Value Measurements,
which defines fair value, providing a framework for measuring fair value,
and expands the disclosures required for fair value measurements. SFAS 157
applies to accounting pronouncements that require fair value measurements and it
does not require any new fair value measurements. The statement
provides that a fair value measurement assumes that the transaction to sell an
asset or transfer a liability occurs in the principal market for the asset or
liability or, in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market
for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants
on the measurement date. SFAS 157 defines fair value based upon an
exit price model and it is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007 and for interim periods within those
years. Management adopted SFAS 157 on October 1, 2008 and it did not
have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities – Including an Amendment of FASB Statement No.
115. The fair value option permits entities to choose to measure eligible
financial instruments at fair value at specified election dates and provides
that unrealized gains and losses on the items on which it has elected the fair
value option will be reported in its earnings. SFAS 159 is effective for fiscal
years beginning after November 15, 2007. The Company adopted SFAS 159
on October 1, 2008. The Company evaluated its existing financial
instruments and elected not to adopt the fair value option to account for its
financial instruments. As a result, SFAS 159 did not have any impact
on the Company’s financial condition or results of
operations. However, because the SFAS 159 election is based on an
instrument-by-instrument election at the time the Company first recognizes an
eligible item or enters into an eligible firm commitment, the Company may decide
to elect the fair value option on new items should business reasons support
doing so in the future.
In
February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Positions (“FSP”) No. 157-1 and
157-2. FSP 157-1 amends SFAS 157 to exclude SFAS No. 13, Accounting for Leases, and
its related interpretive accounting pronouncements that address leasing
transactions, while FSP 157-2 delays the effective date of the application of
SFAS 157 to fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008 for all non-financial
assets and non-financial liabilities that are recognized or disclosed at fair
value in the financial statements on a nonrecurring basis. Non-recurring
non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities for which the Company has not
applied the provisions of SFAS 157 include those measured at fair value in
goodwill impairment testing, intangible assets measured at fair value for
impairment testing, asset retirement obligations initially measured at fair
value, and those initially measured at fair value in a business
combination.
In
October 2008, the FASB issued FSP SFAS No. 157-3, Determining the Fair Value of a
Financial Asset When The Market for That Asset Is Not Active, to clarify
the application of the provisions of SFAS 157 in an inactive market and how
an entity would determine fair value in an inactive market. FSP 157-3 was
effective upon issuance and the application of the provisions of FSP 157-3
did not materially affect our results of operations or financial
condition.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position SFAS 157-4, Determining Fair Value When the
Volume and Level of Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly
Decreased and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly. FSP 157-4
provides guidance on how to determine the fair value of assets and liabilities
when the volume and level of activity for the asset/liability has significantly
decreased. FSP 157-4 also provides guidance on identifying circumstances that
indicate a transaction is not orderly. In addition, FSP 157-4 requires
disclosure in interim and annual periods of the inputs and valuation techniques
used to measure fair value and a discussion of changes in valuation techniques.
FSP 157-4 was effective for interim reporting period ended June 15, 2009
and the application of the provisions of FSP 157-4 did not materially
affect our results of operations or financial condition.
In April
2009, the FASB issued Staff Position SFAS No. 107-1 and Accounting Principles
Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 28-1, Interim Disclosures about Fair Value
of Financial Instruments. SFAS No. 107-1 and APB No. 28-1 amend FASB
Statement No. 107, Disclosures
about Fair Values of Financial Instruments, to require disclosures about
fair value of financial instruments in interim financial statements as well as
in annual financial statements. SFAS No. 107-1 and APB No. 28-1 also amend APB
Opinion No. 28, Interim
Financial Reporting, to require those disclosures in all interim
financial statements. SFAS No. 107-1 and APB No. 28-1 are effective
for interim periods ending after June 15, 2009. SFAS 107-1 was
effective for interim reporting period ended June 15, 2009 and the application
of the provisions of SFAS 107-1 did not materially affect our results of
operations or financial condition.
Fair Value
Disclosure
SFAS 157
establishes a valuation hierarchy for disclosure of the inputs to valuation used
to measure fair value. Valuation techniques used to measure fair value under
SFAS 157 must maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of
unobservable inputs. The standard describes 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:
·
|
Level
1 inputs are unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical
assets or liabilities.
|
·
|
Level
2 inputs are quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active
markets or inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either
directly or indirectly through market corroboration, for substantially the
full term of the financial
instrument.
|
·
|
Level
3 inputs are unobservable inputs based on our own assumptions used to
measure assets and liabilities at fair value. A financial asset or
liability’s classification within the hierarchy is determined based on the
lowest level input that is significant to the fair value
measurement.
|
The
following table provides the Company’s financial assets and liabilities,
consisting of the following types of instruments, measured at fair value on a
recurring basis as of June 30, 2009:
(in
thousands)
|
June
30, 2009
|
|||||||||||||||
Quoted
Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets
[Level
1]
|
Significant
Other Observable Remaining Inputs
[Level
2]
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
[Level
3]
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||
Assets
|
||||||||||||||||
Money
market fund deposits
|
$
|
9,386
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
9,386
|
||||||||
Restricted
fund deposits
|
529
|
-
|
-
|
529
|
||||||||||||
Asset-backed
auction rate securities
|
-
|
1,400
|
-
|
1,400
|
||||||||||||
Total
assets measured at fair value
|
$
|
9,915
|
$
|
1,400
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
11,315
|
The
following table provides the Company’s financial assets and liabilities,
measured and recorded at fair value on a recurring basis, as presented on our
condensed consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2009:
(in
thousands)
|
June
30, 2009
|
|||||||||||||||
Quoted
Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets
[Level
1]
|
Significant
Other Observable Remaining Inputs
[Level
2]
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
[Level
3]
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||
Assets
|
||||||||||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
9,386
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
9,386
|
||||||||
Restricted
cash
|
366
|
-
|
-
|
366
|
||||||||||||
Available-for-sale
securities, non current
|
-
|
1,400
|
-
|
1,400
|
||||||||||||
Long-term
restricted cash
|
163
|
-
|
-
|
163
|
||||||||||||
Total
assets measured at fair value
|
$
|
9,915
|
$
|
1,400
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
11,315
|
The
Company classifies investments within Level 1 if quoted prices are available in
active markets. Level 1 assets include instruments valued based on
quoted market prices in active markets which generally could include money
market funds, corporate publicly traded equity securities on major exchanges and
U.S. Treasury notes with quoted prices on active markets.
The
Company classifies items in Level 2 if the investments are valued using
observable inputs to quoted market prices, benchmark yields, reported trades,
broker/dealer quotes or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of
price transparency. These investments could include: government agencies,
corporate bonds, commercial paper, and auction rate securities.
The
Company did not hold financial assets and liabilities which were valued using
unobservable inputs as of June 30, 2009.
The
carrying amounts of accounts receivable, short-term debt, accounts payable,
accrued expenses and other current liabilities approximate fair value because of
the short maturity of these instruments.
This
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q includes forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 21E of the
Exchange Act of 1934. These forward-looking statements are based
largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and
financial trends affecting the financial condition of our
business. Such forward-looking statements include, in particular,
projections about our future results included in our Exchange Act reports,
statements about our plans, strategies, business prospects, changes and trends
in our business and the markets in which we operate. These
forward-looking statements may be identified by the use of terms and phrases
such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “projects”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “plans”,
believes”, “estimates”, “targets”, “can”, “may”, “could”, “will”, and variations
of these terms and similar phrases. Management cautions that these
forward-looking statements relate to future events or our future financial
performance and are subject to business, economic, and other risks and
uncertainties, both known and unknown, that may cause actual results, levels of
activity, performance or achievements of our business or our industry to be
materially different from those expressed or implied by any forward-looking
statements. The cautionary statements should be read as being
applicable to all forward-looking statements wherever they appear in this
Quarterly Report. This discussion should also be read in conjunction with the
condensed consolidated financial statements, including the related
notes.
These
forward-looking statements include, without limitation, any and all statements
or implications regarding:
§
|
The
ability of EMCORE Corporation (the “Company”, “we”, “our”, or “EMCORE”) to
obtain financing or sell assets and achieve levels of revenue and cost
reductions that are adequate to support our capital and operating
requirements in order to continue as a going
concern.
|
§
|
Our
ability to remain competitive within our industry and the future growth of
the Company, and our industry, and the recovery of financial markets, the
markets for our products, and economic conditions in
general;
|
§
|
Our
ability to achieve structural and material cost reductions without
impacting product development or manufacturing
execution;
|
§
|
Expected
improvements in our product and technology development
programs;
|
§
|
Our
ability to successfully develop, introduce, market and qualify new
products, including our concentrating photovoltaic (CPV) terrestrial solar
products;
|
§
|
Our
ability to identify and acquire suitable acquisition targets and
difficulties in integrating recent or future acquisitions into our
operations; and,
|
§
|
Other
risks and uncertainties described in our filings with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”), including our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008, such as: cancellations,
rescheduling or delays in product shipments; manufacturing capacity
constraints; lengthy sales and qualification cycles; difficulties in the
production process; changes in semiconductor industry growth; increased
competition; delays in developing and commercializing new products; and
other factors.
|
Neither
management nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and
completeness of the forward-looking statements. All forward-looking
statements in this Quarterly Report are made as of the date hereof, based on
information available to us as of the date hereof, and subsequent facts or
circumstances may contradict, obviate, undermine, or otherwise fail to support
or substantiate such statements. We caution you not to rely on these
statements without also considering the risks and uncertainties associated with
these statements and our business that are addressed in this Quarterly Report
and in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30,
2008. Certain information included in this Quarterly Report may
supersede or supplement forward-looking statements in our other Exchange Act
reports filed with the SEC. We assume no obligation to update any
forward-looking statement to conform such statements to actual results or to
changes in our expectations, except as required by applicable law or
regulation.
Business
Overview
EMCORE
Corporation (the “Company”, “we”, “our”, or “EMCORE”) is a provider of compound
semiconductor-based components and subsystems for the fiber optic and solar
power markets. We were established in 1984 as a New Jersey
corporation and have two reporting segments: Fiber Optics and
Photovoltaics. Our Fiber Optics segment offers optical components,
subsystems and systems that enable the transmission of video, voice and data
over high-capacity fiber optic cables for high-speed data and
telecommunications, cable television (“CATV”) and fiber-to-the-premises (“FTTP”)
networks. Our Photovoltaics segment provides solar products for
satellite and terrestrial applications. For satellite applications, we offer
high-efficiency compound semiconductor-based multi-junction solar cells, covered
interconnect cells (“CICs”) and fully integrated solar panels. For
terrestrial applications, we offer concentrating photovoltaic (“CPV”) power
systems for commercial and utility scale solar applications as well as
high-efficiency multi-junction solar cells and integrated CPV components for use
in other solar power concentrator systems. Our headquarters and
principal executive offices are located at 10420 Research Road, SE, Albuquerque,
New Mexico, 87123, and our main telephone number is (505)
332-5000. For specific information about our Company, our products or
the markets we serve, please visit our website at
http://www.emcore.com. The information on our website is not
incorporated into this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Strategy
The
Company’s management has believed for some time that, due to much dissimilarity
between the businesses of the Company’s Fiber Optics and Photovoltaics
businesses, they would provide the greatest value to shareholders if they were
operated as two separate business entities. Over the past two years,
the Company entered into several acquisitions to strengthen one or both of these
businesses with a view toward their eventual separation. On April 4, 2008, the
Company announced that its Board of Directors had formally authorized management
to prepare a comprehensive operational and strategic plan for the separation of
these businesses into separate corporations. Management began
assessing alternative methods for achieving this goal; however, the subsequent
onset of the world-wide economic and financial crisis has had a significant
adverse impact on these plans. A dramatic reduction in customer
demand for many of the Company’s Fiber Optics products has significantly lowered
revenue and cash flow in that business unit, while a shortage of debt and equity
capital, a decline in the price of conventional energy sources, and a generally
cautious and conservative attitude in all segments of the government and
business sectors has delayed the opportunities for expanded deployment of the
Company’s terrestrial photovoltaic products and systems.
As a
result, the Company has instituted a series of initiatives aimed at conserving
and generating cash over the next twelve months, as described above under
“Liquidity Matters - Management Actions and Plans”. The Company’s
strategy over the short term will be focused on the successful implementation of
these initiatives. The Company also continues to investigate a wide
variety of strategic options for the purpose of maximizing shareholder
value. No determination has yet been made regarding which options
will be pursued.
Pending
implementation of any such strategic option, the Company will continue to pursue
its existing strategy of leveraging our expertise in advanced compound
semiconductor technologies to be a leading provider of high-performance,
cost-effective product solutions in each of the markets that we
serve. Key elements of our strategy include:
Drive Business Growth,
Reduce Cost, and Deliver Profitability.
We
believe that as compound semiconductor production costs continue to be reduced,
existing and new customers will be compelled to increase their use of these
products because of their attractive performance characteristics and superior
value. With our enhanced product portfolio, expanded customer base,
and established vertically-integrated, low-cost manufacturing infrastructure in
our fiber optics business, we are better positioned to leverage our resources
and infrastructure to grow our revenue through new product introductions and
gain market share. We expect several initiatives for cost reduction
to come to fruition during the remainder of 2009, which we believe will
eventually improve our gross profit and margins. We are committed to
achieving profitability by increasing revenue through the introduction of new
products, reducing our cost structure and lowering the breakeven points of our
product lines. We have significantly streamlined our manufacturing
operations by focusing on core competencies to identify cost efficiencies. Where
appropriate, we transferred the manufacturing of certain product lines to
low-cost contract manufacturers when we can lower costs while maintaining
quality and reliability. Our restructuring programs are designed to further
reduce the number of headcount, manufacturing facilities, in addition to the
divesture or exit from selected businesses and product lines that are not
strategic and/or are not capable of achieving desired revenue or profitability
goals. Our results of operations and financial condition have and
will likely continue to be significantly affected by severance, restructuring
charges, impairment of long-lived assets and idle facility expenses
incurred. We have also significantly reduced capital expenditures and
have placed a greater emphasis on improving our working capital
management.
Focus Our R&D Effort on
Cost Reduction and Market Share Gain.
We have
invested substantially in research and development and product engineering over
the past years. We have developed a clear path towards business growth and are
recognized as a technology leader in both our Fiber Optics and Photovoltaics
segments. Throughout the rest of 2009, we will continue to be
focusing our R&D and product engineering efforts on product cost reduction
and market share gain through more complete product solutions for our
customers. In this challenging economic environment, we have to be
very selective in allocating our R&D resources to develop competitive
technologies and products as a means to leapfrog
our competitors.
Grow Our Terrestrial Solar
Power Business by a Focus on Our Core Competencies.
For our
CPV component business, we intend to continue to secure and expand our
leadership position by providing high-performance, reliable, and cost-effective
products and excellent customer service. We expect our Gen-III CPV
terrestrial solar power system to provide a competitive levelized cost of energy
for commercial and utility scale projects in certain regions. In August 2009, we
announced to our employees a restructuring of our solar business, combining the
satellite and terrestrial solar businesses within a single business
unit. We also implemented a new marketing strategy which will focus
on EMCORE’s traditional competencies in technological innovation, systems design
and engineering while retaining our unique competitive advantage as the only
vertically integrated competitor in the CPV market. We will continue
to develop and expand partnerships and other ventures with major companies, both
domestically and internationally, to drive the deployment of terrestrial CPV
components and systems.
Quarter
Highlights
Long Term Supply Agreement
with Space Systems Loral
On May
20, 2009, the Company announced that Space Systems Loral, a subsidiary of Loral
Space & Communications, has awarded a long term supply agreement contract to
the Company's Photovoltaics segment to manufacture and deliver high-efficiency,
multi-junction solar cells for Space Systems Loral's spacecraft programs. The
period of performance for the contract is 2009 through 2014 and the solar cells
will be produced at the Company’s state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities
located in Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
Christopher M. Larocca Named
Chief Operating Officer
On June
4, 2009, the Company announced that Christopher M. Larocca has been named Chief
Operating Officer of the Company. Mr. Larocca reports to the
Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Hong Q. Hou.
Solar Panel Manufacturing
Contract for NASA's Global Precipitation Measurement Mission
On June
16, 2009, the Company announced that it was awarded a contract to manufacture,
test, and deliver solar panels for NASA's Global Precipitation Measurement
spacecraft. The contract, valued at approximately $5 million, will be managed by
MEI Technologies, Inc. for the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
(GSFC). The Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission is
one of the satellite-based science missions studying global precipitation,
including rain, snow, and ice. The launch of the spacecraft is presently
scheduled for the summer of 2013. The GPM spacecraft solar arrays will be
powered by the Company’s latest generation, 30% efficiency class ZTJ
multi-junction solar cells.
Contract from Air Force
Research Laboratory
On June
22, 2009, the Company announced it was awarded a $5.7 million cost-plus
fixed-fee contract from the Air Force Research Laboratory, located at the
Kirtland Air Force Base, for the development of high-efficiency photovoltaic
solar cells. The two-year contract calls for the Company to
demonstrate high efficiency solar cells for space applications, as well as
investigate advanced photovoltaic devices based on inverted metamorphic (IMM)
structures. The contract also includes a provision for an additional
twelve-month award of $3.4 million for advanced IMM development once the base
contract has been completed. Funding for the entire contract has been
appropriated.
Solar Power Agreement with
PNM
On June
23, 2009, the Company announced a formal agreement with PNM of New Mexico to
participate in PNM's large distributed generation (DG) solar power program. This
20-year agreement with EMCORE consists of 114 kilowatts of solar power produced
onsite at the Company's corporate headquarters in Albuquerque,
N.M. The power is generated by EMCORE's GEN-II and GEN-III CPV
terrestrial solar power systems.
Reclassification of the
Company’s Space Solar Cells for Export Control
On July
20, 2009, the Company became aware that, as a result of a commodity jurisdiction
request submitted by one of its customers, the Directorate of Defense Trade
Controls of the United States Department of State had determined that future
shipments of the Company’s current-generation family of triple junction solar
cells would no longer be subject to regulation under the International Traffic
in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”) regulations administered by that Directorate of
Defense Trade Controls (which require an export license for all non-U.S.
sales). Rather, the cells would subject to the Export Administration
Regulations (“EAR”) administered by the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of
Industry and Security, and would be classified as ECCN
3A001.e.4. Under this classification, the requirement for a license
will depend on the end use of the product, the final destination and the
identity of the end user. The Company believes that this
reclassification will remove what had been a significant barrier to
international sales of its space solar cells.
Solar Contract
Awarded from Boeing
On July
30, 2009, the Company announced an industry team led by The Boeing Company has
received a contract from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
for work on Phase 2 of the Fast Access Spacecraft Testbed (FAST) program. The
$15.5 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract is currently funded to $13.8
million. DARPA's FAST program aims to develop a new,
ultra-lightweight High Power Generation System (HPGS) that can generate up to
175 kilowatts -- more power than is currently available to the International
Space Station. When combined with electric propulsion, FAST will form the
foundation for future self-deployed, high-mobility spacecraft to perform
ultra-high-power communications, space radar, satellite transfer and servicing
missions.
Impairment
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company performed an evaluation of its
Fiber Optics segment assets for impairment. The impairment test was
triggered by a determination that it was more likely than not that certain
assets would be sold or otherwise disposed of before the end of their previously
estimated useful lives. As a result of the evaluation, it was
determined that an impairment existed, and a charge of $27.0 million was
recorded to write down the long-lived assets to estimated fair value, which was
determined based on a combination of guideline public company comparisons and
discounted estimated future cash flows.
The
current adverse economic conditions had a significant negative effect on the
Company’s assessment of the fair value of the Fiber Optics segment
assets. The impairment charge primarily resulted from the combined
effect of the current slowdown in product orders and lower pricing exacerbated
by currently high discount rates used in estimating fair values and the effects
of recent declines in market values of debt and equity securities of comparable
public companies. This impairment charge in combination with other non-cash
charges will not cause the Company to be in default under any of its financial
covenants associated with its credit facility nor will it have a material
adverse impact on the Company’s liquidity position or cash flows.
See Note
9, Goodwill and Intangible Assets, for more information on the impairment
charges recorded by the Company in response to unfavorable macroeconomic
conditions.
Order
Backlog
As of
June 30, 2009, the Company had a consolidated order backlog of approximately
$49.6 million comprised of $36.2 million in order backlog related to our
Photovoltaics segment and $13.4 million in order backlog related to our Fiber
Optics segment. Order backlog is defined as purchase orders or supply
agreements accepted by the Company with expected product delivery and / or
services to be performed within the next twelve months.
Due to
unfavorable credit market conditions and other factors adversely affecting the
CPV business in our Photovoltaics segment, a number of agreements and other
arrangements previously announced by the Company in press releases have not
resulted in the level of sales that were earlier anticipated, nor does the
Company believe that they are likely to do so in the near
future. These include several memoranda of understanding regarding
the supply of solar power systems and several purchase orders for CPV
components.
Our
Markets
Collectively,
our products serve the telecommunications, datacom, cable television,
fiber-to-the-premises, high-performance computing, defense and homeland
security, and satellite and terrestrial solar power markets.
Fiber
Optics
Our fiber
optics products enable information that is encoded on light signals to be
transmitted, routed (switched) and received in communication systems and
networks. Our Fiber Optics segment primarily offers the
following product lines:
§
|
Telecom
Optical Products – We believe we are a leading supplier of 10
gigabit per second (Gb/s) fully C-band and L-band tunable dense wavelength
division multiplexed (DWDM) transponders for telecommunications transport
systems. We are one of the few suppliers who offer vertically-integrated
products, including external-cavity laser modules, integrated tunable
laser assemblies (ITLAs) and 300-pin transponders. Our internally
developed laser technology is highly suited for applications of 10, 40,
and 100 Gb/s due to the superior narrow linewidth and low noise
characteristics. All DWDM products are fully Telcordia® qualified and
comply with industry multi-source agreements (MSAs). We are currently
sampling customers with our tunable XFP (TXFP) product, and MSA which will
rapidly replace 300-pin based transponders over the next few years,
enabling a higher density transport solution required by
carriers. EMCORE’s TXFP leverages our unique
external cavity laser technology to offer identical performance to
currently deployed network specifications, without the need for any
specification compromise.
|
§
|
Enterprise
Products –
We believe we provide leading-edge optical components and
transceiver modules for data applications that enable switch-to-switch,
router-to-router and server-to-server backbone connections at aggregate
speeds of 10 Gb/s and above. We offer the broadest range of products with
XENPAK form factor which comply with 10 Gb/s Ethernet (10-GE) IEEE802.3ae
standard. Our 10-GE products include short-reach (SR), long-reach (LR),
extended-reach (ER), coarse WDM LX4 optical transceivers to connect
between the photonic physical layer and the electrical section layer and
CX4 transceivers. In addition to the 10-GE products, we offer
traditional MSA small form factor (SFF) and small form factor pluggable
(SFP) optical transceivers for use in Gigabit Ethernet and Fibre Channel
local-area and storage-area networks.. These transceivers
provide integrated duplex data links for bi-directional communication over
both single-mode and multimode optical fibers at data rates
of 1.25Gbps and 4 Gbps,
respectively.
|
§
|
Laser/photodetector
Component Products - We believe we are a leading provider of
optical components including lasers, photodetectors and various forms of
packaged subassemblies. Products include bare die (chip), TO, and TOSA
forms of high-speed 850nm vertical cavity surface emitting lasers
(VCSELs), distributed feedback (DFB) lasers, positive-intrinsic-negative
(pin) and avalanche photodiode (APD) components for 2G, 8G and 10G Fibre
Channel, 1G and 10G Ethernet, FTTP, and Telecom
applications. While we provide component products to the entire
industry, we also leverage the benefits of vertically-integrated
infrastructure through a low-cost and early availability of new product
introduction.
|
§
|
Parallel
Optical Transceiver and Cable Products – We have been the
technology and product leader of optical transmitter and receiver products
utilizing arrays of optical emitting or detection devices, e.g.,
vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs) and photodetectors (PDs).
These optical transmitter, receiver, and transceiver products are used for
back-plane interconnects, switching/routing between telecom racks and
high-performance computing clusters. Our products include 12-lane SNAP-12
MSA transmitter and receivers with single and double data rates. Based on
the core competency of 4-lane parallel optical transceivers, we offer
optical fiber ribbon cables (ECC - EMCORE Connects Cables) with
parallel-optical transceivers embedded within the
connectors. These products, with aggregated bandwidths of up to
40 Gb/s, are ideally suited for high-performance computing clusters. Our
products provide our customers with increased network capacity; increased
data transmission distance and speeds; increased bandwidth; lower power
consumption; improved cable management over copper interconnects (less
weight and bulk); and lower cost optical interconnections for massively
parallel
multi-processor installations.
|
§
|
Fiber
Channel Transceiver Products – We offer tri-rate SFF and SFP
optical transceivers for storage area networks. The MSA transceiver module
is designed for high-speed Fibre Channel data links supporting up to 4.25
Gb/s (4X Fibre Channel rate). The products provide integrated duplex data
links for bi-directional communication over Multimode optical
fiber.
|
§
|
Cable
Television (CATV) Products - We are a market leader in providing
radio frequency (RF) over fiber products for the CATV
industry. Our products are used in hybrid fiber coaxial (HFC)
networks that enable cable service operators to offer multiple advanced
services to meet the expanding demand for high-speed Internet, on-demand
and interactive video and other advanced services, such as high-definition
television (HDTV) and voice over IP (VoIP). Our CATV products
include forward and return-path analog and digital lasers, photodetectors
and subassembly components, broadcast analog and digital fiber-optic
transmitters and quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) transmitters and
receivers. Our products provide our customers with increased
capacity to offer more cable services; increased data transmission
distance, speed and bandwidth; lower noise video receive; and lower power
consumption.
|
§
|
Fiber-To-The-Premises
(FTTP) Products - Telecommunications companies are increasingly
extending their optical infrastructure to their customers’ location in
order to deliver higher bandwidth services. We have developed customer
qualified FTTP components and subsystem products to support plans by
telephone companies to offer voice, video and data services through the
deployment of new fiber optics-based access networks. Our FTTP
products include passive optical network (PON) transceivers, analog fiber
optic transmitters for video overlay and high-power erbium-doped fiber
amplifiers (EDFA), analog and digital lasers, photodetectors and
subassembly components, analog video receivers and multi-dwelling unit
(MDU) video receivers. Our products provide our customers with
higher performance for analog and digital characteristics; integrated
infrastructure to support competitive costs; and additional support for
multiple standards.
|
§
|
Satellite
Communications (Satcom) Products - We believe we are a leading
provider of optical components and systems for use in equipment that
provides high-performance optical data links for the terrestrial portion
of satellite communications networks. Our products include transmitters,
receivers, subsystems and systems that transport wideband radio frequency
and microwave signals between satellite hub equipment and antenna
dishes. Our products provide our customers with increased
bandwidth and lower power
consumption.
|
§
|
Video
Transport - Our video transport product line offers solutions for
broadcasting, transportation, IP television (IPTV), mobile video and
security & surveillance applications over private and public networks.
Our video, audio, data and RF transmission systems serve both analog and
digital requirements, providing cost-effective, flexible solutions geared
for network reconstruction and
expansion.
|
§
|
Defense and
Homeland Security - Leveraging our expertise in RF module design
and high-speed parallel optics, we provide a suite of ruggedized products
that meet the reliability and durability requirements of the U.S.
government and defense markets. Our specialty defense products
include fiber optic gyro components used in precision guided munitions,
ruggedized parallel optic transmitters and receivers, high-frequency RF
fiber optic link components for towed decoy systems, optical delay lines
for radar systems, EDFAs, terahertz spectroscopy systems and other
products. Our products provide our customers with high
frequency and dynamic range; compact form-factor; and extreme temperature,
shock and vibration tolerance.
|
Major
customers for our Fiber Optics segment include: Alcatel-Lucent, Aurora Networks,
BUPT-GUOAN Broadband, Arris/C-Cor Electronics, Ciena, Cisco, Fujitsu,
Hewlett-Packard, Huawei, IBM, Intel, Jabil, JDSU, Merge Optics, Motorola,
Network Appliance, Sycamore Networks, Inc., Tellabs, and ZTE.
Photovoltaics
We
believe our high-efficiency compound semiconductor-based multi-junction solar
cell products provide our customers with compelling cost and performance
advantages over traditional silicon-based solutions. These advantages
include higher solar cell efficiency allowing for greater conversion of light
into electricity as well as a superior ability to withstand extreme heat and
radiation environments. These advantages enable a reduction in a customer’s
solar product footprint by providing more power output with less solar cells,
which is an enhanced benefit when our product is used in concentrating
photovoltaic (CPV) systems. Our Photovoltaics segment primarily
targets the following markets:
§
|
Satellite
Solar Power Generation - We believe we are a leader in providing
solar power generation solutions to the global communications satellite
industry and U.S. government space programs. A satellite’s
operational success depends on its available power and its capacity to
transmit data. We provide advanced compound semiconductor-based solar
cells and solar panel products, which are more resistant to radiation
levels in space and generate substantially more power from sunlight than
silicon-based solutions. Space power systems using our
multi-junction solar cells weigh less per unit of power than traditional
silicon-based solar cells. Our products provide our customers with higher
conversion efficiency for reduced solar array size and launch costs,
higher radiation tolerance, and longer lifetime in harsh space
environments.
|
We design
and manufacture multi-junction compound semiconductor-based solar cells for both
commercial and military satellite applications. We currently manufacture and
sell one of the most efficient and reliable, radiation resistant advanced
triple-junction solar cells in the world, with an average "beginning of life"
efficiency of 28.5%. We are in the final stages of qualifying the
next generation high efficiency multi-junction solar cell platform for space
applications which will have an average conversion efficiency of 30%, providing
our customers with expanded capability.
Additionally,
we are developing an entirely new class of advanced multi-junction solar cells
with even higher conversion efficiency. This new architecture, called
inverted metamorphic (IMM), is being developed in conjunction with the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory and the US Air Force Research Laboratory and to date
has demonstrated conversion efficiency exceeding 33% on an R&D
scale. We believe we are the only manufacturer to supply true
monolithic bypass diodes for shadow protection by utilizing several EMCORE
patented methods.
We also
provide offer interconnect cells (CICs) and solar panel lay-down services,
providing us the capability to manufacture fully integrated solar panels for
space applications. We can provide satellite manufacturers with proven,
integrated, satellite power solutions that significantly improve satellite
economics. Satellite manufacturers and solar array integrators rely on us to
meet their satellite power needs with our proven flight heritage.
§
|
Terrestrial
Solar Power Generation - Solar power generation systems utilize
photovoltaic cells to convert sunlight to electricity and have been used
in space programs and, to a lesser extent, in terrestrial applications for
several decades. The market for terrestrial solar power
generation solutions has grown significantly as solar power generation
technologies improve in efficiency, as global prices for non-renewable
energy sources (i.e., fossil fuels)
continue to rise, and as concern has increased regarding the effect of
fossil fuel-based carbon emissions on global warming. Terrestrial solar
power generation has emerged as one of the most rapidly expanding
renewable energy sources due to certain advantages solar power has when
compared to other energy sources, including reduced environmental impact,
elimination of fuel price risk, installation flexibility, scalability,
distributed power generation (i.e., electric power is
generated at the point of use rather than transmitted from a central
station to the user), and reliability. The rapid increase in demand for
solar power has created a growing need for highly efficient, reliable and
cost-effective concentrating solar power
systems.
|
We have
adapted our high-efficiency compound semiconductor-based multi-junction solar
cell products for terrestrial applications, which are intended for use with CPV
power systems in utility-scale installations. We have attained 39%
peak conversion efficiency under 1000x illumination with our terrestrial
concentrating solar cell products in volume production. This compares favorably
to average efficiency of 15-21% of silicon-based solar cells and approximately
35% for competing multi-junction cells. We believe that solar concentrator
systems assembled using our compound semiconductor-based solar cells will be
competitive with silicon-based solar power generation systems, in certain
geographic regions, because they are more efficient, and when combined with the
advantages of concentration, will result in a lower cost of power
generated. Our multi-junction solar cell technology is not subject to
silicon shortages which, in the past, have led to increasing prices in the raw
materials required for silicon-based solar cells. We currently serve
the terrestrial solar market with two levels of CPV products: components
(including solar cells and solar cell receivers) and CPV terrestrial solar power
systems.
While the
terrestrial power generation market is still developing, we have shipped
production orders of CPV components to several solar concentrator companies, and
have provided samples to others, including major system manufacturers in the
United States, Europe, and Asia. We have finished installations of a
total of approximately 1 megawatt (MW) of CPV systems in Spain, China, and the
US with our own Gen-II CPV power system design. We have recently
responded to several RFPs from public utility companies in the US using our
Gen-III design. The Gen-III product, with enhanced performance (including a
module efficiency of approximately 30%) and much improved cost structure, is
scheduled to be in volume production in the first half of calendar
2010.
Major
customers for the Photovoltaics segment include: ATK, Indian Space Research
Organization (“ISRO”), NASA-JPL, Lockheed Martin, Menova Energy, Northrop
Grumman, Space Systems/Loral, Maxima Energies Renovables Ibahernando, and
ISFOC.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The
preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S.
GAAP”) requires management of the Company to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities, as of the date of the financial statements,
and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reported period.
Management develops estimates based on historical experience, and on various
assumptions about the future that are believed to be reasonable based on the
best information available. The Company’s reported financial position or results
of operations may be materially different under changed conditions or when using
different estimates and assumptions, particularly with respect to significant
accounting policies, which are discussed below. In the event that estimates or
assumptions prove to differ from actual results, adjustments are made in
subsequent periods to reflect more current information. The Company's most
significant estimates relate to accounts receivable, inventory, goodwill,
intangibles, other long-lived assets, warranty accruals, revenue recognition,
and valuation of stock-based compensation.
Valuation of Accounts
Receivable. The Company regularly evaluates the collectibility of its
accounts receivable and accordingly maintains allowances for doubtful accounts
for estimated losses resulting from the inability of our customers to meet their
financial obligations to us. The allowance is based on the age of receivables,
and a specific identification of receivables considered at risk. The Company
classifies charges associated with the allowance for doubtful accounts as
SG&A expense. If the financial condition of our customers were to
deteriorate, impacting their ability to pay us, additional allowances may be
required.
§
|
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded $2.2 million in
bad debt expense, of which $(0.1) million related to the Fiber Optics
segment and $2.3 million related to the Photovoltaics
segment.
|
§
|
During
the nine months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded $4.8 million in
bad debt expense, of which $0.4 million related to the Fiber Optics
segment and $4.4 million related to the Photovoltaics
segment.
|
Valuation of
Inventory. Inventory is stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost
being determined using the standard cost method. The Company reserves against
inventory once it has been determined that conditions exist that may not allow
the inventory to be sold for its intended purpose or the inventory is determined
to be excess or obsolete based on the Company’s forecasted future
revenue. The charge related to inventory reserves is recorded as a
cost of revenue. The majority of the inventory write-downs are related to
estimated allowances for inventory whose carrying value is in excess of net
realizable value and on excess raw material components resulting from finished
product obsolescence. In most cases where the Company sells previously written
down inventory, it is typically sold as a component part of a finished product.
The finished product is sold at market price at the time resulting in higher
average gross margin on such revenue. The Company does not track the selling
price of individual raw material components that have been previously written
down or written off, since such raw material components usually are only a
portion of the resultant finished products and related sales price. The Company
evaluates inventory levels at least quarterly against sales forecasts on a
significant part-by-part basis, in addition to determining its overall inventory
risk. We have incurred, and may in the future incur charges to
write-down our inventory.
§
|
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded $2.1 million in
inventory write-downs, of which $1.9 million related to the Fiber Optics
segment and $0.2 million related to the Photovoltaics
segment.
|
§
|
During
the nine months ended June 30, 2009, the Company recorded $14.9 million in
inventory write-downs, of which $9.1 million related to the Fiber Optics
segment and $5.8 million related to the Photovoltaics
segment.
|
While we
believe, based on current information, that the amount recorded for inventory is
properly reflected on our balance sheet, if market conditions are less favorable
than our forecasts, our future sales mix differs from our forecasted sales mix,
or actual demand from our customers is lower than our estimates, we may be
required to record additional inventory write-downs.
Valuation of
Goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price
of an acquired business over the fair value of the identifiable assets acquired
and liabilities assumed. As required by SFAS 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets, the Company evaluates its goodwill for impairment on an annual
basis, or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying
value of a reporting unit may exceed its fair value. Management has
elected December 31st as the
annual assessment date. Circumstances that could trigger an interim
impairment test include but are not limited to: a significant adverse change in
the market value of the Company’s common stock, the business climate or legal
factors; an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; unanticipated
competition; loss of key personnel; the likelihood that a reporting unit or
significant portion of a reporting unit will be sold or otherwise disposed;
results of testing for recoverability of a significant asset group within a
reporting unit; and recognition of a goodwill impairment loss in the financial
statements of a subsidiary that is a component of a reporting unit.
In
performing goodwill impairment testing, the Company determines the fair value of
each reporting unit using a weighted combination of a market-based approach and
a discounted cash flow (“DCF”) approach. The market-based approach
relies on values based on market multiples derived from comparable public
companies. In applying the DCF approach, management forecasts cash flows over a
five year period using assumptions of current economic conditions and future
expectations of earnings. This analysis requires the exercise of
significant judgment, including judgments about appropriate discount rates based
on the assessment of risks inherent in the amount and timing of projected future
cash flows. The derived discount rate may fluctuate from period to
period as it is based on external market conditions.
All of
these assumptions are critical to the estimate and can change from period to
period. Updates to these assumptions in future periods, particularly
changes in discount rates, could result in different results of goodwill
impairment tests.
§
|
As
disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, as a result of the
unfavorable macroeconomic environment and a significant reduction in our
market capitalization since the completion of the asset acquisitions from
Intel Corporation (the “Intel Acquisitions”), the Company reduced its
internal revenue and profitability forecasts and revised its operating
plans to reflect a general decline in demand and average selling prices,
especially for the Company’s recently acquired telecom-related fiber
optics component products. The Company also performed an
interim test as of September 30, 2008 to determine whether there was
impairment of its goodwill. The fair value of each of the
Company’s reporting units was determined by using a weighted average of
the Guideline Public Company, Guideline Merged and Acquired Company, and
the DCF methods. Due to uncertainty in the Company’s business
outlook arising from the ongoing financial liquidity crisis and the
current economic recession, management believed the most appropriate
approach would be an equally weighted approach, amongst the three methods,
to arrive at an indicated value for each of the reporting
units. The indicated fair value of each of the reporting units
was then compared with the reporting unit’s carrying value to determine
whether there was an indication of impairment of goodwill under SFAS
142. As a result, the Company determined that the goodwill
related to one of its Fiber Optics reporting units may be
impaired. Since the second step of the Company’s goodwill
impairment test was not completed before the fiscal year-end financial
statements were issued and a goodwill impairment loss was probable and
could be reasonably estimated, management recorded a non-cash goodwill
impairment charge of $22.0 million, as a best estimate, during the three
months ended September 30, 2008.
|
§
|
During
the three months ended December 31, 2008, there was further deterioration
of the Company’s market capitalization, significant adverse changes in the
business climate primarily related to product pricing and profit margins,
and an increase in the discount rate. The Company performed its
annual goodwill impairment test as of December 31, 2008 and management
weighted the market-based approach heavier than the DCF method using
information that was available at the
time.
|
§
|
Based
on this analysis, the Company determined that goodwill related to its
Fiber Optics reporting units was fully impaired. As a result,
the Company recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $31.8 million and the
Company’s balance sheet no longer reflects any goodwill associated with
its Fiber Optics reporting units.
|
§
|
The
Company’s annual impairment test as of December 31, 2008, indicated that
there was no impairment of goodwill for the Photovoltaics reporting
unit. Based upon revised operational and cash flow forecasts,
the Photovoltaics’ reporting unit’s fair value exceeded carrying value by
over 15%.
|
§
|
The
Company continues to report goodwill related to its Photovoltaics
reporting unit and the Company’s believes the remaining carrying amount of
goodwill is recoverable. However, if there is further erosion
of the Company’s market capitalization or the Photovoltaics reporting unit
is unable to achieve its projected cash flows, management may be required
to perform additional impairment tests of its remaining
goodwill. The outcome of these additional tests may result in
the Company recording additional goodwill impairment
charges.
|
Valuation of Long-lived
Assets and Other Intangible Assets. Long-lived assets consist
primarily of our property, plant, and equipment. Our intangible
assets consist primarily of intellectual property that has been internally
developed or purchased. Purchased intangible assets include existing
and core technology, trademarks and trade names, and customer
contracts. Intangible assets are amortized using the straight-line
method over estimated useful lives ranging from one to fifteen
years. Because all of the Company’s intangible assets are subject to
amortization, the Company reviews these intangible assets for impairment in
accordance with the provisions of FASB Statement No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment of
Long-Lived Assets and Long-Lived Assets to be Disposed Of. As
part of internal control procedures, the Company reviews long-lived assets and
other intangible assets for impairment on an annual basis or whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be
recoverable. Our impairment testing of intangible assets consists of
determining whether the carrying amount of the long-lived asset (asset group) is
recoverable, in other words, whether the sum of the future undiscounted cash
flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset
(asset group) exceeds its carrying amount. The determination of
the existence of impairment involves judgments that are subjective in nature and
may require the use of estimates in forecasting future results and cash flows
related to an asset or group of assets. In making this determination,
the Company uses certain assumptions, including estimates of future cash flows
expected to be generated by these assets, which are based on additional
assumptions such as asset utilization, the length of service that assets will be
used in our operations, and estimated salvage values.
§
|
As
disclosed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, as a result of
reductions to our internal revenue and profitability forecasts, changes to
our internal operating forecasts and a significant reduction in our market
capitalization since the completion of the Intel Acquisitions, the Company
tested for impairment of its long-lived assets and other intangible
assets. The sum of future undiscounted cash flows exceeded the
carrying value for each of the reporting units’ long-lived and other
intangible assets. Accordingly, no impairment existed under
SFAS 144 at September 30, 2008. As the long-lived asset (asset
group) met the recoverability test, no further testing was required or
performed under SFAS 144.
|
§
|
During
the three months ended December 31, 2008, the Company recorded a non-cash
impairment charge totaling $1.9 million related to certain intangible
assets that were acquired from the Intel Acquisitions that were
subsequently abandoned.
|
As of
December 31, 2008, due to further changes in estimates of future operating
performance and cash flows that occurred during the quarter, the Company tested
for impairment of its long-lived assets and other intangible assets and based on
that analysis, determined that no impairment existed.
§
|
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company performed an evaluation
of its Fiber Optics segment assets for impairment. The
impairment test was triggered by a determination that it was more likely
than not that certain assets would be sold or otherwise disposed of before
the end of their previously estimated useful lives. As a result
of the evaluation, it was determined that an impairment existed, and a
charge of $27.0 million was recorded to write down the long-lived assets
to estimated fair value, which was determined based on a combination of
guideline public company comparisons and discounted estimated future cash
flows. Of the total impairment charge, $17.2 million related to
plant and equipment and $9.8 million related to intangible
assets.
|
The
current adverse economic conditions had a significant negative effect on the
Company’s assessment of the fair value of the Fiber Optics segment
assets. The impairment charge primarily resulted from the combined
effect of the current slowdown in product orders and lower pricing exacerbated
by currently high discount rates used in estimating fair values and the effects
of recent declines in market values of debt and equity securities of comparable
public companies. This impairment charge in combination with other non-cash
charges will not cause the Company to be in default under any of its financial
covenants associated with its credit facility nor will it have a material
adverse impact on the Company’s liquidity position or cash flows.
The
determination of enterprise value involved a number of assumptions and
estimates. The Company uses a combination of two fair value inputs to estimate
enterprise value of its reporting units: internal discounted cash flow analyses
(income approach) and comparable company equity values. Recent
pending and/or completed relevant transactions method was not used due to lack
of recent transactions. The income approach involved estimates of future
performance that reflected assumptions regarding, among other things, sales
volumes and expected margins. Another key variable in the income approach was
the discount rate, or weighted average cost of capital. The determination of the
discount rate takes into consideration the capital structure, debt ratings and
current debt yields of comparable companies as well as an estimate of return on
equity that reflects historical market returns and current market volatility for
the industry. Enterprise value estimates based on comparable company equity
values involve using trading multiples of revenue of those selected companies to
derive appropriate multiples to apply to the revenue of the reporting units.
This approach requires an estimate, using historical acquisition data, of an
appropriate control premium to apply to the reporting unit values calculated
from such multiples. Critical judgments include the selection of comparable
companies and the weighting of the two value inputs in developing the best
estimate of enterprise value.
§
|
The
Company believes the carrying amount of its long-lived assets and
intangible assets at June 30, 2009 is recoverable. However, if
there is further erosion of the Company’s market capitalization or the
Company is unable to achieve its projected cash flows, management may be
required to perform additional impairment tests of its remaining
long-lived assets and intangible assets. The outcome of these
additional tests may result in the Company recording additional impairment
charges.
|
Product Warranty
Reserves. The Company provides its customers with limited rights of
return for non-conforming shipments and warranty claims for certain products. In
accordance with SFAS 5, Accounting for Contingencies,
the Company makes estimates of product warranty expense using historical
experience rates as a percentage of revenue and accrues estimated warranty
expense as a cost of revenue. We estimate the costs of our warranty
obligations based on our historical experience of known product failure rates,
use of materials to repair or replace defective products and service delivery
costs incurred in correcting product issues. In addition, from time to time,
specific warranty accruals may be made if unforeseen technical problems arise.
Should our actual experience relative to these factors differ from our
estimates, we may be required to record additional warranty reserves.
Alternatively, if we provide more reserves than we need, we may reverse a
portion of such provisions in future periods.
§
|
During
the three months ended March 31, 2009, the Company recorded $1.1 million
in product warranty reserves in its Photovoltaics segment, which was
primarily related to new CPV-related product
launches.
|
Revenue Recognition.
Revenue is recognized upon shipment, provided persuasive evidence of a contract
exists, (such as when a purchase order or contract is received from a customer),
the price is fixed, the product meets its specifications, title and ownership
have transferred to the customer, and there is reasonable assurance of
collection of the sales proceeds. In those few instances where a given sale
involves post shipment obligations, formal customer acceptance documents, or
subjective rights of return, revenue is not recognized until all post-shipment
conditions have been satisfied and there is reasonable assurance of collection
of the sales proceeds. The majority of our products have shipping terms that are
free on board (“FOB”) or free carrier alongside (“FCA”) shipping point, which
means that the Company fulfills its delivery obligation when the goods are
handed over to the freight carrier at our shipping dock. This means the buyer
bears all costs and risks of loss or damage to the goods from that point. In
certain cases, the Company ships its products cost insurance and freight
(“CIF”). Under this arrangement, revenue is recognized under FCA shipping point
terms, but the Company pays (and bills the customer) for the cost of shipping
and insurance to the customer's designated location. The Company accounts for
shipping and related transportation costs by recording the charges that are
invoiced to customers as revenue, with the corresponding cost recorded as cost
of revenue. In those instances where inventory is maintained at a consigned
location, revenue is recognized only when our customer pulls product for its use
and title and ownership have transferred to the customer. Revenue from time and
material contracts is recognized at the contractual rates as labor hours and
direct expenses are incurred. The Company also generates service
revenue from hardware repairs and calibrations that is recognized as revenue
upon completion of the service. Any cost of warranties and remaining
obligations that are inconsequential or perfunctory are accrued when the
corresponding revenue is recognized.
§
|
Distributors - The
Company uses a number of distributors around the world. In accordance with
Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, Revenue Recognition,
the Company recognizes revenue upon shipment of product to these
distributors. Title and risk of loss pass to the distributors upon
shipment, and our distributors are contractually obligated to pay the
Company on standard commercial terms, just like our other direct
customers. The Company does not sell to its distributors on
consignment and, except in the event of product discontinuance, does not
give distributors a right of
return.
|
§
|
Solar Panel and Solar Power
Systems Contracts - The Company records revenues from certain solar
panel and solar power systems contracts using the
percentage-of-completion method in accordance with AICPA Statement of
Position 81-1 ("SOP 81-1"), Accounting for Performance of
Construction-Type and Certain Production-Type Contracts. Revenue is
recognized in proportion to actual costs incurred compared to total
anticipated costs expected to be incurred for each contract. If estimates
of costs to complete long-term contracts indicate a loss, a provision is
made for the total loss anticipated. As of June 30, 2009, the
Company had accrued $0.2 million related to estimated contract losses on
certain CPV system-related orders. Such contracts require
estimates to determine the appropriate cost and revenue recognition. The
Company uses all available information in determining dependable estimates
of the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues, and
contract costs. Estimates are revised as additional information becomes
available. Due to the fact that the Company accounts for these
contracts under the percentage-of-completion method, unbilled accounts
receivable represent revenue recognized but not yet billed pursuant to
contract terms or accounts billed after the period
end.
|
§
|
Government R&D
Contracts - R&D contract revenue represents reimbursement by
various U.S. government entities, or their contractors, to aid in the
development of new technology. The applicable contracts generally provide
that the Company may elect to retain ownership of inventions made in
performing the work, subject to a non-exclusive license retained by the
U.S. government to practice the inventions for governmental purposes. The
R&D contract funding may be based on a cost-plus, cost reimbursement,
or a firm fixed price arrangement. The amount of funding under each
R&D contract is determined based on cost estimates that include both
direct and indirect costs. Cost-plus funding is determined based on actual
costs plus a set margin. As we incur costs under cost reimbursement type
contracts, we record revenue. Contract costs include material, labor,
special tooling and test equipment, subcontracting costs, as well as an
allocation of indirect costs. An R&D contract is considered complete
when all significant costs have been incurred, milestones have been
reached, and any reporting obligations to the customer have been
met. Government contract revenue is primarily recognized as
service revenue.
|
The
Company also has certain cost-sharing R&D arrangements. Under
such arrangements in which the actual costs of performance are divided between
the U.S. government and the Company on a best efforts basis, no revenue is
recorded and the Company’s R&D expense is reduced for the amount of the
cost-sharing receipts.
The U.S.
government may terminate any of our government contracts at their convenience as
well as for default based on our failure to meet specified performance
measurements. If any of our government contracts were to be terminated for
convenience, we generally would be entitled to receive payment for work
completed and allowable termination or cancellation costs. If any of our
government contracts were to be terminated for default, generally the U.S.
government would pay only for the work that has been accepted and can require us
to pay the difference between the original contract price and the cost to
re-procure the contract items, net of the work accepted from the original
contract. The U.S. government can also hold us liable for damages resulting from
the default.
Stock-Based
Compensation. The Company uses the Black-Scholes option-pricing model and
the straight-line attribution approach to determine the fair-value of
stock-based awards under SFAS 123(R), Share-Based Payment (revised
2004). The Company elected to use the modified prospective transition
method as permitted by SFAS 123(R) and accordingly prior periods were not
restated to reflect the impact of SFAS 123(R). The modified prospective
transition method requires that stock-based compensation expense be recorded for
all new and unvested stock options and employee stock purchase plan shares that
are ultimately expected to vest as the requisite service is rendered beginning
on October 1, 2005, the first day of the Company’s fiscal year
2006. The option-pricing model requires the input of highly
subjective assumptions, including the option’s expected life and the price
volatility of the underlying stock. The Company’s expected term represents the
period that stock-based awards are expected to be outstanding and is determined
based on historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the
contractual terms of the stock-based awards, vesting schedules and expectations
of future employee behavior as influenced by changes to the terms of its
stock-based awards. The expected stock price volatility is based on the
Company’s historical stock prices.
The above
listing is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all of our accounting
policies. In many cases, the accounting treatment of a particular transaction is
specifically dictated by U.S. GAAP. There are also areas in which
management's judgment in selecting any available alternative would not produce a
materially different result. For a complete discussion of our accounting
policies, recently adopted accounting pronouncements, and other required
U.S. GAAP disclosures, we refer you to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended September 30, 2008.
Results
of Operations
The
following table sets forth the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of
operations data expressed as a percentage of total revenue.
Statement
of Operations Data
|
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Nine
Months Ended
June
30,
|
||||||||||
2009
|
2008
|
2009
|
2008
|
|||||||||
Product
revenue
|
96.6
|
%
|
95.4
|
%
|
95.0
|
%
|
95.0
|
%
|
||||
Service
revenue
|
3.4
|
4.6
|
5.0
|
5.0
|
||||||||
Total
revenue
|
100.0
|
100.0
|
100.0
|
100.0
|
||||||||
Cost
of product revenue
|
103.6
|
80.4
|
102.1
|
80.3
|
||||||||
Cost
of service revenue
|
2.7
|
1.5
|
3.7
|
2.7
|
||||||||
Total
cost of revenue
|
106.3
|
81.9
|
105.8
|
83.0
|
||||||||
Gross
(loss) profit
|
(6.3
|
)
|
18.1
|
(5.8
|
)
|
17.0
|
||||||
Operating
expenses:
|
||||||||||||
Selling,
general, and administrative
|
28.3
|
18.4
|
25.8
|
20.2
|
||||||||
Research
and development
|
14.7
|
15.1
|
15.2
|
15.7
|
||||||||
Impairment
|
70.1
|
-
|
44.7
|
-
|
||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
113.1
|
33.5
|
85.7
|
35.9
|
||||||||
Operating
loss
|
(119.4
|
)
|
(15.4
|
)
|
(91.5
|
)
|
(18.9
|
)
|
||||
Other
(income) expense:
|
||||||||||||
Interest
income
|
-
|
(0.2
|
)
|
(0.1
|
)
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|||||
Interest
expense
|
0.3
|
-
|
0.3
|
0.9
|
||||||||
Impairment
of investment
|
-
|
-
|
0.3
|
-
|
||||||||
Loss
from conversion of subordinated notes
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2.6
|
||||||||
Stock–based
expense from tolled options
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2.4
|
||||||||
Gain
from sale of investment
|
-
|
(4.9
|
)
|
(2.3
|
)
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|||||
Loss
on disposal of equipment
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||
Foreign
exchange gain
|
(1.9
|
)
|
(0.1
|
)
|
0.5
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|||||
Total
other (income) expense
|
(1.6
|
)
|
(5.2
|
)
|
(1.3
|
)
|
3.3
|
|||||
Net
loss
|
(117.8
|
)%
|
(10.2
|
)%
|
(90.2
|
)%
|
(22.2
|
)%
|
Quarterly
Results:
Revenue:
Revenue for the third quarter of fiscal 2009 was
$38.5 million, a decrease of
$37.0 million, or 49%, from $75.5 million reported in the same
period last year and a decrease of $4.8 million, or 11%, from $43.3 million reported in the
immediately preceding second fiscal quarter.
On a
segment basis, third quarter revenue for the Fiber Optics segment was $22.4
million, a $31.2 million, or 58%, decrease from $53.6 million reported in the
same period last year and a decrease of $6.0 million, or 21%, from $28.4 million
reported in the immediately preceding quarter. On a year-over-year
basis, and when compared to the preceding quarter, the decrease in Fiber Optics
revenue was primarily due to extremely unfavorable conditions in the fiber
optics industry, which has been adversely affected by current financial
environment (especially in the debt and equity markets) than the general economy
as a whole. For the third quarter, the Fiber Optics segment
represented 58% of the Company's consolidated revenue compared to 71% in the
same period last year.
Third
quarter revenue for the Photovoltaics segment was $16.1 million, a $5.8 million,
or 27%, decrease from $21.9 million reported in the same period last year and an
increase of $1.2 million, or 8%, from $14.9 million reported in the immediately
preceding quarter. On a year-over-year basis, revenue for our
satellite solar power product lines increased while revenue for our terrestrial
concentrator photovoltaics (“CPV”) product lines and government service
contracts declined. On a sequential quarterly basis, the increase in
Photovoltaics revenue was attributable to increased sales of satellite solar
power products. For the third quarter, the Photovoltaics segment
represented 42% of the Company's consolidated revenue compared to 29% in the
same period last year.
Gross Profit / (Loss):
The
consolidated gross loss for the third quarter of fiscal 2009 was $2.4 million, a decrease of
$16.0 million from a $13.6 million gross profit reported in the same period last
year and an improvement of $4.6 million from a $7.0 million gross loss reported
in the preceding quarter. The consolidated gross margin for the third
quarter was negative 6.3% compared to a gross margin of 18.1% reported in the
same period last year and a negative 16.2% gross margin reported in the
preceding quarter. During the quarter, the Company recorded
approximately $6.4 million in losses on firm inventory purchase commitments
related to the Fiber Optics segment and $2.1 million in additional provision for
excess and obsolete inventory, both of which adversely impacted gross profit and
margins.
Fiber
Optics gross margin for the third quarter was negative 35.2%, a decrease from a
26.9% gross margin reported in the same period last year and a decrease from a
negative 11.7% gross margin reported in the preceding quarter. On a
year-over-year basis, and when compared to the preceding quarter, the decrease
in Fiber Optics gross margin was primarily due to losses recorded on firm
inventory purchase commitments, unabsorbed overhead expenses due to
declining revenues, and inventory valuation write-downs. In addition,
the loss was also increased by our efforts to monetize older-generation product
inventory as we transition to newer lower cost and more competitive design
platforms.
Photovoltaics
gross margin for the third quarter was 33.9%, an improvement from a negative
3.5% gross margin reported in the same period last year and an improvement from
a negative 24.7% gross margin reported in the preceding quarter. The
significant increase in Photovoltaics gross margin was primarily due to
increased sales of higher margin satellite solar power products along with
improved manufacturing yields on certain satellite solar panel
contracts.
Operating
Expenses:
Sales,
general, and administrative expenses for the third quarter totaled
$10.9 million, a decrease of $3.0 million, or
22%, from $13.9 million reported in the same period last year and a
decrease of $1.1 million, or 9%, from $12.0 million reported in the preceding
quarter. The decrease in year-over-year SG&A expenses was
primarily due to the implementation of a series of measures designed to realign
our cost structure with lower revenues including several reductions in
workforce, the furloughing of employees, salary reductions, the elimination of
executive and employee merit increases, and the reduction or elimination of
certain discretionary expenses. In the prior year period, the Company
incurred approximately $1.3 million in non-recurring SG&A expenses related
to transitional services being provided by Intel Corporation associated with
acquisitions completed in that year. As a percentage of revenue,
quarterly SG&A expenses were 28.4%, an increase from 18.4% in the same
period last year, and a slight increase from 27.6% in the preceding
quarter.
Research and
development expenses for the third quarter totaled $5.7 million, a
decrease of $5.7 million, or 50%, from $11.4 million reported in the same period
last year and a decrease of $1.2 million, or 18%, from $6.9 million reported in
the preceding quarter.
In the prior year period, the Company incurred approximately $1.6 million
in non-recurring R&D expenses related to transitional services being
provided by Intel Corporation. As part of the ongoing effort to
reduce expenses, many of the Company’s long-term projects have been placed on
hold in order to focus on research and product development efforts on projects
that we expect to generate returns within one year, such as the Company’s Gen
III CPV terrestrial solar power systems. As a percentage of revenue,
quarterly R&D expenses were 14.7%, a decrease from 15.1% in the same period
last year and a decrease from 15.9% in the preceding quarter.
Impairment:
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company performed an evaluation of its
Fiber Optics segment assets for impairment. The impairment test was
triggered by a determination that it was more likely than not that certain
assets would be sold or otherwise disposed of before the end of their previously
estimated useful lives. As a result of the evaluation, it was
determined that an impairment existed, and a charge of $27.0 million was
recorded to write down the long-lived assets to estimated fair value, which was
determined based on a combination of guideline public company comparisons and
discounted estimated future cash flows.
The
current adverse economic conditions had a significant negative effect on the
Company’s assessment of the fair value of the Fiber Optics segment
assets. The impairment charge primarily resulted from the combined
effect of the current slowdown in product orders and lower pricing exacerbated
by currently high discount rates used in estimating fair values and the effects
of recent declines in market values of debt and equity securities of comparable
public companies. This impairment charge in combination with and other non-cash
charges will not cause the Company to be in default under any of its financial
covenants associated with its credit facility nor will it have a material
adverse impact on the Company’s liquidity position or cash flows.
Third
quarter operating expenses totaled $43.6 million, an increase of $18.3 million
from $25.3 million reported in the same period last year and an increase of
$24.7 million from $18.9 million incurred in the preceding quarter.
Operating
and Net Loss:
The third
quarter consolidated operating loss was $46.0 million, an increase of $34.4
million from an operating loss of $11.6 million reported in the same period last
year and an increase of $20.1 million from an operating loss of $25.9 million
reported in the preceding quarter.
During
the quarter, the Company recognized a net gain on foreign currency exchange of
approximately $0.7 million associated with the Company’s international
operations.
The
consolidated net loss for the third quarter was $45.3 million, an increase of
$37.6 million from $7.7 million reported in the same period last year and an
increase of $21.6 million from $23.7 million reported in the preceding
quarter.
The third
quarter net loss per share was $0.57, an increase of $0.47 per share from a net
loss of $0.10 per share reported in the same period last year and an increase of
$0.27 per share from a net loss of $0.30 per share reported in the preceding
quarter.
Nine-Month
Results:
Revenue:
Revenue for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 was $135.8 million, a decrease of
$42.9 million, or 24%, from $178.7 million reported in the same
period last year.
On a
segment basis, nine month revenue for the Fiber Optics segment was $90.0
million, a decrease of $35.2 million, or 28%, from $125.2 million reported in
the same period last year. The decrease in Fiber Optics revenue was
primarily due to a significant drop in demand from our customers due to the very
unfavorable macroeconomic environment as well as continued pressure on selling
prices as we compete to maintain or increase our market share
positions. For the first nine months of the fiscal year, the
Fiber Optics segment represented 66% of the Company's consolidated revenue
compared to 70% in the same period last year.
Nine
month revenue for the Photovoltaics segment was $45.8 million, a decrease of
$7.6 million, or 14%, from $53.5 million reported in the same period last
year. On a year-over-year basis, our satellite solar power product
lines experienced an increase in revenue while our CPV terrestrial solar power
product lines and government service contracts experienced a decrease in
revenue. For the first nine months of the fiscal year, the Photovoltaics segment
represented 34% of the Company's consolidated revenue compared to 30% in the
same period last year.
Gross Profit / (Loss):
The nine
month consolidated gross loss was $7.8 million, a decrease of $38.2
million from $30.4 million in gross profit reported in the same period last
year. The nine month consolidated gross margin was negative 5.8%
compared to a positive 17.0% gross margin reported in the same period last
year.
Fiber
Optics gross margin for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 was negative 13.0%,
a decrease from a 25.1% gross margin reported in the same period last
year. The decrease in Fiber Optics gross margin was primarily due to
losses recorded on firm inventory purchase commitments, unabsorbed overhead
expenses due to declining revenues, and inventory valuation
write-downs. In addition, the decrease was also increased by our
efforts to monetize older-generation product inventory as we transition to newer
lower cost and more competitive design platforms.
Photovoltaics
gross margin for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 was 8.3%, an increase from
a negative 1.9% gross margin reported in the same period last
year. The significant increase in Photovoltaics gross margin was
primarily due to increased sales of higher margin satellite solar power products
along with improved manufacturing yields on certain satellite solar panel
contracts.
Operating
Expenses:
Sales,
general, and administrative expenses for the nine months ended
June 30, 2009 totaled $35.0 million, a $1.0 million decrease from $36.0
million reported in the same period last year. The overall reduction
of SG&A expenses was primarily due to the implementation of a series of
measures intended to realign our cost structure with lower revenues including
several reductions in workforce, the furloughing of employees, salary
reductions, the elimination of executive and employee merit increases, and the
reduction or elimination of certain discretionary expenses. As a
percentage of revenue, nine month SG&A expenses were 25.8%, an increase from
20.2% in the same period last year.
Nine month research and
development expenses totaled $20.7 million, a decrease of $7.4 million,
or 27%, from $28.1 million reported in the same period last year. Throughout fiscal 2009,
the Company has sequentially lowered its R&D expenses each
quarter. As part of the Company’s ongoing effort to reduce expenses,
many long-term projects have been placed on hold in order to focus on research
and product development efforts on projects that we expect to generate returns
within one year. As a percentage of revenue, nine month R&D
expenses were 15.2%, a decrease from 15.7% in the same period last
year.
Impairment:
As
disclosed in the first fiscal quarter of 2009, the Company performed its annual
goodwill impairment test at December 31, 2008 and, based on that analysis,
determined that goodwill related to its Fiber Optics segment was fully
impaired. As a result, the Company recorded a non-cash impairment
charge of $31.8 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2009 and the Company’s
balance sheet no longer reflects any goodwill associated with its Fiber Optics
segment. During the first fiscal quarter, the Company also
recorded a $2.0 million non-cash impairment charge related to certain intangible
assets acquired from Intel Corporation that were subsequently
abandoned.
During
the three months ended June 30, 2009, the Company performed an evaluation of its
Fiber Optics segment assets for impairment. The impairment test was
triggered by a determination that it was more likely than not that certain
assets would be sold or otherwise disposed of before the end of their previously
estimated useful lives. As a result of the evaluation, it was
determined that an impairment existed, and a charge of $27.0 million was
recorded to write down the long-lived assets to estimated fair value, which was
determined based on a combination of guideline public company comparisons and
discounted estimated future cash flows.
The nine
month operating expenses totaled $116.5 million, an increase of $52.3 million
from $64.2 million reported in the same period last year.
Operating
and Net Loss:
The nine
month consolidated operating loss was $124.3 million, an increase of $90.5
million from an operating loss of $33.8 million reported in the same period last
year.
Non-operating
expenses recognized in the nine months ended June 30, 2009 included $0.6 million
of net expense related to foreign currency exchange losses associated with the
Company’s international operations and $3.1 million of income related to the
sale of the Company’s investment in Entech Solar, Inc. (formerly named
WorldWater and Solar Technologies Corporation).
The nine
month consolidated net loss was $122.5 million, an increase of $82.9 million
from $39.6 million reported in the same period last year.
The nine
month net loss per share was $1.56, an increase of $0.94 per share, from a net
loss of $0.62 per share reported in the same period last year.
Other
Income & Expenses
Impairment of
investment. In April 2008, the Company invested approximately
$1.5 million in Lightron Corporation, a Korean company that is publicly traded
on the Korean Stock Market. The Company initially accounted for this
investment as an available-for-sale security. Due to the decline in
the market value of this investment and the expectation of non-recovery of this
investment beyond its current market value, the Company recorded a $0.5 million
“other than temporary” impairment loss on this investment as of September 30,
2008 and another $0.4 million “other than temporary” impairment loss on this
investment as of December 31, 2008. During the quarter ended March
31, 2009, the Company sold its interest in Lightron Corporation, via
several transactions, for a total of $0.5 million in cash. The
Company recorded a gain on the sale of this investment of approximately $21,000,
after consideration of impairment charges recorded in previous periods, and the
Company also recorded a foreign exchange loss of $0.1million due to the
conversion to Korean Won to U.S. dollars.
Loss from Conversion of Subordinated
Notes. In January 2008, the Company entered into agreements
with holders of approximately 97.5%, or approximately $83.3 million of its
outstanding 5.50% convertible subordinated notes due 2011 (the "Notes") pursuant
to which the holders converted their Notes into the Company's common
stock. In addition, the Company called for redemption of all of its
remaining outstanding Notes. Upon conversion of the Notes, the Company issued
shares of its common stock, based on a conversion price of $7.01 per share, in
accordance with the terms of the Notes. To incentivize certain holders to
convert their Notes, the Company made cash payments to such holders equal to 4%
of the principal amount of the Notes converted (the “Incentive Payment”), plus
accrued interest. By February 20, 2008, all Notes were redeemed and
converted into the Company common stock. As a result of these transactions, 12.2
million shares of the Company common stock were issued. The Company
recognized a loss totaling $4.7 million on the conversion of Notes to equity of
which $3.5 million was related to the Incentive Payment and $1.2 million related
to the accelerated write-off of capitalized finance charges associated with the
convertible notes.
Stock-based expense from tolled
options.
Under the
terms of the Company’s stock option agreements issued under the Option Plans, employees that
have vested and exercisable stock options have 90 days subsequent to the date of
their termination to exercise their stock options. In November 2006,
the Company announced that it was suspending its reliance on previously issued
financial statements, which in turn caused the Company’s Form S-8 registration
statements for shares of common stock issuable under the Option Plans not to be
available. Therefore, employees and terminated employees were
precluded from exercising stock options until the Company became compliant with
its SEC filings and the registration of the stock option shares was once again
effective (the “Blackout Period”). In April 2007, the Company’s Board
of Directors approved a stock option grant “modification” for terminated
employees by extending the normal 90-day exercise period after date of
termination to a date after which the Blackout Period was lifted. The
Company communicated the terms of the stock option grant modification with its
terminated employees in November 2007. The Company’s Board of
Directors approved an extension of the stock option expiration date equal to the
number of calendar days during the Blackout Period before such stock option
would have otherwise expired (the “Tolling Period”). Terminated
employees were able to exercise their vested stock options beginning on the
first day after the lifting of the Blackout Period for a period equal to the
Tolling Period. Approximately 50 terminated employees were impacted
by this modification. All tolled stock options were either exercised
or expired by January 29, 2008.
To
account for a stock option grant modification, when the rights conveyed by a
stock-based compensation award are no longer dependent on the holder being an
employee, the award ceases to be accounted for under SFAS 123(R) and becomes
subject to the recognition and measurement requirements of EITF 00-19, Accounting for Derivative Financial
Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own
Stock, which results in liability classification and measurement of the
award. On the date of modification, stock options that receive
extended exercise terms are initially measured at fair value and expensed as if
the stock options awards were new grants. Subsequent changes in
fair value are reported in earnings and disclosed in the financial statements as
long as the stock options remain classified as liabilities.
During
the three months ended December 31, 2007, the Company incurred a non-cash
expense of $4.4 million associated with the modification of stock options issued
to terminated employees which was calculated using the Black-Scholes option
valuation model. The modified stock options were 100% vested at the
time of grant with an estimated life of no greater than 90 days. When
the stock options classified as liabilities were ultimately settled in stock,
any gains or losses on those stock options were included in additional paid-in
capital. For unexercised stock options that ultimately expired, the
liability was relieved with an offset to income included in current earnings,
which totaled approximately $58,000 in January 2008.
Since
these modified stock options were issued to terminated employees of the Company,
and therefore no services were required to receive this grant and no contractual
obligation existed at the Company to issue these modified stock options, the
Company concluded it was more appropriate to classify this non-cash expense
within “other income and expense” in the Company’s statement of
operations.
Gain from sale of
investment.
In
January 2009, the Company announced that it completed the closing of a two step
transaction involving the sale of its remaining interests in Entech Solar,
Inc. (formerly named WorldWater and Solar Technologies
Corporation). The Company sold its remaining shares of Entech Solar
Series D Convertible Preferred Stock and warrants to a significant shareholder
of both the Company and Entech Solar, for approximately $11.6 million, which
included additional consideration of $0.2 million as a result of the termination
of certain operating agreements with Entech Solar. During the three
months ended March 31, 2009, the Company recognized a gain on the sale of this
investment of approximately $3.1 million.
In June
2008, the Company sold one million shares of Series D Preferred Stock and
100,000 warrants of Entech Solar and recognized a gain on the sale of this
investment of approximately $3.7 million.
Foreign
exchange. The Company recognizes gains and losses on foreign
currency exchange primarily due to the Company’s operations in Spain, the
Netherlands and China.
Balance Sheet
Highlights:
-
|
As
of June 30, 2009, cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash totaled
approximately $9.9 million and working capital totaled $45.3
million.
|
-
|
During
the third quarter, the Photovoltaics segment generated positive cash
flow from operations and positive free cash flow, net of capital
expenditures.
|
-
|
Over
the last two quarters, the Company generated $15.9 million from the
reduction in inventory levels and $15.4 million from the collection of
accounts receivable while, at the same time, lowering its accounts payable
obligations by $23.6 million.
|
-
|
Over
the last two quarters, the Company has reduced the amount of debt
outstanding under its line of credit with Bank of America by $10.5
million, to $5.0 million at the end of the third quarter, and is in full
compliance with its bank financial
covenants.
|
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The
Company incurred a net loss of $122.5 million for the nine months ended June 30,
2009, which included a non-cash impairment charge of $60.8 million related to
the write-down of fixed assets, goodwill and intangible assets associated with
the Company’s Fiber Optics segment. The Company’s operating results
for future periods are subject to numerous uncertainties and it is uncertain if
the Company will be able to reduce or eliminate its net losses for the
foreseeable future. Although total revenue has increased sequentially
over the past several years, the Company has not been able to sustain historical
revenue growth rates in 2009 due to material adverse changes in market and
economic conditions. If management is not able to increase revenue
and/or manage operating expenses in line with revenue forecasts, the Company may
not be able to achieve profitability.
As of
June 30, 2009, cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash totaled approximately
$9.9 million and working capital totaled $45.3 million. Historically,
the Company has consumed cash from operations. During the nine months
ended June 30, 2009, it consumed approximately $30.5 million in cash from
operations.
These
matters raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a
going concern.
Management Actions and
Plans
Historically,
management has addressed liquidity requirements through a series of cost
reduction initiatives, capital markets transactions and the sale of
assets. Management anticipates that the recession in the United
States and internationally may continue to impose formidable challenges for the
Company’s businesses in the near term. Recently, the Company amended the terms
of its asset-backed revolving credit facility with Bank of America that included
the granting of waivers for prior covenant violations. Although the
total amount of available credit under the credit facility has been reduced from
$25 million at September 30, 2008 to $14 million, the amendments addressed a
modification of the borrowing base calculation which generally has resulted in
higher borrowing capacity against any given schedule of accounts
receivable. The Company has also continued to take steps to lower
costs and to conserve and generate cash. Over the past year,
management has implemented a series of measures and continues to evaluate
opportunities intended to align the Company’s cost structure with its current
revenue forecasts which has included several workforce reductions, salary
reductions, the elimination of executive and employee merit increases, and the
elimination or reduction of certain discretionary expenses.
With
respect to measures taken to generate cash, the Company sold its minority
ownership positions in Entech Solar, Inc. and Lightron Corporation earlier in
the fiscal year. The Company has also significantly lowered its
quarterly capital expenditures and improved the management of its working
capital. During the third fiscal quarter, the Company lowered its net
inventory by approximately 17% and achieved positive operating income within the
Company’s space solar business.
In
addition, the Company continues to pursue and evaluate a number of capital
raising alternatives including debt and/or equity financings, product
joint-venture opportunities and the potential sale of certain
assets.
Conclusion
These
initiatives are intended to conserve or generate cash in response to the
deterioration in the global economy so that we can be assured of adequate
liquidity through the next twelve months. However, the full effect of
many of these actions may not be realized until late in calendar year 2009, even
if they are successfully implemented. We are committed to exploring all of
the initiatives discussed above but there is no assurance that capital market
conditions will improve within that time frame. Our ability to continue as a
going concern is substantially dependent on the successful execution of many of
the actions referred to above. The accompanying condensed consolidated
financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the
outcome of this uncertainty.
Since
cash generated from operations and cash on hand are not sufficient to satisfy
the Company’s liquidity requirements, we will seek to raise additional cash
through equity financing, additional debt, asset sales or a combination
thereof. Due to the unpredictable nature of the capital markets,
additional funding may not be available when needed, or on terms acceptable to
us. If adequate funds are not available or not available on
acceptable terms, our ability to continue to fund expansion, develop and enhance
products and services, or otherwise respond to competitive pressures may be
severely limited. Such a limitation could have a material adverse effect
on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash
flow.
Cash
Flow
Cash Used for
Operations
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2009, net cash used by operating activities totaled
approximately $30.5 million, which represents a decrease of $5.4 million from
$35.9 million in cash used by operating activities for the nine months ended
June 30, 2008.
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2009, the $30.5 million cash usage was primarily due
to the Company’s net loss of $122.5 million and a net increase in working
capital of approximately $10.7 million. The net increase in working
capital was primarily due to a $30.5 million increase in accounts payable and a
$5.8 million increase in accrued expenses and other liabilities offset by a
$13.5 million decrease in accounts receivable, a $10.2 million decrease in
inventory and a $2.6 million decrease in prepaid expenses and other current
assets. Non-cash adjustments used to reconcile net loss to net cash used in
operating activities included $60.8 million in impairment of goodwill and
intangible assets, $12.9 million related to depreciation and amortization
expense, $14.9 million related to inventory reserve adjustments, $5.0 million
related to stock-based compensation expense, $4.8 million related to an increase
in the provision for doubtful accounts, $6.5 related to a provision for losses
on firm inventory commitments, and $3.1 million related to a gain on the sale of
investments.
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2008, the $35.9 million cash usage was primarily due
to the Company’s net loss of $39.6 million and a net increase in working capital
of approximately $16.2 million. The net increase in working capital
was primarily due to a $30.1 million increase in accounts receivable, a $6.0
million decrease in accrued expenses and other current liabilities, and a $1.7
million increase in prepaid expenses and other current assets offset by a $14.0
million increase in accounts payable and a $8.1 million decrease in
inventory. Non-cash adjustments used to reconcile net loss to net
cash used in operating activities included $8.7 million related to stock-based
compensation expense, $9.0 million related to depreciation and amortization
expense, $1.6 million related to compensatory stock issuances, $1.2 million
related to a loss from convertible subordinated notes, and a $3.7 million
related to a gain on the sale of an investment.
Net Cash Used for Investing
Activities
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2009, net cash provided by investing activities
totaled $14.4 million, which represents an increase of $74.0 million from $59.6
million in cash used for investing activities for the nine months ended June 30,
2008.
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2009, the $14.4 million in net cash provided by
investing activities was primarily due to $11.0 million received from the sale
of the Company’s investment in Entech Solar, Inc., $2.7 million received from
the sale of available-for-sale securities and $1.9 million of proceeds from
restricted cash offset by $1.2 million in capital expenditures.
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2008, the $59.6 million in net cash usage from
investing activities was primarily due to $75.8 million paid to Intel
Corporation for the purchase of certain fiber optics-related assets, $15.0
million in capital expenditures and $7.0 million for the purchase of
available-for-sale securities offset by $32.8 million received from the sale of
available-for-sale securities, $6.5 million received from the sale of
unconsolidated affiliates and $1.2 million received from an insurance
recovery.
Net Cash Provided by
Financing Activities
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2009, net cash provided by financing activities
totaled $6.8 million, which represents a decrease of $94.6 million from $101.4
million in cash provided by financing activities for the nine months ended June
30, 2008.
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2009, the $6.8 million in net cash provided by
financing activities consisted of $88.8 million in borrowings under the
Company’s credit facility with Bank of America, $0.9 million in other borrowings
and $0.9 in proceeds from the Company’s employee stock purchase plan offset by
$83.8 million in repayment of borrowings under the Company’s credit facility
with Bank of America.
For the
nine months ended June 30, 2008, the $101.4 million in net cash provided by
financing activities consisted of $93.7 million received from the sale of common
stock and warrants, $7.0 million received from the exercise of employee stock
options and $0.7 in proceeds from the Company’s employee stock purchase
plan.
The
Company’s contractual obligations and commitments over the next five years are
summarized in the table below:
Fiscal
Years
|
||||||||||||||||
As
of June 30, 2009
(in
thousands)
|
Total
|
2009
|
2010
to 2011
|
2012
to 2013
|
2014
and
later
|
|||||||||||
Operating
lease obligations
|
$
|
8,916
|
$
|
506
|
$
|
3,772
|
$
|
1,864
|
$
|
2,774
|
||||||
Line
of credit
|
4,984
|
4,984
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Short-term
debt
|
889
|
-
|
889
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Purchase
obligations
|
32,671
|
27,524
|
142
|
5,005
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Total
contractual obligations and commitments
|
$
|
47,460
|
$
|
33,014
|
$
|
4,803
|
$
|
6,869
|
$
|
2,774
|
Operating
leases
Operating
leases include non-cancelable terms and exclude renewal option periods, property
taxes, insurance and maintenance expenses on leased properties.
Loss on firm
commitments
Recently,
the Company has been challenged with higher than expected inventory positions of
product in its Fiber Optics segment as quarterly sales were lower than internal
projections of many of our customers, which has had a significant adverse effect
on results of operations in fiscal 2009. Management performed an
analysis of the Company’s inventory position, including a review of open
purchase and sales commitments, and determined that certain inventory was
impaired which resulted in a $6.5 million loss on purchase and sales commitments
specifically related to inventory. These impairment charges were
recognized in cost of revenues.
Line of
credit
In
September 2008, the Company closed a $25 million asset-backed revolving credit
facility with Bank of America which can be used for working capital, letters of
credit and other general corporate purposes. Subsequently, the credit
facility was amended resulting in a reduction in the total loan availability to
$14 million. The credit facility matures in September 2011 and is
secured by virtually all of the Company’s assets. The credit facility
is subject to a borrowing base formula based on eligible accounts receivable and
provides for prime-based borrowings.
As of
June 30, 2009, the Company had a $5.0 million prime rate loan outstanding, with
an interest rate of 8.25%, and approximately $2.8 million in outstanding standby
letters of credit under this credit facility.
The
facility is also subject to certain financial covenants which management
believes the Company is in compliance with for the three months ended June 30,
2009.
For the
three months ended December 31, 2008, the Company did not meet the requirements
under the EBITDA financial covenant and for the three months ended March 31,
2009, the Company did not meet the requirements under the Fixed Charge Coverage
Ratio and EBITDA financial covenants. Over the last several months,
the Company has entered into several amendments to the credit facility with Bank
of America which has, among other things: (i) increased the amount of eligible
accounts receivable under the borrowing base formula, (ii) waived certain events
of default of financial covenants by the Company, (iii) decreased the
total maximum loan availability amount to $14 million, (iv) increased applicable
interest rates with respect to loans and letters of credit, and (v) adjusted
certain financial covenants. Adjustments were also made to the borrowing
base formula and the calculation of eligible accounts receivable which ,
generally resulted in greater loan availability against accounts receivable
subject to the $14 million overall loan limit.
Short-term
debt
In
December 2008, the Company borrowed $0.9 million from UBS that is collateralized
with $1.4 million of auction rate securities. The average interest
rate on the loan is approximately 1.4% and the term of the loan is dependent
upon the timing of the settlement of the auction rate securities with UBS which
is expected to occur by June 2010 at 100% par value.
Letters of
credit
As of
June 30, 2009, the Company had eleven standby letters of credit issued and
outstanding which totaled approximately $3.3 million, of which $2.8 million was
issued against the Company’s credit facility with Bank of America and the
remaining $0.5 million in standby letters of credit are collateralized with
other financial institutions and are listed on the Company’s balance sheet as
restricted cash.
ITEM
3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
We are
exposed to financial market risks, including changes in currency exchange rates
and interest rates. We do not use derivative financial instruments for
speculative purposes.
Currency Exchange Rates. The
United States dollar is the functional currency for the Company’s consolidated
financials. The functional currency of the Company’s Spanish subsidiary is the
Euro and for the China subsidiary it is the Yuan Renminbi. The financial
statements of these entities are translated to United States dollars using
period end rates for assets and liabilities, and the weighted average rate for
the period for all revenue and expenses. During the normal course of business,
the Company is exposed to market risks associated with fluctuations in foreign
currency exchange rates, primarily the Euro. To reduce the impact of these risks
on the Company’s earnings and to increase the predictability of cash flows, the
Company uses natural offsets in receipts and disbursements within the applicable
currency as the primary means of reducing the risk. Some of our foreign
suppliers may adjust their prices (in $US) from time to time to reflect currency
exchange fluctuations, and such price changes could impact our future financial
condition or results of operations. The Company does not currently
hedge its foreign currency exposure.
Interest Rates. We maintain
an investment portfolio in a variety of high-grade, short-term debt and money
market instruments that includes auction-rate securities. As a result, our
future investment income may be less than expected because of changes in
interest rates, or we may suffer losses in principal if forced to sell
securities that have experienced a decline in market value because of changes in
interest rates. The Company does not currently hedge its interest
rate exposure.
Credit
Market Conditions
Recently,
the U.S. and global capital markets have been experiencing unprecedented
conditions, particularly in the credit markets, as evidenced by tightening of
lending standards, reduced availability of credit, and reductions in certain
asset values. This could impact the Company’s ability to raise
additional cash through debt or equity financing or asset sales.
Auction
Rate Securities
Historically,
the Company has invested in securities with an auction reset feature (“auction
rate securities”). In February 2008, the auction market failed for
the Company’s auction rate securities, which resulted in the Company being
unable to sell its investments in auction rate securities. As of
September 30, 2008, the Company had approximately $3.1 million invested in
auction rate securities.
During
the three months ended December 31, 2008, the Company entered into agreements
with its investment brokers for the settlement of auction rate securities at
100% par value, of which $1.7 million was settled at 100% par value in November
2008. The remaining $1.4 million of auction rate securities should be
settled by June 2010 and it is classified as a current asset based on its
expected settlement date. In December 2008, the Company borrowed $0.9
million from its investment broker, using its remaining $1.4 million in auction
rate securities as collateral, which is classified as short-term
debt. Since the Company believes that it will receive full value of
its remaining $1.4 million securities, we have not recorded any impairment on
these investments as of June 30, 2009.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and
Procedures
The
Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures designed to provide
reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in reports filed
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”) is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported within the specified time periods and accumulated and
communicated to management, including its Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer) and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer),
as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
Management,
under the supervision and with the participation of its Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting
Officer), evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e) promulgated under
the Act), as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that
evaluation, management concluded that, as of that date, the Company’s disclosure
controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance
level.
Attached
as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q are certifications of the
Company’s Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer), which are required in
accordance with Rule 13a-14 of the Act. This Disclosure Controls and
Procedures section includes information concerning management’s evaluation of
disclosure controls and procedures referred to in those certifications and, as
such, should be read in conjunction with the certifications of the Company’s
Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and Chief Financial
Officer (Principal Financial Officer).
Changes in Internal Control over
Financial Reporting
There
were no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting
during the three months ended June 30, 2009 that have materially affected, or
are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting.
Limitations
on the Effectiveness of Controls
Our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
does not expect that our disclosure controls or our internal controls will
prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well
designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that
the control system’s objectives will be met. Further, the design of a control
system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the
benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the
inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can
provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if
any, within the Company have been detected. These inherent limitations include
the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that
breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Controls can
also be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two
or more people, or by management override of the controls. The design
of any system of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions about the
likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will
succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future
conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of compliance with
associated policies or procedures. Because of the inherent
limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or
fraud may occur and not be detected.
The
Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that are discussed
below. The Company is also subject to certain other legal proceedings and claims
that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and which have not been
fully adjudicated. The Company does not believe it has a potential
liability related to current legal proceedings and claims that could
individually, or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on its
financial condition, liquidity or results of operations. However, the results of
legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. Should the Company fail to
prevail in any legal matters or should several legal matters be resolved against
the Company in the same reporting period, then the operating results of that
particular reporting period could be materially adversely
affected. During fiscal 2008, the Company settled certain matters
that did not individually, or in the aggregate, have a material impact on the
Company’s results of operations.
a)
Intellectual Property Lawsuits
We
protect our proprietary technology by applying for patents where appropriate
and, in other cases, by preserving the technology, related know-how and
information as trade secrets. The success and competitive position of our
product lines are significantly impacted by our ability to obtain intellectual
property protection for our R&D efforts.
We have,
from time to time, exchanged correspondence with third parties regarding the
assertion of patent or other intellectual property rights in connection with
certain of our products and processes. Additionally, on September 11, 2006, we
filed a lawsuit against Optium Corporation, currently part of Finisar
Corporation (Optium) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania for patent infringement of certain patents associated with our
Fiber Optics segment. In the suit, the Company and JDS Uniphase Corporation
(JDSU) allege that Optium is infringing on U.S. patents 6,282,003 and 6,490,071
with its Prisma II 1550nm transmitters. On March 14, 2007, following denial of a
motion to add additional claims to its existing lawsuit, the Company and JDSU
filed a second patent suit in the same court against Optium alleging
infringement of JDSU's patent 6,519,374 ("the '374 patent"). On March
15, 2007, Optium filed a declaratory judgment action against the Company and
JDSU. Optium sought in this litigation a declaration that certain products of
Optium do not infringe the '374 patent and that the patent is invalid, but the
District Court dismissed the action on January 3, 2008 without addressing the
merits. The '374 patent is assigned to JDSU and licensed to the
Company.
On
December 20, 2007, the Company was served with a complaint in another
declaratory relief action which Optium had filed in the Federal District Court
for the Western District of Pennsylvania. This action seeks to have
U.S. patents 6,282,003 and 6,490,071 declared invalid or unenforceable because
of certain conduct alleged to have occurred in connection with the grant of
these patents. These allegations are substantially the same as those
brought by Optium by motion in the Company’s own case against Optium, which
motion had been denied by the Court. On August 11, 2008, both actions
pending in the Western District of Pennsylvania were consolidated before a
single judge, and a trial date of October 19, 2009 was set. On
February 18, 2009, the Company’s motion for a summary judgment dismissing
Optium’s declaratory relief action was granted, and on March 11, 2009, the
Company was notified that Optium intended to file an appeal of this
order.
b)
Avago-related Litigation
On July
15, 2008, the Company was served with a complaint filed by Avago Technologies
and what appear to be affiliates thereof in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California, San Jose Division (Avago Technologies U.S.,
Inc., et al., Emcore
Corporation, et al.,
Case No.: C08-3248 JW). In this complaint, Avago asserts
claims for breach of contract and breach of express warranty against Venture
Corporation Limited (one of the Company’s customers) and asserts a tort claim
for negligent interference with prospective economic advantage against the
Company
On
December 5, 2008, EMCORE was also served with a complaint by Avago Technologies
filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, San Jose Division alleging infringement of two patents by the
Company’s VCSEL products. (Avago Technologies Singapore et al., Emcore Corporation,
et al., Case
No.: C08-5394 EMC). This matter has been stayed pending
resolution of the International Trade Commission matter described
immediately below.
On March
5, 2009, the Company was notified that, based on a complaint filed by Avago
alleging the same patent infringement that formed the basis of the complaint
previously filed in the Northern District of California, the U.S. International
Trade Commission had determined to begin an investigation titled “In the Matter
of Certain Optoelectronic Devices, Components Thereof and Products Containing
the Same”, Inv. No. 337-TA-669.
The
Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations of all of the Avago
complaints.
c)
Green and Gold related litigation
On
December 23, 2008, Plaintiffs Maurice Prissert and Claude Prissert filed a
purported stockholder class action (the “Prissert Class Action”) pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 allegedly on behalf of a class of Company
shareholders against the Company and certain of its present and former directors
and officers (the “Individual Defendants”) in the United States District Court
for the District of New Mexico captioned, Maurice Prissert and Claude Prissert
v. EMCORE Corporation, Adam Gushard, Hong Q. Hou, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., David
Danzilio and Thomas Werthan, Case No. 1:08cv1190 (D.N.M.). The
Complaint alleges that Company and the Individual Defendants violated certain
provisions of the federal securities laws, including Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, arising out of the Company’s disclosure
regarding its customer Green and Gold Energy (“GGE”) and the associated backlog
of GGE orders with the Company’s Photovoltaics business segment. The
Complaint in the Class Action seeks, among other things, an unspecified amount
of compensatory damages and other costs and expenses associated with the
maintenance of the Action.
On or
about February 12, 2009, a second purported stockholder class action (Mueller v. EMCORE Corporation et
al., Case No. 1:09cv 133 (D.N.M.)) was filed in the United States
District Court for the District of New Mexico against the same defendants named
in the Prissert Class Action, based on the substantially the same facts and
circumstances, containing substantially the same allegations and seeking
substantially the same relief. Plaintiffs in both class actions have
moved to consolidate the matters into a single action, and several alleged
EMCORE shareholders have moved to be appointed lead class plaintiff of the to-be
consolidated action. The Court has not yet consolidated the two class
actions or selected the lead plaintiff for these class actions
On
January 23, 2009, Plaintiff James E. Stearns filed a purported stockholder
derivative action (the “Stearns Derivative Action”) on behalf of the Company
against certain of its present and former directors and officers (the
“Individual Defendants”), as well as the Company as nominal defendant in the
Superior Court of New Jersey, Atlantic County, Chancery Division (James E. Stearns, derivatively on
behalf of EMCORE Corporation v. Thomas J. Russell, Robert Bogomolny,
Charles Scott, John Gillen, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., Hong Q. Hou, Adam Gushard,
David Danzilio and Thomas Werthan, Case No. Atl-C-10-09). This
action is based on essentially the same factual contentions as the Class Action,
and alleges that the Individual Defendants engaged in improprieties and
violations of law in connection with the reporting of the GGE
backlog. The Derivative Action seeks several forms of relief,
allegedly on behalf of the Company, including, among other things, damages,
equitable relief, corporate governance reforms, an accounting of, rescission of,
restitution of, and costs and disbursements of the lawsuit.
On March
11, 2009, Plaintiff Gary Thomas filed a second purported shareholder derivative
action (the “Thomas Derivative Action”; together with the Stearns Derivative
Action, the “Derivative Actions”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of
New Mexico against the Company and certain of the Individual
Defendants (Gary Thomas, derivatively on behalf
of EMCORE Corporation v. Thomas J. Russell, Robert Bogomolny, Charles
Scott, John Gillen, Reuben F. Richards, Jr., Hong Q. Hou, and EMCORE
Corporation, Case No. 1.09-cv-00236, (D.N.M.)). The Thomas
Derivative Action makes the same allegations as the Stearns Derivative Action
and seeks essentially the same relief.
The
Stearns Derivative Action has recently been transferred to Somerset County, New
Jersey. The plaintiff in the Thomas Derivative Action has recently
voluntarily dismissed the action in U.S. District Court for the District of New
Mexico. The parties have stipulated that the statute of limitations
in the Thomas Derivative Action will be tolled until December 31,
2009. Plaintiff’s counsel has indicated that if the Thomas Derivative
Action is re-filed, it would be filed in New Jersey state court in the County of
Somerset, New Jersey, so that both derivative actions can be consolidated before
a single judge.
The
Company intends to vigorously defend against the allegations of both the Class
Actions and the Derivative Action.
d)
Securities Matters
§
|
SEC
Communications. On or about August 15, 2008, the Company
received a letter from the Denver office of the Enforcement Division of
the Securities and Exchange Commission wherein it sought EMCORE's
voluntary production of documents relating to, among other things, the
Company's business relationship with Green and Gold Energy, Inc., its
licensees, and the Photovoltaics segment backlog the Company reported to
the public. Since that time, the Company has provided documents
to the staff of the SEC and met with the staff on December 12, 2008 to
address this matter. On June 10, 2009, the SEC staff requested
that the Company voluntarily provide documentary backup for certain
information presented at the December 2008 meeting, which was provided on
July 17, 2009, and arrange for a telephone interview with one former
employee, which has not yet been
scheduled.
|
§
|
NASDAQ
Communication. On or about November 13, 2008, the Company
received a letter from the NASDAQ Listings Qualifications group (“NASDAQ”)
concerning the Company's removal of $79 million in backlog attributable to
GGE which the Company announced on August 8, 2008 and the remaining
backlog exclusive of GGE. The Company advised NASDAQ that it would
cooperate with its inquiry. To date, the Company has received
three additional requests for information from NASDAQ (the latter 2 of
which requested updates on the SEC matter). The Company has
complied with each of NASDAQ’s
requests.
|
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
In
addition to the other information set forth in this report, you should carefully
consider the risk factors discussed in Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” in our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2008, which could
materially affect our business, financial condition or future
results. The risks described in our Annual Report on Form 10-K are
not the only risks facing our Company. Additional risks and
uncertainties not currently known to us also may materially adversely affect our
business, financial condition and/or operating results.
|
(a)
|
On
April 20, 2008, the Company acquired the enterprise and storage assets of
Intel Corporation’s OPD business, as well as Intel’s Connects Cables
business. As consideration for the purchase of assets, the
Company issued 3.7 million restricted shares of the Company’s common stock
to Intel. In addition, on April 20, 2009, the Company
issued 1.3 million shares of unrestricted common stock to Intel, valued at
$1.2 million using the closing share price of $0.91, as consideration for
the final purchase price adjustment related to this asset
acquisition.
|
(b)
|
Not
Applicable
|
(c)
|
Not
Applicable
|
Not
Applicable
ITEM
4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
The
Company held its 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders on April 30,
2009.
§
|
The
Company’s shareholders reelected Mr. John Gillen to the Board of Directors
for a term of three years (expiring in 2012). The total shares voted for
the election of Mr. Gillen was 52,060,308 and the total shares withheld
totaled 4,288,285.
|
§
|
The
Company’s shareholders ratified the appointment of Deloitte & Touche
LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm of the Company as
follows:
|
For: 55,157,675
shares
Against: 958,617
shares
Abstain: 232,301
shares
§
|
The
Company’s shareholders approved an increase in the number of shares
reserved for issuance under the Company’s 2000 Employee Stock Purchase
Plan
|
For: 31,991,930
shares
Against: 1,232,162
shares
Abstain: 141,037
shares
Broker
non-votes totaled 22,983,464 shares.
§
|
The
Company’s shareholders approved an increase in the number of shares
reserved for issuance under the Company’s 2000 Stock Option
Plan
|
For: 28,263,264
shares
Against: 4,954,685
shares
Abstain: 147,179
shares
Broker
non-votes totaled 22,983,465 shares.
ITEM
5. OTHER INFORMATION
On April
30, 2009, the Company entered into an amendment with Bank of America that
provided a waiver of events of default through March 31, 2009. This
amendment was included as an exhibit to a Current Report on Form 8-K that was
filed with the SEC on May 6, 2009.
Exhibit
No.
|
Description
|
10.1
|
EMCORE
Corporation 2000 Stock Option Plan, as amended and restated on April 30,
2009 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on May 6, 2009).
|
10.2
|
EMCORE
Corporation 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as amended and restated on
April 30, 2009 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Company’s
Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 6, 2009).
|
10.3
|
Third
Amendment to the Loan and Security Agreement with Bank of America, N.A.,
dated April 30, 2009 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 6, 2009).
|
10.4
*
|
Fourth
Amendment to the Loan and Security Agreement with Bank of America, N.A.,
dated May 8, 2009
|
31.1*
|
Certification
by Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
31.2*
|
Certification
by Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
32.1*
|
Certification
by Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
32.2*
|
Certification
by Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
__________
* Filed herewith
SIGNATURES
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.
EMCORE
CORPORATION
|
|
Date: August
17, 2009
|
By:
/s/
Hong Q. Hou
|
Hong
Q. Hou, Ph.D.
|
|
Chief
Executive Officer
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
Date: August
17, 2009
|
By:
/s/
John M, Markovich
|
John
M. Markovich
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer
(Principal
Financial and Accounting Officer)
|