Allergan, Inc.
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the Fiscal Year Ended
December 31, 2007
|
or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
Commission File
No. 1-10269
Allergan, Inc.
(Exact name of Registrant as
Specified in its Charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
95-1622442
|
(State of
Incorporation)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification
No.)
|
2525 Dupont Drive
|
|
92612
|
Irvine, California
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
(Address of principal executive
offices)
|
|
|
(714) 246-4500
(Registrants
telephone number)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
|
|
Name of each exchange on
|
Title of each class
|
|
which registered
|
Common Stock, $0.01 par value
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
Preferred Share Purchase Rights
|
|
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the
registrant: (1) has filed all reports required
to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file
such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing
requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
(§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein,
and will not be contained, to the best of registrants
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act.
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer
þ
|
|
Accelerated filer
o
|
Non-accelerated filer
o (Do
not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting company
o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
As of June 29, 2007, the aggregate market value of the
registrants common stock held by non-affiliates of the
registrant was approximately $17,685 million based on the
closing sale price as reported on the New York Stock Exchange.
Common Stock outstanding as of February 22,
2008 307,511,888 shares (including
1,582,188 shares held in treasury).
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Part III of this report incorporates certain information by
reference from the registrants proxy statement for the
annual meeting of stockholders to be held on May 6, 2008,
which proxy statement will be filed no later than 120 days
after the close of the registrants fiscal year ended
December 31, 2007.
Statements made by us in this report and in other reports and
statements released by us that are not historical facts
constitute forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 21 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These
forward-looking statements are necessarily estimates reflecting
the best judgment of our senior management based on our current
estimates, expectations, forecasts and projections and include
comments that express our current opinions about trends and
factors that may impact future operating results. Disclosures
that use words such as we believe,
anticipate, estimate,
intend, could, plan,
expect, project or the negative of
these, as well as similar expressions, are intended to identify
forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees
of future performance and rely on a number of assumptions
concerning future events, many of which are outside of our
control, and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties
that could cause our actual results, performance or
achievements, or industry results, to differ materially from any
future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied
by such forward-looking statements. We discuss such risks,
uncertainties and other factors throughout this report and
specifically under the caption Risk Factors in
Item 1A of Part I of this report below. Any such
forward-looking statements, whether made in this report or
elsewhere, should be considered in the context of the various
disclosures made by us about our businesses including, without
limitation, the risk factors discussed below. Except as required
under the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations
of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, we do not
have any intention or obligation to update publicly any
forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new
information, future events, changes in assumptions or
otherwise.
PART I
General
Overview of our Business
We are a multi-specialty health care company focused on
developing and commercializing innovative pharmaceuticals,
biologics and medical devices that enable people to see more
clearly, move more freely and express themselves more fully. Our
diversified approach enables us to follow our research and
development into new specialty areas where unmet needs are
significant.
We discover, develop and commercialize specialty pharmaceutical,
medical device and over-the-counter products for the ophthalmic,
neurological, medical aesthetics, medical dermatological, breast
aesthetics, obesity intervention, urological and other specialty
markets in more than 100 countries around the world. We are a
pioneer in specialty pharmaceutical research, targeting products
and technologies related to specific disease areas such as
glaucoma, retinal disease, chronic dry eye, psoriasis, acne,
movement disorders, neuropathic pain and genitourinary diseases.
In March 2006, we completed the acquisition of Inamed
Corporation, or Inamed, a global healthcare manufacturer and
marketer of breast implants, a range of dermal filler products
to correct facial wrinkles, and bariatric medical devices for
approximately $3.3 billion, consisting of approximately
$1.4 billion in cash and 34,883,386 shares of our
common stock.
In January 2007, we acquired all of the outstanding capital
stock of Groupe Cornéal Laboratoires, or Cornéal, a
healthcare company that develops, manufactures and markets
dermal fillers, viscoelastics and a range of ophthalmic surgical
device products, for an aggregate purchase price of
approximately $209.2 million, net of cash acquired. The
acquisition of Cornéal expanded our marketing rights to
Juvédermtm
and a range of hyaluronic acid dermal fillers from the United
States, Canada and Australia to all countries worldwide and
provided us with control over the manufacturing process and
future research and development of
Juvédermtm
and other dermal fillers.
In October 2007, we acquired all of the outstanding capital
stock of Esprit Pharma Holding Company, Inc., or Esprit, for an
aggregate purchase price of approximately $370.7 million,
net of cash acquired. In addition to marketing
Sanctura®
(trospium chloride), a
twice-a-day
anticholinergic approved for the treatment of overactive
bladder, or OAB, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or
FDA, approved Sanctura
XRtm
(trospium chloride extended release capsules) for the once-daily
treatment of OAB in August 2007. By acquiring Esprit, we
obtained an exclusive license to market
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
in the United States and its territories from Indevus
1
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Indevus. We pay royalties to Indevus
based upon our sales of
Sanctura®
and
Sanctura XRtm
and assumed obligations of Esprit to pay certain other
third-party royalties, also based upon sales of
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm.
We entered into a co-promotion agreement with Indevus pursuant
to which Indevus will
co-promote
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
through at least September 2008, subject to Indevus right
to extend the agreement for up to six months. We launched
Sanctura
XRtm
in the United States in January 2008.
We were founded in 1950 and incorporated in Delaware in 1977.
Our principal executive offices are located at 2525 Dupont
Drive, Irvine, California, 92612, and our telephone number at
that location is
(714) 246-4500.
Our Internet website address is www.allergan.com.
We make our periodic and current reports, together with
amendments to these reports, available on our Internet website,
free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after such
material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the
Securities and Exchange Commission. Members of the public may
read and copy any materials we file with, or furnish to, the
Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, at the SECs
Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington,
DC 20549. To obtain information on the operation of the Public
Reference Room, please call the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
The SEC maintains an Internet site at www.sec.gov
that contains the reports, proxy statements and other
information that we file electronically with the SEC. The
information on our Internet website is not incorporated by
reference into this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Operating
Segments
Through the first fiscal quarter of 2006, we operated our
business on the basis of a single reportable segment
specialty pharmaceuticals. Due to the Inamed acquisition,
beginning in the second fiscal quarter of 2006, we operated our
business on the basis of two reportable segments
specialty pharmaceuticals and medical devices. The specialty
pharmaceuticals segment produces a broad range of pharmaceutical
products, including: ophthalmic products for glaucoma therapy,
ocular inflammation, infection, allergy and chronic dry eye;
Botox®
for certain therapeutic and aesthetic indications; skin care
products for acne, psoriasis and other prescription and
over-the-counter dermatological products; and, beginning in the
fourth quarter of 2007, urologics products. The medical devices
segment produces a broad range of medical devices, including:
breast implants for augmentation, revision and reconstructive
surgery; obesity intervention products, including the
Lap-Band®
System and the
BIBtm
BioEnterics®
Intragastric Balloon; and facial aesthetics products. The
following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, product
net sales for each of our product lines within our specialty
pharmaceuticals segment and medical devices segment, domestic
and international sales as a percentage of total product net
sales within our specialty pharmaceuticals segment and medical
devices segment, and segment operating income for our specialty
pharmaceuticals segment and medical devices segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
Specialty Pharmaceuticals Segment Product Net Sales by Product
Line
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eye Care Pharmaceuticals
|
|
$
|
1,776.5
|
|
|
$
|
1,530.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,321.7
|
|
Botox®/Neuromodulator
|
|
|
1,211.8
|
|
|
|
982.2
|
|
|
|
830.9
|
|
Skin Care Products
|
|
|
110.7
|
|
|
|
125.7
|
|
|
|
120.2
|
|
Urologics
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Specialty Pharmaceuticals Segment Product Net Sales
|
|
$
|
3,105.0
|
|
|
$
|
2,638.5
|
|
|
$
|
2,319.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty Pharmaceuticals Segment Product Net Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic
|
|
|
65.8
|
%
|
|
|
67.9
|
%
|
|
|
67.5
|
%
|
International
|
|
|
34.2
|
%
|
|
|
32.1
|
%
|
|
|
32.5
|
%
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
Medical Devices Segment Product Net Sales by Product Line(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Breast Aesthetics
|
|
$
|
298.4
|
|
|
$
|
177.2
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Obesity Intervention
|
|
|
270.1
|
|
|
|
142.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facial Aesthetics
|
|
|
202.8
|
|
|
|
52.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core Medical Devices
|
|
|
771.3
|
|
|
|
371.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other(3)
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Medical Devices Segment Product Net Sales
|
|
$
|
774.0
|
|
|
$
|
371.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medical Devices Segment Product Net Sales(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic
|
|
|
65.1
|
%
|
|
|
64.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
International
|
|
|
34.9
|
%
|
|
|
35.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty Pharmaceuticals Segment Operating Income(4)
|
|
$
|
1,047.9
|
|
|
$
|
888.8
|
|
|
$
|
762.9
|
|
Medical Devices Segment Operating Income(2)(4)
|
|
|
207.1
|
|
|
|
119.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Long-Lived Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic
|
|
$
|
3,702.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,279.0
|
|
|
$
|
470.7
|
|
International
|
|
|
557.5
|
|
|
|
244.0
|
|
|
|
199.3
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Other specialty pharmaceutical product sales primarily consist
of sales to a former subsidiary that was spun off to our
stockholders in 2002. |
|
(2) |
|
Due to the Inamed acquisition, beginning in the second quarter
of 2006, we operated our business on the basis of two reportable
segments specialty pharmaceuticals and medical
devices. |
|
(3) |
|
Other medical device product sales primarily consist of sales of
ophthalmic surgical devices pursuant to a manufacturing and
supply agreement entered into as part of the July 2007 sale of
the former Cornéal ophthalmic surgical device business,
which was substantially concluded in December 2007. |
|
(4) |
|
Management evaluates business segment performance on an
operating income basis exclusive of general and administrative
expenses and other indirect costs, restructuring charges,
in-process research and development expenses, amortization of
identifiable intangible assets related to the Esprit, EndoArt,
Cornéal and Inamed acquisitions and certain other
adjustments, which are not allocated to our business segments
for performance assessment by our chief operating decision
maker. Other adjustments excluded from our business segments for
purposes of performance assessment represent income or expenses
that do not reflect, according to established company-defined
criteria, operating income or expenses associated with our core
business activities. |
We do not discretely allocate assets to our operating segments,
nor does our chief operating decision maker evaluate operating
segments using discrete asset information.
See Note 16, Business Segment Information, in
the notes to the consolidated financial statements listed under
Item 15 of Part IV of this report, Exhibits and
Financial Statement Schedules, for further information
concerning our foreign and domestic operations.
Specialty
Pharmaceuticals Segment
Eye Care Pharmaceuticals Product Line
We develop, manufacture and market a broad range of prescription
and non-prescription products designed to treat diseases and
disorders of the eye, including glaucoma, chronic dry eye,
inflammation, infection and allergy.
Glaucoma. The largest segment of the market
for ophthalmic prescription drugs is for the treatment of
glaucoma, a sight-threatening disease typically characterized by
elevated intraocular pressure leading to optic nerve damage.
Glaucoma is currently the worlds second leading cause of
blindness, and we estimate that over 60 million people
worldwide have glaucoma. According to IMS Health Incorporated,
an independent marketing research firm,
3
our products for the treatment of glaucoma, including
Lumigan®
(bimatoprost ophthalmic solution) 0.03%, or
Lumigan®,
Alphagan®
(brimonidine tartrate ophthalmic solution) 0.2%, or
Alphagan®,
Alphagan®
P (brimonidine tartrate ophthalmic solution) 0.15%, or
Alphagan®
P,
Alphagan®
P 0.1% (brimonidine tartrate ophthalmic solution) 0.1%,
or
Alphagan®
P 0.1%,
Combigantm
(brimonidine tartrate/timolol maleate ophthalmic solution)
0.2%/0.5%, or
Combigantm
and
Ganfort®
(bimatoprost/timolol maleate ophthalmic solution) captured
approximately 18% of the worldwide glaucoma market for the first
nine months of 2007.
Lumigan®
is a topical treatment indicated for the reduction of elevated
intraocular pressure in patients with glaucoma or ocular
hypertension who are either intolerant or insufficiently
responsive when treated with other intraocular pressure-lowering
medications. We currently sell
Lumigan®
in over 70 countries worldwide and it is now our largest selling
eye care product. According to IMS Health Incorporated,
Lumigan®
was the third largest selling glaucoma product in the world for
the first nine months of 2007. In March 2002, the European
Commission approved
Lumigan®
through its centralized procedure. In January 2004, the European
Unions Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products
approved
Lumigan®
as a first-line therapy for the reduction of elevated
intraocular pressure in chronic open-angle glaucoma and ocular
hypertension. In June 2006, the FDA approved
Lumigan®
as a first-line therapy. In May 2004, we entered into an
exclusive licensing agreement with Senju Pharmaceutical Co.,
Ltd., or Senju, under which Senju became responsible for the
development and commercialization of
Lumigan®
in Japan. Senju incurs associated costs, makes clinical
development and commercialization milestone payments and makes
royalty-based payments on product sales. We agreed to work
collaboratively with Senju on overall product strategy and
management. In June 2007, Senju filed a new drug application in
Japan for
Lumigan®.
In November 2003, we filed a New Drug Application with the FDA
for
Ganfort®,
a
Lumigan®
and timolol combination designed to treat glaucoma or ocular
hypertension. In August 2004, we announced that the FDA issued
an approvable letter for
Ganfort®,
setting out the conditions, including additional clinical
investigation, that we must meet in order to obtain final FDA
approval. In May 2006, we received a license from the European
Commission to market
Ganfort®
in the European Union. Combined sales of
Lumigan®
and
Ganfort®
represented approximately 10% of our total consolidated product
net sales in 2007. Sales of
Lumigan®
represented approximately 11% of our total consolidated product
net sales in 2006 and 12% of our total consolidated product net
sales in 2005. The decline in the percentage of our total net
sales represented by sales of
Lumigan®
primarily resulted from the significant increase in our net
sales as a result of the Inamed acquisition.
Our third largest selling eye care pharmaceutical products are
the ophthalmic solutions
Alphagan®,
Alphagan® P,
and
Alphagan®
P 0.1%.
Alphagan®,
Alphagan®
P and
Alphagan®
P 0.1% lower intraocular pressure by reducing aqueous
humor production and increasing uveoscleral outflow.
Alphagan®
P and
Alphagan®
P 0.1% are improved reformulations of
Alphagan®
containing brimonidine,
Alphagan®s
active ingredient, preserved with
Purite®.
We currently market
Alphagan®,
Alphagan®
P, and
Alphagan®
P 0.1% in over 70 countries worldwide.
Alphagan®,
Alphagan®
P and
Alphagan®
P 0.1% combined were the fifth best selling glaucoma
products in the world for the first nine months of 2007,
according to IMS Health Incorporated. Combined sales of
Alphagan®,
Alphagan®
P and
Alphagan®
P 0.1% and
Combigantm
represented approximately 9% of our total consolidated product
net sales in 2007, 10% of our total consolidated product net
sales in 2006 and 12% of our total consolidated product net
sales in 2005. The decline in the percentage of our total net
sales represented by sales of
Alphagan®,
Alphagan®
P,
Alphagan®
P 0.1% and
Combigantm
primarily resulted from the significant increase in our net
sales as a result of the Inamed acquisition. In July 2002, based
on the acceptance of
Alphagan®
P, we discontinued the U.S. distribution of
Alphagan®.
In May 2004, we entered into an exclusive licensing agreement
with Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., or Kyorin, under which
Kyorin became responsible for the development and
commercialization of
Alphagan®
and
Alphagan®
P in Japans ophthalmic specialty area. Kyorin
subsequently sublicensed its rights under the agreement to Senju
Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Under the licensing agreement, Senju
incurs associated costs, makes clinical development and
commercialization milestone payments, and makes royalty-based
payments on product sales. We agreed to work collaboratively
with Senju on overall product strategy and management.
Alphagan®
P 0.1% was launched in the U.S. market in the first
quarter of 2006. The marketing exclusivity period for
Alphagan®
P expired in the United States in September 2004 and the
marketing exclusivity period for
Alphagan®
P 0.1% will expire in August 2008, although we have a
number of patents covering the
Alphagan®
P and
Alphagan®
P 0.1% technology that extend to 2021 in the United
States and 2009 in Europe, with
4
corresponding patents pending in Europe. In May 2003, the FDA
approved the first generic of
Alphagan®.
Additionally, a generic form of
Alphagan®
is sold in a limited number of other countries, including
Canada, Mexico, India, Brazil, Colombia and Argentina. See
Item 3 of Part I of this report, Legal
Proceedings and Note 13, Commitments and
Contingencies, in the notes to the consolidated financial
statements listed under Item 15 of Part IV of this
report, Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules,
for further information regarding litigation involving
Alphagan®.
Falcon Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., an affiliate of Alcon
Laboratories, Inc., or Alcon, attempted to obtain FDA approval
for and to launch a brimonidine product to compete with our
Alphagan®
P product. However, pursuant to a March 2006 settlement
with Alcon, Alcon agreed not to sell, offer for sale or
distribute its brimonidine product until September 30,
2009, or earlier if specified sales conditions occur. The
primary sales condition will have occurred if prescriptions of
Alphagan®
P have been converted to other brimonidine-containing
products we market above a specified threshold.
In addition to our
Alphagan®
and
Lumigan®
products, we developed the ophthalmic solution
Combigantm,
a brimonidine and timolol combination designed to treat glaucoma
and ocular hypertension in people who are not responsive to
treatment with only one medication and are considered
appropriate candidates for combination therapy. In November
2005, we received positive opinions for
Combigantm
from 20 concerned member states included in the
Combigantm
Mutual Recognition Procedure for the European Union, and we
launched
Combigantm
in the European Union during the following year. In October
2007, the FDA approved
Combigantm
and we launched
Combigantm
in the United States in November 2007.
Combigantm
is now sold in over 30 countries worldwide.
Chronic Dry
Eye. Restasis®
(cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion) 0.05%, or
Restasis®,
is the first and currently the only prescription therapy for the
treatment of chronic dry eye worldwide.
Restasis®
is our second largest selling eye care product. Chronic dry eye
is a painful and irritating condition involving abnormalities
and deficiencies in the tear film initiated by a variety of
causes. The incidence of chronic dry eye increases markedly with
age, after menopause in women and in people with systemic
diseases such as Sjogrens syndrome and rheumatoid
arthritis. Until the approval of
Restasis®,
physicians used lubricating tears as a temporary measure to
provide palliative relief of the debilitating symptoms of
chronic dry eye. We launched
Restasis®
in the United States in April 2003 under a license from Novartis
AG, or Norvartis, for the ophthalmic use of cyclosporine.
Restasis®
is currently approved in 28 countries. In April 2005, we entered
into a royalty buy-out agreement with Novartis related to
Restasis®
and agreed to pay $110 million to Novartis in exchange for
Novartis worldwide rights and obligations, excluding
Japan, for technology, patents and products relating to the
topical ophthalmic use of cyclosporine A, the active ingredient
in
Restasis®.
Under the royalty buy-out agreement, we no longer make royalty
payments to Novartis in connection with our sales of
Restasis®.
In June 2001, we entered into a licensing, development and
marketing agreement with Inspire Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or
Inspire, under which we obtained an exclusive license to develop
and commercialize Inspires product candidate,
Prolacriatm
(diquafosol tetrasodium), or
Prolacriatm,
a treatment to relieve the signs of chronic dry eye by
rehydrating conjunctival mucosa and increasing non-lacrimal tear
component production, in exchange for our agreement to make
royalty payments to Inspire on sales of both
Restasis®
and, ultimately
Prolacriatm,
and for Inspire to promote
Restasis®
in the United States. In December 2003, the FDA issued an
approvable letter for
Prolacriatm
and also requested additional clinical data. In February 2005,
Inspire announced that
Prolacriatm
failed to demonstrate statistically significant improvement as
compared to a placebo for the primary endpoint of the incidence
of corneal clearing. Inspire also announced that
Prolacriatm
achieved improvement compared to a placebo for a number of
secondary endpoints. Inspire filed a New Drug Application
amendment with the FDA in the second quarter of 2005. In
December 2005, Inspire announced that it had received a second
approvable letter from the FDA in connection with
Prolacriatm.
Inflammation. Our leading ophthalmic
anti-inflammatory product is
Acular®
(ketorolac ophthalmic solution) 0.5%, or
Acular®.
Acular®
is a registered trademark of and is licensed from its developer,
Syntex (U.S.A.) Inc., a business unit of Hoffmann-LaRoche Inc.
Acular®
is indicated for the temporary relief of itch associated with
seasonal allergic conjunctivitis, the inflammation of the mucus
membrane that lines the inner surface of the eyelids, and for
the treatment of post-operative inflammation in patients who
have undergone cataract extraction. Acular
PF®
was the first, and currently remains the only unit-dose,
preservative-free topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug,
or NSAID, in the United States. Acular
PF®
is indicated for the reduction of ocular pain and photophobia
following incisional refractive surgery. Acular
LS®
(ketorolac ophthalmic solution) 0.4% is a version of
Acular®
that has been reformulated for the reduction of ocular pain,
burning and stinging
5
following corneal refractive surgery. The
Acular®
franchise was the highest selling ophthalmic NSAID in the world
during the first nine months of 2007, according to IMS Health
Incorporated.
Our ophthalmic anti-inflammatory product Pred
Forte®
remains a leading topical steroid worldwide based on 2007 sales.
Pred
Forte®
has no patent protection or marketing exclusivity and faces
generic competition.
Infection. Our
Ocuflox®/Oflox®/Exocin®
ophthalmic solution is a leading product in the ophthalmic
anti-infective market.
Ocuflox®
has no patent protection or marketing exclusivity and faces
generic competition.
We license
Zymar®
(gatifloxacin ophthalmic solution) 0.3%, or
Zymar®,
from Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., and have worldwide
ophthalmic commercial rights excluding Japan, Korea, Taiwan and
certain other countries in Asia. We launched
Zymar®
in the United States in April 2003.
Zymar®
is a fourth-generation fluoroquinolone for the treatment of
bacterial conjunctivitis and is currently approved in 29
countries. Laboratory studies have shown that
Zymar®
kills the most common bacteria that cause eye infections as well
as specific resistant bacteria. According to Verispan, an
independent research firm,
Zymar®
was the number two ophthalmic anti-infective prescribed by
ophthalmologists in the United States in 2007.
Zymar®
was the third best selling ophthalmic anti-infective product in
the world (and second in the United States) for the first nine
months of 2007, according to IMS Health Incorporated.
Allergy. The allergy market is, by its nature,
a seasonal market, peaking during the spring months. We market
Alocril®
ophthalmic solution for the treatment of itch associated with
allergic conjunctivitis. We license
Alocril®
from Fisons Ltd., a business unit of Sanofi-Aventis, and hold
worldwide ophthalmic commercial rights excluding Japan.
Alocril®
is approved in the United States, Canada and Mexico. We license
Elestat®
from Boehringer Ingelheim AG, and hold worldwide ophthalmic
commercial rights excluding Japan.
Elestat®
is used for the prevention of itching associated with allergic
conjunctivitis. We co-promote
Elestat®
in the United States under an agreement with Inspire within the
ophthalmic specialty area and to allergists. Under the terms of
our agreement with Inspire, Inspire provided us with an up-front
payment and we make payments to Inspire based on
Elestat®
net sales. In addition, the agreement reduced our existing
royalty payment to Inspire for
Restasis®.
Inspire has primary responsibility for selling and marketing
activities in the United States related to
Elestat®.
We have retained all international marketing and selling rights.
We launched
Elestat®
in Europe under the brand names
Relestat®
and
Purivist®
during 2004, and Inspire launched
Elestat®
in the United States during 2004.
Elestat®
(together with sales under its brand names
Relestat®
and
Purivist®)
is currently approved in 38 countries and was the fifth best
selling ophthalmic allergy product in the world (and fourth in
the United States) for the first nine months of 2007, according
to IMS Health Incorporated.
Neuromodulator
Our neuromodulator product,
Botox®
(botulinum toxin type A), has a long-established safety profile
and has been approved by the FDA for more than 18 years to
treat a variety of medical conditions, as well as for aesthetic
use since 2002. With more than 3,000 publications on botulinum
toxin type A in scientific and medical journals, results of
dozens of clinical trials involving more than
10,000 patients and having been used in clinical practice
to treat more than a million patients worldwide,
Botox®
is a widely researched medicine with more than 100 therapeutic
and aesthetic uses reported in the medical literature.
Botox®
is now accepted in many global regions as the standard therapy
for indications ranging from therapeutic neuromuscular disorders
and related pain to facial aesthetics. The versatility of
Botox®
is based on its localized treatment effect. Marketed as
Botox®,
Botox®
Cosmetic,
Vistabel®
or
Vistabex®,
depending on the indication and country of approval, the product
is currently approved in 77 countries for up to 20 unique
indications. Sales of
Botox®
represented approximately 31%, 33% and 36% of our total
consolidated product net sales in 2007, 2006 and 2005
respectively. The decline in the percentage of our total net
sales represented by sales of
Botox®
primarily resulted from the significant increase in our net
sales as a result of the Inamed acquisition.
6
Botox®
is used therapeutically for the treatment of certain
neuromuscular disorders which are characterized by involuntary
muscle contractions or spasms. The approved therapeutic
indications for
Botox®
in the United States are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
blepharospasm, the uncontrollable contraction of the eyelid
muscles which can force the eye closed and result in functional
blindness;
|
|
|
|
strabismus, or misalignment of the eyes, in people 12 years
of age and over;
|
|
|
|
cervical dystonia, or sustained contractions or spasms of
muscles in the shoulders or neck in adults, along with
associated pain; and
|
|
|
|
severe primary axillary hyperhidrosis (underarm sweating) that
is inadequately managed with topical agents.
|
In many countries outside of the United States,
Botox®
is also approved for treating hemifacial spasm, pediatric
cerebral palsy and post-stroke focal spasticity. We are
currently pursuing approvals for
Botox®
in the United States and Europe for new indications, including
headache, post-stroke focal spasticity, overactive bladder and
benign prostatic hypertrophy. In April 2005, we announced plans
to move forward with a large Phase III clinical trial
program to investigate the safety and efficacy of
Botox®
as a prophylactic therapy in patients with chronic migraine, and
all patients have now exited the double blind phase of these
studies. In May 2005, we reached agreement with the FDA to enter
Phase III clinical trials for
Botox®
to treat neurogenic overactive bladder and Phase II
clinical trials for
Botox®
to treat idiopathic overactive bladder. In December 2005, we
initiated Phase II clinical trials for
Botox®
to treat benign prostatic hypertrophy.
Botox®
Cosmetic. The FDA has approved
Botox®
for the temporary improvement in the appearance of moderate to
severe glabellar lines in adult men and women age 65 or
younger. Referred to as
Botox®,
Botox®
Cosmetic,
Vistabel®
or
Vistabex®,
depending on the country of approval, this product is designed
to relax wrinkle-causing muscles to smooth the deep, persistent,
glabellar lines between the brow that often develop during the
aging process. Currently, over 50 countries have approved facial
aesthetic indications for
Botox®,
Botox®
Cosmetic,
Vistabel®
or
Vistabex®.
Health Canada, the Canadian national regulatory body, also
approved
Botox®
Cosmetic for the treatment of upper facial lines in November
2005, and this indication has also been approved in Australia
and New Zealand. In 2002, we launched comprehensive
direct-to-consumer marketing campaigns, including television
commercials, radio commercials, print advertising and
interactive media aimed at dermatologists, plastic and
reconstructive surgeons and other aesthetic specialty
physicians, as well as consumers, in Canada and the United
States and these campaigns continue. We also continue to sponsor
aesthetic specialty physician training in approved countries to
further expand the base of qualified physicians using
Botox®,
Botox®
Cosmetic,
Vistabel®
or
Vistabex®.
With the integration of the former Inamed medical products into
our Total Facial
Rejuvenationtm
portfolio, we now have a worldwide leadership position in the
facial aesthetics market.
In October 2005, we entered into a long-term arrangement with
GlaxoSmithKline, or GSK, under which GSK agreed to develop and
promote
Botox®
in Japan and China and we agreed to co-promote GSKs
products Imitrex STATdose
System®
(sumatriptan succinate) and
Amerge®
(naratriptan hydrochloride) in the United States. Under the
terms of the arrangement, we licensed to GSK all clinical
development and commercial rights to
Botox®
in Japan and China, markets in which GSK has extensive
commercial, regulatory and research and development resources,
as well as expertise in neurology. We received an up-front
payment, and we receive royalties on GSKs Japan and China
Botox®
sales. We also manufacture
Botox®
for GSK as part of a long-term supply agreement and
collaboratively support GSK in its new clinical developments for
Botox®
and its strategic marketing in those markets, for which we
receive payments. In addition, we obtained the right to
co-promote GSKs products Imitrex STATdose
System®
and
Amerge®
in the United States to neurologists for a
5-year
period, for which we receive fixed and performance payments from
GSK. Imitrex STATdose
System®
is approved for the treatment of acute migraine in adults and
for the acute treatment of cluster headache episodes.
Amerge®
is approved for the acute treatment of migraine attacks with and
without an aura in adults.
Skin Care Product Line
Our skin care product line focuses on the psoriasis, acne and
physician-dispensed skin care markets, particularly in the
United States and Canada.
7
Avage®. Our
product
Avage®
is a tazarotene cream indicated for the treatment of facial fine
wrinkling, mottled hypo- and hyperpigmentation (blotchy skin
discoloration) and benign facial lentigines (flat patches of
skin discoloration) in patients using a comprehensive skin care
and sunlight avoidance program. We launched
Avage®
in the United States in January 2003.
Azelex®. Azelex®
cream is approved by the FDA for the topical treatment of mild
to moderate inflammatory acne and is licensed from Intendis
GmbH, or Intendis, a division of Bayer Schering Pharma AG. We
market
Azelex®
cream primarily in the United States.
Finacea®. We
co-promoted
Finacea®
(azelaic acid gel 15%), or
Finacea®,
a topical rosacea treatment, with Intendis GmbH through a
collaboration with Intendis that ended by its terms in February
2008. Following the termination of the collaboration, we no
longer promote
Finacea®
but continue to receive certain payments for up to three years.
Tazarotene Products. We market
Tazorac®
gel in the United States for the treatment of plaque psoriasis,
a chronic skin disease characterized by dry red patches, and
acne. We also market a cream formulation of
Tazorac®
in the United States for the treatment of psoriasis and the
topical treatment of acne. We have also engaged Pierre Fabre
Dermatologie as our promotion partner for
Zorac®
in certain parts of Europe, the Middle East and Africa. We
entered into a strategic collaboration agreement with Stiefel
Laboratories, Inc. to develop and market new products involving
tazarotene for dermatological use worldwide, and to co-promote
Tazorac®
in the United States.
M.D.
Forte®. We
develop and market glycolic acid-based skin care products. We
market our M.D.
Forte®
line of alpha hydroxy acid products to physicians in the United
States.
Prevage®. In
January 2005, we launched
Prevage®
cream, containing 1% idebenone, a clinically tested antioxidant
designed to reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles, as
well as provide protection against environmental factors,
including sun damage, air pollution and cigarette smoke. In May
2005, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with
Elizabeth Arden, Inc., or Elizabeth Arden, granting Elizabeth
Arden the right to globally market a new formulation of
Prevage®
containing 0.5% idebenone, to leading department stores and
other prestige cosmetic retailers. In September 2005, we began
marketing
Prevage®
MD, containing 1% idebenone, to physicians in the United States.
Vivitetm. In
April 2007, we launched
Vivitetm,
an advanced anti-aging skin care line that uses proprietary
GLX
Technologytm,
creating a highly specialized blend of glycolic acid and natural
antioxidants. We market our
Vivitetm
line of skin care products to physicians in the United States.
In January 2008, we entered into a strategic collaboration with
Clinique Laboratories, LLC, or Clinique, a subsidiary of the
Estée Lauder Companies Inc., to develop and exclusively
market a new line of science-based skin care products to
complement in-office aesthetic procedures that may affect the
skin. The new skin care product line, which will incorporate the
Clinique brand name, will be sold exclusively in
physicians offices in the United States and is expected to
launch in the fall of 2008. As part of the agreement, Clinique
will formulate, develop and manufacture the new product line and
we will market and distribute the new product line to
physicians. The agreement with Clinique also led to the
expansion of our sales force dedicated to physician-dispensed
skin care products.
Urologics
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm. Following
our October 2007 acquisition of Esprit, we began marketing
Sanctura®
(trospium chloride), or
Sanctura®,
a
twice-a-day
anticholinergic approved for the treatment of overactive
bladder, or OAB. In August 2007, the FDA approved Sanctura
XRtm
(trospium chloride extended release capsules), or Sanctura
XRtm,
a once-daily anticholinergic for the treatment of OAB, and we
launched Sanctura
XRtm
in January 2008. Sanctura
XRtm
is well tolerated by patients and has demonstrated improvements
in certain adverse side effects common in existing OAB
treatments, including dry mouth. We obtained an exclusive
license to market
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
in the United States and its territories from Indevus
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Indevus. We pay royalties to Indevus
based upon our sales of
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
and assumed obligations of Esprit to pay certain other
third-party royalties, also based upon sales of
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm.
We have also entered into
8
a co-promotion agreement with Indevus pursuant to which Indevus
will co-promote
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
through at least September 2008, subject to Indevus right
to extend the co-promotion period for up to six months.
Medical
Devices Segment
Breast Aesthetics
For more than 25 years, our silicone gel-filled and
saline-filled breast implants, consisting of a variety of
shapes, sizes and textures, have been available to women in more
than 60 countries for breast augmentation, revision and
reconstructive surgery. Our breast implants consist of a
silicone elastomer shell filled with either a saline solution or
silicone gel with varying degrees of cohesivity. This shell can
consist of either a smooth or textured surface. We market our
breast implants under the trade names
Natrelletm,
Inspira®,
McGhan®
and
CUI®
and the trademarks
BioCell®,
MicroCell®,
BioDimensionaltm
and
Inamed®.
We currently market over 1,000 breast implant product variations
worldwide to meet our customers preferences and needs.
Saline-Filled Breast Implants. We sell
saline-filled breast implants in the United States and worldwide
for use in breast augmentation, revision and for reconstructive
surgery. The U.S. market is the primary consumer of our
saline-filled breast implants.
Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implants. We sell
silicone gel-filled breast implants in the United States and
worldwide for use in breast augmentation, revision and
reconstructive surgery. The safety of our silicone gel-filled
breast implants is supported by our extensive pre-clinical
device testing, their use in approximately 1,000,000 women
worldwide and nearly a decade of U.S. clinical experience
involving more than 80,000 women. FDA approval of our silicone
gel-filled breast implants, which we received in November 2006,
was granted based on the FDAs review of our
10-year core
clinical study and our preclinical studies, its review of
studies by independent scientific bodies and the deliberations
of advisory panels of outside experts. Following approval, we
are also required to comply with a number of conditions,
including our distribution of labeling to physicians and the
distribution of our patient planner, which includes our informed
consent process to help patients fully consider the risks
associated with breast implant surgery. In addition and pursuant
to the conditions placed on the FDAs approval of our
silicone gel-filled breast implants, we continue to monitor
patients in the
10-year core
clinical study and the
5-year
adjunct clinical study and we initiated the Breast Implant
Follow-Up
Study, or BIFS, a
10-year
post-approval clinical study. The
10-year core
clinical study, which we began in 1999 and had fully enrolled in
2000 with approximately 940 augmentation, revision or
reconstructive surgery patients, was designed to establish the
safety and effectiveness of our silicone gel-filled breast
implants. We plan to continue to monitor patients in the
10-year core
clinical study through the end of the study. In November 2006,
we terminated new enrollment into our
5-year
adjunct study, which was designed to further support the safety
and effectiveness of silicone gel-filled breast implants and
which includes over 80,000 revision or reconstructive surgery
patients. We plan to continue to monitor patients in the
5-year
adjunct study through the end of the study. Finally, pursuant to
the conditions placed on the FDAs approval of our silicone
gel-filled breast implants, we initiated the BIFS study, a new
10-year
post-approval study of approximately 40,000 augmentation,
revision or reconstructive surgery patients with silicone
gel-filled implants and approximately 20,000 augmentation,
revision or reconstructive surgery patients with saline-filled
implants acting as a control group. The BIFS study is designed
to provide data on a number of endpoints including, for example,
long-term local complications, connective tissue disease issues,
neurological disease issues, offspring issues, reproductive
issues, lactation issues, cancer, suicide, mammography issues
and to study magnetic resonance imaging compliance and rupture
results.
Tissue Expanders. We sell a line of tissue
expanders for breast reconstruction and as an alternative to
skin grafting to cover burn scars and correct birth defects.
Facial Aesthetics
We develop, manufacture and market dermal filler products
designed to improve facial appearance by smoothing wrinkles and
folds. Our primary facial aesthetics products are the
Juvédermtm
dermal filler family of products,
Zyderm®
and
Zyplast®
and
CosmoDerm®
and
CosmoPlast®.
9
Juvédermtm. Our
Juvédermtm
dermal filler family of products, including
Juvédermtm,
Hydrafilltm
and
Surgiderm®,
are developed using our proprietary
Hylacrosstm
technology, a technologically advanced manufacturing process
that results in a malleable, smooth gel. This technology is
based on the delivery of a homogeneous gel-based hyaluronic
acid, as opposed to a particle gel-based hyaluronic acid
technology, which is used in other dermal filler products. In
addition, the
Juvédermtm
dermal family of products do not require a pre-treatment skin
test. In June 2006, the FDA approved
Juvédermtm
, indicated for wrinkle and fold correction, for sale in the
United States and we began selling
Juvédermtm
Ultra and
Juvédermtm
Ultra Plus in January 2007 following the completion of an
experience trial with a group of dermatologists, plastic and
reconstructive surgeons and aesthetic specialty physicians. In
Europe, we market various formulations of
Juvédermtm,
Hydrafilltm
and
Surgiderm®
for wrinkle and fold augmentation. The
Juvédermtm
dermal filler family of products are currently approved or
registered in over 34 countries, including all major European
markets.
In June 2007, the FDA approved label extensions in the United
States for
Juvedermtm
Ultra and
Juvedermtm
Ultra Plus based on new clinical data demonstrating that effects
of both products may last for up to one year, which is a longer
period of time than was reported in clinical studies that
supported FDA approval of other hyaluronic acid dermal fillers.
We began selling
Juvédermtm
Ultra 3, containing lidocaine, an anesthetic that alleviates
pain during injections, in Europe in January 2008.
Zyderm®
and
Zyplast®. Zyderm®
and
Zyplast®
dermal fillers are injectable formulations of bovine collagen.
The
Zyderm®
family of dermal fillers is formulated for people with fine line
wrinkles or superficial facial contour defects.
Zyderm®
and
Zyplast®
dermal fillers require a skin test, with a requisite
30-day
period to observe the possibility of allergic reaction in the
recipient. Both of these products are formulated with lidocaine.
Zyderm®
and
Zyplast®
are approved for marketing in the United States and Europe.
CosmoDerm®
and
CosmoPlast®.
CosmoDerm®
and
CosmoPlast®
dermal fillers are a line of injectable human skin-cell derived
collagen products.
CosmoDerm®
and
CosmoPlast®
dermal fillers are formulated for people with fine line wrinkles
or superficial facial contour defects.
CosmoDerm®
and
CosmoPlast®
implants do not require a skin test pre-treatment. Both of these
products are formulated with lidocaine.
CosmoDerm®
and
CosmoPlast®
are approved for marketing in the United States, Canada and a
number of European countries.
In January 2007, in response to a reduction in anticipated
future market demand for human and bovine collagen products, our
Board of Directors approved a plan to sell or close the collagen
manufacturing facility in Fremont, California that we acquired
in the Inamed acquisition. In connection with the restructuring
and eventual sale or closure of the facility, we estimate that
total pre-tax charges for severance, lease termination and
contract settlement costs will be between $6.0 million and
$8.0 million, all of which are expected to be cash
expenditures. The foregoing estimates are based on assumptions
relating to, among other things, a reduction of approximately 59
positions, consisting principally of manufacturing positions at
our facility. We began recording these costs in the first
quarter of 2007 and expect to continue to incur them up through
and including the fourth quarter of 2008. Prior to any closure
of our facility, we intend to manufacture a sufficient quantity
of our collagen products to meet estimated market demand through
2010.
Obesity Intervention
We develop, manufacture and market several medical devices for
the treatment of obesity. Our principal product in this area,
the
Lap-Band®
System, is designed to provide minimally invasive long-term
treatment of severe obesity and is used as an alternative to
more invasive procedures such as gastric bypass surgery or
stomach stapling. The
Lap-Band®
System is an adjustable silicone elastomer band that is
laparoscopically placed around the upper part of the stomach
through a small incision, creating a small pouch at the top of
the stomach. This new pouch fills faster to make the patient
feel full sooner, and the adjustable component of the band
regulates the passage of food to retain that feeling of fullness
for longer periods of time.
The
Lap-Band®
System has achieved widespread acceptance in the United States
and worldwide. In 2001, the FDA approved the
Lap-Band®
System to treat severe obesity in adults who have failed more
conservative weight reduction alternatives. The
Lap-Band®
VG, a version of the
Lap-Band®
System with a larger band circumference, was approved by the FDA
in January 2004, and meets the needs of a wider range of
patients. In June 2007, we launched the Lap-Band
APtm
System, an evolution of the
Lap-Band®
System. The
Lap-Band
APtm
System has proprietary
10
360-degree
OMNIFORMtm
technology, which is designed to evenly distribute pressure
throughout the bands adjustment range. The Lap-Band
APtm
also serves those who are physically larger, have thicker
gastric walls or have substantial internal fat. Over 350,000
Lap-Band®
System units have been sold worldwide since 1993. In November
2007, we completed enrollment into a
5-year
adolescent pivotal study of
Lap-Band®
patients aged 14 to 17 and plan to review interim results at
one year. Also in November 2007, we began enrollment of our
lower body mass index, or BMI,
3-year
pivotal study for
Lap-Band®
patients with a BMI of 30 to 40 and plan to review interim
results at one year.
In November 2007, we entered into a co-promotion agreement with
a subsidiary of Covidien Ltd., or Covidien, a leading global
provider of healthcare products, under which Covidien will
co-promote the
Lap-Band®
System to bariatric and other surgeons in the United States.
Under the multi-year agreement, which became effective in
November 2007, Covidien will utilize its surgical devices sales
force and other specialized staff, as an adjunct to our
bariatric sales force and other specialized staff, to promote,
educate and train surgeons on the
Lap-Band®
System.
In February 2007, we completed the acquisition of Swiss medical
technology developer EndoArt SA, or EndoArt, a pioneer in the
field of telemetrically-controlled (or remote-controlled)
gastric bands used to treat morbid obesity and other conditions.
We paid approximately $97.1 million, net of cash acquired,
for all of the outstanding EndoArt shares in an all cash
transaction. The EndoArt acquisition gave us ownership of
EndoArts proprietary technology platform, including
FloWatch®
technology, which powers the
EasyBand®
Remote Adjustable Gastric Band System, a next-generation,
telemetrically-adjustable gastric banding device for the
treatment of morbid obesity.
In September 2005, the
EasyBandtm
received CE clearance for commercialization of the
EasyBandtm
in Europe. The
EasyBandtm,
like the
Lap-Band®
System, is implanted laparoscopically through a small incision.
Clinical benefits for the
EasyBandtm
are similar to the
Lap-Band®
Systems clinical benefit, except that the
EasyBandtms
adjustments are done telemetrically rather than hydraulically
allowing for greater ease in adjustments and greater patient
comfort.
We also sell the
BIBtm
System, which is a fixed-term weight loss therapy designed for
use with moderately obese patients. Approved for sale in 67
countries but not in the United States, the
BIBtm
System includes a silicone elastomer balloon that is filled with
saline after transoral insertion into the patients stomach
to reduce stomach capacity and create an earlier sensation of
fullness. The
BIBtm
System is removed endoscopically within six months of being
implanted, and works best when used in conjunction with a
comprehensive diet and exercise program.
Other Products
Contigen®
is our collagen product used for treatment of urinary
incontinence due to intrinsic sphincter deficiency. C. R. Bard,
Inc., or Bard, licenses from us the exclusive worldwide
marketing and distribution rights to
Contigen®.
We plan to supply Bards collagen needs through the
expiration of our agreement with Bard in 2010 prior to closing
the Fremont facility by the end of 2008. We also plan to provide
other collagen products for use by other medical manufacturers
prior to closing the Fremont facility.
International
Operations
Our international sales represented 34.3%, 32.6% and 32.5% of
our total consolidated product net sales for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Our
products are sold in over 100 countries. Marketing activities
are coordinated on a worldwide basis, and resident management
teams provide leadership and infrastructure for
customer-focused, rapid introduction of new products in the
local markets.
Sales and
Marketing
We sell our products directly and through independent
distributors in over 100 countries worldwide. We maintain a
global marketing team, as well as regional sales and marketing
organizations, to support the promotion and sale of our
products. We also engage contract sales organizations to promote
certain products. Our sales efforts and promotional activities
are primarily aimed at eye care professionals, neurologists,
dermatologists, plastic and reconstructive surgeons, aesthetic
specialty physicians, bariatric surgeons, urologists and primary
care physicians (in the case of
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
) who use, prescribe and recommend our products. We advertise in
11
professional journals, participate in medical meetings and
utilize direct mail and Internet programs to provide descriptive
product literature and scientific information to specialists in
the ophthalmic, dermatological, medical aesthetics, bariatric,
neurology, movement disorder and urology fields. We have
developed training modules and seminars to update physicians
regarding evolving technology in our products. In 2007, we also
utilized direct-to-consumer advertising for
Botox®
Cosmetic,
Juvedermtm
, the
Lap-Band®
System,
Natrelletm
,
Optivetm
and
Refresh®
artificial tears and
Restasis®.
Our products are sold to drug wholesalers, independent and chain
drug stores, pharmacies, commercial optical chains, opticians,
mass merchandisers, food stores, hospitals, group purchasing
organizations, integrated direct hospital networks, ambulatory
surgery centers and medical practitioners, including
ophthalmologists, neurologists, dermatologists, plastic and
reconstructive surgeons, aesthetic specialty physicians,
bariatric surgeons, pediatricians, urologists and general
practitioners. As of December 31, 2007, we employed
approximately 2,407 sales representatives throughout the world.
We also utilize distributors for our products in smaller
international markets.
U.S. sales, including manufacturing operations, represented
65.7%, 67.4% and 67.5% of our total consolidated product net
sales in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Sales to Cardinal
Healthcare for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005 were 11.2%, 13.0% and 14.9% respectively, of our total
consolidated product net sales. Sales to McKesson Drug Company
for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 were
11.1%, 13.0% and 14.2% respectively, of our total consolidated
product net sales. No other country, or single customer,
generated over 10% of our total product net sales.
We supplement our marketing efforts with exhibits at medical
conventions, advertisements in trade journals, sales brochures
and national media. In addition, we sponsor symposia and
educational programs to familiarize physicians with the leading
techniques and methods for using our products.
Research
and Development
Our global research and development efforts currently focus on
eye care, skin care, neuromodulators, medical aesthetics,
obesity intervention, urology and neurology. We have a fully
integrated research and development organization with in-house
discovery programs, including medicinal chemistry, high
throughput screening and biological sciences. We supplement our
own research and development activities with our commitment to
identify and obtain new technologies through in-licensing,
research collaborations, joint ventures and acquisitions.
As of December 31, 2007, we had approximately
1,491 employees involved in our research and development
efforts. Our research and development expenditures for 2007,
2006 and 2005 were approximately $718.1 million,
$1,055.5 million and $388.3 million, respectively.
Research and development expenditures in 2007 were less than
2006 largely due to in-process research and development expenses
of $579.3 million recorded in 2006 in connection with the
Inamed acquisition compared to only $72.0 million of
in-process research and development expenses recorded in 2007 in
connection with the EndoArt acquisition. Excluding in-process
research and development expenditures related to company
acquisitions, we have increased our annual investment in
research and development by over $413.4 million in the past
five years.
In 2004, we completed construction of a new $75 million
research and development facility in Irvine, California, which
provides us with approximately 175,000 square feet of
additional laboratory space. In 2005, we completed construction
of a new biologics facility on our Irvine, California campus at
an aggregate cost of approximately $50 million. Both
facilities are occupied and in use.
Our strategy includes developing innovative products to address
unmet medical needs and conditions associated with aging, and
otherwise assisting patients in reaching lifes potential.
Our top priorities include furthering our leadership in medical
aesthetics and neuromodulators, identifying new potential
compounds for sight-threatening diseases such as glaucoma,
age-related macular degeneration and other retinal disorders and
developing novel therapies for chronic dry eye, pain and
genitourinary diseases. We plan to continue to build on our
strong market positions in medical aesthetics, ophthalmic
pharmaceuticals, medical dermatology, obesity intervention and
neurology, and to explore new therapeutic areas that are
consistent with our focus on specialty physician groups.
12
Our research and development efforts for the ophthalmic
pharmaceuticals business focus primarily on new therapeutic
products for retinal disease, glaucoma and chronic dry eye. As
part of our focus on diseases of the retina, we acquired Oculex
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in 2003. With this acquisition, we
obtained a novel posterior segment drug delivery system for use
with compounds to treat eye diseases, including age-related
macular degeneration and other retinal disorders. We have
subsequently begun Phase III studies for
Posurdex®,
dexamethasone delivered in a bioerodable implant for macular
edema and retinal vein occlusion. In March 2005, we entered into
an exclusive licensing agreement with Sanwa Kagaku Kenkyusho
Co., Ltd., or Sanwa, to develop and commercialize
Posurdex®
for the ophthalmic specialty market in Japan. Under the terms of
the agreement, Sanwa is responsible for the development and
commercialization of
Posurdex®
in Japan and associated costs. Sanwa pays us a royalty based on
net sales of
Posurdex®
in Japan, makes clinical development and commercialization
milestone payments and reimburses us for certain expenses
associated with our continuing Phase III studies outside of
Japan. We are working collaboratively with Sanwa on the clinical
development of
Posurdex®,
as well as overall product strategy and management. We are also
in phase III clinical trials for
Trivaristm
(triamcinolone acetonide), a steroid used for the treatment of
retinal disease. In September 2005, we entered into a multi-year
alliance with Sirna Therapeutics, Inc., which was subsequently
acquired by Merck & Co., Inc., to develop Sirna-027, a
novel RNAi-based therapeutic currently in clinical trials for
age-related macular degeneration, and to discover and develop
other novel RNAi-based therapeutics against select gene targets
for ophthalmic diseases.
We license memantine from Merz GmbH & Co. KGaA, or
Merz, and hold worldwide rights for ophthalmic use. Memantine is
approved by the FDA for Alzheimers disease in the United
States and is marketed as
Namenda®
by Forest Laboratories and as
Axura®
by Merz and as
Ebixa®
by Lundbeck in Europe. Two Phase III clinical trials have
been conducted over the last ten years. We recently released the
topline data from the second Phase III clinical trial. Although
the study showed that the progression of disease was
significantly lower in patients receiving the higher dose of
memantine compared to patients receiving the lower dose of
memantine, there was no significant benefit compared to patients
receiving placebo. Therefore, the study failed to meet its
primary endpoint and to sufficiently replicate the results of
the first Phase III trial. While additional analyses are
ongoing, we do not believe that these analyses will support an
approval of the drug.
We continue to invest heavily in the research and development of
neuromodulators, primarily
Botox®.
We focus on both expanding the approved indications for
Botox®
and pursuing next generation neuromodulator-based therapeutics.
This includes expanding the approved uses for
Botox®
to include treatment for spasticity, headache, brow furrow and
urologic conditions, including overactive bladder. Also, we are
conducting Phase II clinical trials of
Botox®
for the treatment of benign prostatic hypertrophy. In
collaboration with Syntaxin, a newly formed company, whose
technology was contributed by the United Kingdom
governments Health Protection Agency, we are focused on
engineering new neuromodulators for the treatment of severe
pain. We are also continuing our investment in the areas of
biologic process development and manufacturing and the next
generation of neuromodulator products, and we are conducting a
Phase IV study of
Botox®
for the treatment of palmar hyperhidrosis, as part of our
conditions of approval for axiliar hyperhidrosis by the FDA.
We also continue to invest in research and development around
our
Juvéderm®
family of dermal filler products, including preparation for and
ongoing clinical trials.
In connection with our obesity intervention products, we are
planning to conduct clinical trials of the
EasyBandtm
and
BIBtm
System, both of which are currently approved in Europe, with the
goal of obtaining approval in the United States. We anticipate
beginning those trials in 2008.
We are also working to leverage our technologies in therapeutic
areas outside of our current specialties, such as our
Phase II clinical trials for the use of alpha agonists for
the treatment of neuropathic pain.
We have a strategic research collaboration and license agreement
with ExonHit Therapeutics, or ExonHit. The goals of this
collaboration are to identify new molecular targets based on
ExonHits gene profiling
DATAStm
technology and to work collaboratively to develop unique
compounds and commercial products based on these targets. Our
strategic alliance with ExonHit provides us with the rights to
compounds developed in the fields of neurodegenerative disease,
pain and ophthalmology. In 2007, we began development of a
compound for a neurological indication as part of our
collaboration with ExonHit.
13
The continuing introduction of new products supplied by our
research and development efforts and in-licensing opportunities
are critical to our success. There are intrinsic uncertainties
associated with research and development efforts and the
regulatory process. We cannot assure you that any of the
research projects or pending drug marketing approval
applications will result in new products that we can
commercialize. Delays or failures in one or more significant
research projects and pending drug marketing approval
applications could have a material adverse affect on our future
operations.
Manufacturing
We manufacture the majority of our commercial products in our
own plants located at the following locations: Arklow and
Westport, Ireland; San José, Costa Rica; Annecy,
France; Fremont, California; Waco, Texas; and Guarulhos, Brazil.
We maintain sufficient manufacturing capacity at these
facilities to support forecasted demand as well as a modest
safety margin of additional capacity to meet peaks of demand and
sales growth in excess of expectations. We increase our capacity
as required in anticipation of future sales increases. In the
event of a very large or very rapid unforeseen increase in
market demand for a specific product or technology, supply of
that product or technology could be negatively impacted until
additional capacity is brought on line. Third parties
manufacture a small number of commercial products for us,
including
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
. For a discussion of the risks relating to the use of third
party manufacturers, see Item 1A of Part I of this
report, Risk Factors We could experience
difficulties obtaining or creating the raw materials needed to
produce our products and interruptions in the supply of raw
materials could disrupt our manufacturing and cause our sales
and profitability to decline.
In January 2007, we announced that we are closing the collagen
manufacturing facility in Fremont, California that we acquired
in the Inamed acquisition, which we intend to conclude in the
fourth quarter of 2008. Prior to the closure of this facility,
we intend to manufacture a sufficient quantity of our collagen
products to meet estimated market demand through 2010. In
January 2008, we announced that production at our Arklow,
Ireland breast implant manufacturing facility, which we acquired
in connection with the Inamed acquisition and which employs
approximately 360 persons, will be transferred to our
San José, Costa Rica manufacturing plant and that
production at our Arklow, Ireland manufacturing facility will be
phased out by the end of 2009.
We are vertically integrated into the production of plastic
parts and produce our own bottles, tips and caps for use in the
manufacture of our ophthalmic solutions. Additionally, we
ferment, purify and characterize the botulinum toxin used in our
product
Botox®.
With these two exceptions, we purchase all other significant raw
materials from qualified domestic and international sources.
Where practical, we maintain more than one supplier for each
material, and we have an ongoing alternate program that
identifies additional sources of key raw materials. In some
cases, however, most notably with active pharmaceutical
ingredients, we are a niche purchaser of specialty chemicals,
which, in certain cases, are sole sourced. These sources are
identified in filings with regulatory agencies, including the
FDA, and cannot be changed without prior regulatory approval. In
these cases, we maintain inventories of the raw material itself
and precursor intermediates to mitigate the risk of interrupted
supply. A lengthy interruption of the supply of one of these
materials could adversely affect our ability to manufacture and
supply commercial product. A small number of the raw materials
required to manufacture certain of our products are derived from
biological sources which could be subject to contamination and
recall by their suppliers. We use multiple lots of these raw
materials at any one time in order to mitigate such risks.
However, a shortage, contamination or recall of these products
could disrupt our ability to maintain an uninterrupted
commercial supply of our finished goods.
Manufacturing facilities producing pharmaceutical and medical
device products intended for distribution in the United States
and internationally are subject to regulation and periodic
review by the FDA, international regulatory authorities and
European notified bodies for certain of our medical devices. All
of our facilities are currently approved by the FDA, the
relevant notified bodies and other regulatory authorities to
manufacture medical devices for distribution in the United
States and international markets.
14
Competition
The pharmaceutical and medical device industries are highly
competitive and require an ongoing, extensive search for
technological innovation. They also require, among other things,
the ability to effectively discover, develop, test and obtain
regulatory approvals for products, as well as the ability to
effectively commercialize, market and promote approved products,
including communicating the effectiveness, safety and value of
products to actual and prospective customers and medical
professionals. Numerous companies are engaged in the
development, manufacture and marketing of health care products
competitive with those that we manufacture, develop and market.
Many of our competitors have greater resources than we have.
This enables them, among other things, to make greater research
and development investments and spread their research and
development costs, as well as their marketing and promotion
costs, over a broader revenue base. Our competitors may also
have more experience and expertise in obtaining marketing
approvals from the FDA and other regulatory authorities. In
addition to product development, testing, approval and
promotion, other competitive factors in the pharmaceutical and
medical device industries include industry consolidation,
product quality and price, product technology, reputation,
customer service and access to technical information. We believe
that our products principally compete on the basis of quality,
product design, an experienced sales force, physicians and
surgeons familiarity with our products and brand names,
regional warranty programs and our ability to identify and
develop or license patented products embodying new technologies.
Specialty Pharmaceuticals Segment
Eye Care Products. Our major eye care
competitors include Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Bausch &
Lomb Incorporated, Pfizer Inc., Novartis AG and
Merck & Co., Inc. For our eye care products to be
successful, we must be able to manufacture and effectively
detail them to a sufficient number of eye care professionals
such that they use or continue to use our current products and
the new products we may introduce. Glaucoma must be treated over
an extended period and doctors may be reluctant to switch a
patient to a new treatment if the patients current
treatment for glaucoma is effective and well tolerated.
We also face competition from generic drug manufacturers in the
United States and internationally. For instance, Falcon
Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., an affiliate of Alcon, attempted to
obtain FDA approval for and to launch a brimonidine product to
compete with our
Alphagan®
P product. However, pursuant to a March 2006 settlement
with Alcon, Alcon agreed not to sell, offer for sale or
distribute its brimonidine product until September 30,
2009, or earlier if specified sales conditions occur. The
primary sales condition will have occurred if prescriptions of
Alphagan®
P have been converted to other brimonidine-containing
products we market above a specified threshold. In addition,
Apotex, Inc., or Apotex, attempted to obtain FDA approval for
and to launch a generic form of
Acular®.
Pursuant to a federal court ruling in June 2006, Apotex is
barred from obtaining approval before our
Acular®
patent expires in 2009. See Item 3 of Part I of this
report, Legal Proceedings and Note 13,
Commitments and Contingencies, in the notes to the
consolidated financial statements listed under Item 15 of
Part IV of this report, Exhibits and Financial
Statement Schedules, for information concerning our
current litigation.
Neuromodulators. With respect to
neuromodulators, until December 2000,
Botox®
was the only neuromodulator approved by the FDA. At that time,
the FDA approved
Myobloc®,
a neuromodulator formerly marketed by Elan Pharmaceuticals and
now marketed by Solstice Neurosciences Inc. In addition, Ipsen
Ltd., or Ipsen, is seeking FDA approval of its
Dysport®
neuromodulator for certain therapeutic indications, and Medicis
Pharmaceutical Corporation, or Medicis, its licensee for the
United States, Canada and Japan, is seeking approval of
Reloxin®
for cosmetic indications. Ipsen and Medicis submitted a
Biologics License Application, or BLA, to the FDA for
Reloxin®
in December 2007. In January 2008, the FDA announced that it had
denied the BLA for
Reloxin®
because the application was not sufficiently complete to permit
a substantive review. The FDAs determination may delay
Reloxin®s
launch in the United States. Ipsen has marketed
Dysport®
in Europe since 1991, prior to our European commercialization of
Botox®
in 1992. In June 2006, Ipsen received marketing authorization
for a cosmetic indication for
Dysport®
in Germany. In 2007, Ipsen granted Galderma, a joint venture
between Nestle and LOreal Group, an exclusive development
and marketing license for
Dysport®
for aesthetic indications in the European Union, Russia, Eastern
Europe and the Middle East, and first rights of negotiation for
other countries around the world, except the United States,
Canada and Japan. In January 2008, Galderma became Ipsens
sole distributor for
Dysport®
in Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay. Ipsen has also been seeking
approval for
Reloxin®
for
15
cosmetic indications across the European Union, including
submitting a file to the French regulatory authority in May
2003. We expect, based on statements made by Galderma, that
Reloxin®
will be approved in France in 2009.
Mentor Corporation is conducting clinical trials for a competing
neuromodulator in the United States. In addition, we are aware
of competing neuromodulators currently being developed and
commercialized in Asia, Europe, South America and other markets.
A Chinese entity received approval to market a botulinum toxin
in China in 1997, and we believe that it has launched or is
planning to launch its botulinum toxin product in other lightly
regulated markets in Asia, South America and Central America.
These lightly regulated markets may not require adherence to the
FDAs current Good Manufacturing Practice regulations, or
cGMPs, or the regulatory requirements of the European Medical
Evaluation Agency or other regulatory agencies in countries that
are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development. Therefore, companies operating in these markets may
be able to produce products at a lower cost than we can. In
addition, Merz received approval for
Xeomin®
in Germany and launched its product in July 2005, received
approval in Mexico in 2006 and commenced sales in the United
Kingdom and France in early 2008, and is pursuing additional
approvals in the European Union and Latin America. Merz is
currently in clinical trials in the United States for cervical
dystonia, blepharospasm and cosmetic indications and is awaiting
therapeutic licenses for
Xeomin®
in many countries across the European Union. A Korean botulinum
toxin product,
Meditoxin®,
was approved for sale in Korea in June 2006. The company,
Medy-Tox Inc., received exportation approval from Korean
authorities in early 2005 to ship their product under the
tradename
Neuronox®.
In February 2007, Q-Med A.B. announced a worldwide license for
Neuronox®,
with the exception of certain countries in Asia where Medy-Tox
may retain the marketing rights.
Skin Care Product Line. Our skin care business
competes against a number of companies, including among others,
Dermik, a division of Sanofi-Aventis, Galderma, Medicis
Pharmaceutical Corporation, Stiefel Laboratories, Inc., Novartis
AG, Schering-Plough Corporation, Johnson & Johnson,
Obagi Medical Products, Inc., LOréal Group,
SkinMedica, Inc. and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, most
of which have greater resources than us.
Urologics. Our urologics business competes
against a number of companies, including among others, Pfizer
Inc., Watson Pharma Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation,
the Proctor & Gamble Company, Astellas Pharma US, Inc.
and GlaxoSmithKline plc, many of which have greater resources
than us. We also face competition from generic urologic drug
manufacturers in the United States and internationally. For our
urologic products to be successful, we must be able to
effectively detail our products to a sufficient number of
urologists, obstetrician/gynecologists, primary care physicians
and other medical specialists such that they recommend our
products to their patients. We will also have to demonstrate
that our products are safe and reduce patients sense of
urgency, frequency and urge urinary incontinence episodes while
also having limited side effects, such as dry mouth,
constipation, blurred vision, drowsiness and headaches.
Medical Devices Segment
Breast Aesthetics. We compete in the
U.S. breast implant market with Mentor Corporation, or
Mentor. Mentor announced that, like us, it received FDA approval
in November 2006 to sell its silicone breast implants in the
United States. The conditions under which Mentor is allowed to
market its silicone breast implants in the United States are
similar to ours, including indications for use and the
requirement to conduct post-marketing studies. If patients or
physicians prefer Mentors breast implant products to ours
or perceive that Mentors breast implant products are safer
than ours, our sales of breast implants could materially suffer.
In the United States, Sientra, Inc., or Sientra, is conducting
clinical studies of breast implant products. Internationally, we
compete with several manufacturers, including Mentor
Corporation, Sientra, MediCor Ltd, Poly Implant Prostheses,
Nagor and Laboratories Sebbin.
Obesity Intervention. Ethicon Endo-Surgery,
Inc., a Johnson & Johnson company, received FDA
approval in September 2007 to market its gastric band product,
the
Realizetm
Personalized Banding Solution, or the
Realizetm
band, in the U.S. market, and the
Realizetm
band competes with our
Lap-Band®
System. Outside the United States, the
Lap-Band®
System competes primarily with the
Realizetm
band and the
Heliogast®
Adjustable Gastric Ring (manufactured by Helioscopie, S.A.,
France). There are at least two other gastric bands on the
market internationally. The
Lap-Band®
System also competes with surgical obesity procedures, including
gastric bypass, vertical banded gastroplasty, sleeve gastrectomy
and biliopancreatic diversion. No intragastric balloons for the
treatment of obesity are commercially available in the United
States, and we are currently aware of only one
16
other company outside the United States that offers an
intragastric balloon. Helioscopie recently launched its
intragastric balloon, the
Heliospheretm.
We are not aware of any published clinical studies that support
this devices effectiveness.
Facial Aesthetics. Our facial products compete
in the dermatology and plastic surgery markets with other
hyaluronic acid products, substantially different treatments,
such as laser treatments, chemical peels, fat injections,
gelatin- or cadaver-based collagen products, and botulinum
toxin-based products, as well as other polymer-based
injectables. In addition, several companies are engaged in
research and development activities examining the use of
collagen, hyaluronic acids and other biomaterials for the
correction of soft tissue defects. Internationally, we compete
with products such as
Restylane®,
Restylane®
Fine Lines, and
Perlanetm
(all manufactured by Q-Med A.B.) and many other hyaluronic acid,
bioceramic, protein and other polymer-based dermal fillers. We
have competed in the U.S. dermal filler market with
Restylane®
since January 2004 and with
Perlanetm
since May 2007, both of which are distributed by Medicis.
Also, in December 2006,
Radiesse®,
a bioceramic-based dermal filler from BioForm Medical, Inc.,
received approval in the United States.
Government
Regulation
Specialty Pharmaceuticals Segment
Drugs and biologics are subject to regulation by the FDA, state
agencies and by foreign health agencies. Pharmaceutical products
and biologics are subject to extensive pre- and post-market
regulation by the FDA, including regulations that govern the
testing, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, storage,
record keeping, advertising and promotion of the products under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FFDCA, regulations
with respect to drugs and the Public Health Services Act and its
implementing regulations with respect to biologics, and by
comparable agencies in foreign countries. Failure to comply with
applicable FDA or other requirements may result in civil or
criminal penalties, recall or seizure of products, partial or
total suspension of production or withdrawal of a product from
the market.
The process required by the FDA before a new drug or biologic
may be marketed in the United States is long and expensive. We
must complete preclinical laboratory and animal testing; submit
an Investigational New Drug Application, or IND, which must
become effective before United States clinical trials may begin;
and perform adequate and well controlled human clinical trials
to establish the safety and efficacy of the proposed drug or
biologic for its intended use. Clinical trials are typically
conducted in three sequential phases, which may overlap, and
must satisfy extensive Good Clinical Practice regulations and
informed consent regulations. Further, an independent
institutional review board, or IRB, for each medical center or
medical practice proposing to conduct the clinical trial must
review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it
commences at that center or practice and must monitor the study
until completed. The FDA, the IRB, or the study sponsor may
suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds,
including a finding that the subjects or patients are being
exposed to an unacceptable health risk.
We must submit a New Drug Application, or NDA, for a new drug,
or a Biologics License Application, or BLA, for a biologic, and
the NDA or BLA must be reviewed and approved by the FDA before
the drug or biologic may be legally marketed in the United
States. To satisfy the criteria for approval, an NDA or BLA must
demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product based on
results of preclinical studies and the three phases of clinical
trials. Both NDAs and BLAs must also contain extensive
manufacturing information, and the applicant must pass an FDA
pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facilities at which
the drug or biologic is produced to assess compliance with the
FDAs current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP,
regulations prior to commercialization. Satisfaction of FDA
pre-market approval requirements typically takes several years
and the actual time required may vary substantially based on the
type, complexity and novelty of the product, and we cannot be
certain that any approvals for our products will be granted on a
timely basis, or at all.
Once approved, the FDA may require post-marketing clinical
studies, known as Phase IV studies, and surveillance
programs to monitor the effect of approved products. The FDA may
limit further marketing of the product based on the results of
these post-market studies and programs. Further, any
modifications to the drug or biologic, including changes in
indications, labeling or manufacturing processes or facilities,
may require the
17
submission of a new or supplemental NDA or BLA, which may
require that we develop additional data or conduct additional
preclinical studies and clinical trials.
The manufacture and distribution of drugs and biologics are
subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including
recordkeeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences
associated with the drug, and cGMPs, which regulate all aspects
of the manufacturing process and impose certain procedural and
documentation requirements. Drug and biologic manufacturers and
their subcontractors are required to register their
establishments, and are subject to periodic unannounced
inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance
with regulation requirements. If the manufacturer or distributor
fails to comply with the statutory and regulatory requirements,
or if safety concerns arise, the FDA may take legal or
regulatory action, including civil or criminal penalties,
suspension, withdrawal or delay in the issuance of approvals, or
seizure or recall of products, any one or more of which could
have a material adverse effect upon us.
The FDA imposes a number of complex regulatory requirements on
entities that advertise and promote pharmaceuticals and
biologics, including, but not limited to, standards and
regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label
promotion, industry sponsored scientific and educational
activities, and promotional activities including Internet
marketing. Drugs and biologics can only be marketed for approved
indications and in accordance with the labeling approved by the
FDA. Failure to abide by these regulations can result in
penalties, including the issuance of a warning letter directing
us to correct deviations from FDA standards, a requirement that
future advertising and promotional materials be pre-cleared by
the FDA, and state and federal civil and criminal investigations
and prosecutions. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of
physicians in their choice of treatment. Physicians may
prescribe (although we are not permitted to promote) legally
available drugs and biologics for uses that are not described in
the products labeling and that differ from those tested by
us and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common
across medical specialties.
We are also subject to various laws and regulations regarding
laboratory practices, the experimental use of animals, and the
use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous
substances in connection with our research. In each of these
areas, as above, the FDA has broad regulatory and enforcement
powers, including the ability to levy fines and civil penalties,
suspend or delay our operations and the issuance of approvals,
seize or recall products, and withdraw approvals, any one or
more of which could have a material adverse effect upon us.
Internationally, the regulation of drugs is also complex. In
Europe, our products are subject to extensive regulatory
requirements. As in the United States, the marketing of
medicinal products has for many years been subject to the
granting of marketing authorizations by medicine agencies.
Particular emphasis is also being placed on more sophisticated
and faster procedures for reporting adverse events to the
competent authorities. The European Union procedures for the
authorization of medicinal products are intended to improve the
efficiency of operation of both the mutual recognition and
centralized procedures. Additionally, new rules have been
introduced or are under discussion in several areas, including
the harmonization of clinical research laws and the law relating
to orphan drugs and orphan indications. Outside the United
States, reimbursement pricing is typically regulated by
government agencies.
The total cost of providing health care services has been and
will continue to be subject to review by governmental agencies
and legislative bodies in the major world markets, including the
United States, which are faced with significant pressure to
lower health care costs. Legislation passed in recent years,
such as the Medicare Prescription Drug Modernization Act of 2003
and the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, has imposed certain
changes to the way in which pharmaceuticals, including our
products, are covered and reimbursed in the United States. For
instance, recent federal legislation and regulations have
created a voluntary prescription drug benefit, Medicare
Part D, and have imposed significant revisions to the
Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. These changes have resulted in and
may continue to result in coverage and reimbursement
restrictions and increased rebate obligations. In addition,
there is growing political pressure to allow the importation of
pharmaceutical and medical device products from outside the
United States. These reimbursement restrictions or other price
reductions or controls or imports of pharmaceutical or medical
device products from outside of the United States could
materially and adversely affect our revenues and financial
condition. Additionally, price reductions and rebates have
recently been mandated in several European countries,
principally Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom.
Certain products are also no longer eligible for reimbursement
in France, Italy and Germany. Reference pricing is used in
several markets around
18
the world to reduce prices. Furthermore, parallel trade within
the European Union, whereby products flow from relatively
low-priced to high-priced markets, has been increasing.
We cannot predict the likelihood or pace of any significant
regulatory or legislative action in these areas, nor can we
predict whether or in what form health care legislation being
formulated by various governments will be passed. Initiatives in
these areas could subject Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement
rates to change at any time. We cannot predict with precision
what effect such governmental measures would have if they were
ultimately enacted into law. However, in general, we believe
that such legislative activity will likely continue.
Medical Devices Segment
Medical devices are subject to regulation by the FDA, state
agencies and by foreign government health agencies. FDA
regulations, as well as various U.S. federal and state
laws, govern the development, clinical testing, manufacturing,
labeling, record keeping and marketing of medical device
products. The majority of our medical device product candidates,
including our breast implants, must undergo rigorous clinical
testing and an extensive government regulatory approval process
prior to sale in the United States and other countries. The
lengthy process of clinical development and submissions for
approvals, and the continuing need for compliance with
applicable laws and regulations, require the expenditure of
substantial resources. Regulatory approval, when and if
obtained, may be limited in scope, and may significantly limit
the indicated uses for which a product may be marketed. Approved
products and their manufacturers are subject to ongoing review,
and discovery of previously unknown problems with products may
result in restrictions on their manufacture, sale, or use, or
their withdrawal from the market.
Our medical device products are subject to extensive regulation
by the FDA in the United States. Unless an exemption applies,
each medical device we market in the United States must have a
510(k) clearance or a Premarket Approval, or PMA, application in
accordance with the FFDCA and its implementing regulations. The
FDA classifies medical devices into one of three classes,
depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical
device and the extent of controls that are needed to ensure
safety and effectiveness. Devices deemed to pose a lower risk
are placed in either Class I or Class II, which may
require the manufacturer to submit to the FDA a premarket
notification under Section 510(k) of the FFDCA requesting
permission for commercial distribution. Devices deemed by the
FDA to pose the greatest risk, such as life-sustaining,
life-supporting or implantable devices, or a device deemed to be
not substantially equivalent to a previously cleared 510(k)
device, are placed in Class III. In general, a
Class III device cannot be marketed in the United States
unless the FDA approves the device after submission of a PMA
application. The majority of our medical device products,
including our breast implants, are regulated as Class III
medical devices.
When we are required to obtain a 510(k) clearance for a device
we wish to market, we must submit a premarket notification to
the FDA demonstrating that the device is substantially
equivalent to a previously cleared 510(k) device or a
device that was in commercial distribution before May 28,
1976 for which the FDA had not yet called for the submission of
PMA applications. By regulation, the FDA is required to respond
to a 510(k) premarket notification within 90 days after
submission of the notification, although clearance can take
significantly longer. If a device receives 510(k) clearance, any
modification that could significantly affect its safety or
efficacy, or that would constitute a major change in its
intended use, design or manufacture requires a new 510(k)
clearance or PMA approval. The FDA requires each manufacturer to
make this determination initially, but the FDA can review any
such decision and can disagree with a manufacturers
determination. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturers
determination that a new clearance or approval is not required
for a particular modification, the FDA can require the
manufacturer to cease marketing
and/or
recall the modified device until 510(k) clearance or premarket
approval is obtained.
A PMA application must be submitted if the device cannot be
cleared through the 510(k) process. The PMA process is much more
demanding than the 510(k) clearance process. A PMA application
must be supported by extensive information, including data from
preclinical and clinical trials, sufficient to demonstrate to
the FDAs satisfaction that the device is safe and
effective for its intended use. The FDA, by statute and
regulation, has 180 days to review and accept a PMA
application, although the review generally occurs over a
significantly longer period of time, and can take up to several
years. The FDA may also convene an advisory panel of experts
outside the FDA to review and evaluate the PMA application and
provide recommendations to the FDA as to the approvability of
the device. New PMA applications or supplemental PMA
applications are required for significant modifications to the
19
manufacturing process, labeling and design of a medical device
that is approved through the PMA process. PMA supplements
require information to support the changes and may include
clinical data.
A clinical trial is almost always required to support a PMA
application and is sometimes required for a 510(k) premarket
notification. These trials generally require submission of an
application for an investigational device exemption, or IDE,
which must be supported by appropriate data, such as animal and
laboratory testing results, showing that it is safe to test the
device in humans and that the testing protocol is scientifically
sound, as well as approval by the FDA and the IRB overseeing the
trial. We, the FDA or the IRB at each site at which a clinical
trial is being performed may suspend a clinical trial at any
time for various reasons, including a belief that the study
subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. The
results of clinical testing may not be sufficient to obtain
approval of the product.
After a device is placed on the market, numerous regulatory
requirements apply. These include:
|
|
|
|
|
establishing registration and device listings with the FDA;
|
|
|
|
Quality System Regulation, which requires manufacturers to
follow design, testing, control documentation and other quality
assurance procedures during the manufacturing process;
|
|
|
|
labeling regulations, which prohibit the promotion of products
for unapproved or off-label uses and impose other
restrictions on labeling;
|
|
|
|
medical device reporting regulations, which require that
manufacturers report to the FDA if their device may have caused
or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in
a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or
serious injury if it were to recur; and
|
|
|
|
corrections and removal reporting regulations, which require
that manufacturers report to the FDA field corrections and
product recalls or removals if undertaken to reduce a risk to
health posed by the device or to remedy a violation of the FFDCA
that may present a health risk.
|
A Class III device may have significant additional
obligations imposed in its conditions of approval. Compliance
with regulatory requirements is assured through periodic,
unannounced facility inspections by the FDA and other regulatory
authorities, and these inspections may include the manufacturing
facilities of our subcontractors or other third party
manufacturers. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory
requirements can result in enforcement action by the FDA, which
may include any of the following sanctions: warning letters or
untitled letters; fines, injunctions and civil penalties; recall
or seizure of our products; operating restrictions, partial
suspension or total shutdown of production; refusing our request
for 510(k) clearance or PMA approval of new products;
withdrawing 510(k) clearance or PMAs that are already granted;
and criminal prosecution.
Products that are marketed in the European Union, or EU, must
comply with the requirements of the Medical Device Directive, or
MDD, as implemented into the national legislation of the EU
member states. The MDD, as implemented, provides for a
regulatory regime with respect to the design, manufacture,
clinical trials, labeling and adverse event reporting for
medical devices to ensure that medical devices marketed in the
EU are safe and effective for their intended uses. Medical
devices that comply with the MDD, as implemented, are entitled
to bear a CE marking and may be marketed in the EU. Medical
device laws and regulations similar to those described above are
also in effect in many of the other countries to which we export
our products. These range from comprehensive device approval
requirements for some or all of our medical device products to
requests for product data or certifications. Failure to comply
with these domestic and international regulatory requirements
could affect our ability to market and sell our products in
these countries.
Other Regulations
We are subject to federal, state, local and foreign
environmental laws and regulations, including the
U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Act, the
U.S. Toxic Substances Control Act, the U.S. Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act, Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act and other current and potential
future federal, state or local regulations. Our manufacturing
and research and development activities involve the controlled
use of hazardous materials, chemicals and biological materials,
which require compliance with various laws and
20
regulations regarding the use, storage and disposal of such
materials. We cannot assure you, however, that environmental
problems relating to properties owned or operated by us will not
develop in the future, and we cannot predict whether any such
problems, if they were to develop, could require significant
expenditures on our part. In addition, we are unable to predict
what legislation or regulations may be adopted or enacted in the
future with respect to environmental protection and waste
disposal. Additionally, we may be subject either directly or by
contract to federal and state laws pertaining to the privacy and
security of personal health information.
We are also subject to various federal and state laws pertaining
to health care fraud and abuse and gifts to health
care practitioners. For example, the federal Anti-Kickback
Statute makes it illegal to solicit, offer, receive or pay any
remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, in
exchange for, or to induce, the referral of business, including
the purchase or prescription of a particular product, for which
payment may be made under government health care programs such
as Medicare and Medicaid. The U.S. federal government has
published regulations that identify safe harbors or
exemptions for certain practices from enforcement actions under
the Anti-Kickback Statute. We seek to comply with the safe
harbors where possible. Due to the breadth of the statutory
provisions and in the absence of guidance in the form of
regulations or court decisions addressing some of our practices,
it is possible that our practices might be challenged under the
Anti-Kickback Statute or similar laws. The federal False Claims
Act prohibits anyone from, among other things, knowingly and
willingly presenting, or causing to be presented for payment to
third party payors (including Medicare and Medicaid), claims for
reimbursed products or services that are false or fraudulent,
claims for items or services not provided as claimed, or claims
for medically unnecessary items or services. The federal Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA,
prohibits executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit
program or making false statements relating to health care
matters. In addition, many states have adopted laws similar to
the federal fraud and abuse laws discussed above, which, in some
cases, apply to all payors whether governmental or private. Our
activities, particularly those relating to the sale and
marketing of our products, may be subject to scrutiny under
these and other laws. Violations of fraud and abuse laws may be
punishable by criminal
and/or civil
sanctions, including fines and civil monetary penalties, as well
as the possibility of exclusion from federal health care
programs (including Medicare and Medicaid).
Patents,
Trademarks and Licenses
We own, or are licensed under, numerous U.S. and foreign
patents relating to our products, product uses and manufacturing
processes. We believe that our patents and licenses are
important to all segments of our business.
With the exception of the U.S. and European patents
relating to
Lumigan®,
Alphagan®
P,
Combigantm
and the U.S. patents relating to
Restasis®,
Acular®
and
Zymar®,
no one patent or license is materially important to our
specialty pharmaceuticals segment. The U.S. patents
covering
Lumigan®
expire in 2012 and 2014. The European patent covering
Lumigan®
expires in various countries between 2013 and 2017. The
U.S. patent covering the commercial formulation of
Acular®
expires in 2009. The U.S. patents covering the commercial
formulation of
Alphagan®
P expire in 2012 and 2021 and in 2009 in Europe, with
corresponding patents pending. The U.S. patents covering
Restasis®
expire in 2009 and 2014. The U.S. patents covering
Zymar®
expire in 2010, 2015 and 2019. The U.S. patents for
Combigantm
expire in 2022 and the European patents in 2023.
We have rights in well over 100 issued
Botox®
related U.S. and European use and process patents
covering, for example, treatment of migraine, hyperhydrosis,
overactive bladder and benign prostatic hyperplasia. We have
granted worldwide, royalty-bearing patent licenses to Merz
Pharmaceuticals with regard to
Xeomin®,
and to Solstice Neurosciences with regard to
MyoBloc®.
In addition, in December 2007, the FDAs grant of orphan
exclusivity for
Botox®
for the treatment of certain aspects of cervical dystonia
expired.
With the exception of certain U.S. and European patents
relating to the
Lap-Band®
System and our
Inspira®
and
Natrelletm
Collection of breast implants, no one patent or license is
materially important to our specialty medical device segment
based on overall sales. The patents covering our
Lap-Band®
System, some of which we license from third parties, expire in
2011, 2013 and 2014 in the U.S. and in 2013 in Europe. The
patents covering our
Inspira®
and
Natrelletm
Collection of breast implants expire in 2018 in the
U.S. and in 2017 in Europe.
Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain patents or
rights to patents, protect trade secrets and other proprietary
technologies and processes, operate without infringing upon the
proprietary rights of others, and prevent
21
others from infringing on our patents, trademarks, service marks
and other intellectual property rights. Upon the expiration or
loss of patent protection for a product, we can lose a
significant portion of sales of that product in a very short
period of time as other companies manufacture generic forms of
our previously protected product at lower cost, without having
had to incur significant research and development costs in
formulating the product. In addition, the issuance of a patent
is not conclusive as to its validity or as to the enforceable
scope of the claims of the patent. It is impossible to
anticipate the breadth or degree of protection that any such
patents will afford, or that any such patents will not be
successfully challenged in the future. Accordingly, our patents
may not prevent other companies from developing substantially
identical products. Hence, if our patent applications are not
approved or, even if approved, such patents are circumvented,
our ability to competitively exploit our patented products and
technologies may be significantly reduced. Also, such patents
may or may not provide competitive advantages for their
respective products, in which case our ability to commercially
exploit these products may be diminished.
Third parties may challenge, invalidate or circumvent our
patents and patent applications relating to our products,
product candidates and technologies. Challenges may result in
significant harm to our business. The cost of responding to
these challenges and the inherent costs to defend the validity
of our patents, including the prosecution of infringements and
the related litigation, can require a substantial commitment of
our managements time, require us to incur significant
legal expenses and can preclude or delay the commercialization
of products. See Item 3 of Part I of this report,
Legal Proceedings and Note 13,
Commitments and Contingencies, in the notes to the
consolidated financial statements listed under Item 15 of
Part IV of this report, Exhibits and Financial
Statement Schedules, for information concerning our
current intellectual property litigation.
From time to time, we may need to obtain licenses to patents and
other proprietary rights held by third parties to develop,
manufacture and market our products. If we are unable to timely
obtain these licenses on commercially reasonable terms, our
ability to commercially exploit such products may be inhibited
or prevented. See Item 1A of Part I of this report,
Risk Factors.
We market our products under various trademarks, for which we
have both registered and unregistered trademark protection in
the United States and certain countries outside the United
States. We consider these trademarks to be valuable because of
their contribution to the market identification of our products.
Any failure to adequately protect our rights in our various
trademarks and service marks from infringement could result in a
loss of their value to us. If the marks we use are found to
infringe upon the trademark or service mark of another company,
we could be forced to stop using those marks and, as a result,
we could lose the value of those marks and could be liable for
damages caused by infringing those marks. In addition to
intellectual property protections afforded to trademarks,
service marks and proprietary know-how by the various countries
in which our proprietary products are sold, we seek to protect
our trademarks, service marks and proprietary know-how through
confidentiality agreements with third parties, including our
partners, customers, employees and consultants. These agreements
may be breached or become unenforceable, and we may not have
adequate remedies for any such breach. It is also possible that
our trade secrets will become known or independently developed
by our competitors, resulting in increased competition for our
products.
In addition, we are currently engaged in various collaborative
ventures for the development, manufacturing and distribution of
current and new products. These projects include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
We have entered into an exclusive licensing agreement with
Kyorin Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., under which Kyorin became
responsible for the development and commercialization of
Alphagan®
and
Alphagan®
P in Japan. Kyorin subsequently sublicensed its rights
under the agreement to Senju Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Under the
licensing agreement, Senju incurs associated costs, makes
clinical development and commercialization milestone payments,
and makes royalty-based payments on product sales. We are
working collaboratively with Senju on overall product strategy
and management.
|
|
|
|
We have entered into an exclusive licensing agreement with Senju
Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., under which Senju became responsible
for the development and commercialization of
Lumigan®
in Japans ophthalmic specialty area. Senju incurs
associated costs, makes development and commercialization
milestone payments and makes royalty-based payments on product
sales. We are working collaboratively with Senju on overall
product strategy and management.
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
We have licensed from Novartis the worldwide, excluding Japan,
rights for technology, patents and products relating to the
topical ophthalmic use of cyclosporine A, the active ingredient
in
Restasis®.
In April 2005, we entered into a royalty buy-out agreement with
Novartis related to
Restasis®
and agreed to pay $110 million to Novartis. As a result of
the buy-out agreement, we no longer pay royalties to Novartis
based on sales of
Restasis®.
|
|
|
|
We license to GSK all clinical development and commercial rights
to
Botox®
in Japan and China. We receive royalties on GSKs Japan
and China
Botox®
sales. We also manufacture
Botox®
for GSK as part of a long-term supply agreement and
collaboratively support GSK in its new clinical developments for
Botox®
and its strategic marketing in those markets, for which we
receive payments.
|
|
|
|
As a result of the Esprit acquisition, we obtained an exclusive
license to market
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
in the United States and its territories from Indevus. We pay
royalties to Indevus based upon our sales of
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
and assumed obligations of Esprit to pay certain other
third-party royalties, also based upon sales of
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm.
We have also entered into a co-promotion agreement with Indevus
pursuant to which Indevus will co-promote
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
through at least September 2008, subject to Indevus right
to extend the co-promotion period for up to six months.
|
Through Inamed, in June 2004, we entered into a settlement
agreement with Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc. pursuant to which,
among other terms, we were granted a worldwide, royalty-bearing,
non-exclusive license with respect to a portfolio of
U.S. and international patents applicable to adjustable
gastric bands.
We are also a party to license agreements allowing other
companies to manufacture products using some of our technology
in exchange for royalties and other compensation or benefits.
Environmental
Matters
We are subject to federal, state, local and foreign
environmental laws and regulations. We believe that our
operations comply in all material respects with applicable
environmental laws and regulations in each country where we have
a business presence. We also pride ourselves on our
comprehensive and successful environmental health and safety
programs and performance against internal objectives. We have
been recognized many times for superior environmental health and
safety performance.
Although we continue to make capital expenditures for
environmental protection, we do not anticipate any expenditures
in order to comply with such laws and regulations that would
have a material impact on our earnings or competitive position.
We are not aware of any pending litigation or significant
financial obligations arising from current or past environmental
practices that are likely to have a material adverse effect on
our financial position. We cannot assure you, however, that
environmental problems relating to properties owned or operated
by us will not develop in the future, and we cannot predict
whether any such problems, if they were to develop, could
require significant expenditures on our part. In addition, we
are unable to predict what legislation or regulations may be
adopted or enacted in the future with respect to environmental
protection and waste disposal.
Seasonality
Our business, both taken as a whole and by our business
segments, is not materially affected by seasonal factors,
although we have noticed an historical trend with respect to
sales of our
Botox®
product. Specifically, sales of
Botox®
have tended to be lowest during the first fiscal quarter, with
sales during the second and third fiscal quarters being
comparable and marginally higher than sales during the first
fiscal quarter.
Botox®
sales during the fourth fiscal quarter have tended to be the
highest due to patients obtaining their final therapeutic
treatment at the end of the year, presumably to fully utilize
deductibles and to receive additional cosmetic treatments prior
to the holiday season.
Third
Party Coverage and Reimbursement
Health care providers generally rely on third-party payors,
including governmental payors such as Medicare and Medicaid, and
private insurance carriers, to adequately cover and reimburse
the cost of pharmaceuticals and medical devices. Such
third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price of
medical products and services
23
and instituting cost containment measures to control or
significantly influence the purchase of medical products and
services. The market for some of our products therefore is
influenced by third-party payors policies. This includes
the placement of our pharmaceutical products on drug formularies
or lists of medications.
Purchases of aesthetic products and procedures using those
products generally are not covered by most third-party payors,
and patients incur out-of-pocket costs for such products and
associated procedures. This includes breast aesthetics products
for augmentation and facial aesthetics products. Since 1998,
however, U.S. federal law has mandated that group health
plans, insurance companies and health maintenance organizations
offering mastectomy coverage must also provide coverage for
reconstructive surgery following a mastectomy, which includes
coverage for breast implants. Outside the United States,
reimbursement for breast implants used in reconstructive surgery
following a mastectomy may be available, but the programs vary
on a country by country basis.
Furthermore, treatments for obesity alone may not be covered by
third-party payors. In February 2006, Medicare began covering
certain designated bariatric surgical services, including
gastric bypass surgery and procedures using the
Lap-Band®
System, for Medicare patients who have previously been
unsuccessfully treated for obesity and who have a body mass
index, or BMI, equal to or greater than 40 or a BMI of 35 and
who have at least one co-morbidity. However, the policy
reiterates that treatments for obesity alone are not covered,
because such treatments are not considered reasonable and
necessary. While Medicare policies are sometimes adopted by
other third-party payors, other governmental and private
insurance coverage currently varies by carrier and geographic
location, and we actively work with major insurance carriers to
obtain reimbursement coverage for procedures using our
Lap-Band®
System product. For instance, the Technology Evaluation Center
of the Blue Cross/Blue Shield National Association provided a
positive assessment of the
Lap-Band®
System, an important step in providing private payor
reimbursement for the procedure.
Outside the United States, reimbursement programs vary on a
country by country basis. In some countries, both the procedure
and product are fully reimbursed by the government healthcare
systems for all citizens who need it, and there is no limit on
the number of procedures that can be performed. In other
countries, there is complete reimbursement but the number of
procedures that can be performed at each hospital is limited
either by the hospitals overall budget or by the national
budget for the type of product.
In the United States, there have been and continue to be a
number of legislative initiatives to contain health care
coverage and reimbursement by governmental and other payors. For
example, effective January 1, 2006, the Medicare
Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003
implemented a new Part D prescription drug benefit under
which Medicare beneficiaries can purchase certain prescription
drugs at discounted prices from private sector entities, or
Part D plan sponsors. Currently, drug manufacturers
negotiate directly with Part D plan sponsors to determine
whether their drugs will be listed on a Part D formulary
and the prices at which such drugs will be listed. Industry
competition to be included in formularies maintained by both
private payors and Part D plans can result in downward
pricing pressures on pharmaceutical companies. Although certain
lawmakers have suggested in the past that the federal government
should be granted the authority to negotiate the prices of drugs
included on Part D formularies, at this time the federal
government does not have such authority. There has also been an
increased emphasis in the marketplace on the delivery of more
cost-effective medical devices as well as a number of federal
and state proposals to limit payments by local governmental
payors for medical devices and the procedures in which medical
devices are used.
Breast
Implant Replacement Programs
We conduct our product development, manufacturing, marketing and
service and support activities with careful regard for the
consequences to patients. As with any medical device
manufacturer, however, we receive communications from surgeons
or patients with respect to our various breast implant products
claiming the products were defective, lost volume or have
resulted in injury to patients. In the event of a loss of shell
integrity resulting in breast implant rupture or deflation that
requires surgical intervention with respect to our breast
implant products sold and implanted in the United States, in
most cases our
ConfidencePlustm
programs provide lifetime product replacement and some financial
assistance for surgical procedures required within ten years of
implantation. Breast implants sold and implanted outside of the
United States are subject to a similar program. We do not
warrant any
24
level of aesthetic result and, as required by government
regulation, make extensive disclosure concerning the risks of
our products and implantation surgery.
Employee
Relations
At December 31, 2007, we employed approximately
7,886 persons throughout the world, including approximately
4,188 in the United States. None of our
U.S.-based
employees are represented by unions. We believe that our
relations with our employees are generally good.
Executive
Officers
Our executive officers and their ages as of February 28,
2008 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Principal Position with Allergan
|
|
David E.I. Pyott
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer)
|
F. Michael Ball
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
President, Allergan
|
James F. Barlow
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
|
Raymond H. Diradoorian
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Global Technical Operations
|
Jeffrey L. Edwards
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Finance and Business Development,
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
|
Douglas S. Ingram, Esq.
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer, General
Counsel and Secretary
|
Scott M. Whitcup, M.D.
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Research & Development
|
Officers are appointed by and hold office at the pleasure of the
Board of Directors.
Mr. Pyott has been Allergans Chief Executive Officer
since January 1998 and in 2001 became the Chairman of the Board.
Mr. Pyott also served as Allergans President from
January 1998 until February 2006. Previously, he was head of the
Nutrition Division and a member of the executive committee of
Novartis AG, a publicly-traded company focused on the research
and development of products to protect and improve health and
well-being, from 1995 until December 1997. From 1992 to 1995,
Mr. Pyott was President and Chief Executive Officer of
Sandoz Nutrition Corp., Minneapolis, Minnesota, a predecessor to
Novartis, and General Manager of Sandoz Nutrition, Barcelona,
Spain, from 1990 to 1992. Prior to that, Mr. Pyott held
various positions within the Sandoz Nutrition group from 1980.
Mr. Pyott is also a member of the board of directors of
Avery Dennison Corporation, a publicly-traded company focused on
pressure-sensitive technology and self-adhesive solutions, and
Edwards Lifesciences Corporation, a publicly-traded company
focused on products and technologies to treat advanced
cardiovascular disease. Mr. Pyott is a member of the
Directors Board of The Paul Merage School of Business at
the University of California, Irvine (UCI). Mr. Pyott
serves on the board of directors and the Executive Committee of
the California Healthcare Institute and the Board of the
Biotechnology Industry Organization. Mr. Pyott also serves
as a member of the board of directors of the
Pan-American
Ophthalmological Foundation, the International Council of
Ophthalmology Foundation, and as a member of the Advisory Board
for the Foundation of the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
Mr. Ball has been President, Allergan since February 2006.
Mr. Ball was Executive Vice President and President,
Pharmaceuticals from October 2003 until February 2006. Prior to
that, Mr. Ball was Corporate Vice President and President,
North America Region and Global Eye Rx Business since May 1998
and prior to that was Corporate Vice President and President,
North America Region since April 1996. He joined Allergan in
1995 as Senior Vice President, U.S. Eye Care after
12 years with Syntex Corporation, a multinational
pharmaceutical company, where he held a variety of positions
including President, Syntex Inc. Canada and Senior Vice
President, Syntex Laboratories. Mr. Ball serves on the
board of directors of STEC, Inc., a publicly-traded manufacturer
and marketer of computer memory and hard drive storage solutions.
25
Mr. Barlow has been Senior Vice President, Corporate
Controller since February 2005. Mr. Barlow joined Allergan
in January 2002 as Vice President, Corporate Controller. Prior
to joining Allergan, Mr. Barlow served as Chief Financial
Officer of Wynn Oil Company, a division of Parker Hannifin
Corporation. Prior to Wynn Oil Company, Mr. Barlow was
Treasurer and Controller at Wynns International, Inc., a
supplier of automotive and industrial components and specialty
chemicals, from July 1990 to September 2000. Before working for
Wynns International, Inc., Mr. Barlow was Vice
President, Controller from 1986 to 1990 for Ford Equipment
Leasing Company. From 1983 to 1985 Mr. Barlow worked for
the accounting firm Deloitte, Haskins and Sells.
Mr. Diradoorian has served as Allergans Executive
Vice President, Global Technical Operations since February 2006.
From April 2005 to February 2006, Mr. Diradoorian served as
Senior Vice President, Global Technical Operations. From
February 2001 to April 2005, Mr. Diradoorian served as Vice
President, Global Engineering and Technology.
Mr. Diradoorian joined Allergan in July 1981. Prior to
joining Allergan, Mr. Diradoorian held positions at
American Hospital Supply and with the Los Angeles Dodgers
baseball team.
Mr. Edwards has been Executive Vice President, Finance and
Business Development, Chief Financial Officer since September
2005. Prior to that, Mr. Edwards was Corporate Vice
President, Corporate Development since March 2003 and previously
served as Senior Vice President Treasury, Tax, and Investor
Relations. He joined Allergan in 1993. Prior to joining
Allergan, Mr. Edwards was with Banque Paribas and Security
Pacific National Bank, where he held various senior level
positions in the credit and business development functions.
Mr. Ingram has been Executive Vice President, Chief
Administrative Officer, General Counsel and Secretary, as well
as our Chief Ethics Officer, since October 2006. From October
2003 through October 2006, Mr. Ingram served as Executive
Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, as well as our
Chief Ethics Officer. Prior to that, Mr. Ingram served as
Corporate Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary, as well
as our Chief Ethics Officer, since July 2001. Prior to that he
was Senior Vice President and General Counsel since January
2001, and Assistant Secretary since November 1998. Prior to
that, Mr. Ingram was Associate General Counsel from August
1998, Assistant General Counsel from January 1998 and Senior
Attorney and Chief Litigation Counsel from March 1996, when he
first joined Allergan. Prior to joining Allergan,
Mr. Ingram was, from August 1988 to March 1996, an attorney
with the law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.
Mr. Ingram manages the Global Legal Affairs organization,
Global Regulatory Affairs, Compliance and Internal Audit,
Corporate Communications, Global Trade Compliance, the Global
Human Resources organization and the Information Technology
organization. Mr. Ingram serves as a member of the board of
directors of Volcom, Inc., a publicly-traded designer and
distributor of clothing and accessories.
Dr. Whitcup has been Executive Vice President, Research and
Development since July 2004. Dr. Whitcup joined Allergan in
January 2000 as Vice President, Development, Ophthalmology. In
January 2004, Dr. Whitcup became Allergans Senior
Vice President, Development, Ophthalmology. From 1993 until
2000, Dr. Whitcup served as the Clinical Director of the
National Eye Institute at the National Institutes of Health. As
Clinical Director, Dr. Whitcups leadership was vital
in building the clinical research program and promoting new
ophthalmic therapeutic discoveries. Dr. Whitcup is a
faculty member at the Jules Stein Eye Institute/David Geffen
School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Dr. Whitcup serves on the board of directors of Avanir
Pharmaceuticals, a publicly-traded pharmaceutical company.
We operate in a rapidly changing environment that involves a
number of risks. The following discussion highlights some of
these risks and others are discussed elsewhere in this report.
These and other risks could materially and adversely affect our
business, financial condition, prospects, operating results or
cash flows. The following risk factors are not an exhaustive
list of the risks associated with our business. New factors may
emerge or changes to these risks could occur that could
materially affect our business.
We
operate in a highly competitive business.
The pharmaceutical and medical device industries are highly
competitive and they require an ongoing, extensive search for
technological innovation. They also require, among other things,
the ability to effectively discover, develop, test and obtain
regulatory approvals for products, as well as the ability to
effectively
26
commercialize, market and promote approved products, including
communicating the effectiveness, safety and value of products to
actual and prospective customers and medical professionals.
Many of our competitors have greater resources than we have.
This enables them, among other things, to make greater research
and development investments and spread their research and
development costs, as well as their marketing and promotion
costs, over a broader revenue base. Our competitors may also
have more experience and expertise in obtaining marketing
approvals from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or
FDA, and other regulatory authorities. In addition to product
development, testing, approval and promotion, other competitive
factors in the pharmaceutical and medical device industries
include industry consolidation, product quality and price,
product technology, reputation, customer service and access to
technical information.
It is possible that developments by our competitors could make
our products or technologies less competitive or obsolete. Our
future growth depends, in part, on our ability to develop
products which are more effective. For instance, for our eye
care products to be successful, we must be able to manufacture
and effectively market those products and effectively detail
them to a sufficient number of eye care professionals such that
they determine to use or continue to use our current products
and the new products we may introduce. Glaucoma must be treated
over an extended period and doctors may be reluctant to switch a
patient to a new treatment if the patients current
treatment for glaucoma remains effective. Sales of our existing
products may decline rapidly if a new product is introduced by
one of our competitors or if we announce a new product that, in
either case, represents a substantial improvement over our
existing products. Similarly, if we fail to make sufficient
investments in research and development programs, our current
and planned products could be surpassed by more effective or
advanced products developed by our competitors.
Until December 2000,
Botox®
was the only neuromodulator approved by the FDA. At that time,
the FDA approved
Myobloc®,
a neuromodulator formerly marketed by Elan Pharmaceuticals and
now marketed by Solstice Neurosciences, Inc. Ipsen Ltd., or
Ipsen, is seeking FDA approval of its
Dysport®
neuromodulator for certain therapeutic indications, and Medicis
Pharmaceutical Corporation, or Medicis, its licensee for the
United States, Canada and Japan, is seeking approval of
Reloxin®
for cosmetic indications. Ipsen and Medicis submitted a
Biologics License Application, or BLA, to the FDA for
Reloxin®
in December 2007. Ipsen has marketed
Dysport®
in Europe since 1991, prior to our European commercialization of
Botox®
in 1992. In June 2006, Ipsen received marketing authorization
for a cosmetic indication for
Dysport®
in Germany. In 2007, Ipsen granted Galderma, a joint venture
between Nestle and LOreal Group, an exclusive development
and marketing license for
Dysport®
for aesthetic indications in the European Union, Russia, Eastern
Europe and the Middle East, and first rights of negotiation for
other countries around the world, except the United States,
Canada and Japan. In January 2008, Galderma became Ipsens
sole distributor for
Dysport®
in Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay. Ipsen is also seeking
approval for
Reloxin®
for cosmetic indications in the European Union, having submitted
a file to the French regulatory authority in May 2003. We
expect, based on comments made by Galderma, that
Reloxin®
will be approved in France in 2009.
Mentor Corporation is conducting clinical trials for a competing
neuromodulator in the United States. In addition, we are aware
of competing neuromodulators currently being developed and
commercialized in Asia, Europe, South America and other markets.
A Chinese entity received approval to market a botulinum toxin
in China in 1997, and we believe that it has launched or is
planning to launch its botulinum toxin product in other lightly
regulated markets in Asia, South America and Central America.
These lightly regulated markets may not require adherence to the
FDAs current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP,
regulations or the regulatory requirements of the European
Medical Evaluation Agency or other regulatory agencies in
countries that are members of the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development. Therefore, companies operating in
these markets may be able to produce products at a lower cost
than we can. In addition, Merz received approval for
Xeomin®
in Germany and launched its product in July 2005, received
approval in Mexico in 2006 and commenced sales in the United
Kingdom and France in early 2008, and is pursuing additional
approvals in the European Union and Latin America. Merz is
currently in clinical trials in the United States for cervical
dystonia, blepharospasm and cosmetic indications and is awaiting
therapeutic licenses for
Xeomin®
in many countries across the European Union. A Korean botulinum
toxin,
Meditoxin®,
was approved for sale in Korea in June 2006. The company,
Medy-Tox Inc., received exportation approval from Korean
authorities in early 2005 to ship their product under the trade
name
Neuronox®.
In February 2007, Q-Med announced a worldwide license for
Neuronox®,
with the exception of certain
27
countries in Asia where Medy-Tox may retain the marketing
rights. Our sales of
Botox®
could be materially and negatively impacted by this competition
or competition from other companies that might obtain FDA
approval or approval from other regulatory authorities to market
a neuromodulator.
Mentor Corporation is our principal competitor in the United
States for breast implants. Mentor announced that, like us, it
received FDA approval in November 2006 to sell its silicone
breast implants. The conditions under which Mentor is allowed to
market its silicone breast implants in the United States are
similar to ours, including indications for use and the
requirement to conduct post-marketing studies. If patients or
physicians prefer Mentors breast implant products to ours
or perceive that Mentors breast implant products are safer
than ours, our sales of breast implants could materially suffer.
We are aware of several companies conducting clinical studies of
breast implant products in the United States. Internationally,
we compete with several manufacturers, including Mentor
Corporation, Sientra, Inc., MediCor Ltd, Poly Implant
Prostheses, Nagor and Laboratoires Sebbin.
Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation began marketing the dermal
fillers
Restylane®
in January 2004 and
Perlanetm
in May 2007. Through our purchase of Cornéal, we acquired
the rights to sell the
Juvédermtm
family of products worldwide.
Juvédermtm
30,
Juvédermtm
Ultra and
Juvédermtm
Ultra Plus were approved by the FDA for sale in the United
States in June 2006, and we announced nationwide availability of
Juvédermtm
Ultra and
Juvédermtm
Ultra Plus in January 2007. We cannot assure you that our
Juvédermtm
family of products will offer equivalent or greater facial
aesthetic benefits to competitive dermal filler products, that
it will be competitive in price or gain acceptance in the
marketplace.
In addition, in June 2007, the FDA approved label extensions for
Juvedermtm
Ultra and
Juvedermtm
Ultra Plus based on new clinical data demonstrating that effects
of both products may last for up to one year, which is a longer
period of time than was reported in clinical studies that
supported FDA approval of other hyaluronic acid dermal fillers.
We cannot assure you that other dermal fillers, including
hyaluronic acid dermal fillers, do not have or will not obtain
labels or label extensions that demonstrate product effects that
are equivalent to or better than our products. Should our
competitors obtain such labels or label extensions demonstrating
product effects that are equivalent to or better than our
products, our sales of
Juvedermtm
could be materially and negatively impacted.
In September 2007, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., a
Johnson & Johnson company, announced FDA approval of
its gastric band product, the
Realizetm
band, which competes with our
Lap-Band®
System in the U.S. market. The
Lap-Band®
System also competes with surgical obesity procedures, including
gastric bypass, vertical banded gastroplasty, sleeve gastrectomy
and biliopancreatic diversion.
Our products for the treatment of over-active-bladder, or OAB,
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm,
compete with several other OAB treatment products, most of which
have been on the market for a longer period of time, including
Pfizer Inc.s
Detrol®
and
Detrol®
LA, Watson Pharma Inc.s
Oxytrol®,
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation and the Proctor &
Gamble Companys
Enablex®
and Astellas Pharma US, Inc. and GlaxoSmithKlines
Vesicare®.
While we believe that
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
have advantages over these competing products, we cannot assure
you that
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
offer more effective treatment of OAB for all patients, will be
competitive in price or will obtain, maintain or expand market
share in the OAB treatment market.
We also face competition from generic drug manufacturers in the
United States and internationally. For instance, Falcon
Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., an affiliate of Alcon, attempted to
obtain FDA approval for a brimonidine product to compete with
our
Alphagan®
P product. Pursuant to our March 2006 settlement with
Alcon, Alcon may sell, offer for sale or distribute its
brimonidine product after September 30, 2009, or earlier if
specified market conditions occur. The primary market condition
will have occurred if the extent to which prescriptions of
Alphagan®
P have been converted to other brimonidine-containing
products we market has increased to a specified threshold. In
May 2005, we received a paragraph 4 Hatch-Waxman Act
certification from Apotex, Inc., in which it purports to have
sought FDA approval to market a generic form of Acular
LS®.
In February 2007, we received a paragraph 4 Hatch-Waxman
Act certification from Exela PharmSci, Inc. in which it purports
to have sought FDA approval to market a generic form of
Alphagan®
P. In May 2007, we received a paragraph 4 Hatch-Waxman Act
certification from Apotex, Inc. in which it purports to have
sought FDA approval to market a generic form of
Alphagan®
P. In October 2007, we received a paragraph 4 Hatch-Waxman
Act certification from Apotex Corp. in which it purports to have
sought FDA approval to market a generic form of
Zymar®.
See Item 3 of Part I of
28
this report, Legal Proceedings and Note 13,
Commitments and Contingencies, in the notes to the
consolidated financial statements listed under Item 15 of
Part IV of this report, Exhibits and Financial
Statement Schedules, for information concerning our
current litigation.
Changes
in the consumer marketplace and economic conditions may
adversely affect sales or the profitability of our
products.
Facial aesthetic products, such as
Botox®
Cosmetic and dermal fillers, obesity intervention products and,
to a significant extent, breast implants, are products based on
consumer choice. If we fail to anticipate, identify or react to
competitive products or if consumer preferences in the cosmetic
marketplace shift to alternative treatments, we may experience a
decline in demand for these products. In addition, the popular
media has at times in the past produced, and may continue in the
future to produce, negative reports and publicity regarding the
efficacy, safety or side effects of these products. Consumer
perceptions of these products may be negatively impacted by
these reports and for other reasons, including the use of
unapproved botulinum toxins that result in injury, which may
cause demand to decline.
Breast augmentation,
Botox®
Cosmetic and dermal fillers are elective aesthetic procedures
and are not typically covered by insurance. Adverse changes in
the economy may cause consumers to reassess their spending
choices and reduce the demand for these procedures and our other
over-the-counter products, and this shift could have an adverse
effect on our sales and profitability.
Reimbursement for obesity surgery, including use of our
products, is available to various degrees in most of our
international markets. In the United States, coverage and
reimbursement by insurance plans are increasing, but not widely
available to all insured patients. Adverse changes in the
economy could have an adverse effect on consumer spending and
governmental health care resources. This shift could have an
adverse effect on the sales and profitability of our obesity
intervention business.
We
could experience difficulties obtaining or creating the raw
materials needed to produce our products and interruptions in
the supply of raw materials could disrupt our manufacturing and
cause our sales and profitability to decline.
The loss of a material supplier or the interruption of our
manufacturing processes could adversely affect our ability to
manufacture or sell many of our products. We obtain the
specialty chemicals that are the active pharmaceutical
ingredients in certain of our products from single sources, who
must maintain compliance with the FDAs cGMP regulations.
We also obtain
Sanctura®
and Sanctura
XRtm
under a manufacturing agreement with a sole source supplier. If
we experience difficulties acquiring sufficient quantities of
these materials or products from our existing suppliers, or if
our suppliers are found to be non-compliant with the cGMPs,
obtaining the required regulatory approvals, including from the
FDA or the European Medical Evaluation Agency, or EMEA, to use
alternative suppliers may be a lengthy and uncertain process. A
lengthy interruption of the supply of one or more of these
materials could adversely affect our ability to manufacture and
supply products, which could cause our sales and profitability
to decline. In addition, the manufacturing process to create the
raw material necessary to produce
Botox®
is technically complex and requires significant lead-time. Any
failure by us to forecast demand for, or to maintain an adequate
supply of, the raw material and finished product could result in
an interruption in the supply of
Botox®
and a resulting decrease in sales of the product.
We also rely on a single supplier for silicone raw materials
used in some of our products, including breast implants.
Although we have an agreement with this supplier to transfer the
necessary formulations to us in the event that it cannot meet
our requirements, we cannot guarantee that we would be able to
produce or obtain a sufficient amount of quality silicone raw
materials in a timely manner. We depend on third party
manufacturers for silicone molded components. These third party
manufacturers must maintain compliance with the FDAs
Quality System Regulation, or QSR, which sets forth the current
good manufacturing practice standard for medical devices and
requires manufacturers to follow design, testing and control
documentation and air quality assurance procedures during the
manufacturing process. Any material reduction in our raw
material supply or a failure by our third party manufacturers to
maintain compliance with the QSR could result in decreased sales
of our products and a decease in
29
our revenues. Additionally, certain of our manufacturing
processes that we perform are only performed at one location
worldwide.
Our
future success depends upon our ability to develop new products,
and new indications for existing products, that achieve
regulatory approval for commercialization.
For our business model to be successful, we must continually
develop, test and manufacture new products or achieve new
indications or label extensions for the use of our existing
products. Prior to marketing, these new products and product
indications must satisfy stringent regulatory standards and
receive requisite approvals or clearances from regulatory
authorities in the United States and abroad. The development,
regulatory review and approval, and commercialization processes
are time consuming, costly and subject to numerous factors that
may delay or prevent the development, approval or clearance, and
commercialization of new products, including legal actions
brought by our competitors. To obtain approval or clearance of
new indications or products in the United States, we must
submit, among other information, the results of preclinical and
clinical studies on the new indication or product candidate to
the FDA. The number of preclinical and clinical studies that
will be required for FDA approval varies depending on the new
indication or product candidate, the disease or condition for
which the new indication or product candidate is in development
and the regulations applicable to that new indication or product
candidate. Even if we believe that the data collected from
clinical trials of new indications for our existing products or
for our product candidates are promising, the FDA may find such
data to be insufficient to support approval of the new
indication or product. The FDA can delay, limit or deny approval
or clearance of a new indication or product candidate for many
reasons, including:
|
|
|
|
|
a determination that the new indication or product candidate is
not safe and effective;
|
|
|
the FDA may interpret our preclinical and clinical data in
different ways than we do;
|
|
|
the FDA may not approve our manufacturing processes or
facilities;
|
|
|
the FDA may require us to perform post-marketing clinical
studies; or
|
|
|
the FDA may change its approval policies or adopt new
regulations.
|
Products that we are currently developing, other future product
candidates or new indications or label extensions for our
existing products, may or may not receive the regulatory
approvals or clearances necessary for marketing or may receive
such approvals or clearances only after delays or unanticipated
costs. Delays or unanticipated costs in any part of the process
or our inability to obtain timely regulatory approval for our
products, including those attributable to, among other things,
our failure to maintain manufacturing facilities in compliance
with all applicable regulatory requirements, including the cGMPs
and QSR, could cause our operating results to suffer and our
stock price to decrease. Our facilities, our suppliers
facilities and other third parties facilities on which we
rely must pass pre-approval reviews and plant inspections and
demonstrate compliance with the cGMPs and QSR.
Further, even if we receive FDA and other regulatory approvals
for a new indication or product, the product may later exhibit
adverse effects that limit or prevent its widespread use or that
force us to withdraw the product from the market or to revise
our labeling to limit the indications for which the product may
be prescribed. In addition, even if we receive the necessary
regulatory approvals, we cannot assure you that new products or
indications will achieve market acceptance. Our future
performance will be affected by the market acceptance of
products such as Acular
LS®,
Alphagan®
P,
Alphagan®
P 0.1%,
Botox®,
Botox®
Cosmetic,
Combigantm,
Ganfort®,
Juvédermtm,
the
Lap-Band®
System,
Lumigan®,
Restasis®,
Sanctura®,
Sanctura
XRtm
and
Zymar®,
as well as silicone breast implant products, new indications for
Botox®
and new products such as
Posurdex®
and
Trivaristm.
We cannot assure you that our currently marketed products will
not be subject to further regulatory review and action or that
any other compounds or products that we are developing for
commercialization will be approved by the FDA or foreign
regulatory bodies for marketing or that we will be able to
commercialize them on terms that will be profitable, or at all.
If any of our products cannot be successfully or timely
commercialized, our operating results could be materially
adversely affected.
30
Our
product development efforts may not result in commercial
products.
We intend to continue an aggressive research and development
program. Successful product development in the pharmaceutical
and medical device industry is highly uncertain, and very few
research and development projects produce a commercial product.
Product candidates that appear promising in the early phases of
development, such as in early human clinical trials, may fail to
reach the market for a number of reasons, such as:
|
|
|
|
|
the product candidate did not demonstrate acceptable clinical
trial results even though it demonstrated positive preclinical
trial results;
|
|
|
the product candidate was not effective in treating a specified
condition or illness;
|
|
|
the product candidate had harmful side effects in humans or
animals;
|
|
|
the necessary regulatory bodies, such as the FDA, did not
approve the product candidate for an intended use;
|
|
|
the product candidate was not economical for us to manufacture
and commercialize;
|
|
|
other companies or people have or may have proprietary rights to
the product candidate, such as patent rights, and will not sell
or license these rights to us on reasonable terms, or at all;
|
|
|
the product candidate is not cost effective in light of existing
therapeutics or alternative devices; and
|
|
|
certain of our licensors or partners may fail to effectively
conduct clinical development or clinical manufacturing
activities.
|
Several of our product candidates have failed or been
discontinued at various stages in the product development
process. Of course, there may be other factors that prevent us
from marketing a product. We cannot guarantee we will be able to
produce commercially successful products. Further, clinical
trial results are frequently susceptible to varying
interpretations by scientists, medical personnel, regulatory
personnel, statisticians and others, which may delay, limit or
prevent further clinical development or regulatory approvals of
a product candidate. Also, the length of time that it takes for
us to complete clinical trials and obtain regulatory approval
for product marketing has in the past varied by product and by
the intended use of a product. We expect that this will likely
be the case with future product candidates and we cannot predict
the length of time to complete necessary clinical trials and
obtain regulatory approval.
If we
are unable to obtain and maintain adequate protection for our
intellectual property rights associated with the technologies
incorporated into our products, our business and results of
operations could suffer.
Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain patents or
rights to patents, protect trade secrets and other proprietary
technologies and processes, and prevent others from infringing
on our patents, trademarks, service marks and other intellectual
property rights. Upon the expiration or loss of patent
protection for a product, we can lose a significant portion of
sales of that product in a very short period of time as other
companies manufacture generic forms of our previously protected
product or manufacture similar products or devices at lower
cost, without having had to incur significant research and
development costs in formulating the product or designing the
device. Therefore, our future financial success may depend in
part on obtaining patent protection for technologies
incorporated into our products. We cannot assure you that such
patents will be issued, or that any existing or future patents
will be of commercial benefit. In addition, it is impossible to
anticipate the breadth or degree of protection that any such
patents will afford, and we cannot assure you that any such
patents will not be successfully challenged in the future. If we
are unsuccessful in obtaining or preserving patent protection,
or if any of our products rely on unpatented proprietary
technology, we cannot assure you that others will not
commercialize products substantially identical to those
products. Generic drug manufacturers are currently challenging
the patents covering certain of our products, and we expect that
they will continue to do so in the future.
Third parties may challenge, invalidate or circumvent our
patents and patent applications relating to our products,
product candidates and technologies. Challenges may result in
potentially significant harm to our business. The cost of
responding to these challenges and the inherent costs to defend
the validity of our patents, including the prosecution of
infringements and the related litigation, could be substantial
and can preclude or delay commercialization of products. Such
litigation also could require a substantial commitment of our
managements time. For certain of our product candidates,
third parties may have patents or pending patents that they
claim prevent us from commercializing certain product candidates
in certain territories. Our success depends in part on our
ability
31
to obtain and defend patent rights and other intellectual
property rights that are important to the commercialization of
our products and product candidates. For additional information
on our material patents, see Patents, Trademarks and
Licenses in Item 1 of Part I of this report,
Business.
We also believe that the protection of our trademarks and
service marks is an important factor in product recognition and
in our ability to maintain or increase market share. If we do
not adequately protect our rights in our various trademarks and
service marks from infringement, their value to us could be lost
or diminished, seriously impairing our competitive position.
Moreover, the laws of certain foreign countries do not protect
our intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws
of the United States. In addition to intellectual property
protections afforded to trademarks, service marks and
proprietary know-how by the various countries in which our
proprietary products are sold, we seek to protect our
trademarks, service marks and proprietary know-how through
confidentiality and proprietary information agreements with
third parties, including our partners, customers, employees and
consultants. These agreements may not provide meaningful
protection or adequate remedies for violation of our rights in
the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential
information. It is possible that these agreements will be
breached or that they will not be enforceable in every instance,
and that we will not have adequate remedies for any such breach.
It is also possible that our trade secrets will become known or
independently developed by our competitors.
We may
be subject to intellectual property litigation and infringement
claims, which could cause us to incur significant expenses and
losses or prevent us from selling our products.
We cannot assure you that our products will not infringe patents
or other intellectual property rights held by third parties. In
the event we discover that we may be infringing third party
patents or other intellectual property rights, we may not be
able to obtain licenses from those third parties on commercially
attractive terms or at all. We may have to defend, and have
defended, against charges that we violated patents or the
proprietary rights of third parties. Litigation is costly and
time-consuming, and diverts the attention of our management and
technical personnel. In addition, if we infringe the
intellectual property rights of others, we could lose our right
to develop, manufacture or sell products or could be required to
pay monetary damages or royalties to license proprietary rights
from third parties. An adverse determination in a judicial or
administrative proceeding or a failure to obtain necessary
licenses could prevent us from manufacturing or selling our
products, which could harm our business, financial condition,
prospects, results of operations and cash flows. See Item 3
of Part I of this report, Legal Proceedings and
Note 13, Commitments and Contingencies, in the
notes to the consolidated financial statements listed under
Item 15 of Part IV of this report, Exhibits and
Financial Statement Schedules, for information concerning
our current intellectual property litigation.
Importation
of products from Canada and other countries into the United
States and intra-European Union trade may lower the prices we
receive for our products.
In the United States, some of our pharmaceutical products are
subject to competition from lower priced versions of those
products and competing products from Canada, Mexico and other
countries where government price controls or other market
dynamics result in lower prices. Our products that require a
prescription in the United States are often available to
consumers in these other markets without a prescription, which
may cause consumers to further seek out our products in these
lower priced markets. The ability of patients and other
customers to obtain these lower priced imports has grown
significantly as a result of the Internet, an expansion of
pharmacies in Canada and elsewhere targeted to American
purchasers, the increase in
U.S.-based
businesses affiliated with Canadian pharmacies marketing to
American purchasers and other factors. These foreign imports are
illegal under current U.S. law, with the sole exception of
limited quantities of prescription drugs imported for personal
use. However, the volume of imports continues to rise due to the
limited enforcement resources of the FDA and the
U.S. Customs Service, and there is increased political
pressure to permit the imports as a mechanism for expanding
access to lower priced medicines.
In December 2003, Congress enacted the Medicare Prescription
Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003. This law
contains provisions that may change U.S. import laws and
expand consumers ability to import lower priced versions
of our products and competing products from Canada, where there
are government price controls. These changes to U.S. import
laws will not take effect unless and until the Secretary of
Health and Human
32
Services certifies that the changes will lead to substantial
savings for consumers and will not create a public health safety
issue. The Secretary of Health and Human Services has not made
such a certification. However, it is possible that the current
Secretary or a subsequent Secretary could make such a
certification in the future. As directed by Congress, a task
force on drug importation conducted a comprehensive study
regarding the circumstances under which drug importation could
be safely conducted and the consequences of importation on the
health, medical costs and development of new medicines for
U.S. consumers. The task force issued its report in
December 2004, finding that there are significant safety and
economic issues that must be addressed before importation of
prescription drugs is permitted. In addition, federal
legislative proposals have been made to implement the changes to
the U.S. import laws without any certification, and to
broaden permissible imports in other ways. Even if the changes
to the U.S. import laws do not take effect, and other
changes are not enacted, imports from Canada and elsewhere may
continue to increase due to market and political forces, and the
limited enforcement resources of the FDA, the U.S. Customs
Service and other government agencies. For example, Public Law
Number
109-295,
which was signed into law in October 2006 and provides
appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the
2007 fiscal year, expressly prohibits the U.S. Customs
Services from using funds to prevent individuals from importing
from Canada less than a
90-day
supply of a prescription drug for personal use, when the drug
otherwise complies with the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
In addition, certain state and local governments have
implemented importation schemes for their citizens and, in the
absence of federal action to curtail such activities, other
states and local governments may also launch importation efforts.
The importation of foreign products adversely affects our
profitability in the United States. This impact could become
more significant in the future, and the impact could be even
greater if there is a further change in the law or if state or
local governments take further steps to import products from
abroad.
Our
ownership of real property and the operation of our business
will continue to expose us to risks of environmental
liabilities.
Under various U.S. federal, state and local environmental
laws, ordinances and regulations, a current or previous owner or
operator of real property may be liable for the cost of removal
or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in
such property. Such laws often impose liability whether or not
the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the
presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. Environmental
laws also may impose restrictions on the manner in which
property may be used or the businesses that may be operated, and
these restrictions may require expenditures. Environmental laws
provide for sanctions in the event of noncompliance and may be
enforced by governmental agencies or, in certain circumstances,
by private parties. In connection with the acquisition and
ownership of our properties, we may be potentially liable for
such costs. The cost of defending against claims of liability,
complying with environmental regulatory requirements or
remediating any contaminated property could have a material
adverse effect on our business, assets or results of operations.
Any costs or expenses relating to environmental matters may not
be covered by insurance.
Our product development programs and manufacturing processes
involve the controlled use of hazardous materials, chemicals and
toxic compounds. These programs and processes expose us to risks
that an accidental contamination could lead to noncompliance
with environmental laws, regulatory enforcement actions and
claims for personal injury and property damage. If an accident
or environmental discharge occurs, or if we discover
contamination caused by prior operations, including by prior
owners and operators of properties we acquire, we could be
liable for cleanup obligations, damages and fines. The
substantial unexpected costs we may incur could have a
significant and adverse effect on our business and results of
operations.
We may
experience losses due to product liability claims, product
recalls or corrections.
The design, development, manufacture and sale of our products
involve an inherent risk of product liability or other claims by
consumers and other third parties. We have in the past been, and
continue to be, subject to various product liability claims and
lawsuits. In addition, we have in the past and may in the future
recall or issue field corrections related to our products due to
manufacturing deficiencies, labeling errors or other safety or
regulatory reasons. We cannot assure you that we will not in the
future experience material losses due to product liability
claims, lawsuits, product recalls or corrections.
33
As part of the Inamed acquisition, we assumed Inameds
product liability risks, including any product liability for its
past and present manufacturing of breast implant products. The
manufacture and sale of breast implant products has been and
continues to be the subject of a significant number of product
liability claims due to allegations that the medical devices
cause disease or result in complications and other health
conditions due to rupture, deflation or other product failure.
See Item 3 of Part I of this report, Legal
Proceedings and Note 13, Commitments and
Contingencies, in the notes to the consolidated financial
statements listed under Item 15 of Part IV of this
report, Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules,
for information concerning our current products liability
litigation. Historically, other breast implant manufacturers
that suffered such claims in the 1990s were forced to
cease operations or even to declare bankruptcy.
Additionally, recent FDA marketing approval for our silicone
breast implants requires that:
|
|
|
|
|
we monitor patients in our core study out to 10 years if
there has been explantation without replacement;
|
|
|
patients in the core study receive magnetic resonance imaging
tests, or MRIs, at seven and nine years;
|
|
|
we conduct a large,
10-year
postapproval study; and
|
|
|
we conduct additional smaller studies, including a study aimed
at ensuring patients are adequately informed about the risks of
our silicone breast implants and that the format and content of
patient labeling is adequate.
|
We are seeking marketing approval for other silicone breast
implants in the United States, and if we obtain this approval,
it may similarly be subject to significant restrictions and
requirements, including the need for a patient registry, follow
up MRIs and substantial Phase IV clinical trial commitments.
We also face a substantial risk of product liability claims from
our eye care, neuromodulator, urology, skin care, obesity
intervention and facial aesthetics products. Additionally, our
pharmaceutical and medical device products may cause, or may
appear to cause, serious adverse side effects or potentially
dangerous drug interactions if misused, improperly prescribed,
improperly implanted or based on faulty surgical technique. We
are subject to adverse event reporting regulations that require
us to report to the FDA or similar bodies in other countries if
our products are associated with a death or serious injury.
These adverse events, among others, could result in additional
regulatory controls, such as the performance of costly
post-approval clinical studies or revisions to our approved
labeling, which could limit the indications or patient
population for our products or could even lead to the withdrawal
of a product from the market. Furthermore, any adverse publicity
associated with such an event could cause consumers to seek
alternatives to our products, which may cause our sales to
decline, even if our products are ultimately determined not to
have been the primary cause of the event.
Negative
publicity concerning the safety of our products may harm our
sales, force us to withdraw products and cause a decline in our
stock price.
Physicians and potential and existing patients may have a number
of concerns about the safety of our products, including
Botox®,
breast implants, eye care pharmaceuticals, urology
pharmaceuticals, skin care products, obesity intervention
products and facial dermal fillers, whether or not such concerns
have a basis in generally accepted science or peer-reviewed
scientific research. Negative publicity whether
accurate or inaccurate about our products, based on,
for example, news about
Botox®,
breast implant litigation or regulatory activities and
developments, whether involving us or a competitor, or new
government regulation, could materially reduce market acceptance
of our products and could result in product withdrawals. For
example, recent activities by an advocacy group requesting
labeling changes for botulinum toxins marketed in the United
States resulted in significant adverse media attention.
Significant negative publicity could result in an increased
number of product liability claims, whether or not these claims
have a basis in scientific fact. Furthermore, adverse publicity
associated with such an event could cause our stock price to
decline or consumers to seek alternatives to our products, which
may cause our sales to decline, and could lead to a further
decline in our stock price, even if our products are ultimately
determined not to have been the primary cause of the event.
Health
care initiatives and other third-party payor cost-containment
pressures could cause us to sell our products at lower prices,
resulting in decreased revenues.
Some of our products are purchased or reimbursed by state and
federal government authorities, private health insurers and
other organizations, such as health maintenance organizations,
or HMOs, and managed care
34
organizations, or MCOs. Third-party payors increasingly
challenge pharmaceutical and other medical device product
pricing. There also continues to be a trend toward managed
healthcare in the United States. Pricing pressures by
third-party payors and the growth of organizations such as HMOs
and MCOs could result in lower prices
and/or a
reduction in demand for our products.
In addition, legislative and regulatory proposals and enactments
to reform healthcare and government insurance programs,
including the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and
Modernization Act of 2003, or MMA, the Deficit Reduction Act of
2005, or DRA, and the hospital outpatient prospective payment
system, or HOPPS, could significantly influence the manner in
which pharmaceutical products and medical devices are prescribed
and purchased. For example, effective January 1, 2006, the
MMA established a new Medicare outpatient prescription drug
benefit under Part D. The MMA also established a
competitive acquisition program, or CAP, in which physicians who
administer drugs in their offices are offered an option to
acquire drugs covered under the Medicare Part B benefit
from vendors who are selected in a competitive bidding process.
Implementation of the CAP began in July 2006. Further, the DRA
requires the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS,
the federal agency that both administers the Medicare program
and administers and overseas the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program,
to amend certain formulas used to calculate pharmacy
reimbursement and rebates under Medicaid. In July 2007, CMS
issued a final rule that, among other things, clarifies and
changes how drug manufacturers must calculate and report key
pricing data under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. This data
is used by CMS and state Medicaid agencies to calculate rebates
owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and
to calculate the federal upper limits on cost-sharing for
certain prescription drugs. In December 2007, following a
judicial challenge brought by a national association of
pharmacies, a federal judge ordered an injunction that prevents
CMS from implementing its July rule. If CMS is ultimately
permitted to implement its rule, changes could lead to reduced
payments to pharmacies for certain pharmaceutical products. In
addition and effective January 1, 2008, Medicare reduced
reimbursement for separately payable physician-administered
drugs under HOPPS, and may continue to reduce reimbursement in
the future. These or other reimbursement reductions may make it
financially impractical for hospitals to offer treatment, which
could negatively affect our ability to sell our products in the
hospital market. These and other cost containment measures and
healthcare reforms could adversely affect our ability to sell
our products.
Furthermore, individual states have become increasingly
aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations
designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including
price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts,
restrictions on certain product access, and to encourage
importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.
Legally-mandated price controls on payment amounts by
third-party payors or other restrictions could negatively and
materially impact our revenues and financial condition. We
encounter similar regulatory and legislative issues in most
countries outside the United States.
We expect there will continue to be federal and state laws
and/or
regulations, proposed and implemented, that could limit the
amounts that foreign, federal and state governments will pay for
health care products and services. The extent to which future
legislation or regulations, if any, relating to the health care
industry or third-party coverage and reimbursement may be
enacted or what effect such legislation or regulation would have
on our business remains uncertain. Such measures or other health
care system reforms that are adopted could have a material
adverse effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our
products or could limit or eliminate our spending on development
projects and affect our ultimate profitability.
In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual
hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine
what pharmaceutical and medical device products and which
suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other
health care programs. This can reduce demand for our products or
put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively
affect our revenues and profitability.
Our ability to sell our products to United States hospitals
depends in part on our relationships with group purchasing
organizations, or GPOs. Many existing and potential customers
for our products become members of GPOs. GPOs negotiate pricing
arrangements and contracts, sometimes exclusive, with medical
supply manufacturers and distributors, and these negotiated
prices are made available to a GPOs affiliated hospitals
and other members. If we are not one of the providers selected
by a GPO, affiliated hospitals and other members may be less
likely to purchase our products, and if the GPO has negotiated a
strict sole source, market share
35
compliance or bundling contract for another manufacturers
products, we may be precluded from making sales to members of
the GPO for the duration of the contractual arrangement. Our
failure to renew contracts with GPOs may cause us to lose market
share and could have a material adverse effect on our sales,
financial condition and results of operations. We cannot assure
you that we will be able to renew these contracts at the current
or substantially similar terms. If we are unable to keep our
relationships and develop new relationships with GPOs, our
competitive position would likely suffer.
We are
subject to risks arising from currency exchange rates, which
could increase our costs and may cause our profitability to
decline.
We collect and pay a substantial portion of our sales and
expenditures in currencies other than the U.S. dollar.
Therefore, fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates
affect our operating results. We cannot assure you that future
exchange rate movements, inflation or other related factors will
not have a material adverse effect on our sales or operating
expenses.
We are
subject to risks associated with doing business
internationally.
Our business is subject to certain risks inherent in
international business, many of which are beyond our control.
These risks include, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
adverse changes in tariff and trade protection measures;
|
|
|
reductions in the reimbursement amounts we receive for our
products from foreign governments and foreign insurance
providers;
|
|
|
unexpected changes in foreign regulatory requirements, including
quality standards and other certification requirements;
|
|
|
potentially negative consequences from changes in or
interpretations of tax laws;
|
|
|
differing labor regulations;
|
|
|
changing economic conditions in countries where our products are
sold or manufactured or in other countries;
|
|
|
differing local product preferences and product requirements;
|
|
|
exchange rate risks;
|
|
|
restrictions on the repatriation of funds;
|
|
|
political unrest and hostilities;
|
|
|
product liability, intellectual property and other claims;
|
|
|
new export license requirements;
|
|
|
differing degrees of protection for intellectual
property; and
|
|
|
difficulties in coordinating and managing foreign operations,
including ensuring that foreign operations comply with foreign
laws as well as U.S. laws applicable to U.S. companies
with foreign operations, such as export laws and the Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act.
|
Any of these factors, or any other international factors, could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations. We cannot assure you that
we can successfully manage these risks or avoid their effects.
The
consolidation of drug wholesalers and other wholesaler actions
could increase competitive and pricing pressures on
pharmaceutical manufacturers, including us.
We sell our pharmaceutical products primarily through
wholesalers. These wholesale customers comprise a significant
part of the distribution network for pharmaceutical products in
the United States. This distribution network is continuing to
undergo significant consolidation. As a result, a smaller number
of large wholesale distributors control a significant share of
the market. We expect that consolidation of drug wholesalers
will increase competitive and pricing pressures on
pharmaceutical manufacturers, including us. In addition,
wholesalers may apply pricing pressure through
fee-for-service
arrangements, and their purchases may exceed customer demand,
resulting in reduced wholesaler purchases in later quarters. We
cannot assure you that we can manage these pressures or that
wholesaler purchases will not decrease as a result of this
potential excess buying.
36
Our
failure to attract and retain key managerial, technical, selling
and marketing personnel could adversely affect our
business.
Our success depends upon our retention of key managerial,
technical, selling and marketing personnel. The loss of the
services of key personnel might significantly delay or prevent
the achievement of our development and strategic objectives.
We must continue to attract, train and retain managerial,
technical, selling and marketing personnel. Competition for such
highly skilled employees in our industry is high, and we cannot
be certain that we will be successful in recruiting or retaining
such personnel. We also believe that our success depends to a
significant extent on the ability of our key personnel to
operate effectively, both individually and as a group. If we are
unable to identify, hire and integrate new employees in a timely
and cost-effective manner, our operating results may suffer.
We may
acquire companies in the future and these acquisitions could
disrupt our business.
As part of our business strategy, we regularly consider and, as
appropriate, make acquisitions of technologies, products and
businesses that we believe are complementary to our business.
Acquisitions typically entail many risks and could result in
difficulties in integrating the operations, personnel,
technologies and products of the companies acquired, some of
which may result in significant charges to earnings. If we are
unable to successfully integrate our acquisitions with our
existing business, we may not obtain the advantages that the
acquisitions were intended to create, which may materially
adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial
condition and cash flows, our ability to develop and introduce
new products and the market price of our stock. In connection
with acquisitions, we could experience disruption in our
business or employee base, or key employees of companies that we
acquire may seek employment elsewhere, including with our
competitors. Furthermore, the products of companies we acquire
may overlap with our products or those of our customers,
creating conflicts with existing relationships or with other
commitments that are detrimental to the integrated businesses.
Uncertainties
exist in integrating the business and operations of Inamed,
Cornéal and Esprit into our own.
We are currently integrating certain of Inameds,
Cornéals and Esprits functions and operations
into our own, although there can be no assurance that we will be
successful in this endeavor. There are inherent challenges in
integrating the operations that could result in a delay or the
failure to achieve the anticipated synergies and, therefore, any
potential cost savings and increases in earnings. Issues that
must be addressed in integrating the operations of Inamed,
Cornéal and Esprit into our own include, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
conforming standards, controls, procedures and policies,
business cultures and compensation structures between the
companies;
|
|
|
conforming information technology and accounting systems;
|
|
|
consolidating corporate and administrative infrastructures;
|
|
|
consolidating sales and marketing operations;
|
|
|
retaining existing customers and attracting new customers;
|
|
|
retaining key employees;
|
|
|
identifying and eliminating redundant and underperforming
operations and assets;
|
|
|
minimizing the diversion of managements attention from
ongoing business concerns;
|
|
|
coordinating geographically dispersed organizations;
|
|
|
managing tax costs or inefficiencies associated with integrating
the operations of the combined company; and
|
|
|
making any necessary modifications to operating control
standards to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the
rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.
|
If we are not able to adequately address these challenges, we
may not realize the anticipated benefits of the integration of
the companies. Actual cost and sales synergies, if achieved at
all, may be lower than we expect and may take longer to achieve
than we anticipate.
37
Compliance
with the extensive government regulations to which we are
subject is expensive and time consuming, and may result in the
delay or cancellation of product sales, introductions or
modifications.
Extensive industry regulation has had, and will continue to
have, a significant impact on our business, especially our
product development and manufacturing capabilities. All
companies that manufacture, market and distribute
pharmaceuticals and medical devices, including us, are subject
to extensive, complex, costly and evolving regulation by federal
governmental authorities, principally by the FDA and the
U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA, and similar
foreign and state government agencies. Failure to comply with
the regulatory requirements of the FDA, DEA and other
U.S. and foreign regulatory agencies may subject a company
to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions, including,
among others, a refusal to approve a pending application to
market a new product or a new indication for an existing
product. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the
Controlled Substances Act and other domestic and foreign
statutes and regulations govern or influence the research,
testing, manufacturing, packing, labeling, storing, record
keeping, safety, effectiveness, approval, advertising,
promotion, sale and distribution of our products. Under certain
of these regulations, we are subject to periodic inspection of
our facilities, production processes and control operations
and/or the
testing of our products by the FDA, the DEA and other
authorities, to confirm that we are in compliance with all
applicable regulations, including FDA cGMP regulations with
respect to drug and biologic products and the QSR with respect
to medical device products. The FDA conducts pre-approval and
post-approval reviews and plant inspections of us and our direct
and indirect suppliers to determine whether our record keeping,
production processes and controls, personnel and quality control
are in compliance with the cGMPs, the QSR and other FDA
regulations. We are also required to perform extensive audits of
our vendors, contract laboratories and suppliers to ensure that
they are compliant with these requirements. In addition, in
order to commercialize our products or new indications for an
existing product, we must demonstrate that the product or new
indication is safe and effective, and that our and our
suppliers manufacturing facilities are compliant with
applicable regulations, to the satisfaction of the FDA and other
regulatory agencies.
The process for obtaining governmental approval to manufacture
and to commercialize pharmaceutical and medical device products
is rigorous, typically takes many years and is costly, and we
cannot predict the extent to which we may be affected by
legislative and regulatory developments. We are dependent on
receiving FDA and other governmental approvals prior to
manufacturing, marketing and distributing our products. We may
fail to obtain approval from the FDA or other governmental
authorities for our product candidates, or we may experience
delays in obtaining such approvals, due to varying
interpretations of data or our failure to satisfy rigorous
efficacy, safety and manufacturing quality standards.
Consequently, there is always a risk that the FDA or other
applicable governmental authorities will not approve our
products, or will take post-approval action limiting or revoking
our ability to sell our products, or that the rate, timing and
cost of such approvals will adversely affect our product
introduction plans, results of operations and stock price.
Despite the time and expense exerted, regulatory approval is
never guaranteed.
Even after we obtain regulatory approval or clearance for a
product candidate or new indication, we are subject to extensive
regulation, including ongoing compliance with the FDAs
cGMP and QSR regulations, completion of post-marketing clinical
studies mandated by the FDA, and compliance with regulations
relating to labeling, advertising, marketing and promotion. In
addition, we are subject to adverse event reporting regulations
that require us to report to the FDA if our products are
associated with a death or serious injury. If we or any third
party that we involve in the testing, packing, manufacture,
labeling, marketing and distribution of our products fail to
comply with any such regulations, we may be subject to, among
other things, warning letters, product seizures, recalls, fines
or other civil penalties, injunctions, suspension or revocation
of approvals, operating restrictions
and/or
criminal prosecution. The FDA recently has increased its
enforcement activities related to the advertising and promotion
of pharmaceutical, biological and medical device products. In
particular, the FDA has expressed concern regarding the
pharmaceutical and medical device industrys compliance
with the agencys regulations and guidance governing
direct-to-consumer
advertising, and has increased its scrutiny of such promotional
materials. For example, we received a warning letter from the
FDA in May 2007 stating that we submitted a false and misleading
journal advertisement for Acular
LS®.
The FDA may limit or, with respect to certain products,
terminate our dissemination of
direct-to-consumer
advertisements in the future, which could cause sales of those
products to decline. Physicians
38
may prescribe pharmaceutical and biologic products, and utilize
medical device products for uses that are not described in a
products labeling or differ from those tested by us and
approved by the FDA. While such off-label uses are
common and the FDA does not regulate a physicians choice
of treatment, the FDA does restrict a manufacturers
communications on the subject of off-label use. Companies cannot
actively promote FDA-approved pharmaceutical, biologic or
medical device products for off-label uses, but they may
disseminate to physicians articles published in peer-reviewed
journals. To the extent allowed by law, we disseminate
peer-reviewed articles on our products to targeted physicians.
If, however, our promotional activities fail to comply with the
FDAs or another regulatory bodys regulations or
guidelines, we may be subject to warnings from, or enforcement
action by, the FDA or another enforcement agency.
From time to time, legislative or regulatory proposals are
introduced that could alter the review and approval process
relating to our products. It is possible that the FDA or other
governmental authorities will issue additional regulations
further restricting the sale of our present or proposed
products. Any change in legislation or regulations that govern
the review and approval process relating to our current and
future products could make it more difficult and costly to
obtain approval for new products, or to produce, market and
distribute existing products.
If we
market products in a manner that violates health care fraud and
abuse laws, we may be subject to civil or criminal
penalties.
The Federal health care program Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits,
among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying,
soliciting or receiving remuneration to induce or in return for
purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase,
lease or order of any health care item or service reimbursable
under Medicare, Medicaid or other federally financed health care
programs. This statute has been interpreted to apply to
arrangements between pharmaceutical or medical device
manufacturers, on the one hand, and prescribers, purchasers and
formulary managers, on the other hand. Although there are a
number of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors
protecting certain common activities from prosecution, the
exemptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices
that involve remuneration intended to induce prescribing,
purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they
do not qualify for an exemption or safe harbor.
Federal false claims laws prohibit any person from knowingly
presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for
payment to the federal government, or knowingly making, or
causing to be made, a false statement to get a false claim paid.
Pharmaceutical companies have been prosecuted under these laws
for a variety of alleged promotional and marketing activities,
such as allegedly providing free product to customers with the
expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for
the product; reporting to pricing services inflated average
wholesale prices that were then used by federal programs to set
reimbursement rates; engaging in off-label promotion that caused
claims to be submitted to Medicaid for non-covered off-label
uses; and submitting inflated best price information to the
Medicaid Rebate Program.
HIPAA created two new federal crimes: health care
fraud, and false statements relating to health care matters. The
health care fraud statute prohibits knowingly and willfully
executing a scheme to defraud any health care benefit program,
including private payors. The false statements statute prohibits
knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a
material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or
fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or
payment for health care benefits, items or services.
The majority of states also have statutes or regulations similar
to these federal laws, which apply to items and services
reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in
several states, apply regardless of the payor. In addition, some
states have laws that require pharmaceutical companies to adopt
comprehensive compliance programs. For example, under California
law, pharmaceutical companies must comply with both the April
2003 Office of Inspector General Compliance Program Guidance for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and the July 2002 PhRMA Code on
Interactions with Healthcare Professionals. We have adopted and
implemented a compliance program which we believe satisfies the
requirements of these laws.
Sanctions under these federal and state laws may include civil
monetary penalties, exclusion of a manufacturers products
from reimbursement under government programs, criminal fines and
imprisonment. Because of the breadth of these laws and the
narrowness of the safe harbors, it is possible that some of our
business activities could be subject to challenge under one or
more of such laws. For example, we and several other
39
pharmaceutical companies are currently subject to suits by
governmental entities in several jurisdictions, including Erie,
Oswego and Schenectady Counties in New York and in Alabama
alleging that we and these other companies, through promotional,
discounting and pricing practices, reported false and inflated
average wholesale prices or wholesale acquisition costs and
failed to report best prices as required by federal and state
rebate statutes, resulting in the plaintiffs overpaying for
certain medications. If our past or present operations are found
to be in violation of any of the laws described above or other
similar governmental regulations to which we are subject, we may
be subject to the applicable penalty associated with the
violation which could adversely affect our ability to operate
our business and our financial results.
We
could be adversely affected by violations of the U.S. Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act and similar worldwide anti-bribery
laws.
The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar
anti-bribery laws in other jurisdictions generally prohibit
companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments
to
non-U.S. government
officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business.
Our policies mandate compliance with these anti-bribery laws. We
operate in many parts of the world that have experienced
governmental corruption to some degree and in certain
circumstances, strict compliance with anti-bribery laws may
conflict with local customs and practices. We cannot assure you
that our internal control policies and procedures always will
protect us from reckless or criminal acts committed by our
employees or agents. These laws are complex and often difficult
to interpret and apply, and we may be required in the future to
alter our practices to be in compliance. Allegations that we
have violated these laws could disrupt our business and subject
us to criminal or civil enforcement actions. Violations are
punishable by severe criminal penalties, including fines or
imprisonment. In addition, violations may result in civil
penalties, including fines, loss of our export licenses,
suspension of our ability to do business with the federal
government, denial of government reimbursement for our products
and exclusion from participation in government healthcare
programs. These penalties could have a material adverse effect
on our business.
If our
collaborative partners do not perform, we will be unable to
develop and market products as anticipated.
We have entered into collaborative arrangements with third
parties to develop and market certain products, including our
arrangement with GlaxoSmithKline to market
Botox®
in Japan and China and certain other products in the United
States, our arrangement with Indevus to market Sanctura
XRtm
in the United States, our co-promotion agreement with Covidien
to promote the
Lap-Band®
System in the United States, our agreement with Clinique to
develop, market and distribute a new physician dispensed skin
care line for sale in the United States and our agreement with
Stiefel to co-promote our current
Tazorac®
products to dermatologists and pediatricians and to develop and
commercialize new products that include tazarotene. We cannot
assure you that these collaborations will be successful, lead to
additional sales of our products or lead to the creation of
additional products. If we fail to maintain our existing
collaborative arrangements or fail to enter into additional
collaborative arrangements, our licensing revenues
and/or the
number of products from which we could receive future revenues
could decline.
Our dependence on collaborative arrangements with third parties
subjects us to a number of risks. These collaborative
arrangements may not be on terms favorable to us. Agreements
with collaborative partners typically allow partners significant
discretion in marketing our products or electing whether or not
to pursue any of the planned activities. We cannot fully control
the amount and timing of resources our collaborative partners
may devote to products based on the collaboration, and our
partners may choose to pursue alternative products to the
detriment of our collaboration. In addition, our partners may
not perform their obligations as expected. Business
combinations, significant changes in a collaborative
partners business strategy, or its access to financial
resources may adversely affect a partners willingness or
ability to complete its obligations. Moreover, we could become
involved in disputes with our partners, which could lead to
delays or termination of the collaborations and time-consuming
and expensive litigation or arbitration. Even if we fulfill our
obligations under a collaborative agreement, our partner can
terminate the agreement under certain circumstances. If any
collaborative partners were to terminate or breach our
agreements with them, or otherwise fail to complete their
obligations in a timely manner, we could be materially and
adversely affected.
40
Unanticipated
changes in our tax rates or exposure to additional income tax
liabilities could affect our profitability.
We are subject to income taxes in both the United States and
numerous foreign jurisdictions. Our effective tax rate could be
adversely affected by changes in the mix of earnings in
countries with different statutory tax rates, changes in the
valuation of deferred tax assets and liabilities, changes in or
interpretations of tax laws, including pending tax law changes,
changes in our manufacturing activities and changes in our
future levels of research and development spending. In addition,
we are subject to the continuous examination of our income tax
returns by the Internal Revenue Service and other state and
foreign tax authorities. We regularly assess the likelihood of
outcomes resulting from these examinations to determine the
adequacy of our estimated income tax liabilities. There can be
no assurance that the outcomes from these continuous
examinations will not have an adverse effect on our provision
for income taxes and estimated income tax liabilities.
Changes in applicable tax laws may adversely affect sales or the
profitability of
Botox®,
Botox®
Cosmetic, our dermal fillers or breast implants. Because
Botox®
and
Botox®
Cosmetic are pharmaceutical products, we generally do not
collect or pay state sales or other tax on sales of
Botox®
or
Botox®
Cosmetic. We could be required to collect and pay state sales or
other tax associated with prior, current or future years on
sales of
Botox®
or
Botox®
Cosmetic, our dermal fillers or breast implants. In addition to
any retroactive taxes and corresponding interest and penalties
that could be assessed, if we were required to collect or pay
state sales or other tax associated with current or future years
on sales of
Botox®,
Botox®
Cosmetic, our dermal fillers or breast implants, our sales of,
or our profitability from,
Botox®,
Botox®
Cosmetic, our dermal fillers or breast implants could be
adversely affected due to the increased cost associated with
those products.
The
terms of our debt agreements impose many restrictions on us.
Failure to comply with these restrictions could result in
acceleration of our substantial debt. Were this to occur, we
might not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient cash to pay our
accelerated indebtedness.
Our total indebtedness as of December 31, 2007 was
approximately $1,629.9 million. This indebtedness may limit
our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our
business and the industry in which it operates and,
consequently, place us at a competitive disadvantage to our
competitors. The operating and financial restrictions and
covenants in our debt agreements may adversely affect our
ability to finance future operations or capital needs or to
engage in new business activities. For example, our debt
agreements restrict our ability to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
incur liens or engage in sale lease-back
transactions; and
|
|
|
engage in consolidations, mergers and asset sales.
|
In addition, our debt agreements include financial covenants
that we maintain certain financial ratios. As a result of these
covenants and ratios, we have certain limitations on the manner
in which we can conduct our business, and we may be restricted
from engaging in favorable business activities or financing
future operations or capital needs. Accordingly, these
restrictions may limit our ability to successfully operate our
business. Failure to comply with the financial covenants or to
maintain the financial ratios contained in our debt agreements
could result in an event of default that could trigger
acceleration of our indebtedness. We cannot assure you that our
future operating results will be sufficient to ensure compliance
with the covenants in our debt agreements or to remedy any such
default. In addition, in the event of any default and related
acceleration of obligations, we may not have or be able to
obtain sufficient funds to make any accelerated payments.
Litigation
may harm our business or otherwise distract our
management.
Substantial, complex or extended litigation could cause us to
incur large expenditures and distract our management. For
example, lawsuits by employees, stockholders, customers or
competitors could be very costly and substantially disrupt our
business. Disputes from time to time with such companies or
individuals are not uncommon, and we cannot assure you that that
we will always be able to resolve such disputes out of court or
on terms favorable to us.
41
Our
publicly-filed SEC reports are reviewed by the SEC from time to
time and any significant changes required as a result of any
such review may result in material liability to us and have a
material adverse impact on the trading price of our common
stock.
The reports of publicly-traded companies are subject to review
by the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time for
the purpose of assisting companies in complying with applicable
disclosure requirements and to enhance the overall effectiveness
of companies public filings, and comprehensive reviews of
such reports are now required at least every three years under
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. SEC reviews may be initiated at
any time. While we believe that our previously filed SEC reports
comply, and we intend that all future reports will comply in all
material respects with the published rules and regulations of
the SEC, we could be required to modify or reformulate
information contained in prior filings as a result of an SEC
review. Any modification or reformulation of information
contained in such reports could be significant and could result
in material liability to us and have a material adverse impact
on the trading price of our common stock.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
Our operations are conducted in owned and leased facilities
located throughout the world. We believe our present facilities
are adequate for our current needs. Our headquarters and primary
administrative and research facilities, which we own, are
located in Irvine, California. We lease additional facilities in
California to provide administrative, research and raw material
support, manufacturing, warehousing and distribution. We own one
facility in Texas for manufacturing and warehousing.
Outside of the United States, we own, lease and operate various
facilities for manufacturing and warehousing. Those facilities
are located in Brazil, France, Ireland and Costa Rica. Other
material facilities include leased facilities for administration
in Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong,
Ireland, Italy, Japan, Singapore, Spain and the United Kingdom.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
The information required by this Item is incorporated herein by
reference to Note 13, Commitments and
Contingencies, in our notes to the consolidated financial
statements listed under Item 15 of Part IV of this
report, Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
We did not submit any matter during the fourth quarter of the
fiscal year covered by this report to a vote of security
holders, through the solicitation of proxies or otherwise.
42
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
For Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
The following table shows the quarterly price range of our
common stock and the cash dividends declared per share of common
stock during the periods listed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007(1)
|
|
2006(1)
|
Calendar Quarter
|
|
Low
|
|
High
|
|
Div.
|
|
Low
|
|
High
|
|
Div.
|
|
First
|
|
$
|
52.50
|
|
|
$
|
60.61
|
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
|
$
|
52.51
|
|
|
$
|
59.00
|
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
Second
|
|
|
55.15
|
|
|
|
62.50
|
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
|
|
46.29
|
|
|
|
54.66
|
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
Third
|
|
|
56.96
|
|
|
|
66.15
|
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
|
|
51.40
|
|
|
|
57.82
|
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
60.79
|
|
|
|
69.15
|
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
|
|
52.92
|
|
|
|
61.51
|
|
|
|
0.05
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Adjusted to reflect the effect of our
two-for-one
stock split that was completed on June 22, 2007. |
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and is
traded under the symbol AGN. In newspapers, stock
information is frequently listed as Alergn.
The approximate number of stockholders of record of our common
stock was 5,731 as of February 12, 2008.
On January 29, 2008, our Board of Directors declared a cash
dividend of $0.05 per share, payable March 7, 2008 to
stockholders of record on February 15, 2008.
Securities
Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation
Plans
The information included under Item 12 of Part III of
this report, Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial
Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters, is
hereby incorporated by reference into this Item 5 of
Part II of this report.
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
The following table discloses the purchases of our equity
securities during the fourth fiscal quarter of 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of
|
|
Maximum Number (or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased
|
|
Approximate Dollar
|
|
|
Total Number
|
|
Average
|
|
as Part of Publicly
|
|
Value) of Shares that May
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
Price Paid
|
|
Announced Plans
|
|
Yet Be Purchased Under
|
Period
|
|
Purchased(1)
|
|
per Share
|
|
or Programs
|
|
the Plans or Programs(2)
|
|
September 29, 2007 to October 31, 2007
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
17,859,995
|
|
November 1, 2007 to November 30, 2007
|
|
|
1,928,907
|
|
|
$
|
64.66
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
16,210,947
|
|
December 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
16,794,929
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1,928,907
|
|
|
$
|
64.66
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We maintain an evergreen stock repurchase program, which we
first announced on September 28, 1993. Under the stock
repurchase program after giving effect to our June 22, 2007
two-for-one
stock split, we may maintain up to 18.4 million repurchased
shares in our treasury account at any one time. As of
December 31, 2007, we held approximately 1.6 million
treasury shares under this program. |
|
(2) |
|
The share numbers reflect the maximum number of shares that may
be purchased under our stock repurchase program and are as of
the end of each of the respective periods. |
43
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
SELECTED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
|
(in millions, except per share data)
|
|
Summary of Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product net sales
|
|
$
|
3,879.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,010.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,319.2
|
|
|
$
|
2,045.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,755.4
|
|
Other revenues
|
|
|
59.9
|
|
|
|
53.2
|
|
|
|
23.4
|
|
|
|
13.3
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
|
Research service revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
3,938.9
|
|
|
|
3,063.3
|
|
|
|
2,342.6
|
|
|
|
2,058.9
|
|
|
|
1,780.8
|
|
Operating costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales (excludes amortization of acquired
intangible assets)
|
|
|
673.2
|
|
|
|
575.7
|
|
|
|
385.3
|
|
|
|
381.7
|
|
|
|
316.9
|
|
Cost of research services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
1,680.1
|
|
|
|
1,333.4
|
|
|
|
936.8
|
|
|
|
791.7
|
|
|
|
705.9
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
718.1
|
|
|
|
1,055.5
|
|
|
|
388.3
|
|
|
|
342.9
|
|
|
|
762.6
|
|
Amortization of acquired intangible assets
|
|
|
121.3
|
|
|
|
79.6
|
|
|
|
17.5
|
|
|
|
8.2
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
Restructuring charges (reversal) and asset write-offs, net
|
|
|
26.8
|
|
|
|
22.3
|
|
|
|
43.8
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
719.4
|
|
|
|
(3.2
|
)
|
|
|
570.9
|
|
|
|
527.4
|
|
|
|
(23.7
|
)
|
Non-operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(31.7
|
)
|
|
|
(16.3
|
)
|
|
|
28.3
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
(5.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes
and minority interest
|
|
|
687.7
|
|
|
|
(19.5
|
)
|
|
|
599.2
|
|
|
|
532.1
|
|
|
|
(29.5
|
)
|
Earnings (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
501.0
|
|
|
|
(127.4
|
)
|
|
|
403.9
|
|
|
|
377.1
|
|
|
|
(52.5
|
)
|
Loss from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings (loss)
|
|
$
|
499.3
|
|
|
$
|
(127.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
403.9
|
|
|
$
|
377.1
|
|
|
$
|
(52.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$
|
1.64
|
|
|
$
|
(0.43
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.54
|
|
|
$
|
1.44
|
|
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$
|
1.62
|
|
|
$
|
(0.43
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.51
|
|
|
$
|
1.41
|
|
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends per share
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Position
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
2,124.2
|
|
|
$
|
2,130.3
|
|
|
$
|
1,825.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,376.0
|
|
|
$
|
928.2
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
1,408.5
|
|
|
|
1,472.2
|
|
|
|
781.6
|
|
|
|
916.4
|
|
|
|
544.8
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
6,579.3
|
|
|
|
5,767.1
|
|
|
|
2,850.5
|
|
|
|
2,257.0
|
|
|
|
1,754.9
|
|
Long-term debt, excluding current portion
|
|
|
1,590.2
|
|
|
|
1,606.4
|
|
|
|
57.5
|
|
|
|
570.1
|
|
|
|
573.3
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
3,738.6
|
|
|
|
3,143.1
|
|
|
|
1,566.9
|
|
|
|
1,116.2
|
|
|
|
718.6
|
|
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
This financial review presents our operating results for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007, and
our financial condition at December 31, 2007. Except for
the historical information contained herein, the following
discussion contains forward-looking statements which are subject
to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that
may cause our actual results to differ materially from those
expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. We
discuss such risks, uncertainties and other factors throughout
this report and specifically under Item 1A of Part I
of this report, Risk Factors. In addition, the
following review should be read in connection with the
information presented in our consolidated financial statements
and the related notes to our consolidated financial statements.
Critical
Accounting Policies, Estimates and Assumptions
The preparation and presentation of financial statements in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles, or GAAP, requires us to establish policies and to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported
in our consolidated financial statements. In our judgment, the
accounting policies,
44
estimates and assumptions described below have the greatest
potential impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Accounting assumptions and estimates are inherently uncertain
and actual results may differ materially from our estimates.
Revenue
Recognition
We recognize revenue from product sales when goods are shipped
and title and risk of loss transfer to our customers. A
substantial portion of our revenue is generated by the sale of
specialty pharmaceutical products (primarily eye care
pharmaceuticals and skin care products) to wholesalers within
the United States, and we have a policy to attempt to maintain
average U.S. wholesaler inventory levels at an amount less
than eight weeks of our net sales. A portion of our revenue is
generated from consigned inventory of breast implants maintained
at physician, hospital and clinic locations. These customers are
contractually obligated to maintain a specific level of
inventory and to notify us upon the use of consigned inventory.
Revenue for consigned inventory is recognized at the time we are
notified by the customer that the product has been used.
Notification is usually through the replenishing of the
inventory, and we periodically review consignment inventories to
confirm the accuracy of customer reporting.
We generally offer cash discounts to customers for the early
payment of receivables. Those discounts are recorded as a
reduction of revenue and accounts receivable in the same period
that the related sale is recorded. The amounts reserved for cash
discounts were $1.8 million and $2.3 million at
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Provisions for
cash discounts deducted from consolidated sales in 2007, 2006
and 2005 were $35.1 million, $30.9 million and
$26.6 million, respectively. We permit returns of product
from most product lines by any class of customer if such product
is returned in a timely manner, in good condition and from
normal distribution channels. Return policies in certain
international markets and for certain medical device products,
primarily breast implants, provide for more stringent guidelines
in accordance with the terms of contractual agreements with
customers. Our estimates for sales returns are based upon the
historical patterns of products returned matched against the
sales from which they originated, and managements
evaluation of specific factors that may increase the risk of
product returns. The amount of allowances for sales returns
recognized in our consolidated balance sheets at
December 31, 2007 and 2006 were $29.8 million and
$20.1 million, respectively, and are recorded in
Other accrued expenses and Trade receivables,
net in our consolidated balance sheet. See Note 5,
Composition of Certain Financial Statement Captions
in the notes to our consolidated financial statements listed
under Item 15 of Part IV of this report,
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
Provisions for sales returns deducted from consolidated sales
were $297.4 million, $146.5 million and
$30.6 million in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The
increase in the allowance for sales returns at December 31,
2007 compared to December 31, 2006 and the increase in the
provision for sales returns in 2007 and 2006 compared to the
corresponding prior year were primarily due to growth in net
sales of medical device products, primarily breast implants,
which generally have a significantly higher rate of return than
specialty pharmaceutical products. Historical allowances for
cash discounts and product returns have been within the amounts
reserved or accrued.
We participate in various managed care sales rebate and other
incentive programs, the largest of which relates to Medicaid and
Medicare. Sales rebate and other incentive programs also include
chargebacks, which are contractual discounts given primarily to
federal government agencies, health maintenance organizations,
pharmacy benefits managers and group purchasing organizations.
Sales rebates and incentive accruals reduce revenue in the same
period that the related sale is recorded and are included in
Other accrued expenses and Trade receivables,
net in our consolidated balance sheets. See Note 5,
Composition of Certain Financial Statement Captions
in the notes to our consolidated financial statements listed
under Item 15 of Part IV of this report,
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules. The
amounts accrued for sales rebates and other incentive programs
were $82.0 million and $71.2 million at
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Provisions for
sales rebates and other incentive programs deducted from
consolidated sales were $224.1 million, $175.6 million
and $167.4 million in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The increase in the provision for sales rebates and other
incentive programs during 2007 and 2006 compared to the
corresponding prior year is primarily due to an increase in
U.S. specialty pharmaceutical sales, principally eye care
pharmaceutical products, which are subject to such rebate and
incentive programs. In addition, an increase in our published
list prices in the United States for pharmaceutical products,
which occurred for several of our products early in each of 2007
and 2006, generally results in higher provisions for sales
rebates and other incentive programs deducted from consolidated
sales.
45
Our procedures for estimating amounts accrued for sales rebates
and other incentive programs at the end of any period are based
on available quantitative data and are supplemented by
managements judgment with respect to many factors,
including but not limited to, current market dynamics, changes
in contract terms, changes in sales trends, an evaluation of
current laws and regulations and product pricing.
Quantitatively, we use historical sales, product utilization and
rebate data and apply forecasting techniques in order to
estimate our liability amounts. Qualitatively, managements
judgment is applied to these items to modify, if appropriate,
the estimated liability amounts. There are inherent risks in
this process. For example, customers may not achieve assumed
utilization levels; customers may misreport their utilization to
us; and actual movements of the U.S. Consumer Price
Index Urban (CPI-U), which affect our rebate
programs with U.S. federal and state government agencies,
may differ from those estimated. On a quarterly basis,
adjustments to our estimated liabilities for sales rebates and
other incentive programs related to sales made in prior periods
have not been material and have generally been less than 0.5% of
consolidated product net sales. An adjustment to our estimated
liabilities of 0.5% of consolidated product net sales on a
quarterly basis would result in an increase or decrease to net
sales and earnings before income taxes of approximately
$5 million to $6 million. The sensitivity of our
estimates can vary by program and type of customer.
Additionally, there is a significant time lag between the date
we determine the estimated liability and when we actually pay
the liability. Due to this time lag, we record adjustments to
our estimated liabilities over several periods, which can result
in a net increase to earnings or a net decrease to earnings in
those periods. Material differences may result in the amount of
revenue we recognize from product sales if the actual amount of
rebates and incentives differ materially from the amounts
estimated by management.
We recognize license fees, royalties and reimbursement income
for services provided as other revenues based on the facts and
circumstances of each contractual agreement. In general, we
recognize income upon the signing of a contractual agreement
that grants rights to products or technology to a third party if
we have no further obligation to provide products or services to
the third party after entering into the contract. We defer
income under contractual agreements when we have further
obligations that indicate that a separate earnings process has
not been completed.
Pensions
We sponsor various pension plans in the United States and abroad
in accordance with local laws and regulations. Our
U.S. pension plans account for a large majority of our
aggregate pension plans net periodic benefit costs and
projected benefit obligations. In connection with these plans,
we use certain actuarial assumptions to determine the
plans net periodic benefit costs and projected benefit
obligations, the most significant of which are the expected
long-term rate of return on assets and the discount rate.
Our assumption for the weighted average expected long-term rate
of return on assets in our U.S. funded pension plan for
determining the net periodic benefit cost is 8.25% for 2007,
which is the same rate used for 2006 and 2005. Our assumptions
for the weighted average expected long-term rate of return on
assets in our
non-U.S. funded
pension plans were 6.43%, 6.19% and 6.89% for 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively. For our U.S. funded pension plan, we
determine, based upon recommendations from our pension
plans investment advisors, the expected rate of return
using a building block approach that considers diversification
and rebalancing for a long-term portfolio of invested assets.
Our investment advisors study historical market returns and
preserve long-term historical relationships between equities and
fixed income in a manner consistent with the widely-accepted
capital market principle that assets with higher volatility
generate a greater return over the long run. They also evaluate
market factors such as inflation and interest rates before
long-term capital market assumptions are determined. For our
non-U.S. funded
pension plans, the expected rate of return was determined based
on asset distribution and assumed long-term rates of return on
fixed income instruments and equities. Market conditions and
other factors can vary over time and could significantly affect
our estimates of the weighted average expected long-term rate of
return on plan assets. The expected rate of return is applied to
the market-related value of plan assets. As a sensitivity
measure, the effect of a 0.25% decline in our rate of return on
assets assumptions for our U.S. and
non-U.S. funded
pension plans would increase our expected 2008 pre-tax pension
benefit cost by approximately $1.3 million.
The weighted average discount rates used to calculate our
U.S. and
non-U.S. pension
benefit obligations at December 31, 2007 were 6.25% and
5.50%, respectively, and at December 31, 2006 were 5.90%
and 4.65%, respectively. The weighted average discount rates
used to calculate our U.S. and
non-U.S. net
periodic benefit costs
46
for 2007 were 5.90% and 4.65%, respectively, for 2006, 5.60% and
4.24%, respectively, and for 2005, 5.95% and 5.05%,
respectively. We determine the discount rate largely based upon
an index of high-quality fixed income investments (for our
U.S. plans, we use the U.S. Moodys Aa Corporate
Long Bond Index and for our
non-U.S. plans,
we use the iBoxx Corporate AA 10+ Year Index and the
iBoxx £ Corporate AA 15+ Year Index) and, for our
U.S. plans, a constructed hypothetical portfolio of high
quality fixed income investments with maturities that mirror the
pension benefit obligations at the plans measurement date.
Market conditions and other factors can vary over time and could
significantly affect our estimates for the discount rates used
to calculate our pension benefit obligations and net periodic
benefit costs for future years. As a sensitivity measure, the
effect of a 0.25% decline in the discount rate assumption for
our U.S and
non-U.S. pension
plans would increase our expected 2008 pre-tax pension benefit
costs by approximately $3.3 million and increase our
pension plans projected benefit obligations at
December 31, 2007 by approximately $27.8 million.
Share-Based
Compensation
On January 1, 2006, we adopted Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised), Share-Based
Payment (SFAS No. 123R), which requires
measurement and recognition of compensation expense for all
share-based payment awards made to employees and directors.
Under SFAS No. 123R, the fair value of share-based
payment awards is estimated at the grant date using an option
pricing model, and the portion that is ultimately expected to
vest is recognized as compensation cost over the requisite
service period. We use the Black-Scholes option-pricing model to
estimate the fair value of share-based awards and recognize
shared-based compensation cost over the vesting period using the
straight-line single option method. Prior to the adoption of
SFAS No. 123R, we accounted for share-based awards
using the intrinsic value method prescribed by Accounting
Principles Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock
Issued to Employees, as allowed under Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation. Under the intrinsic value method, no
share-based compensation cost was recognized for awards to
employees or directors if the exercise price of the award was
equal to the fair market value of the underlying stock on the
date of grant. Accordingly, no compensation expense for stock
option awards was recognized in the periods before
January 1, 2006.
Income
Taxes
The provision for income taxes is determined using an estimated
annual effective tax rate, which is generally less than the
U.S. federal statutory rate, primarily because of lower tax
rates in certain
non-U.S. jurisdictions,
research and development, or R&D, tax credits available in
the United States and other jurisdictions, and deductions
available in the United States for domestic production
activities. Our effective tax rate may be subject to
fluctuations during the year as new information is obtained,
which may affect the assumptions we use to estimate our annual
effective tax rate, including factors such as our mix of pre-tax
earnings in the various tax jurisdictions in which we operate,
valuation allowances against deferred tax assets, the
recognition or derecognition of tax benefits related to
uncertain tax positions, utilization of R&D tax credits and
changes in or the interpretation of tax laws in jurisdictions
where we conduct business. We recognize deferred tax assets and
liabilities for temporary differences between the financial
reporting basis and the tax basis of our assets and liabilities
along with net operating loss and tax credit carryovers. We
record a valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets to
reduce the net carrying value to an amount that we believe is
more likely than not to be realized. When we establish or reduce
the valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets, our
provision for income taxes will increase or decrease,
respectively, in the period such determination is made.
Reductions to valuation allowances related to net operating loss
carryforwards of acquired businesses will be treated as
adjustments to purchased goodwill up through and until the end
of our 2008 fiscal year.
Effective January 1, 2007, we adopted Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No. 48, Accounting
for Uncertainty in Income Taxes An Interpretation of
FASB Statement No. 109 (FIN 48), which prescribes
a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the
financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.
Historically, our policy has been to account for uncertainty in
income taxes in accordance with the provisions of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, Accounting for
Contingencies, which considered whether the tax benefit from
an uncertain tax position was probable of being sustained. Under
FIN 48, the tax benefit from uncertain tax positions may be
47
recognized only if it is more likely than not that the tax
position will be sustained, based solely on its technical
merits, with the taxing authority having full knowledge of all
relevant information. We recognize deferred tax assets and
liabilities for temporary differences between the financial
reporting basis and the tax basis of our assets and liabilities
along with net operating loss and tax credit carryovers only for
tax positions that meet the more likely than not recognition
criteria. We record a liability for unrecognized tax benefits
from uncertain tax positions as discrete tax adjustments in the
first interim period that the more likely than not threshold is
not met. Due to the inherent risks in the estimates and
assumptions used in determining the sustainability of our tax
positions and in the measurement of the related tax, our
provision for income taxes and our effective tax rate may vary
significantly from our estimates and from amounts reported in
future or prior periods. We discuss this change in accounting
principle and its effect on our consolidated financial
statements in Note 1, Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies, and Note 9, Income
Taxes, in the notes to the consolidated financial
statements listed under Item 15 of Part IV of this
report, Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
Valuation allowances against our deferred tax assets were
$99.9 million and $20.8 million at December 31,
2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively. Changes in the
valuation allowances, when they are recognized in the provision
for income taxes, are included as a component of the estimated
annual effective tax rate. The increase in the amount of
valuation allowances at December 31, 2007 compared to
December 31, 2006 is primarily due to our October 2007
acquisition of Esprit Pharma Holding Company, Inc., or Esprit,
and our February 2007 acquisition of EndoArt SA, or EndoArt.
Material differences in the estimated amount of valuation
allowances may result in an increase or decrease in the
provision for income taxes if the actual amounts for valuation
allowances required against deferred tax assets differ from the
amounts we estimate. Reductions to valuation allowances related
to net operating loss carryforwards of acquired businesses will
be treated as adjustments to purchased goodwill up through and
until the end of our 2008 fiscal year.
We have not provided for withholding and U.S. taxes for the
unremitted earnings of certain
non-U.S. subsidiaries
because we have currently reinvested these earnings indefinitely
in these foreign operations. At December 31, 2007, we had
approximately $1,007.0 million in unremitted earnings
outside the United States for which withholding and
U.S. taxes were not provided. Income tax expense would be
incurred if these funds were remitted to the United States. It
is not practicable to estimate the amount of the deferred tax
liability on such unremitted earnings. Upon remittance, certain
foreign countries impose withholding taxes that are then
available, subject to certain limitations, for use as credits
against our U.S. tax liability, if any. We annually update
our estimate of unremitted earnings outside the United States
after the completion of each fiscal year.
Purchase
Price Allocation
The purchase price allocation for acquisitions requires
extensive use of accounting estimates and judgments to allocate
the purchase price to the identifiable tangible and intangible
assets acquired, including in-process research and development,
and liabilities assumed based on their respective fair values.
Additionally, we must determine whether an acquired entity is
considered to be a business or a set of net assets, because a
portion of the purchase price can only be allocated to goodwill
in a business combination.
On October 16, 2007, we acquired Esprit for an aggregate
purchase price of approximately $370.7 million, net of cash
acquired. On February 22, 2007, we acquired EndoArt for an
aggregate purchase price of approximately $97.1 million,
net of cash acquired. On January 2, 2007, we acquired
Groupe Cornéal Laboratoires, or Cornéal, for an
aggregate purchase price of approximately $209.2 million,
net of cash acquired. On March 23, 2006, we completed the
acquisition of Inamed Corporation, or Inamed, for approximately
$3.3 billion, consisting of approximately $1.4 billion
in cash and 34,883,386 shares of our common stock with a
fair value of approximately $1.9 billion. The purchase
prices for the acquisitions were allocated to tangible and
intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on
their estimated fair values at the acquisition dates. We engaged
an independent third-party valuation firm to assist us in
determining the estimated fair values of in-process research and
development, identifiable intangible assets and certain tangible
assets. Such a valuation requires significant estimates and
assumptions, including but not limited to, determining the
timing and estimated costs to complete the in-process projects,
projecting regulatory approvals, estimating future cash flows,
and developing appropriate discount rates. We believe the
estimated fair values assigned to the assets acquired and
liabilities assumed are based on reasonable assumptions. Fair
value estimates for purchase price allocations may change during
the allowable
48
allocation period, which is currently up to one year from the
acquisition dates, if additional information becomes available.
Discontinued
Operations
On July 2, 2007, we completed the sale of the ophthalmic
surgical device business that we acquired as a part of the
Cornéal acquisition in January 2007, for net cash proceeds
of $28.6 million. The net assets of the disposed business
consisted of current assets of $24.3 million, non-current
assets of $9.8 million and current liabilities of
$4.2 million. We recorded a pre-tax loss of
$1.3 million ($1.0 million net of tax) associated with
the sale.
The following amounts related to the ophthalmic surgical device
business have been segregated from continuing operations and
reported as discontinued operations through the date of
disposition. We did not account for our ophthalmic surgical
device business as a separate legal entity. Therefore, the
following selected financial data for the discontinued
operations is presented for informational purposes only and does
not necessarily reflect what the net sales or earnings would
have been had the business operated as a stand-alone entity. The
financial information for the discontinued operations includes
allocations of certain expenses to the ophthalmic surgical
device business. These amounts have been allocated to the
discontinued operations on the basis that is considered by
management to reflect most fairly or reasonably the utilization
of the services provided to, or the benefit obtained by, the
ophthalmic surgical device business.
The following table sets forth selected financial data of our
discontinued operations for 2007. There were no comparable
amounts for 2006 or 2005.
Selected
Financial Data for Discontinued Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
20.0
|
|
Loss from discontinued operations before income taxes
|
|
$
|
(1.1
|
)
|
Loss from discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
(0.7
|
)
|
Continuing
Operations
Headquartered in Irvine, California, we are a multi-specialty
health care company focused on developing and commercializing
innovative pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices that
enable people to see more clearly, move more freely and express
themselves more fully. Our diversified approach enables us to
follow our research and development into new specialty areas
where unmet needs are significant.
We discover, develop and commercialize specialty pharmaceutical,
medical device and
over-the-counter
products for the ophthalmic, neurological, medical aesthetics,
medical dermatological, breast aesthetics, obesity intervention,
urological and other specialty markets in more than 100
countries around the world. We are a pioneer in specialty
pharmaceutical research, targeting products and technologies
related to specific disease areas such as glaucoma, retinal
disease, chronic dry eye, psoriasis, acne, movement disorders,
neuropathic pain and genitourinary diseases. Additionally, we
are a leader in discovering, developing and marketing
therapeutic and aesthetic biologic, pharmaceutical and medical
device products, including saline and silicone gel-filled breast
implants, cosmetic injections, dermal fillers and obesity
intervention products. At December 31, 2007, we employed
approximately 7,886 persons around the world. Our principal
markets are the United States, Europe, Latin America and Asia
Pacific.
Results
of Continuing Operations
Through the first fiscal quarter of 2006, we operated our
business on the basis of a single reportable segment
specialty pharmaceuticals. Due to the Inamed acquisition,
beginning in the second fiscal quarter of 2006, we operate our
business on the basis of two reportable segments
specialty pharmaceuticals and medical devices. The specialty
pharmaceuticals segment produces a broad range of pharmaceutical
products, including: ophthalmic products for glaucoma therapy,
ocular inflammation, infection, allergy and chronic dry eye;
Botox®
for certain therapeutic and aesthetic indications; skin care
products for acne, psoriasis and other prescription and
over-the-counter dermatological
49
products; and, beginning in the fourth quarter of 2007,
urologics products. The medical devices segment produces a broad
range of medical devices, including: breast implants for
augmentation, revision and reconstructive surgery; obesity
intervention products, including the
Lap-Band®
System and the
BIBtm
BioEnterics®
Intragastric Balloon; and facial aesthetics products. We provide
global marketing strategy teams to coordinate the development
and execution of a consistent marketing strategy for our
products in all geographic regions that share similar
distribution channels and customers.
Management evaluates our business segments and various global
product portfolios on a revenue basis, which is presented below
in accordance with GAAP. We also report sales performance using
the non-GAAP financial measure of constant currency sales.
Constant currency sales represent current period reported sales,
adjusted for the translation effect of changes in average
foreign exchange rates between the current period and the
corresponding period in the prior year. We calculate the
currency effect by comparing adjusted current period reported
sales, calculated using the monthly average foreign exchange
rates for the corresponding period in the prior year, to the
actual current period reported sales. We routinely evaluate our
net sales performance at constant currency so that sales results
can be viewed without the impact of changing foreign currency
exchange rates, thereby facilitating
period-to-period
comparisons of our sales. Generally, when the U.S. dollar
either strengthens or weakens against other currencies, the
growth at constant currency rates will be higher or lower,
respectively, than growth reported at actual exchange rates.
The following table compares net sales by product line within
each reportable segment and certain selected pharmaceutical
products for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Change in
|
|
Percent Change in
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Product Net Sales
|
|
Product Net Sales
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
Total
|
|
Performance
|
|
Currency
|
|
Total
|
|
Performance
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Sales by Product Line:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty Pharmaceuticals:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eye Care Pharmaceuticals
|
|
$
|
1,776.5
|
|
|
$
|
1,530.6
|
|
|
$
|
245.9
|
|
|
$
|
200.1
|
|
|
$
|
45.8
|
|
|
|
16.1
|
%
|
|
|
13.1
|
%
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
Botox®/Neuromodulator
|
|
|
1,211.8
|
|
|
|
982.2
|
|
|
|
229.6
|
|
|
|
201.9
|
|
|
|
27.7
|
|
|
|
23.4
|
%
|
|
|
20.6
|
%
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
Skin Care
|
|
|
110.7
|
|
|
|
125.7
|
|
|
|
(15.0
|
)
|
|
|
(15.1
|
)
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
(11.9
|
)%
|
|
|
(12.0
|
)%
|
|
|
0.1
|
%
|
Urologics
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Specialty Pharmaceuticals
|
|
|
3,105.0
|
|
|
|
2,638.5
|
|
|
|
466.5
|
|
|
|
392.9
|
|
|
|
73.6
|
|
|
|
17.7
|
%
|
|
|
14.9
|
%
|
|
|
2.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medical Devices:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Breast Aesthetics
|
|
|
298.4
|
|
|
|
177.2
|
|
|
|
121.2
|
|
|
|
114.1
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
68.4
|
%
|
|
|
64.4
|
%
|
|
|
4.0
|
%
|
Obesity Intervention
|
|
|
270.1
|
|
|
|
142.3
|
|
|
|
127.8
|
|
|
|
124.0
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
89.8
|
%
|
|
|
87.1
|
%
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
Facial Aesthetics
|
|
|
202.8
|
|
|
|
52.1
|
|
|
|
150.7
|
|
|
|
147.8
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
289.3
|
%
|
|
|
283.7
|
%
|
|
|
5.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core Medical Devices
|
|
|
771.3
|
|
|
|
371.6
|
|
|
|
399.7
|
|
|
|
385.9
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
107.6
|
%
|
|
|
103.8
|
%
|
|
|
3.8
|
%
|
Other(a)
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Medical Devices
|
|
|
774.0
|
|
|
|
371.6
|
|
|
|
402.4
|
|
|
|
388.6
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
108.3
|
%
|
|
|
104.5
|
%
|
|
|
3.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total product net sales
|
|
$
|
3,879.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,010.1
|
|
|
$
|
868.9
|
|
|
$
|
781.5
|
|
|
$
|
87.4
|
|
|
|
28.9
|
%
|
|
|
26.0
|
%
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic product net sales
|
|
|
65.7
|
%
|
|
|
67.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International product net sales
|
|
|
34.3
|
%
|
|
|
32.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selected Product Sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alphagan®
P,
Alphagan®
and
Combigantm
|
|
$
|
341.4
|
|
|
$
|
295.9
|
|
|
$
|
45.5
|
|
|
$
|
35.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
15.4
|
%
|
|
|
12.0
|
%
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
Lumigan®
Franchise
|
|
|
391.7
|
|
|
|
327.5
|
|
|
|
64.2
|
|
|
|
52.1
|
|
|
|
12.1
|
|
|
|
19.6
|
%
|
|
|
15.9
|
%
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
Other Glaucoma
|
|
|
15.3
|
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
(6.5
|
)%
|
|
|
(12.9
|
)%
|
|
|
6.4
|
%
|
Restasis®
|
|
|
344.5
|
|
|
|
270.2
|
|
|
|
74.3
|
|
|
|
74.1
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
27.5
|
%
|
|
|
27.4
|
%
|
|
|
0.1
|
%
|
Sanctura®
Franchise
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Change in
|
|
Percent Change in
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Product Net Sales
|
|
Product Net Sales
|
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Total
|
|
Performance
|
|
Currency
|
|
Total
|
|
Performance
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Sales by Product Line:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty Pharmaceuticals:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eye Care Pharmaceuticals
|
|
$
|
1,530.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,321.7
|
|
|
$
|
208.9
|
|
|
$
|
200.0
|
|
|
$
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
15.8
|
%
|
|
|
15.1
|
%
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
Botox®/Neuromodulator
|
|
|
982.2
|
|
|
|
830.9
|
|
|
|
151.3
|
|
|
|
145.1
|
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
18.2
|
%
|
|
|
17.5
|
%
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
Skin Care
|
|
|
125.7
|
|
|
|
120.2
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
%
|
|
|
4.5
|
%
|
|
|
0.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal Pharmaceuticals
|
|
|
2,638.5
|
|
|
|
2,272.8
|
|
|
|
365.7
|
|
|
|
350.5
|
|
|
|
15.2
|
|
|
|
16.1
|
%
|
|
|
15.4
|
%
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
Other(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46.4
|
|
|
|
(46.4
|
)
|
|
|
(46.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(100.0
|
)%
|
|
|
(100.0
|
)%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Specialty Pharmaceuticals
|
|
|
2,638.5
|
|
|
|
2,319.2
|
|
|
|
319.3
|
|
|
|
304.1
|
|
|
|
15.2
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
%
|
|
|
13.1
|
%
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medical Devices:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Breast Aesthetics
|
|
|
177.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177.2
|
|
|
|
177.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
Obesity Intervention
|
|
|
142.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
142.3
|
|
|
|
142.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
Facial Aesthetics
|
|
|
52.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52.1
|
|
|
|
52.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Medical Devices
|
|
|
371.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
371.6
|
|
|
|
371.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total product net sales
|
|
$
|
3,010.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,319.2
|
|
|
$
|
690.9
|
|
|
$
|
675.7
|
|
|
$
|
15.2
|
|
|
|
29.8
|
%
|
|
|
29.1
|
%
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic product net sales
|
|
|
67.4
|
%
|
|
|
67.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International product net sales
|
|
|
32.6
|
%
|
|
|
32.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selected Product Sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alphagan®
P,
Alphagan®
and
Combigantm
|
|
$
|
295.9
|
|
|
$
|
277.2
|
|
|
$
|
18.7
|
|
|
$
|
16.9
|
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
|
|
6.1
|
%
|
|
|
0.6
|
%
|
Lumigan®
Franchise
|
|
|
327.5
|
|
|
|
267.6
|
|
|
|
59.9
|
|
|
|
57.8
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
22.4
|
%
|
|
|
21.6
|
%
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
Other Glaucoma
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
(9.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(10.4
|
)%
|
|
|
1.2
|
%
|
Restasis®
|
|
|
270.2
|
|
|
|
190.9
|
|
|
|
79.3
|
|
|
|
79.2
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
41.6
|
%
|
|
|
41.5
|
%
|
|
|
0.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Other medical devices sales primarily consist of sales of
ophthalmic surgical devices pursuant to a manufacturing and
supply agreement entered into as part of the July 2007 sale of
the former Cornéal ophthalmic surgical device business,
which was substantially concluded in December 2007. |
|
(b) |
|
Other specialty pharmaceuticals sales primarily consist of sales
to Advanced Medical Optics, Inc., or AMO, pursuant to a
manufacturing and supply agreement entered into as part of the
June 2002 AMO spin-off that terminated as scheduled in June
2005. |
Product
Net Sales
The $868.9 million increase in product net sales in 2007
compared to 2006 was the combined result of an increase of
$466.5 million in our specialty pharmaceuticals product net
sales and an increase of $402.4 million in our medical
devices product net sales. The increase in specialty
pharmaceuticals product net sales is due primarily to increases
in sales of our eye care pharmaceuticals and
Botox®
product lines. The increase in medical devices product net sales
reflects significant growth across all product lines. The
increase in medical devices product net sales in 2007 compared
to 2006 was also positively impacted by the March 2006 Inamed
and January 2007 Cornéal business acquisitions. We did not
detect any significant impact on our sales during 2007 from
declines in consumer spending in the United States or other
major international markets.
Eye care pharmaceuticals sales increased in 2007 compared to
2006 primarily because of strong growth in sales of
Restasis®,
our therapeutic treatment for chronic dry eye disease, an
increase in sales of our glaucoma drug
Lumigan®,
including strong sales growth from
Ganfort®,
our
Lumigan®
and timolol combination, which we launched in 2006 in certain
European markets, an increase in product net sales of
Alphagan®
P 0.1%, our most recent generation of
Alphagan®
for the treatment of glaucoma that we launched in the United
States in the first quarter of 2006, an increase in sales of
Combigantm
in Europe, Latin America, Asia, Canada and, to a lesser degree,
in the United States due to the initial U.S. launch of
Combigantm
late in the fourth quarter of 2007, an increase in sales of
Acular
LS®,
our more recent non-steroidal anti-inflammatory, and growth in
sales of eye drop products, primarily
Refresh®
and
Optivetm,
our artificial tear that was launched in the United States,
Europe, Latin America, Asia and Australia during 2007. In
addition, net sales of eye care pharmaceuticals benefited from
an increase in net
51
sales of
Elestat®,
our topical antihistamine used for the prevention of itching
associated with allergic conjunctivitis, and
Zymar®,
an ophthalmic anti-infective product for the treatment of
bacterial conjunctivitis, in 2007 compared to 2006. These
increases in eye care pharmaceuticals sales were partially
offset by lower sales of
Alphagan®
P 0.15% due to a general decline in U.S. wholesaler
demand resulting from a decrease in promotion efforts. We
continue to believe that generic formulations of
Alphagan®
may have a negative effect on future net sales of our
Alphagan®
franchise. We estimate the majority of the increase in our eye
care pharmaceuticals sales during 2007 was due to a shift in
sales mix to a greater percentage of higher priced products, and
an overall net increase in the volume of product sold. We
increased the published list prices for certain eye care
pharmaceutical products in the United States, ranging from seven
percent to nine percent, effective February 3, 2007. We
increased the published U.S. list price for
Restasis®
by seven percent,
Lumigan®
by seven percent,
Alphagan®
P 0.15% and
Alphagan®
P 0.1% by eight percent, Acular
LS®
by nine percent,
Elestat®
by seven percent and
Zymar®
by seven percent. This increase in prices had a positive net
effect on our U.S. sales for 2007, but the actual net
effect is difficult to determine due to the various managed care
sales rebate and other incentive programs in which we
participate. Wholesaler buying patterns and the change in dollar
value of prescription product mix also affected our reported net
sales dollars, although we are unable to determine the impact of
these effects. We have a policy to attempt to maintain average
U.S. wholesaler inventory levels of our specialty
pharmaceutical products at an amount less than eight weeks of
our net sales. At December 31, 2007, based on available
external and internal information, we believe the amount of
average U.S. wholesaler inventories of our specialty
pharmaceutical products was near the lower end of our stated
policy levels.
Botox®
sales increased in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to strong
growth in demand in the United States and in international
markets for both cosmetic and therapeutic use. Effective
January 1, 2007, we increased the published price for
Botox®
and
Botox®
Cosmetic in the United States by approximately four percent,
which may have had a positive effect on our U.S. sales
growth in 2007, primarily related to sales of
Botox®
Cosmetic. In the United States, the actual net effect from the
increase in price for sales of
Botox®
for therapeutic use is difficult to determine, primarily due to
rebate programs with U.S. federal and state government
agencies. International
Botox®
sales benefited from strong sales growth for both cosmetic and
therapeutic use in Europe, Latin America and Asia Pacific. Based
on internal information and assumptions, we estimate in 2007
that
Botox®
therapeutic sales accounted for approximately 50% of total
consolidated
Botox®
sales and grew at a rate of approximately 19% compared to 2006.
In 2007,
Botox®
cosmetic sales accounted for approximately 50% of total
consolidated
Botox®
sales and grew at a rate of approximately 29% compared to 2006.
We believe our worldwide market share for neuromodulators,
including
Botox®,
is currently over 85%.
Skin care sales, which are presently concentrated in the United
States, decreased in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to
lower sales of
Tazorac®,
principally due to the impact of a negative change in formulary
positions at key managed cared plans from the end of 2006, and
lower sales of other physician dispensed creams, including
M.D.
Forte®
and
Prevagetm
MD, partially offset by an increase in sales of
Vivitétm,
a new line of physician dispensed skin care products. Net sales
of
Tazorac®,
Zorac®
and
Avage®
decreased $11.3 million, or 12.4%, to $79.9 million in
2007, compared to $91.2 million in 2006. We increased the
published U.S. list price for
Tazorac®,
Zorac®
and
Avage®
by nine percent effective February 3, 2007. On
January 24, 2008, we announced a strategic collaboration
with Clinique Laboratories, LLC to develop and market a new skin
care line, which will be sold exclusively in physicians
offices. In the third quarter of 2007, we entered into a
collaboration with Stiefel Laboratories, Inc. to develop and
market new products involving tazarotene for dermatological use
worldwide, and to co-promote
Tazorac®
in the United States.
In connection with our Esprit acquisition in October 2007, we
established a new product line that is focused on the urologics
market. Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2007, we began to
recognize sales of
Sanctura®,
Esprits
twice-a-day
anticholinergic for the treatment of over-active bladder. In
January 2008, we launched Sanctura
XRtm,
our improved once-daily treatment for over-active bladder.
Breast aesthetics product net sales, which consist primarily of
sales of silicone gel-filled and saline-filled breast implants
and tissue expanders, increased $121.2 million, or 68.4%,
to $298.4 million in 2007 compared to $177.2 million
in 2006 primarily due to strong sales growth in all of our
principal geographic markets and the full year impact of the
Inamed acquisition in 2007 compared to only nine months of sales
activity in 2006. The November 2006 U.S. Food and Drug
Administration, or FDA, and Health Canada, approvals of certain
silicone gel-
52
filled breast implants for breast augmentation, revision or
reconstructive surgery and the transition of the market from
lower priced saline products to higher priced silicone products
in North America had a positive effect on net sales in the
United States and Canada in 2007 compared to 2006.
Obesity intervention product net sales, which consist primarily
of sales of devices used for minimally invasive long-term
treatments of obesity such as our
Lap-Band®
and Lap-Band
APtm
Systems and
BIBtm
System, increased $127.8 million, or 89.8%, to
$270.1 million in 2007 compared to $142.3 million in
2006 primarily due to strong sales growth across all of our
principal geographic markets and the full year impact of the
Inamed acquisition in 2007 compared to only nine months of sales
activity in 2006. Net sales of obesity intervention products
were also positively benefited in 2007 compared to 2006 by an
approximately three percent increase in the published
U.S. list price for our
Lap-Band®
System effective July 2, 2007 and our introduction in the
United States of a premium priced, next generation Advanced
Performance (AP) Band.
Facial aesthetics product net sales, which consist primarily of
sales of hyaluronic acid-based and collagen-based dermal fillers
used to correct facial wrinkles, increased $150.7 million,
or 289.3%, to $202.8 million in 2007 compared to
$52.1 million in 2006 primarily due to strong sales growth
in all of our principal geographic markets and the full year
impact in 2007 of the Cornéal and Inamed acquisitions. Our
January 2007 launch of our FDA approved hyaluronic acid-based
dermal fillers
Juvédermtm
Ultra and
Juvédermtm
Ultra Plus had a positive effect on net sales in the United
States in 2007 compared to 2006. The 2007 launch of these
products in Canada and Australia also had a positive effect on
net sales growth in 2007 compared to 2006. The increase in net
sales was partially offset by a general decline in sales of
collagen-based dermal fillers due to our reduced promotion
efforts associated with those products. Our acquisition of
Cornéal in January 2007, had a positive effect on our net
sales of facial aesthetic products in Europe and Asia in 2007
compared to 2006.
Net sales of other medical devices were $2.7 million in
2007 and consisted of sales of ophthalmic surgical devices under
a manufacturing and supply agreement. The manufacturing and
supply agreement was entered into as part of the July 2007 sale
of the former Cornéal ophthalmic surgical device business.
This agreement was substantially concluded in December 2007.
Foreign currency changes increased product net sales by
$87.4 million in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to
the strengthening of the euro, Brazilian real, U.K. pound,
Australian dollar and the Canadian dollar compared to the
U.S. dollar.
U.S. sales as a percentage of total product net sales
decreased by 1.7 percentage points to 65.7% in 2007
compared to U.S. sales of 67.4% in 2006, due primarily to
an increase in international specialty pharmaceutical product
net sales as a percentage of total specialty pharmaceuticals net
sales, partially offset by an increase in U.S. sales of
medical devices as a percentage of total medical devices net
sales, primarily driven by growth in U.S. sales of
Juvédermtm
dermal fillers and a decrease in U.S. skin care sales. The
increase in the international percentage of specialty
pharmaceutical net sales was primarily due to growth in
international product net sales of
Botox®
and eye care pharmaceuticals.
The $690.9 million increase in product net sales in 2006
compared to 2005 primarily resulted from $371.6 million of
medical devices product net sales in 2006 following the Inamed
acquisition and an increase of $319.3 million in our
specialty pharmaceuticals product net sales. The increase in
specialty pharmaceuticals product net sales is due primarily to
increases in sales of our eye care pharmaceuticals and
Botox®
product lines, partially offset by a decrease in other specialty
pharmaceuticals sales, primarily consisting of contract sales to
AMO that terminated as scheduled in June 2005.
Eye care pharmaceuticals sales increased in 2006 compared to
2005 primarily because of strong growth in sales of
Restasis®,
our therapeutic for the treatment of chronic dry eye disease, an
increase in sales of our glaucoma drug
Lumigan®,
growth in sales of eye drop products, primarily
Refresh®,
an increase in sales of
Elestat®,
our topical antihistamine used for the prevention of itching
associated with allergic conjunctivitis, an increase in sales of
Combigantm
in Europe, Latin America and Canada, an increase in new product
sales of
Alphagan®
P 0.1%, our recently introduced next generation of
Alphagan®
for the treatment of glaucoma that was launched in the United
States in the first quarter of 2006, strong sales growth of
Zymar®,
a newer anti-infective, and an increase in sales of Acular
LS®,
our newer non-steroidal anti-inflammatory. This increase in eye
care pharmaceuticals sales was
53
partially offset by lower sales of
Alphagan®
P 0.15% due to a general decline in U.S. wholesaler
demand and the negative effect of generic
Alphagan®
competition, a decrease in sales of
Acular®,
our older generation anti-inflammatory, and lower sales of other
glaucoma products. We estimate the majority of the increase in
our eye care pharmaceuticals sales was due to a shift in sales
mix to a greater percentage of higher priced products, and an
overall net increase in the volume of product sold. We increased
the published list prices for certain eye care pharmaceutical
products in the United States, ranging from five percent to nine
percent, effective January 22, 2006. We increased the
published U.S. list price for
Lumigan®
by five percent,
Restasis®
by seven percent,
Alphagan®
P 0.15% by five percent,
Zymar®
by seven percent, and Acular
LS®
by nine percent. This increase in prices had a positive net
effect on our U.S. sales for 2006, but the actual net
effect is difficult to determine due to the various managed care
sales rebate and other incentive programs in which we
participate. Wholesaler buying patterns and the change in dollar
value of prescription product mix also affected our reported net
sales dollars, although we are unable to determine the impact of
these effects. We have a policy to attempt to maintain average
U.S. wholesaler inventory levels of our specialty
pharmaceutical products at an amount less than eight weeks of
our net sales. At December 31, 2006, based on available
external and internal information, we believe the amount of
average U.S. wholesaler inventories of our specialty
pharmaceutical products was near the lower end of our stated
policy levels.
Botox®
sales increased in 2006 compared to 2005 primarily due to strong
growth in demand in the United States and in international
markets, excluding Japan, for both cosmetic and therapeutic use.
Effective January 1, 2006, we increased the published price
for
Botox®
and
Botox®
Cosmetic in the United States by approximately four percent,
which we believe had a positive effect on our U.S. sales
growth in 2006, primarily related to sales of
Botox®
Cosmetic. In the United States, the actual net effect from the
increase in price for sales of
Botox®
for therapeutic use is difficult to determine, primarily due to
rebate programs with U.S. federal and state government
agencies. International
Botox®
sales benefited from strong sales growth for both cosmetic and
therapeutic use in Europe, Latin America and Asia Pacific
outside Japan. This increase in international
Botox®
sales was partially offset by a $38.8 million decrease in
international sales of
Botox®
for therapeutic use in Japan, where we adopted a third party
license and distribution business model as a result of our
long-term agreement with GlaxoSmithKline, or GSK, that commenced
in September 2005. Based on internal information and
assumptions, we estimate in 2006 that
Botox®
therapeutic sales accounted for approximately 52% of total
consolidated
Botox®
net sales and cosmetic sales accounted for approximately 48% of
total consolidated
Botox®
net sales. Therapeutic and cosmetic net sales increased by
approximately 8% and 32%, respectively in 2006 compared to 2005.
The growth rate in
Botox®
therapeutic net sales was negatively impacted in 2006 by the
$38.8 million reduction in net sales in Japan in 2006
compared to 2005 due to our long-term agreement with GSK.
Excluding this net sales reduction of $38.8 million in
Japan, therapeutic
Botox®
net sales increased by 17% in 2006 compared to 2005. We believe
our worldwide market share for neuromodulators, including
Botox®,
was over 85%.
Skin care sales increased in 2006 compared to 2005 primarily due
to higher sales of
Tazorac®,
Zorac®,
Avage®
and MD
Forte®.
Net sales of
Tazorac®,
Zorac®
and
Avage®
increased $4.3 million, or 4.9%, to $91.2 million in
2006, compared to $86.9 million in 2005. The increase in
sales of
Tazorac®,
Zorac®
and
Avage®
resulted primarily from our increasing the published
U.S. list price for these products by nine percent
effective January 14, 2006.
Net sales from medical device products were $371.6 million
in 2006. Product net sales consisted of $177.2 million
related to breast aesthetics, $142.3 million for obesity
intervention and $52.1 million for facial aesthetics.
Medical device product net sales have been included in our
consolidated product net sales effective March 23, 2006,
the date of the Inamed acquisition.
Foreign currency changes increased product net sales by
$15.2 million in 2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to
the strengthening of the euro, U.K. pound, Canadian dollar and
Brazilian real, partially offset by the weakening of the
Australian dollar and other Asian and Latin American currencies
compared to the U.S. dollar.
U.S. sales as a percentage of total product net sales
decreased by 0.1 percentage points to 67.4% in 2006
compared to U.S. sales of 67.5% in 2005, due primarily to
the impact of sales of medical device products, which had a
lower amount of U.S. sales as a percentage of total product
net sales compared to our pharmaceutical products, and a
decrease in U.S. other non-pharmaceutical sales, partially
offset by an increase in
U.S. Botox®
sales as a percentage of total pharmaceutical product net sales.
54
Other Revenues
Other revenues increased $6.7 million to $59.9 million
in 2007 compared to $53.2 million in 2006. The increase in
other revenues in 2007 compared to 2006 is primarily due to an
increase of approximately $7.7 million in royalty income
earned principally from sales of
Botox®
in Japan and China by GlaxoSmithKline, or GSK, under a license
agreement, and other miscellaneous royalty income, partially
offset by a decrease of approximately $1.0 million in
reimbursement income, primarily related to services provided in
connection with a contractual agreement for the development of
Posurdex®
for the ophthalmic specialty pharmaceutical market in Japan.
Other revenues increased $29.8 million to
$53.2 million in 2006 compared to $23.4 million in
2005. The increase in other revenues in 2006 compared to 2005 is
primarily related to an increase of approximately
$18.0 million in royalty income earned principally from
sales of
Botox®
in Japan by GSK and other miscellaneous royalty agreements, and
an increase of approximately $11.8 million in reimbursement
income, earned primarily from services provided in connection
with contractual agreements related to the development and
promotion of
Botox®
in Japan and China, the co-promotion of GSKs products
Imitrex Statdose
System®
and
Amerge®
in the United States to neurologists, and services performed
under a co-promotion agreement for a third-party skin care
product.
Income
and Expenses
The following table sets forth the relationship to product net
sales of various items in our consolidated statements of
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Product net sales
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Other revenues
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Operating costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales (excludes amortization of acquired intangible
assets)
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
19.1
|
|
|
|
16.6
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
43.3
|
|
|
|
44.3
|
|
|
|
40.4
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
|
35.1
|
|
|
|
16.7
|
|
Amortization of acquired intangible assets
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
24.6
|
|
Non-operating income (expense)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) from continuing operations before income
taxes
and minority interest
|
|
|
17.7
|
%
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)%
|
|
|
25.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
12.9
|
%
|
|
|
(4.2
|
)%
|
|
|
17.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of Sales
Cost of sales increased $97.5 million, or 16.9%, in 2007 to
$673.2 million, or 17.4% of product net sales, compared to
$575.7 million, or 19.1% of product net sales in 2006. Cost
of sales includes charges of $3.3 million in 2007 and
$47.9 million in 2006 for purchase accounting fair-market
value inventory adjustment rollouts related to the 2007
acquisitions of Cornéal and Esprit and the 2006 acquisition
of Inamed, respectively. Excluding the effect of these purchase
accounting charges, cost of sales increased $142.1 million,
or 26.9%, in 2007 compared to 2006. This increase in cost of
sales, excluding the effect of purchase accounting charges, in
2007 compared to the 2006 primarily resulted from the 28.9%
increase in product net sales. Cost of sales as a percentage of
product net sales, excluding the effect of purchase accounting
charges, declined to 17.3% in 2007 from 17.5% in 2006. Cost of
sales as a percentage of product net sales declined during 2007
compared to 2006 primarily as a result of the January 2007
launch of
Juvédermtm
Ultra and
Juvédermtm
Ultra Plus and the November 2006 FDA approval of certain
silicone gel-filled breast implants in the United States. These
products generally have lower cost of sales as a percentage of
55
product net sales compared to our collagen-based dermal fillers
and saline-filled breast implants. Additionally, higher levels
of production of medical device products during 2007 compared to
2006 led to improved manufacturing efficiencies. These
improvements in cost of sales as a percentage of product net
sales were partially offset by the impact of the overall
increase in our medical device product net sales, which
generally have a higher cost of sales percentage compared to our
specialty pharmaceutical products.
Cost of sales increased $190.4 million, or 49.4%, in 2006
to $575.7 million, or 19.1% of product net sales, compared
to $385.3 million, or 16.6% of product net sales in 2005.
Cost of sales in dollars increased in 2006 compared to 2005
primarily as a result of the 29.8% increase in product net sales
and the increase in the mix of medical device product net sales
relative to total product net sales. Our cost of sales as a
percentage of product net sales for 2006 increased
2.5 percentage points from our cost of sales percentage in
2005, primarily as a result of incremental cost of sales of
$47.9 million associated with the Inamed acquisition
purchase accounting fair-market value inventory adjustment that
was fully recognized as cost of sales in 2006, sales of our
medical device products, which generally have a higher cost of
sales percentage compared to our specialty pharmaceutical
products and a small increase in our cost of sales percentage
for
Botox®.
Cost of sales in 2006 also includes $0.9 million related to
integration and transition costs associated with the Inamed
acquisition and $3.0 million of costs associated with stock
option compensation. The increase in the cost of sales
percentage in 2006 compared to 2005 was partially offset by the
$46.4 million decrease in other non-pharmaceutical sales,
primarily contract manufacturing sales related to AMO, which had
a significantly higher cost of sales percentage than our
pharmaceutical sales.
Selling,
General and Administrative
Selling, general and administrative, or SG&A, expenses
increased $346.7 million, or 26.0%, to
$1,680.1 million, or 43.3% of product net sales, in 2007
compared to $1,333.4 million, or 44.3% of product net sales
in 2006. The current year increase in the dollar amount of
SG&A expenses primarily relates to a substantial increase
in promotion, selling and marketing expenses and an increase in
general and administrative expenses to support the continuing
growth in revenues. Promotion expenses primarily increased due
to additional costs to promote our medical device product lines
that we obtained in the Inamed acquisition, including an
increase in direct-to-consumer advertising and other promotional
costs for our
Lap-Band®
System,
Juvédermtm
Ultra and
Juvédermtm
Ultra Plus dermal fillers, and
Natrelle®
silicone breast implant products. The increase in selling and
marketing expenses principally relate to personnel and related
incentive compensation costs driven by the expansion of our
U.S. and European facial aesthetics, neuroscience, breast
implant and obesity intervention sales forces. The increase in
selling and marketing expenses in 2007 compared to 2006 was also
impacted by an increase in our U.S. and European
ophthalmology sales forces, the addition of the Esprit sales
personnel in the fourth quarter of 2007 and launch related
expenses for Sanctura
XRtm
and
Combigantm.
General and administrative expenses increased in 2007 compared
to 2006 primarily due to an increase in incentive compensation,
legal, finance, information systems, human resources and
facilities costs. Additionally, we did not incur any significant
SG&A expenses related to our medical device product lines
prior to our acquisition of Inamed in March 2006. In 2007,
SG&A expenses also include $14.5 million of
integration and transition costs related to the Esprit,
Cornéal, EndoArt and Inamed acquisitions, $6.4 million
of expenses associated with the settlement of a patent dispute
assumed in the Inamed acquisition that related to tissue
expanders and $2.3 million of expenses associated with the
settlement of a pre-existing unfavorable distribution agreement
between Cornéal and one of our subsidiaries. In 2006,
SG&A expenses also included a $28.5 million
contribution to The Allergan Foundation, $19.6 million of
integration and transition costs related to the acquisition of
Inamed and $5.7 million of transition and duplicate
operating expenses, including a loss of $3.4 million on the
sale of our Mougins, France facility, primarily related to the
restructuring and streamlining of our European operations.
SG&A expenses as a percentage of product net sales declined
in 2007 compared to 2006 due primarily to lower general and
administrative and selling expenses, partially offset by higher
promotion and marketing expenses, as a percentage of product net
sales.
SG&A expenses increased $396.6 million, or 42.3%, to
$1,333.4 million, or 44.3% of product net sales in 2006
compared to $936.8 million, or 40.4% of product net sales
in 2005. The increase in the dollar amount of SG&A expenses
primarily related to increased SG&A expenses associated
with the Inamed acquisition, an increase in selling expenses,
principally personnel costs driven by the expansion of our
U.S. facial aesthetics, neuroscience and ophthalmology
sales forces and our European glaucoma sales force to promote
growth in consolidated product
56
sales, especially for
Restasis®,
Lumigan®,
Combigantm,
Botox®
and
Botox®
Cosmetic, and to support our agreement with GSK to promote
GSKs Imitrex Statdose
System®
and
Amerge®
products in the United States. SG&A also increased in 2006
compared to 2005 due to an increase in marketing expenses
supporting our expanded selling efforts, higher general and
administrative expenses, primarily incentive compensation costs,
legal costs and bank fees, an increase in integration and
transition costs related to the Inamed acquisition of
$19.6 million, additional costs associated with the
recording of stock option compensation of $34.6 million
starting in 2006, and a $1.9 million increase in transition
and duplicate operating expenses associated with the
restructuring and streamlining of our European operations, to
$5.7 million in 2006, which includes a loss of
$3.4 million on the sale of our Mougins, France facility,
compared to $3.8 million in 2005. In addition, SG&A
expenses increased in 2006 compared to 2005 due to pre-tax gains
in 2005 totaling $14.2 million that did not recur in 2006.
These gains in 2005 consisted of a $7.9 million pre-tax
gain on the sale of our contact lens care and surgical
distribution business in India to a subsidiary of AMO, a
$5.7 million pre-tax gain on the sale of assets primarily
used for contract manufacturing and the former distribution of
AMO related products at our manufacturing facility in Ireland,
and a $0.6 million pre-tax gain from the sale of a former
manufacturing plant in Argentina. SG&A expenses in 2006
also included a $28.5 million contribution to The Allergan
Foundation compared to a $2.0 million contribution in 2005.
SG&A expenses as a percentage of product net sales
increased in 2006 compared to 2005 due primarily to higher
selling expenses and general and administrative costs, partially
offset by lower promotion expenses as a percentage of product
net sales.
Research
and Development
Research and development, or R&D, expenses decreased
$337.4 million, or 32.0%, to $718.1 million in 2007,
or 18.5% of product net sales, compared to
$1,055.5 million, or 35.1% of product net sales in 2006.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, R&D expenses
include a charge of $72.0 million for in-process research
and development assets acquired in the EndoArt acquisition, and
for 2006 include a charge of $579.3 million for in-process
research and development assets acquired in the Inamed
acquisition. In-process research and development represents an
estimate of the fair value of purchased in-process technology as
of the date of acquisition that had not reached technical
feasibility and had no alternative future uses in its current
state. Excluding the effect of the in-process research and
development charges, R&D expenses increased by
$169.9 million, or 35.7%, to $646.1 million in 2007,
or 16.7% of product net sales, compared to $476.2 million,
or 15.8% of product net sales in 2006. The increase in R&D
expenses, excluding the in-process research and development
charges, primarily resulted from higher rates of investment in
our eye care pharmaceuticals and
Botox®
product lines, increased spending for new pharmaceutical
technologies and the addition of development expenses associated
with our medical device products acquired in the EndoArt,
Cornéal and Inamed acquisitions. R&D spending
increases in 2007 compared to 2006 were primarily driven by an
increase in clinical trial costs associated with
Posurdex®,
Trivaristm,
certain
Botox®
indications for overactive bladder and migraine headache, and
alpha agonists for the treatment of neuropathic pain, and an
increase in costs related to breast implant
follow-up
studies and additional spending on obesity intervention
technologies. R&D spending on memantine declined during
2007 compared to 2006. The increase in R&D expenses,
excluding the in-process research and development charges, as a
percentage of product net sales in 2007 compared to 2006 was
primarily due to the 35.7% increase in R&D expenses
relative to the lower percentage increase in product net sales
during the same period.
R&D expenses increased $667.2 million, or 171.8%, to
$1,055.5 million in 2006, or 35.1% of product net sales,
compared to $388.3 million, or 16.7% of product net sales
in 2005. For the year ended December 31, 2006, R&D
expenses include a charge of $579.3 million for in-process
research and development acquired in the Inamed acquisition.
Excluding the effect of the $579.3 million Inamed
in-process research and development charge, R&D expenses
increased by $87.9 million, or 22.6%, to
$476.2 million in 2006, or 15.8% of product net sales,
compared to $388.3 million, or 16.7% of product net sales
in 2005. The increase in R&D expenses, excluding the
$579.3 million in-process research and development charge,
was primarily a result of higher rates of investment in our eye
care pharmaceuticals and
Botox®
product lines, increased spending for new pharmaceutical
technologies, the addition of development expenses associated
with our medical device products acquired in the Inamed
acquisition, and $11.0 million of additional costs
associated with stock option compensation, partially offset by a
decline in spending for our skin care product line. R&D
expenses in 2006
57
include $0.2 million of integration and transition costs
related to the Inamed acquisition and $0.5 million of
transition and duplicate operating expenses related to the
restructuring and streamlining of our operations in Europe.
Included in our spending for research and development in 2005 is
approximately $10.4 million in costs, which did not recur
in 2006, associated with two third party technology license and
development agreements associated with in-process technologies
and a buy-out of a license agreement with John Hopkins
University associated with ongoing
Botox®
research activities. Spending increases in 2006 compared to 2005
were primarily driven by an increase in clinical trial costs
associated with
Posurdex®,
memantine, and certain
Botox®
indications for overactive bladder, migraine headache and benign
prostatic hypertrophy. The decrease in R&D expenses,
excluding the in-process research and development charge, as a
percentage of product net sales in 2006 compared to 2005 was
primarily due to our medical device products acquired in the
acquisition of Inamed, which have a lower level of R&D
spending as a percentage of product net sales relative to our
specialty pharmaceutical products.
Amortization
of Acquired Intangible Assets
Amortization of acquired intangible assets increased
$41.7 million to $121.3 million in 2007, or 3.1% of
product net sales, compared to $79.6 million, or 2.6% of
product net sales in 2006. This increase in amortization expense
in dollars and as a percentage of product net sales is primarily
due to an increase in amortization of acquired intangible assets
related to the 2007 acquisitions of Esprit, EndoArt and
Cornéal and a full-year impact during 2007 from the Inamed
acquisition that was completed on March 23, 2006.
Amortization of acquired intangible assets increased
$62.1 million to $79.6 million in 2006, or 2.6% of
product net sales, compared to $17.5 million, or 0.8% of
product net sales in 2005. This increase in amortization expense
in dollars and as a percentage of product net sales in 2006
compared to 2005 is primarily due to an increase in amortization
of intangible assets related to the Inamed acquisition and
capitalized payments to third party licensors related to
achievement of regulatory approvals to commercialize
Juvédermtm
dermal filler products in the United States and Australia.
Restructuring
Charges, Integration Costs and Transition and Duplicate
Operating Expenses
Restructuring charges in 2007 were $26.8 million compared
to $22.3 million in 2006 and $43.8 million in 2005.
The $4.5 million increase in restructuring charges in 2007
compared to 2006 is primarily due to an increase in
restructuring costs associated with the integration of the
Cornéal operations, partially offset by a decrease in
restructuring costs associated with the integration of the
Inamed operations and the streamlining of our European
operations. The $21.5 million decrease in restructuring
charges in 2006 compared to 2005 is due primarily to a decline
in restructuring activities related to the streamlining of our
European operations and the termination of our manufacturing and
supply agreement with AMO, which terminated as scheduled in June
2005, partially offset by an increase in restructuring costs
associated with the integration of the Inamed operations that we
acquired in 2006.
Restructuring
and Integration of Cornéal Operations
In connection with our January 2007 Cornéal acquisition, we
initiated a restructuring and integration plan to merge the
Cornéal facial aesthetics business operations with our
operations. Specifically, the restructuring and integration
activities involve moving key business functions to our
locations, integrating Cornéals distributor
operations with our existing distribution network and
integrating Cornéals information systems with our
information systems. We currently estimate that the total
pre-tax charges resulting from the restructuring and integration
of the Cornéal facial aesthetics business operations will
be between $29.0 million and $36.0 million, consisting
primarily of contract termination costs, salaries, travel and
consulting costs, all of which are expected to be cash
expenditures.
The foregoing estimates are based on assumptions relating to,
among other things, a reduction of approximately 20 positions,
principally general and administrative positions at Cornéal
locations. Charges associated with the workforce reduction,
including severance, relocation and one-time termination
benefits, and payments to public employment and training
programs, are currently expected to total approximately
$3.5 million to $4.5 million. Estimated charges
include estimates for contract termination costs, including the
58
termination of duplicative distribution arrangements. Contract
termination costs are expected to total approximately
$16.0 million to $21.0 million.
We began to record costs associated with the restructuring and
integration of the Cornéal facial aesthetics business in
the first quarter of 2007 and expect to continue to incur costs
up through and including the second quarter of 2008. The
restructuring charges primarily consist of employee severance,
one-time termination benefits, employee relocation, termination
of duplicative distributor agreements and other costs related to
the restructuring of the Cornéal operations. During the
year ended December 31, 2007, we recorded
$16.6 million related to the restructuring of the
Cornéal operations. The integration and transition costs
primarily consist of salaries, travel, communications,
recruitment and consulting costs. During 2007, we also recorded
$8.5 million of integration and transition costs associated
with the Cornéal integration, consisting of
$0.1 million in cost of sales and $8.4 million in
SG&A expenses.
The following table presents the cumulative restructuring
activities related to the Cornéal operations during the
year ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
|
|
Contract
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
Termination Costs
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
Net charge during 2007
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
|
$
|
12.8
|
|
|
$
|
16.6
|
|
Spending
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
(4.9
|
)
|
|
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007 ($6.0 million included in
Other accrued expenses and $4.7 million
included in Accounts payable)
|
|
$
|
2.8
|
|
|
$
|
7.9
|
|
|
$
|
10.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring
and Integration of Inamed Operations
In connection with the March 2006 Inamed acquisition, we
initiated a global restructuring and integration plan to merge
Inameds operations with our operations and to capture
synergies through the centralization of certain general and
administrative and commercial functions. Specifically, the
restructuring and integration activities involved a workforce
reduction of approximately 60 positions, principally general and
administrative positions, moving key commercial Inamed business
functions to our locations around the world, integrating
Inameds distributor operations with our existing
distribution network and integrating Inameds information
systems with our information systems.
On January 30, 2007, our Board of Directors approved an
additional plan to restructure and eventually sell or close our
collagen manufacturing facility in Fremont, California that we
acquired in the Inamed acquisition. This plan is the result of a
reduction in anticipated future market demand for human and
bovine collagen products.
With the exception of the restructuring of the collagen
manufacturing facility, which currently is expected to be
completed by the end of the fourth quarter of 2008, we
substantially completed all activities related to the
restructuring and operational integration of the former Inamed
operations during 2007. As of December 31, 2007, we have
recorded cumulative pre-tax restructuring charges of
$22.7 million, cumulative pre-tax integration and
transition costs of $26.0 million, and $1.6 million
for income tax costs related to intercompany transfers of trade
businesses and net assets. Cumulative restructuring charges
consist of $21.0 million related to the global
restructuring and integration plan to merge Inameds
operations with our operations, and $1.7 million related to
the restructuring of the collagen manufacturing facility. The
restructuring charges primarily consist of employee severance,
one-time termination benefits, employee relocation, termination
of duplicative distributor agreements and other costs related to
restructuring the former Inamed operations. During 2007 and
2006, we recorded pre-tax restructuring charges of
$9.2 million and $13.5 million, respectively. The
integration and transition costs primarily consist of salaries,
travel, communications, recruitment and consulting costs. During
2007, we recorded $5.3 million of integration and
transition costs associated with the Inamed integration,
consisting of $0.1 million in cost of sales and
$5.2 million in SG&A expenses. During 2006, we
recorded $20.7 million of integration and transition costs,
consisting of $0.9 million in cost of sales,
$19.6 million in SG&A expenses and $0.2 million
in R&D expenses. During 2006, we also recorded
$1.6 million for income tax costs related to intercompany
transfers of trade businesses and net assets, which we included
in our provision for income taxes.
59
In connection with the restructuring and eventual sale or
closure of the collagen manufacturing facility, we estimate that
total pre-tax restructuring charges for severance, lease
termination and contract settlement costs will be between
$6.0 million and $8.0 million, all of which are
expected to be cash expenditures. The foregoing estimates are
based on assumptions relating to, among other things, a
reduction of approximately 59 positions, consisting principally
of manufacturing positions at the facility, that are expected to
result in estimated total employee severance costs of
approximately $1.5 million to $2.0 million. Estimated
charges for contract and lease termination costs are expected to
total approximately $4.5 million to $6.0 million. We
began to record these costs in the first quarter of 2007 and
expect to continue to incur them up through and including the
fourth quarter of 2008. Prior to any closure or sale of the
collagen manufacturing facility, we intend to manufacture a
sufficient quantity of collagen products to meet estimated
market demand through 2010.
The following table presents the cumulative restructuring
activities related to the combined effects of the global
restructuring of the Inamed operations and restructuring of the
collagen manufacturing facility through December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
|
|
Contract and Lease
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
Termination Costs
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
Net charge during 2006
|
|
$
|
6.1
|
|
|
$
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
13.5
|
|
Spending
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
|
|
(2.5
|
)
|
|
|
(4.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
8.9
|
|
Net charge during 2007
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
|
Spending
|
|
|
(5.7
|
)
|
|
|
(9.5
|
)
|
|
|
(15.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007 (included in Other
accrued expenses)
|
|
$
|
1.9
|
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
|
$
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring
and Streamlining of European Operations
Effective January 2005, our Board of Directors approved the
initiation and implementation of a restructuring of certain
activities related to our European operations to optimize
operations, improve resource allocation and create a scalable,
lower cost and more efficient operating model for our European
R&D and commercial activities. Specifically, the
restructuring involved moving key European R&D and select
commercial functions from our Mougins, France and other European
locations to our Irvine, California, Marlow, United Kingdom and
Dublin, Ireland facilities and streamlining functions in our
European management services group. The workforce reduction
began in the first quarter of 2005 and was substantially
completed by the close of the second quarter of 2006.
As of December 31, 2006, we substantially completed all
activities related to the restructuring and streamlining of our
European operations. As of December 31, 2006, we recorded
cumulative pre-tax restructuring charges of $37.5 million,
primarily related to severance, relocation and one-time
termination benefits, payments to public employment and training
programs, contract termination costs and capital and other
asset-related expenses. During 2007, we recorded an additional
$1.0 million of restructuring charges for an abandoned
leased facility related to our European operations. During the
years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, we recorded
$8.6 million and $28.9 million, respectively, of
restructuring charges related to our European operations. As of
December 31, 2007, remaining accrued expenses of
$6.2 million for restructuring charges related to the
restructuring and streamlining of our European operations are
included in Other accrued expenses and Other
liabilities in the amount of $2.8 million and
$3.4 million, respectively.
Additionally, as of December 31, 2006, we had incurred
cumulative transition and duplicate operating expenses of
$11.8 million relating primarily to legal, consulting,
recruiting, information system implementation costs and taxes in
connection with the European restructuring activities. For the
year ended December 31, 2006, we recorded $6.2 million
of transition and duplicate operating expenses, including a
$3.4 million loss related to the sale of our Mougins,
France facility, consisting of $5.7 million in SG&A
expenses and $0.5 million in R&D expenses. For the
year ended December 31, 2005, we recorded $5.6 million
of transition and duplicate operating expenses, consisting of
$0.3 million in cost of sales, $3.8 million in
SG&A expenses and $1.5 million in R&D expenses.
There
60
were no transition and duplicate operating expenses related to
the restructuring and streamlining of our European operations
recorded in 2007.
Other
Restructuring Activities and Integration Costs
Included in 2007 are $0.8 million and $0.1 million,
respectively, of SG&A expenses related to miscellaneous
integration costs associated with the Esprit and EndoArt
acquisitions.
Included in 2006 and 2005 are $0.6 million and
$14.5 million, respectively, of restructuring charges
related to the scheduled June 2005 termination of our
manufacturing and supply agreement with Advanced Medical Optics,
which we spun-off in June 2002. Also included in 2006 and 2005
is a $0.4 million restructuring charge reversal and
$2.3 million of restructuring charges, respectively,
related to the streamlining of our operations in Japan.
On January 30, 2008, we announced the phased closure of our
breast implant manufacturing facility at Arklow, Ireland and the
transfer of production to our state-of-the-art manufacturing
plant in Costa Rica. The Arklow facility was acquired by us in
connection with our 2006 Inamed acquisition and employs
360 people. Production at the plant will be phased out
between 2008 and 2009. We currently expect to incur
restructuring and other transition related costs beginning in
the first quarter of 2008 and continuing up through 2009 of
between $60 million and $65 million.
Operating
Income (Loss)
Management evaluates business segment performance on an
operating income (loss) basis exclusive of general and
administrative expenses and other indirect costs, restructuring
charges, in-process research and development expenses,
amortization of identifiable intangible assets related to the
Esprit, EndoArt, Cornéal and Inamed acquisitions and
certain other adjustments, which are not allocated to our
business segments for performance assessment by our chief
operating decision maker. Other adjustments excluded from our
business segments for purposes of performance assessment
represent income or expenses that do not reflect, according to
established company-defined criteria, operating income or
expenses associated with our core business activities.
General and administrative expenses, other indirect costs and
other adjustments not allocated to our business segments for
purposes of performance assessment consisted of the following
items: for 2007, general and administrative expenses of
$292.1 million, integration and transition costs related to
the Esprit, EndoArt, Cornéal and Inamed acquisitions of
$14.7 million, $6.4 million of expenses associated
with the settlement of a patent dispute, $2.3 million of
expenses associated with the settlement of a pre-existing
unfavorable distribution agreement between Cornéal and one
of our subsidiaries, purchase accounting fair-market value
inventory adjustments related to the Esprit and Cornéal
acquisitions of $3.3 million and other net indirect costs
of $18.1 million; for 2006, general and administrative
expenses of $244.8 million, integration and transition
costs related to Inamed operations of $20.7 million, a
purchase accounting fair-market value inventory adjustment
related to the Inamed acquisition of $47.9 million,
transition and duplicate operating expenses relating to the
restructuring and streamlining of our operations in Europe of
$6.2 million, a contribution to The Allergan Foundation of
$28.5 million, and other net indirect costs of
$3.6 million; and for 2005, general and administrative
expenses of $159.0 million, transition and duplicate
operating expenses relating to the restructuring and
streamlining of our operations in Europe of $5.6 million,
pre-tax gains totaling $14.2 million on the sale of our
contact lens care and surgical distribution business in India,
the sale of assets at our manufacturing facility in Ireland and
the sale of a former manufacturing plant in Argentina, the
buyout of a license agreement of $3.0 million, and other
net indirect income of $5.2 million.
61
The following table presents operating income (loss) for each
reportable segment for the years ended December 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005 and a reconciliation of our segment operating
income to consolidated operating income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty pharmaceuticals
|
|
$
|
1,047.9
|
|
|
$
|
888.8
|
|
|
$
|
762.9
|
|
Medical devices
|
|
|
207.1
|
|
|
|
119.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segments
|
|
|
1,255.0
|
|
|
|
1,008.7
|
|
|
|
762.9
|
|
General and administrative expenses, other indirect costs and
other adjustments
|
|
|
336.9
|
|
|
|
351.7
|
|
|
|
148.2
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
72.0
|
|
|
|
579.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of acquired intangible assets(a)
|
|
|
99.9
|
|
|
|
58.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
26.8
|
|
|
|
22.3
|
|
|
|
43.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating income (loss)
|
|
$
|
719.4
|
|
|
$
|
(3.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
570.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Represents amortization of identifiable intangible assets
related to the Esprit, EndoArt, Cornéal and Inamed
acquisitions, as applicable. |
Our consolidated operating income for the year ended
December 31, 2007 was $719.4 million, or 18.5% of
product net sales, compared to a consolidated operating loss of
$3.2 million, or (0.1)% of product net sales in 2006. The
$722.6 million increase in consolidated operating income
was due to an $868.9 million increase in product net sales,
a $6.7 million increase in other revenues and a
$337.4 million decrease in R&D expenses, partially
offset by a $97.5 million increase in cost of sales, a
$346.7 million increase in SG&A expenses, a
$41.7 million increase in amortization of acquired
intangible assets and a $4.5 million increase in
restructuring charges.
Our specialty pharmaceuticals segment operating income in 2007
was $1,047.9 million, compared to operating income of
$888.8 million in 2006. The $159.1 million increase in
specialty pharmaceuticals segment operating income was due
primarily to an increase in product net sales of our eye care
pharmaceuticals and
Botox®
product lines, partially offset by an increase in cost of sales,
an increase in promotion, selling and marketing expenses,
primarily due to increased sales personnel costs and additional
promotion and marketing expenses to support our expanded selling
efforts and new products, including new products acquired in the
Esprit acquisition, and an increase in R&D expenses.
Our medical devices segment operating income in 2007 was
$207.1 million, compared to operating income of
$119.9 million in 2006. The increase in our medical devices
segment operating income of $87.2 million in 2007 was due
primarily to an increase in product net sales, and the combined
operating results of the EndoArt, Cornéal and Inamed
acquisitions in the current year compared to only nine months of
operating results for the Inamed acquisition in 2006, partially
offset by an increase in cost of sales, an increase in
promotion, selling and marketing expenses, including an increase
in direct-to-consumer advertising expenses, and an increase in
R&D expenses.
Our consolidated operating loss for the year ended
December 31, 2006 was $3.2 million, or (0.1)% of
product net sales, compared to consolidated operating income of
$570.9 million, or 24.6% of product net sales in 2005. The
$574.1 million decrease in consolidated operating income
was due to a $190.4 million increase in cost of sales, a
$396.6 million increase in SG&A expenses, a
$667.2 million increase in R&D expenses, and a
$62.1 million increase in amortization of acquired
intangible assets, partially offset by a $690.9 million
increase in product net sales, a $29.8 million increase in
other revenues and a $21.5 million decrease in
restructuring charges.
Our specialty pharmaceuticals segment operating income in 2006
was $888.8 million, compared to operating income of
$762.9 million in 2005. The $125.9 million increase in
specialty pharmaceuticals segment operating income was due
primarily to an increase in product net sales of our eye care
pharmaceuticals and
Botox®
product lines, partially offset by an increase in cost of sales,
including the effect of a small increase in our cost of sales
62
percentage for
Botox®,
an increase in selling and marketing expenses, primarily due to
increased personnel costs, and an increase in research and
development expenses.
The increase in our medical devices segment operating income of
$119.9 million in 2006 compared to 2005 was due to the
March 2006 Inamed acquisition. We did not have medical devices
segment operating income prior to the Inamed acquisition.
Non-Operating
Income and Expenses
Total net non-operating expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2007 were $31.7 million compared to
$16.3 million in 2006. Interest income in 2007 was
$65.3 million compared to interest income of
$48.9 million in 2006. The increase in interest income was
primarily due to higher average cash equivalent balances,
earning interest, of approximately $143 million and an
increase in average interest rates earned on all cash equivalent
balances earning interest of approximately 0.27% in 2007
compared to 2006 and a $4.9 million reversal during 2006 of
previously recognized estimated statutory interest income
related to a matter involving the recovery of previously paid
state income taxes. Interest expense increased
$11.2 million to $71.4 million in 2007 compared to
$60.2 million in 2006, primarily due to an increase in
average outstanding borrowings for 2007 compared to 2006 and a
$4.9 million reversal of previously accrued statutory
interest expense included in 2006 associated with the resolution
of several significant uncertain income tax audit issues,
partially offset by the write-off of unamortized debt
origination fees of $4.4 million in 2006 due to the
redemption of our Zero Coupon Convertible Senior Notes due 2022,
or 2022 Notes. We incurred a substantial increase in borrowings
to fund the Inamed acquisition on March 23, 2006.
We recorded a net gain of $0.3 million on the sale of third
party equity investments in 2006. There were no similar gains or
losses recognized during 2007. At December 31, 2007, we had
a carrying amount of $8.0 million, with a cost basis of
$5.0 million, in third party equity investments with public
and privately held companies. These investments are subject to
review for other than temporary declines in fair value on a
quarterly basis.
During 2007, we recorded a net unrealized loss on derivative
instruments of $0.4 million compared to a net unrealized
loss of $0.3 million in 2006. Other, net expense was
$25.2 million in 2007, consisting primarily of
$25.0 million in net realized losses from foreign currency
transactions primarily due to the weakening of the
U.S. dollar. Other, net expense was $5.0 million in
2006, which includes $2.7 million of costs for the
settlement of a previously disclosed contingency involving
non-income taxes in Brazil and net realized losses from foreign
currency transactions of $3.2 million.
Total net non-operating expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2006 were $16.3 million compared to net
non-operating income of $28.3 million in 2005. Interest
income in 2006 was $48.9 million compared to interest
income of $35.4 million in 2005. The increase in interest
income in 2006 was primarily due to higher average cash
equivalent balances earning interest of approximately
$139 million and an increase in average interest rates
earned on all cash equivalent balances earning interest of
approximately 1.44% in 2006 compared to 2005. The increase in
interest income in 2006 compared to 2005 was partially offset by
a $4.9 million reversal of previously recognized estimated
statutory interest income related to a matter involving the
expected recovery of previously paid state income taxes, which
became recoverable due to a favorable state tax court decision
that became final in 2004. Interest income in 2005 included the
recognition of $2.1 million of statutory interest income
related to that same state tax court decision. Interest expense
increased $47.8 million to $60.2 million in 2006
compared to $12.4 million in 2005, primarily due to an
increase in borrowings to fund the Inamed acquisition and the
write-off of unamortized debt origination fees of
$4.4 million due to the redemption of our 2022 Notes,
partially offset by a $4.9 million reversal of previously
accrued statutory interest expense associated with the
resolution of several significant uncertain income tax audit
issues. Interest expense in 2005 also includes a
$7.3 million reversal of statutory interest expense
associated with the resolution of several significant uncertain
income tax audit issues.
Gains on investments of $0.3 million in 2006 and
$0.8 million in 2005 resulted from the sale of
miscellaneous third party equity investments.
During 2006, we recorded a net unrealized loss on derivative
instruments of $0.3 million compared to a net unrealized
gain of $1.1 million in 2005. Other, net expense was
$5.0 million in 2006 compared to Other, net income
63
of $3.4 million in 2005. In 2006, Other, net expense
primarily includes $2.7 million of costs for the settlement
of a previously disclosed contingency involving non-income taxes
in Brazil and net realized losses from foreign currency
transactions of $3.2 million. In 2005, Other, net primarily
includes a gain of $3.5 million for the receipt of a
technology transfer fee related to the assignment of a third
party patent licensing arrangement covering the use of botulinum
toxin type B for cervical dystonia and net realized losses from
foreign currency transactions of $1.0 million.
Income
Taxes
Our effective tax rate in 2007 was 27.1% compared to the
effective tax rate of 551.3% in 2006. Included in our operating
income for 2007 are pre-tax charges of $72.0 million for
in-process research and development acquired in the EndoArt
acquisition, a $3.3 million charge to cost of sales
associated with the combined Esprit and Cornéal purchase
accounting fair-market value inventory adjustment rollouts,
$2.3 million of expenses associated with the settlement of
a pre-existing unfavorable distribution agreement between
Cornéal and one of our subsidiaries, total integration and
transition costs of $14.7 million related to the Esprit,
EndoArt, Cornéal and Inamed acquisitions, total
restructuring charges of $26.8 million and a legal
settlement cost of $6.4 million. In 2007, we recorded
income tax benefits of $1.3 million related to the combined
Esprit and Cornéal purchase accounting fair-market value
inventory adjustment rollouts, $3.6 million related to the
total integration and transition costs, $8.0 million
related to the total restructuring charges and $2.5 million
related to the legal settlement cost. We did not record any
income tax benefit for the in-process research and development
charges or the expenses associated with the settlement of the
pre-existing unfavorable distribution agreement between
Cornéal and one of our subsidiaries. Also included in the
provision for income taxes in 2007 is $1.6 million of tax
benefit related to state income tax refunds resulting from the
settlement of tax audits. Excluding the impact of the total
pre-tax charges of $125.5 million and the total net income
tax benefit of $17.0 million for the items discussed above,
our adjusted effective tax rate for 2007 was 25.0%. We believe
that the use of an adjusted effective tax rate provides a more
meaningful measure of the impact of income taxes on our results
of operations because it excludes the effect of certain discrete
items that are not included as part of our core business
activities. This allows stockholders to better determine the
effective tax rate associated with our core business activities.
64
The calculation of our adjusted effective tax rate for the year
ended December 31, 2007 is summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Earnings from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest, as reported
|
|
$
|
687.7
|
|
In-process research and development expense
|
|
|
72.0
|
|
Esprit and Cornéal fair-market value inventory rollouts
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
Settlement of pre-existing unfavorable distribution agreement
with Cornéal
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
Total integration and transition costs
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
Total restructuring charges
|
|
|
26.8
|
|
Legal settlement cost
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
813.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes, as reported
|
|
$
|
186.2
|
|
Income tax benefit for:
|
|
|
|
|
Esprit and Cornéal fair-market value inventory rollouts
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Total integration and transition costs
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
Total restructuring charges
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
Legal settlement cost
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
State income tax refunds
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
203.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted effective tax rate
|
|
|
25.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our effective tax rate in 2006 was 551.3% compared to the
effective tax rate of 32.1% in 2005. Included in our operating
loss for the year ended December 31, 2006 are pre-tax
charges of $579.3 million for in-process research and
development acquired in the Inamed acquisition, a
$47.9 million charge to cost of sales associated with the
Inamed purchase accounting fair-market value inventory
adjustment rollout, total integration, transition and duplicate
operating expenses of $26.9 million related to the Inamed
acquisition and restructuring and streamlining of our European
operations, a $28.5 million contribution to The Allergan
Foundation and total restructuring charges of
$22.3 million. In 2006, we recorded income tax benefits of
$15.7 million related to the Inamed purchase accounting
fair-market value inventory adjustment rollout,
$9.1 million related to total integration, transition and
duplicate operating expenses, $11.3 million related to the
contribution to The Allergan Foundation and $3.5 million
related to total restructuring charges. Also included in the
provision for income taxes in 2006 is a $17.2 million
reduction in the provision for income taxes due to the reversal
of the valuation allowance against a deferred tax asset that we
have determined is realizable, a reduction of $14.5 million
in estimated income taxes payable primarily due to the
resolution of several significant previously uncertain income
tax audit issues associated with the completion of an audit by
the U.S. Internal Revenue Service for tax years 2000 to
2002, a $2.8 million reduction in income taxes payable
previously estimated for the 2005 repatriation of foreign
earnings that had been permanently re-invested outside the
United States, a beneficial change of $1.2 million for the
expected income tax benefit for previously paid state income
taxes, which became recoverable due to a favorable state court
decision concluded in 2004, an unfavorable adjustment of
$3.9 million for a previously filed income tax return
currently under examination and a provision for income taxes of
$1.6 million related to intercompany transfers of trade
businesses and net assets associated with the Inamed
acquisition. Excluding the impact of the total pre-tax charges
of $704.9 million and the total net income tax benefits of
$69.8 million for the items discussed above, our adjusted
effective tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2006 was
25.9%.
65
The calculation of our adjusted effective tax rate for the year
ended December 31, 2006 is summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before income taxes and minority
interest, as reported
|
|
$
|
(19.5
|
)
|
In-process research and development expense
|
|
|
579.3
|
|
Inamed fair-market value inventory rollout
|
|
|
47.9
|
|
Total integration, transition and duplicate operating expenses
|
|
|
26.9
|
|
Contribution to The Allergan Foundation
|
|
|
28.5
|
|
Total restructuring charges
|
|
|
22.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
685.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes, as reported
|
|
$
|
107.5
|
|
Income tax (provision) benefit for:
|
|
|
|
|
Inamed fair-market value inventory rollout
|
|
|
15.7
|
|
Total integration, transition and duplicate operating expenses
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
Contribution to The Allergan Foundation
|
|
|
11.3
|
|
Total restructuring charges
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
Reduction in valuation allowance associated with a deferred tax
asset
|
|
|
17.2
|
|
Resolution of uncertain income tax audit issues
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
Adjustment to estimated taxes on 2005 repatriation of foreign
earnings
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
Recovery of previously paid state income taxes
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
Unfavorable adjustment for previously filed tax return currently
under examination
|
|
|
(3.9
|
)
|
Intercompany transfers of trade businesses and net assets
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
177.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted effective tax rate
|
|
|
25.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our effective tax rate in 2005 was 32.1%. Included in our
operating income in 2005 are pre-tax restructuring charges of
$43.8 million, transition and duplicate operating expenses
associated with our European restructuring activities of
$5.6 million, a gain of $7.9 million on the sale of
our distribution business in India and a gain of
$5.7 million on the sale of assets used primarily for
contract manufacturing of AMO products. In 2005, we recorded
income tax benefits of $7.6 million related to the pre-tax
restructuring charges and $1.1 million related to
transition and duplicate operating expenses, and a provision for
income taxes of $1.7 million on the gain on sale of the
distribution business in India and $0.6 million on the gain
on sale of assets used primarily for contract manufacturing.
Included in the provision for income taxes in 2005 is an
estimated $29.9 million income tax provision associated
with our decision to repatriate $674.0 million in
extraordinary dividends as defined by the American Jobs Creation
Act of 2004, or the Act, from unremitted foreign earnings that
were previously considered indefinitely reinvested by certain
non-U.S. subsidiaries.
Also included in the provision for income taxes in 2005 is an
estimated provision of $19.7 million associated with our
decision to repatriate approximately $85.8 million in
additional dividends above the base and extraordinary dividend
amounts, as defined by the Act, from unremitted foreign earnings
that were previously considered indefinitely reinvested. Also
included in the provision for income taxes in 2005 is a
$1.4 million beneficial change in estimate for the expected
income tax benefit for previously paid state income taxes, which
became recoverable due to a favorable state court decision that
became final during 2004, and an estimated $24.1 million
reduction in estimated income taxes payable primarily due to the
resolution of several significant previously uncertain income
tax audit issues, including the resolution of certain transfer
pricing issues for which an Advance Pricing Agreement, or APA,
was executed with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service during
the third quarter of 2005. The APA covers tax years 2002 through
2008. The $24.1 million reduction in estimated income taxes
payable also includes beneficial changes associated with other
transfer price settlements for
66
a discontinued product line, which was not covered by the APA,
the deductibility of transaction costs associated with the 2002
spin-off of AMO and intangible asset issues related to certain
assets of Allergan Specialty Therapeutics, Inc. and Bardeen
Sciences Company, LLC, which we acquired in 2001 and 2003,
respectively. This change in estimate relates to tax years
currently under examination or not yet settled through expiry of
the statute of limitations.
Excluding the impact of the pre-tax restructuring charges,
transition and duplicate operating expenses and gains from the
sale of the distribution business in India and the sale of
assets used for contract manufacturing, and the related income
tax provision (benefit) associated with these pre-tax amounts,
the provision for income taxes due to the extraordinary
dividends and additional dividends above the base and
extraordinary dividend amounts, the decrease in the provision
for income taxes resulting from the additional income tax
benefit for previously paid state income taxes which became
recoverable, and reduction in estimated income taxes payable due
to the resolution of several significant uncertain income tax
audit issues, our adjusted effective tax rate for 2005 was 27.5%.
The calculation of our adjusted effective tax rate for the year
ended December 31, 2005 is summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Earnings from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest, as reported
|
|
$
|
599.2
|
|
Total restructuring charges
|
|
|
43.8
|
|
Transition and duplicate operating expenses associated with the
European restructuring
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
Gain on sale of distribution business in India
|
|
|
(7.9
|
)
|
Gain on sale of assets used for contract manufacturing
|
|
|
(5.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
635.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes, as reported
|
|
$
|
192.4
|
|
Income tax (provision) benefit for:
|
|
|
|
|
Total restructuring charges
|
|
|
7.6
|
|
Transition and duplicate operating expenses associated with the
European restructuring
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
Gain on sale of distribution business in India
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
Gain on sale of assets used for contract manufacturing
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
Recovery of previously paid state income taxes
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
Resolution of uncertain income tax audit issues
|
|
|
24.1
|
|
Extraordinary dividend of $674.0 million under the American
Jobs Creation Act of 2004
|
|
|
(29.9
|
)
|
Additional dividends of $85.8 million above the base and
extraordinary dividend amounts
|
|
|
(19.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
174.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted effective tax rate
|
|
|
27.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
The decrease in the adjusted effective tax rate to 25.0% in 2007
compared to the adjusted effective tax rate in 2006 of 25.9% is
primarily due to an increase in the mix of earnings in lower tax
rate jurisdictions and the beneficial tax rate effect of
increased deductions in the United States for interest expense
and increased deductions for the amortization of acquired
intangible assets associated with the Esprit, Cornéal and
Inamed acquisitions.
The decrease in the adjusted effective tax rate to 25.9% in 2006
compared to the adjusted effective tax rate in 2005 of 27.5% is
primarily due to the beneficial tax rate effects from increased
U.S. deductions for interest expense and the amortization
of acquired intangible assets associated with the Inamed
acquisition, stock option
67
compensation expense, and an increase in the utilization of
R&D tax credits, partially offset by an increase in the mix
of earnings in higher tax rate jurisdictions.
Earnings
(Loss) from Continuing Operations
Our earnings from continuing operations for the year ended
December 31, 2007 were $501.0 million compared to a
loss from continuing operations of $127.4 million in 2006.
The $628.4 million increase in earnings from continuing
operations was primarily the result of the increase in operating
income of $722.6 million, partially offset by the increase
in net non-operating expense of $15.4 million, the increase
in the provision for income taxes of $78.7 million and the
increase in minority interest expense of $0.1 million.
Our loss from continuing operations for the year ended
December 31, 2006 was $127.4 million compared to net
earnings from continuing operations of $403.9 million in
2005. The $531.3 million decrease in net earnings from
continuing operations was primarily the result of the decrease
in operating income of $574.1 million and the increase in
net non-operating expense of $44.6 million, partially
offset by a decrease in the provision for income taxes of
$84.9 million and a decrease in minority interest expense
of $2.5 million.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
We assess our liquidity by our ability to generate cash to fund
our operations. Significant factors in the management of
liquidity are: funds generated by operations; levels of accounts
receivable, inventories, accounts payable and capital
expenditures; the extent of our stock repurchase program; funds
required for acquisitions; adequate credit facilities; and
financial flexibility to attract long-term capital on
satisfactory terms.
Historically, we have generated cash from operations in excess
of working capital requirements. The net cash provided by
operating activities was $792.5 million in 2007 compared to
$746.9 million in 2006 and $424.6 million in 2005.
Cash flow from operating activities increased in 2007 compared
to 2006 primarily as a result of an increase in earnings from
operations, including the effect of adjusting for non-cash
items, of $162.7 million, partially offset by a net
increase in cash required to fund growth in net operating assets
and liabilities, principally inventories and other current and
non-current assets and income taxes payable, and an increase in
income taxes paid. We paid pension contributions of
$23.2 million in 2007 compared to $15.8 million in
2006.
Cash flow from operating activities increased in 2006 compared
to 2005 primarily as a result of an increase in earnings from
operations, including the effect of adjusting for non-cash
items, a decrease in income taxes paid, a decrease in
contributions made to our pension plans, a decrease in cash
requirements for our inventories and a net decrease in cash
required to fund changes in other net operating assets and
liabilities, partially offset by an increase in cash required to
fund growth in our trade receivables, primarily in North America
and Europe. The decrease in income taxes paid in 2006 compared
to 2005 was primarily due to payments made in 2005 related to
the estimated U.S. income tax liability for the
repatriation of certain foreign earnings and advance payments in
anticipation of income tax audit settlements. We paid pension
contributions of $15.8 million in 2006 compared to
$49.2 million in 2005. The decrease in pension
contributions in 2006 compared to 2005 was primarily due to
beneficial changes in actuarial assumptions, primarily the
discount rate, and a change in our funding policy during 2006.
Net cash used in investing activities was $833.1 million in
2007, compared to $1,484.6 million in 2006 and
$182.1 million in 2005. In 2007, we paid
$683.7 million, net of cash acquired, for the acquisitions
of Esprit, EndoArt and Cornéal. In 2006, we paid
$1,328.7 million, net of cash acquired, for the cash
portion of the Inamed acquisition. In 2007, we received
$23.9 million from the sale of the ophthalmic surgical
device business that we acquired as a part of the Cornéal
acquisition. We invested $141.8 million in new facilities
and equipment during 2007 compared to $131.4 million during
2006 and $78.5 million in 2005. Additionally, in 2007 we
capitalized $10.0 million as intangible assets in
connection with a milestone payment related to
Restasis®,
our drug for the treatment of chronic dry eye disease, and an
upfront licensing payment related to urologics products incurred
subsequent to the Esprit acquisition, and collected
$9.2 million primarily from a final installment payment
related to the 2006 sale of our Mougins, France facility. In
2006, we capitalized $11.5 million as intangible assets
primarily related to milestone payments for regulatory approvals
to commercialize the
Juvédermtm
dermal filler family of products in the United States and
Australia and collected $4.8 million primarily from the
sale of our Mougins, France facility. In 2005, we paid
$110.0 million in connection with a royalty buyout
agreement relating to
68
Restasis®,
of which $99.3 million was capitalized as an intangible
licensing asset and $10.7 million was used to pay
previously accrued net royalty obligations, and we collected
$7.8 million primarily from the sale of our contact lens
care and surgical products distribution business in India to a
subsidiary of AMO. Net cash used in investing activities also
includes $30.7 million, $18.4 million and
$13.6 million to acquire software during 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively. We currently expect to invest between
$210 million and $220 million in capital expenditures
for manufacturing and administrative facilities, manufacturing
equipment and other property, plant and equipment during 2008.
In July 2007, our Board of Directors approved the investment of
up to $95 million for the construction of a new office
building at our main facility in Irvine, California. We
currently expect to incur design related costs for this office
building in 2008, followed by major construction activities
beginning in 2009.
Net cash used in financing activities was $182.4 million in
2007 compared to net cash provided by financing activities of
$803.0 million in 2006 and $160.3 million in 2005. In
2007, we repurchased approximately 3.0 million shares of
our common stock for $186.5 million, had net repayments of
notes payable of $108.5 million and paid $60.8 million
in dividends. This use of cash was partially reduced by
$137.4 million received from the sale of stock to employees
and $36.0 million in excess tax benefits from share-based
compensation. In 2006, we borrowed $825.0 million under a
bridge credit facility to fund part of the cash portion of the
Inamed purchase price. On April 12, 2006, we completed
concurrent private placements of $750 million in aggregate
principal amount of 1.50% Convertible Senior Notes due
2026, or 2026 Convertible Notes, and $800 million in
aggregate principal amount of 5.75% Senior Notes due 2016,
or 2016 Notes. We used part of the proceeds from these debt
issuances to repay all borrowings under the bridge credit
facility. Additionally, in 2006, we received $182.7 million
from the sale of stock to employees, $13.0 million upon
termination of an interest rate swap contract related to the
2016 Notes and $35.4 million in excess tax benefits from
share-based compensation. These amounts were partially reduced
by net repayments of notes payable of $67.5 million, cash
payments of $20.2 million in offering fees related to the
issuance of the 2026 Convertible Notes and the 2016 Notes, cash
paid on the conversion of our 2022 Notes of $521.9 million,
repurchase of approximately 5.8 million shares of our
common stock for approximately $307.8 million and
$58.4 million in dividends paid to stockholders. Net cash
provided by financing activities was $160.3 million in
2005, composed primarily of a $157.0 million increase in
notes payable and $149.9 million of cash provided by the
sale of stock to employees, partially reduced by
$94.3 million of cash used for the purchase of treasury
stock and $52.3 million for payment of dividends.
Effective January 29, 2008, our Board of Directors declared
a quarterly cash dividend of $0.05 per share, payable on
March 7, 2008 to stockholders of record on
February 15, 2008. We maintain an evergreen stock
repurchase program. Our evergreen stock repurchase program
authorizes us to repurchase our common stock for the primary
purpose of funding our stock-based benefit plans. Under the
stock repurchase program, we may maintain up to
18.4 million repurchased shares in our treasury account at
any one time. As of December 31, 2007, we held
approximately 1.6 million treasury shares under this
program. Effective January 1, 2008, we entered into a
Rule 10b5-1
plan that authorizes our broker to purchase our common stock
traded in the open market pursuant to our evergreen stock
repurchase program. The terms of the plan set forth a maximum
annual limit of 4.0 million shares to be repurchased, and
certain quarterly maximum and minimum volume limits. The term of
our
Rule 10b5-1
plan ends on December 31, 2009 and is cancellable at any
time in our sole discretion.
The 2026 Convertible Notes pay interest semi-annually at a rate
of 1.50% per annum and are convertible, at the holders
option, at an initial conversion rate of 15.7904 shares per
$1,000 principal amount of notes. In certain circumstances the
2026 Convertible Notes may be convertible into cash in an amount
equal to the lesser of their principal amount or their
conversion value. If the conversion value of the 2026
Convertible Notes exceeds their principal amount at the time of
conversion, we will also deliver common stock or, at our
election, a combination of cash and common stock for the
conversion value in excess of the principal amount. We will not
be permitted to redeem the 2026 Convertible Notes prior to
April 5, 2009, will be permitted to redeem the 2026
Convertible Notes from and after April 5, 2009 to
April 4, 2011 if the closing price of our common stock
reaches a specified threshold, and will be permitted to redeem
the 2026 Convertible Notes at any time on or after April 5,
2011. Holders of the 2026 Convertible Notes will also be able to
require us to redeem the 2026 Convertible Notes on April 1,
2011, April 1, 2016 and April 1, 2021 or upon a change
in control of us. The 2026 Convertible Notes mature on
April 1, 2026, unless previously redeemed by us or earlier
converted by the note holders.
69
The 2016 Notes were sold at 99.717% of par value with an
effective interest rate of 5.79%, pay interest semi-annually at
a rate of 5.75% per annum, and are redeemable at any time at our
option, subject to a make-whole provision based on the present
value of remaining interest payments at the time of the
redemption. The aggregate outstanding principal amount of the
2016 Notes is due and payable on April 1, 2016, unless
earlier redeemed by us.
On January 31, 2007, we entered into a nine-year, two-month
interest rate swap with a $300.0 million notional amount
with semi-annual settlements and quarterly interest rate reset
dates. The swap receives interest at a fixed rate of 5.75% and
pays interest at a variable interest rate equal to
3-month
LIBOR plus 0.368%, and effectively converts $300.0 million
of our 2016 Notes to a variable interest rate. Based on the
structure of the hedging relationship, the hedge meets the
criteria for using the short-cut method for a fair value hedge
under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133). Under the
provisions of SFAS No. 133, the investment in the
derivative and the related long-term debt are recorded at
fair-value. As a result, we have recognized an asset associated
with the fair-value of the derivative of $17.1 million
reported in Investments and other assets and a
corresponding increase in Long-term debt of
$17.1 million reported in our consolidated balance sheet as
of December 31, 2007. As the hedge meets the criteria for
using the short-cut method under the provisions of
SFAS No. 133, the change in the fair-value of the
derivative is assumed to exactly equal the related change in the
fair-value of the 2016 Notes, so there is no gain or loss
reported in our consolidated statements of operations related to
the interest rate hedge.
At December 31, 2007, we had a committed long-term credit
facility, a commercial paper program, a medium term note
program, an unused debt shelf registration statement that we may
use for a new medium term note program and other issuances of
debt securities, and various foreign bank facilities. In May
2007, we amended the termination date of our committed long-term
credit facility to May 2012. The termination date can be further
extended from time to time upon our request and acceptance by
the issuer of the facility for a period of one year from the
last scheduled termination date for each request accepted. The
committed long-term credit facility allows for borrowings of up
to $800 million. The commercial paper program also provides
for up to $600 million in borrowings. The current medium
term note program allows us to issue up to an additional
$5.4 million in registered notes on a non-revolving basis.
The debt shelf registration statement provides for up to
$350 million in additional debt securities. Borrowings
under the committed long-term credit facility and medium-term
note program are subject to certain financial and operating
covenants that include, among other provisions, maximum leverage
ratios. Certain covenants also limit subsidiary debt. We believe
we were in compliance with these covenants at December 31,
2007. As of December 31, 2007, we had no borrowings under
our committed long-term credit facility, $59.6 million in
borrowings outstanding under the medium term note program,
$5.1 million in borrowings outstanding under various
foreign bank facilities and no borrowings under our commercial
paper program. Commercial paper, when outstanding, is issued at
current short-term interest rates. Additionally, any future
borrowings that are outstanding under the long-term credit
facility will be subject to a floating interest rate.
As of December 31, 2007, we have net pension and
post-retirement benefit obligations totaling $56.5 million.
Future funding requirements are subject to change depending on
the actual return on net assets in our funded pension plans and
changes in actuarial assumptions. In 2008, we expect to pay
pension contributions of between approximately
$18.0 million and $19.0 million.
On October 16, 2007, we completed the acquisition of
Esprit. As of December 31, 2007, we substantially completed
the integration activities to merge the Esprit operations with
our operations.
In connection with our January 2007 Cornéal acquisition, we
initiated a restructuring and integration plan to merge the
Cornéal facial aesthetics business operations with our
operations. As of December 31, 2007, we have recorded
pre-tax restructuring and integration costs of
$25.1 million. We currently estimate that the total pre-tax
charges resulting from the restructuring and integration of the
Cornéal facial aesthetics business operations will be
between $29.0 million and $36.0 million, all of which
are expected to be cash expenditures.
In connection with our March 2006 Inamed acquisition, we
initiated a global restructuring and integration plan to merge
the Inamed operations with our operations and to capture
synergies through the centralization of certain general and
administrative functions. In addition, in January 2007, we
initiated an additional plan to restructure and eventually sell
or close our collagen manufacturing facility in Fremont,
California that we acquired in connection with the Inamed
acquisition. As of December 31, 2007, with the exception of
the restructuring of our collagen
70
manufacturing facility, which currently is expected to be
completed by the end of the fourth quarter of 2008, we
substantially completed all activities related to the
restructuring and operational integration of the former Inamed
operations. As of December 31, 2007, we recorded cumulative
pre-tax restructuring and integration charges of
$48.7 million, including $1.7 million of restructuring
charges related to the restructuring of the collagen
manufacturing facility, and $1.6 million of income tax
costs related to intercompany transfers of trade businesses and
net assets. In addition to the pre-tax charges, we incurred
capital expenditures of approximately $13.0 million,
primarily related to the integration of information systems. We
currently estimate that the total pre-tax charges resulting from
the restructuring of the collagen manufacturing facility will be
between $6.0 and $8.0 million, all of which are expected to
be cash expenditures.
On January 30, 2008, we announced the phased closure of our
breast implant manufacturing facility at Arklow, Ireland and the
transfer of production to our state-of-the-art manufacturing
plant in Costa Rica. The Arklow facility was acquired by us in
connection with our 2006 Inamed acquisition and employs
360 people. Production at the plant will be phased out
between 2008 and 2009. We currently expect to incur
restructuring and other transition related costs beginning in
the first quarter of 2008 and continuing up through 2009 of
between $60 million and $65 million.
A significant amount of our existing cash and equivalents are
held by
non-U.S. subsidiaries.
We currently plan to use these funds in our operations outside
the United States. Withholding and U.S. taxes have not been
provided for unremitted earnings of certain
non-U.S. subsidiaries
because we have reinvested these earnings indefinitely in such
operations. As of December 31, 2007, we had approximately
$1,000.7 million in unremitted earnings outside the United
States for which withholding and U.S. taxes were not
provided. Tax costs would be incurred if these funds were
remitted to the United States.
We believe that the net cash provided by operating activities,
supplemented as necessary with borrowings available under our
existing credit facilities and existing cash and equivalents,
will provide us with sufficient resources to meet our current
expected obligations, working capital requirements, debt service
and other cash needs over the next year.
Inflation
Although at reduced levels in recent years, inflation continues
to apply upward pressure on the cost of goods and services that
we use. The competitive and regulatory environments in many
markets substantially limit our ability to fully recover these
higher costs through increased selling prices. We continually
seek to mitigate the adverse effects of inflation through cost
containment and improved productivity and manufacturing
processes.
Foreign
Currency Fluctuations
Approximately 34.3% of our product net sales in 2007 were
derived from operations outside the United States, and a portion
of our international cost structure is denominated in currencies
other than the U.S. dollar. As a result, we are subject to
fluctuations in sales and earnings reported in U.S. dollars
due to changing currency exchange rates. We routinely monitor
our transaction exposure to currency rates and implement certain
economic hedging strategies to limit such exposure, as we deem
appropriate. The net impact of foreign currency fluctuations on
our sales was an increase of $87.4 million,
$15.2 million and $22.3 million in 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively. The 2007 sales increase included
$44.5 million related to the euro, $11.7 million
related to the Brazilian real, $8.3 million related to the
Australian dollar, $8.2 million related to the Canadian
dollar, $8.2 million related to the U.K. pound and
$6.5 million related to other Asian and Latin American
currencies. The 2006 sales increase included $7.8 million
related to the Brazilian real, $6.1 million related to the
Canadian dollar, $2.0 million related to the euro and
$1.0 million related to the U.K. pound, partially offset by
decreases of $1.7 million primarily related to the
Australian dollar and other Asian and Latin American currencies.
The 2005 sales increase included $1.1 million related to
the euro, $5.2 million related to the Canadian dollar,
$1.3 million related to the Australian dollar,
$10.9 million related to the Brazilian real,
$1.2 million related to the Mexican peso and
$2.3 million related to other Latin American currencies.
See Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies, in the notes to the consolidated financial
statements listed under Item 15 of Part IV of this
report, Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules,
for a description of our accounting policy on foreign currency
translation.
71
Esprit
Acquisition
On October 16, 2007, we completed the acquisition of
Esprit, a pharmaceutical company based in the United States with
expertise in the genitourinary market, for an aggregate purchase
price of approximately $370.7 million, net of cash
acquired. The acquisition was funded from our cash and
equivalents balances. See Note 2, Acquisitions,
in the notes to our consolidated financial statements listed
under Item 15 of Part IV of this report,
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
We believe the fair values assigned to the Esprit assets
acquired and liabilities assumed were based on reasonable
assumptions. The following table summarizes the estimated fair
values of net assets acquired:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
35.8
|
|
Identifiable intangible assets
|
|
|
358.0
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
122.6
|
|
Other non-current assets
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(24.2
|
)
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(128.9
|
)
|
Other non-current liabilities
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
370.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our fair value estimates for the Esprit purchase price
allocation may change during the allowable allocation period,
which is up to one year from the acquisition date, if additional
information becomes available.
EndoArt
Acquisition
On February 22, 2007, we completed the acquisition of
EndoArt, a provider of telemetrically-controlled (or
remote-controlled) implants used in the treatment of morbid
obesity and other conditions. Under the terms of the purchase
agreement, we acquired all of the outstanding capital stock of
EndoArt for an aggregate purchase price of approximately
$97.1 million, net of cash acquired. The acquisition
consideration was all cash, funded from our cash and equivalents
balances. See Note 2, Acquisitions, in the
notes to our consolidated financial statements listed under
Item 15 of Part IV of this report, Exhibits and
Financial Statement Schedules.
We believe the fair values assigned to the EndoArt assets
acquired and liabilities assumed were based on reasonable
assumptions. The following table summarizes the estimated fair
values of net assets acquired:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
0.8
|
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Identifiable intangible assets
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
72.0
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
97.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cornéal
Acquisition
On January 2, 2007, we purchased all of the outstanding
common stock of Cornéal, a privately held healthcare
company that develops, manufactures and markets dermal fillers,
viscoelastics and a range of ophthalmic surgical device
products, for an aggregate purchase price of approximately
$209.2 million, net of cash acquired. The acquisition was
funded from our cash and equivalents balances and our committed
long-term credit facility. See Note 2,
Acquisitions, in the notes to our consolidated
financial statements listed under Item 15 of Part IV
of this report, Exhibits and Financial Statement
Schedules.
72
We believe the fair values assigned to the Cornéal assets
acquired and liabilities assumed were based upon reasonable
assumptions. The following table summarizes the estimated fair
values of the net assets acquired:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
38.9
|
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
19.5
|
|
Identifiable intangible assets
|
|
|
115.7
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
109.2
|
|
Other non-current assets
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(16.4
|
)
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
(11.6
|
)
|
Deferred tax liabilities non-current
|
|
|
(45.0
|
)
|
Other non-current liabilities
|
|
|
(2.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
209.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inamed
Acquisition
On March 23, 2006, we completed the acquisition of Inamed,
a global healthcare company that develops, manufactures and
markets a diverse line of products, including breast implants, a
range of facial aesthetics and obesity intervention products,
for approximately $3.3 billion, consisting of approximately
$1.4 billion in cash and 34,883,386 shares of our
common stock with a fair value of approximately
$1.9 billion. See Note 2, Acquisitions, in
the notes to our consolidated financial statements listed under
Item 15 of Part IV of this report, Exhibits and
Financial Statement Schedules.
Contractual
Obligations and Commitments
The table below presents information about our contractual
obligations and commitments at December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More
|
|
|
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
|
|
|
than Five
|
|
|
|
|
One Year
|
|
1-3 Years
|
|
3-5 Years
|
|
Years
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Notes payable, convertible notes and long-term debt
obligations(a)
|
|
$
|
39.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
775.0
|
|
|
$
|
798.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,612.8
|
|
Operating lease obligations
|
|
|
42.4
|
|
|
|
58.2
|
|
|
|
29.8
|
|
|
|
51.1
|
|
|
|
181.5
|
|
Purchase obligations
|
|
|
200.5
|
|
|
|
71.2
|
|
|
|
40.3
|
|
|
|
50.3
|
|
|
|
362.3
|
|
Pension minimum funding(b)
|
|
|
18.9
|
|
|
|
36.5
|
|
|
|
34.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89.7
|
|
Other long-term liabilities (including unrecognized tax benefit
liabilities but excluding deferred income and pension
liabilities) reflected on our consolidated balance sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46.7
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
125.3
|
|
|
|
174.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
301.5
|
|
|
$
|
212.6
|
|
|
$
|
882.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,024.8
|
|
|
$
|
2,420.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Excludes the interest rate swap fair value adjustment of
$17.1 million. |
|
(b) |
|
For purposes of this table, we assume that we will be required
to fund our U.S. and
non-U.S.
funded pension plans based on the minimum funding required by
applicable regulations. In determining the minimum required
funding, we utilize current actuarial assumptions and exchange
rates to forecast estimates of amounts that may be payable for
up to five years in the future. In managements judgment,
minimum funding estimates beyond a five year time horizon cannot
be reliably estimated. Where minimum funding as determined for
each individual plan would not achieve a funded status to the
level of local statutory requirements, additional discretionary
funding may be provided from available cash resources. |
73
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
In the normal course of business, our operations are exposed to
risks associated with fluctuations in interest rates and foreign
currency exchange rates. We address these risks through
controlled risk management that includes the use of derivative
financial instruments to economically hedge or reduce these
exposures. We do not enter into financial instruments for
trading or speculative purposes. See Note 12,
Financial Instruments, in the notes to the
consolidated financial statements listed under Item 15 of
Part IV of this report, Exhibits and Financial
Statement Schedules, for activities relating to interest
rate and foreign currency risk management.
To ensure the adequacy and effectiveness of our interest rate
and foreign exchange hedge positions, we continually monitor our
interest rate swap positions and foreign exchange forward and
option positions both on a stand-alone basis and in conjunction
with our underlying interest rate and foreign currency
exposures, from an accounting and economic perspective.
However, given the inherent limitations of forecasting and the
anticipatory nature of the exposures intended to be hedged, we
cannot assure you that such programs will offset more than a
portion of the adverse financial impact resulting from
unfavorable movements in either interest or foreign exchange
rates. In addition, the timing of the accounting for recognition
of gains and losses related to mark-to-market instruments for
any given period may not coincide with the timing of gains and
losses related to the underlying economic exposures and,
therefore, may adversely affect our consolidated operating
results and financial position.
Interest
Rate Risk
Our interest income and expense is more sensitive to
fluctuations in the general level of U.S. interest rates
than to changes in rates in other markets. Changes in
U.S. interest rates affect the interest earned on our cash
and equivalents, interest expense on our debt as well as costs
associated with foreign currency contracts.
On January 31, 2007, we entered into a nine-year, two-month
interest rate swap with a $300.0 million notional amount
with semi-annual settlements and quarterly interest rate reset
dates. The swap receives interest at a fixed rate of 5.75% and
pays interest at a variable interest rate equal to
3-month
LIBOR plus 0.368%, and effectively converts $300.0 million
of our $800 million aggregate principal amount 2016 Notes
issued in April 2006 to a variable interest rate. Based on the
structure of the hedging relationship, the hedge meets the
criteria for using the short-cut method for a fair value hedge
under the provisions of SFAS No. 133. Under the
provisions of SFAS No. 133, the investment in the
derivative and the related long-term debt are recorded at fair
value. At December 31, 2007, we have recognized an asset
associated with the fair-value of the derivative of
$17.1 million reported in Investments and other
assets and a corresponding increase in Long-term
debt of $17.1 million reported in our consolidated
balance sheet. The differential to be paid or received as
interest rates change is accrued and recognized as an adjustment
of interest expense related to the 2016 Notes. For the year
ended December 31, 2007, we recognized $0.3 million as
a reduction of interest expense.
In February 2006, we entered into interest rate swap contracts
based on the
3-month
LIBOR with an aggregate notional amount of $800 million, a
swap period of 10 years and a starting swap rate of 5.198%.
We entered into these swap contracts as a cash flow hedge to
effectively fix the future interest rate for our 2016 Notes. In
April 2006, we terminated the interest rate swap contracts and
received approximately $13.0 million. The total gain is
being amortized as a reduction to interest expense over a
10 year period to match the term of the 2016 Notes. As of
December 31, 2007, the remaining unrecognized gain, net of
tax, of $6.5 million is recorded as a component of
accumulated other comprehensive loss.
At December 31, 2007, we had approximately
$4.2 million of variable rate debt. If interest rates were
to increase or decrease by 1% for the year, annual interest
expense, including the effect of the $300.0 million
notional amount of the interest rate swap entered into on
January 31, 2007, would increase or decrease by
approximately
74
$3.0 million. Commercial paper, when outstanding, is issued
at current short-term interest rates. Additionally any future
borrowings that are outstanding under the long-term credit
facility will be subject to a floating interest rate. Therefore,
higher interest costs could occur if interest rates increase in
the future.
The tables below present information about certain of our
investment portfolio and our debt obligations at
December 31, 2007 and 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
Market
|
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
2012
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
Total
|
|
Value
|
|
|
(in millions, except interest rates)
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Equivalents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Paper
|
|
$
|
871.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
871.0
|
|
|
$
|
871.0
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
4.62
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.62
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign Time Deposits
|
|
|
108.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108.1
|
|
|
|
108.1
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
3.55
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.55
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Other Cash Equivalents
|
|
|
96.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96.9
|
|
|
|
96.9
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
5.52
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.52
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash Equivalents
|
|
$
|
1,076.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,076.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,076.0
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
4.59
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.59
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Rate (US$)
|
|
$
|
34.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
750.0
|
|
|
$
|
25.0
|
|
|
$
|
798.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,607.7
|
|
|
$
|
1,768.4
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
6.91
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.50
|
%
|
|
|
7.47
|
%
|
|
|
5.79
|
%
|
|
|
3.84
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Rate (non-US$)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
4.15
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.15
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Other Variable Rate (non-US$)
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
4.42
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.42
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Total Debt Obligations(a)
|
|
$
|
39.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
750.0
|
|
|
$
|
25.0
|
|
|
$
|
798.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,612.8
|
|
|
$
|
1,773.5
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
6.59
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.50
|
%
|
|
|
7.47
|
%
|
|
|
5.79
|
%
|
|
|
3.84
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTEREST RATE DERIVATIVES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate Swaps:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed to Variable (US$)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
300.0
|
|
|
$
|
300.0
|
|
|
$
|
17.1
|
|
Average Pay Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.10
|
%
|
|
|
5.10
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Average Receive Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.75
|
%
|
|
|
5.75
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Total debt obligations in the consolidated balance sheet at
December 31, 2007 include debt obligations of
$1,612.8 million and the interest rate swap fair value
adjustment of $17.1 million.
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
Market
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
Total
|
|
Value
|
|
|
(in millions, except interest rates)
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Equivalents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase Agreements
|
|
$
|
130.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
130.0
|
|
|
$
|
130.0
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
5.35
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.35
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Paper
|
|
|
771.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
771.0
|
|
|
|
771.0
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
5.29
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.29
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign Time Deposits
|
|
|
288.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
288.6
|
|
|
|
288.6
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
3.75
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.75
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Other Cash Equivalents
|
|
|
138.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
138.7
|
|
|
|
138.7
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
5.91
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.91
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash Equivalents
|
|
$
|
1,328.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,328.3
|
|
|
$
|
1,328.3
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
5.03
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.03
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Rate (US$)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
33.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
750.0
|
|
|
$
|
822.9
|
|
|
$
|
1,606.4
|
|
|
$
|
1,686.7
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.91
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.50
|
%
|
|
|
5.84
|
%
|
|
|
3.84
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Other Variable Rate (non-US$)
|
|
|
102.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102.0
|
|
|
|
102.0
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
5.46
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.46
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Total Debt Obligations
|
|
$
|
102.0
|
|
|
$
|
33.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
750.0
|
|
|
$
|
822.9
|
|
|
$
|
1,708.4
|
|
|
$
|
1,788.7
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate
|
|
|
5.46
|
%
|
|
|
6.91
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.50
|
%
|
|
|
5.84
|
%
|
|
|
3.93
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
Currency Risk
Overall, we are a net recipient of currencies other than the
U.S. dollar and, as such, benefit from a weaker dollar and
are adversely affected by a stronger dollar relative to major
currencies worldwide. Accordingly, changes in exchange rates,
and in particular a strengthening of the U.S. dollar, may
negatively affect our consolidated revenues or operating costs
and expenses as expressed in U.S. dollars.
From time to time, we enter into foreign currency option and
forward contracts to reduce earnings and cash flow volatility
associated with foreign exchange rate changes to allow our
management to focus its attention on our core business issues.
Accordingly, we enter into various contracts which change in
value as foreign exchange rates change to economically offset
the effect of changes in the value of foreign currency assets
and liabilities, commitments and anticipated foreign currency
denominated sales and operating expenses. We enter into foreign
currency option and forward contracts in amounts between minimum
and maximum anticipated foreign exchange exposures, generally
for periods not to exceed one year.
We use foreign currency option contracts, which provide for the
sale or purchase of foreign currencies to offset foreign
currency exposures expected to arise in the normal course of our
business. While these instruments are subject to fluctuations in
value, such fluctuations are anticipated to offset changes in
the value of the underlying exposures.
All of our outstanding foreign currency option contracts are
entered into to reduce the volatility of earnings generated in
currencies other than the U.S. dollar, primarily earnings
denominated in the Canadian dollar, Mexican peso, Australian
dollar, Brazilian real, euro, Japanese yen, Swedish krona, Swiss
franc and U.K. pound. Current changes in the fair value of open
foreign currency option contracts are recorded through earnings
as Unrealized gain (loss) on derivative instruments,
net while any realized gains (losses) on settled contracts
are recorded through earnings as Other, net in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The premium
costs of purchased foreign exchange option contracts are
recorded in Other current assets and amortized to
Other, net over the life of the options.
76
All of our outstanding foreign exchange forward contracts are
entered into to protect the value of certain intercompany
receivables or payables denominated in currencies other than the
U.S. dollar. The realized and unrealized gains and losses from
foreign currency forward contracts and the revaluation of the
foreign denominated intercompany receivables or payables are
recorded through Other, net in the accompanying
consolidated statements of operations.
The following table provides information about our foreign
currency derivative financial instruments outstanding as of
December 31, 2007 and 2006. The information is provided in
U.S. dollars, as presented in our consolidated financial
statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
Average Contract
|
|
|
|
Average Contract
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
Rate or Strike
|
|
Notional
|
|
Rate or Strike
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Amount
|
|
Amount
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Receive U.S. dollar/pay foreign currency)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Euro
|
|
$
|
175.5
|
|
|
|
1.44
|
|
|
$
|
142.3
|
|
|
|
1.32
|
|
Australian dollar
|
|
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
0.85
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
0.78
|
|
Swiss franc
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
1.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canadian dollar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
1.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
188.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
153.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated fair value
|
|
$
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency sold put options:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canadian dollar
|
|
$
|
50.3
|
|
|
|
1.00
|
|
|
$
|
35.0
|
|
|
|
1.14
|
|
Mexican peso
|
|
|
14.2
|
|
|
|
11.17
|
|
|
|
14.3
|
|
|
|
11.00
|
|
Australian dollar
|
|
|
21.3
|
|
|
|
0.86
|
|
|
|
20.6
|
|
|
|
0.78
|
|
Brazilian real
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
1.86
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
2.24
|
|
Euro
|
|
|
151.2
|
|
|
|
1.47
|
|
|
|
73.0
|
|
|
|
1.34
|
|
Japanese yen
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
|
107.92
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
113.06
|
|
Swedish krona
|
|
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
6.41
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
6.79
|
|
Swiss franc
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
1.12
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
1.18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
279.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
178.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated fair value
|
|
$
|
7.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency purchased call options:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.K. pound
|
|
$
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
2.05
|
|
|
$
|
15.3
|
|
|
|
1.96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated fair value
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
The information required by this Item is incorporated herein by
reference to the financial statements set forth in Item 15
of Part IV of this report, Exhibits and Financial
Statement Schedules.
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
77
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed
to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our
Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and
Exchange Commissions rules and forms, and that such
information is accumulated and communicated to our management,
including our Principal Executive Officer and our Principal
Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosures. Our management, including our
Principal Executive Officer and our Principal Financial Officer,
does not expect that our disclosure controls or procedures will
prevent all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how
well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not
absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system
are met. Further, the 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 Allergan 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. Additionally, controls can
be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by
collusion of two or more people, or by management override of
the control. The design of any system of controls is also 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. Because of the inherent limitations in a
cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or
fraud may occur and not be detected. Also, we have investments
in certain unconsolidated entities. As we do not control or
manage these entities, our disclosure controls and procedures
with respect to such entities are necessarily substantially more
limited than those we maintain with respect to our consolidated
subsidiaries.
We carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our Principal
Executive Officer and our Principal Financial Officer, of the
effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure
controls and procedures as of December 31, 2007, the end of
the annual period covered by this report. The evaluation of our
disclosure controls and procedures included a review of the
disclosure controls and procedures objectives,
design, implementation and the effect of the controls and
procedures on the information generated for use in this report.
In the course of our evaluation, we sought to identify data
errors, control problems or acts of fraud and to confirm the
appropriate corrective actions, including process improvements,
were being undertaken.
Based on the foregoing, our Principal Executive Officer and our
Principal Financial Officer concluded that, as of the end of the
period covered by this report, our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective and were operating at the reasonable
assurance level.
Further, management determined that, as of December 31,
2007, there were no changes in our internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the fourth fiscal
quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely
to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
Our management report on internal control over financial
reporting and the report of our independent registered public
accounting firm on our internal control over financial reporting
are contained in Item 15 of Part IV of this report,
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
None.
78
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
For information required by this Item regarding our executive
officers, see Item 1 of Part I of this report,
Business.
The information to be included in the sections entitled
Election of Directors and Corporate
Governance in the Proxy Statement to be filed by us with
the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than
120 days after the close of our fiscal year ended
December 31, 2007 (the Proxy Statement) is
incorporated herein by reference.
The information to be included in the section entitled
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance in the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein
by reference.
The information to be included in the section entitled
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics in the Proxy
Statement is incorporated herein by reference.
We have filed, as exhibits to this report, the certifications of
our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
required pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
On May 17, 2007, we submitted to the New York Stock
Exchange the Annual CEO Certification required pursuant to
Section 303A.12(a) of the New York Stock Exchange Listed
Company Manual.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The information to be included in the sections entitled
Executive Compensation and Non-Employee
Directors Compensation in the Proxy Statement is
incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
The information to be included in the section entitled
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management and Related Stockholder Matters in the Proxy
Statement is incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
The information to be included in the sections entitled
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation in the Proxy Statement is incorporated
herein by reference.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services
|
The information to be included in the section entitled
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firms
Fees in the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by
reference.
79
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a) 1. Consolidated Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data:
The following financial statements are included herein under
Item 8 of Part II of this report, Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
|
F-1
|
|
|
|
|
F-2
|
|
|
|
|
F-4
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
F-6
|
|
|
|
|
|