e424b4
Filed pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4)
Registration
No. 333-137121
Prospectus
5,500,000 Shares
Common Stock
We are offering 2,000,000 shares of our common stock and
the selling stockholders named in this prospectus, which are
entities affiliated with members of our senior management and
our directors, are offering an additional 3,500,000 shares
of common stock. We will not receive any of the proceeds from
the sale of the shares being sold by the selling stockholders.
Our common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Global Market under the
symbol EGLT. The last reported sale price of our
common stock on September 27, 2006 was $17.11 per share.
Investing in our common stock involves risks. See Risk
Factors beginning on page 7.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Share | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Public offering price
|
|
$ |
16.5000 |
|
|
$ |
90,750,000 |
|
Underwriting discount
|
|
$ |
0.9075 |
|
|
$ |
4,991,250 |
|
Proceeds, before expenses, to Eagle Test Systems
|
|
$ |
15.5925 |
|
|
$ |
31,185,000 |
|
Proceeds, before expenses, to the selling stockholders
|
|
$ |
15.5925 |
|
|
$ |
54,573,750 |
|
We have granted the underwriters a
30-day option to
purchase up to 825,000 additional shares of common stock at the
public offering price, less the underwriting discount, if the
underwriters sell more than 5,500,000 shares in this
offering. The underwriters expect to deliver the shares of
common stock to purchasers on or about October 3, 2006.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or
complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
|
|
|
Banc of America Securities LLC |
Lehman Brothers |
Deutsche Bank Securities |
|
|
A.G. Edwards |
Canaccord Adams |
September 27, 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
F-1 |
|
ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS
You should rely only on the information contained in this
prospectus. We and the selling stockholders have not, and the
underwriters have not, authorized anyone to provide you with
different information. We and the selling stockholders are not
making an offer to sell or seeking an offer to buy these
securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not
permitted. You should assume that the information contained in
this prospectus is accurate as of the date on the front of this
prospectus only. Our business, financial condition, results of
operations and prospects may have changed since that date.
Our fiscal year ends on September 30. Accordingly, a
reference to fiscal 2005 in this prospectus, for
example, refers to the
12-month period that
ended on September 30, 2005.
PROSPECTUS SUMMARY
This summary highlights selected information contained
elsewhere in this prospectus. This summary does not contain all
of the information you should consider before investing in our
common stock. You should read this entire prospectus carefully,
especially the risks of investing in our common stock discussed
under Risk Factors beginning on page 7, and the
consolidated financial statements and notes to those
consolidated financial statements, before making an investment
decision. Unless the context otherwise requires, we
use the terms Eagle Test, the Company,
we, us and our in this
prospectus to refer to Eagle Test Systems, Inc. and its
subsidiaries.
Eagle Test Systems, Inc.
We design, manufacture, sell and service high-performance
automated test equipment, or ATE, for the semiconductor
industry. Our test equipment is designed to address our
customers volume production needs and to enable them to
achieve low
cost-of-test per
device. Our customers, including semiconductor manufacturers and
assembly and test subcontractors, use our products to test
analog, a combination of digital and analog, known as
mixed-signal, and radio frequency, or RF, semiconductors. Our
proprietary
SmartPintm
technology enables multiple semiconductor devices to be tested
simultaneously, or in parallel, on an individual test system,
permitting greater test throughput. We believe that our
technology and ATE architecture offer significant test speed and
precision, leading to high production yields. Our modular and
scalable test systems are designed to provide our customers with
cost-efficient, customized solutions. Semiconductors tested by
our systems are incorporated into a wide range of products in
high-growth markets, including digital cameras, MP3 players,
cellular telephones, video/multimedia products, automotive
electronics, computer peripherals, and notebook and desktop
computers.
Semiconductor manufacturers continuously strive for
manufacturing and process improvements in order to satisfy the
demand for smaller, better performing and lower cost
semiconductors. Semiconductor manufacturers are aggressively
pursuing strategies to reduce their overall
cost-of-test by
increasing the throughput of their test systems.
Cost-of-test includes
the initial ATE and ancillary equipment purchase price, as well
as set-up and operating
costs, and is often the most significant manufacturing cost,
particularly for high-volume, low-cost devices. For these types
of devices, ATE throughput, or the number of devices that can be
tested in a given unit of time on a single test system, is a key
determinant of
cost-of-test per device
and of a manufacturers ability to compete profitably.
We were founded and began providing test solutions in 1976.
Since October 1, 2003, we have delivered over 500 test
systems to more than 50 customers worldwide including Allegro
MicroSystems, Inc., Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc.,
Guidant Corporation, Intersil Corporation, National
Semiconductor Corporation, ON Semiconductor Corporation and
Texas Instruments Incorporated. Since October 1, 2005, we
have shipped production test systems to the following new
customers: Diodes Shanghai Co., Ltd., Dongbu Electronics,
Infineon Technologies, Microchip Technology, Myson Century Inc.
and STMicroelectronics. For our fiscal year ended
September 30, 2005, we had net revenue of
$63.5 million and net income of $7.4 million. For the
nine months ended June 30, 2006, we had net revenue of
$87.8 million and net income of $13.3 million,
compared to $35.0 million and $76,000, respectively, for
the similar nine month period in fiscal 2005. We completed our
initial public offering on March 14, 2006.
Our test systems are designed to enable our customers to achieve
low overall
cost-of-test per
device, thereby lowering their semiconductor production costs
and improving their profit opportunity. Based on informal
feedback from customers, we believe that our test systems offer
customers a competitive overall test solution relative to their
current testing method, which may include a test system provided
by one of our competitors, such as Credence Systems Corporation,
LTX Corporation or Teradyne, Inc., a test system
1
internally developed by such customer, or one of our previous
generation test systems. The aspects of our solution that
facilitate low
cost-of-test include:
|
|
|
|
|
Increased Throughput. Our test systems are designed to
reduce the time required to complete the test process for each
individual device and to enable high-speed, simultaneous testing
across multiple sites on the same test system. |
|
|
|
Improved Yield with Precision and Repeatability. Our
proprietary technology and product architecture are designed to
achieve a high degree of test precision and repeatable results
for analog and digital parameters in order to achieve higher
test yields resulting in significant cost savings for our
customers. |
|
|
|
Scalable and Flexible Architecture. Our architecture is
designed to enable our customers to tailor their test system
capabilities to the specific testing needs of their devices, and
to quickly and cost-effectively upgrade or reconfigure their ATE
as their testing needs evolve. |
|
|
|
Lower Switching Costs. We have developed a proprietary,
adaptable interface that enables our test systems to operate
using other vendors device under test, or DUT, boards, as
well as earlier generations of our DUT boards. This allows our
customers to easily migrate from competing test platforms or
earlier generations of our own product line to a more
cost-effective Eagle Test solution. |
Our objective is to strengthen our position as a leading
provider of semiconductor test solutions. Key elements of our
strategy include:
|
|
|
|
|
Innovate to Enable Low Overall
Cost-of-Test. We
intend to leverage our technology and architecture to further
enable multi-site, parallel testing, higher throughput and
greater test precision, while offering customers the flexibility
to upgrade and reconfigure existing test systems as their
testing needs evolve. |
|
|
|
Focus on High-Volume, Cost Sensitive Devices. We focus on
delivering test systems for high-volume, high-performance
analog, mixed-signal and RF devices. These devices are used in a
broad and growing range of high-volume consumer products such as
cellular telephones, computers, digital cameras, MP3 players and
automotive electronics. Decreasing the
cost-of-test will
become increasingly important to device manufacturers competing
in these markets as their products experience reductions in
average selling prices, or ASPs. We believe our focused approach
enables us to better serve these markets than vendors who
compete across a broader range of markets. |
|
|
|
Increase Our Market Share within Our Targeted Markets. We
seek to increase our sales to existing and new customers by
expanding the quantity and types of devices that we test,
including additional devices that our customers and prospective
customers currently test on competitors test systems.
During fiscal 2005, we significantly expanded our global
presence with the opening of five new offices in Asia and
Europe, and intend to continue to make additional investments in
our sales, marketing and service operations in these markets. |
|
|
|
Expand Our Addressable Markets by Broadening Test
Capabilities. Through new product enhancements and expanded
customer focus, we have recently begun to expand our addressable
markets to include test solutions for other mid to
low-complexity semiconductors such as discrete devices, data
converters and automotive products. We believe that our
demonstrated expertise and proven value proposition in the
analog, mixed-signal and RF device markets which are
characterized by high-volume and cost-sensitive products, such
as power and battery management devices, should enable us to
compete effectively in these newer markets which present similar
cost-of-test challenges. |
|
|
|
Maintain Profitable Growth Through Our Flexible Business
Model. We outsource a substantial portion of our subassembly
manufacturing functions to third parties, and focus our
manufacturing efforts on final test, assembly and integration.
This allows us to be flexible during industry downturns while
maintaining the quality of our products. In addition, our
modular system architecture is designed to allow us to offer new
products and enhancements in a short period of time and at low
incremental |
2
|
|
|
|
|
cost. These strategies provide us with a flexible business model
and better enable us to respond to the cyclical changes in our
industry. |
Our business is subject to numerous risks as discussed more
fully in the section entitled Risk Factors
immediately following this prospectus summary. Principal risks
of our business include:
|
|
|
|
|
The semiconductor industry is highly cyclical with recurring
periods of over-supply that adversely affect our business.
Because downturns often occur very rapidly, we cannot adequately
foresee their timing and extent or their effect on customer
orders and our revenue. |
|
|
|
In the past we have experienced, and in the future we expect to
experience, fluctuations in our revenue and results of
operations from quarter to quarter due to a variety of factors. |
|
|
|
We depend on a small number of customers for a significant
portion of our sales. Our customers are not obligated by
long-term purchase contracts, and may cancel orders with little
regard for potential penalties. |
|
|
|
We face difficulty in obtaining new customers because of the
high cost of switching test equipment vendors in our markets.
Unless our test systems offer substantial performance or cost
advantages that materially outweigh a customers expense of
switching to our test systems, it will be difficult for us to
achieve significant sales to that customer once it has selected
another vendors test system for an application. |
|
|
|
Some of our competitors and potential competitors have greater
financial, engineering, manufacturing and marketing resources
than we do. Some of our competitors also have broader product
offerings than we do, since our products are not designed to
test semiconductors with high digital capacity. We may not be
able to compete effectively with products introduced by any
current or new competitors, which would have an adverse effect
on our revenue and results of operations. |
|
|
|
Our Corporate Information |
We were founded as an Illinois corporation in 1976 and merged
into a newly-formed Delaware corporation on March 1, 2006.
Our principal executive offices are located at
2200 Millbrook Drive, Buffalo Grove, Illinois 60089.
The telephone number of our principal executive offices is
(847) 367-8282,
and we maintain a website at www.eagletest.com. Information
contained on our website does not constitute a part of this
prospectus.
We own, have rights to, or have applied for the trademarks and
trade names that we use in conjunction with our business,
including Eagle Test Systems and our logo. All other trademarks
and trade names appearing in this prospectus are the property of
their respective holders.
3
THE OFFERING
|
|
|
Common stock offered by Eagle Test |
|
2,000,000 Shares |
|
Common stock offered by the selling stockholders |
|
3,500,000 Shares |
|
Common stock to be outstanding after this offering |
|
22,655,283 Shares |
|
Use of proceeds |
|
We expect to receive net proceeds from the offering of
approximately $30.5 million. We intend to use our net
proceeds from the offering for general corporate purposes,
including working capital and possible acquisitions and
investments. |
|
|
|
We will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of shares
of common stock by the selling stockholders. The selling
stockholders are entities affiliated with members of our senior
management and our directors. TA Associates, Inc. holds a
significant interest in us. One of our directors,
Mr. Child, is a managing director of TA Associates, Inc.
Foxman Family LLC is an entity controlled by our chief executive
officer in which our chief operating officer, among others, has
a pecuniary interest. See Principal and Selling
Stockholders. |
|
Nasdaq Global Market symbol |
|
EGLT |
The number of shares of our common stock to be outstanding
following this offering is based on and assumes
20,655,283 shares of our common stock outstanding as of
June 30, 2006. This number excludes 764,500 shares
subject to options granted as of June 30, 2006 at a
weighted average exercise price of $9.27 per share, and
2,575,000 additional shares reserved as of June 30,
2006 for future issuance under our stock-based compensation
plans.
Unless otherwise indicated, the share information in this
prospectus is as of June 30, 2006 and assumes no exercise
of the underwriters option to purchase additional shares.
4
SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
The tables below summarize our financial data as of the date and
for the periods indicated. You should read the following
information together with the more detailed information
contained in Selected Consolidated Financial Data,
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and our consolidated
financial statements and the accompanying notes included
elsewhere in this prospectus. The unaudited results for the nine
months ended June 30, 2006 are not necessarily indicative
of results expected for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2006 or for any other future period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended September 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited) | |
Consolidated Statement of Net Income Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenue
|
|
$ |
55,766 |
|
|
$ |
111,210 |
|
|
$ |
63,477 |
|
|
$ |
34,954 |
|
|
$ |
87,791 |
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
20,457 |
|
|
|
37,337 |
|
|
|
26,596 |
|
|
|
16,000 |
|
|
|
28,605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
35,309 |
|
|
|
73,873 |
|
|
|
36,881 |
|
|
|
18,954 |
|
|
|
59,186 |
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
16,491 |
|
|
|
23,932 |
|
|
|
21,066 |
|
|
|
14,630 |
|
|
|
21,259 |
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
3,113 |
|
|
|
6,051 |
|
|
|
7,883 |
|
|
|
5,800 |
|
|
|
6,555 |
|
|
Write-off of offering expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
15,705 |
|
|
|
42,032 |
|
|
|
7,932 |
|
|
|
(1,476 |
) |
|
|
31,372 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
3,887 |
|
|
|
3,910 |
|
|
|
2,928 |
|
|
|
3,481 |
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
(599 |
) |
|
|
(384 |
) |
|
|
5,466 |
|
Other (income) and expense, net
|
|
|
(636 |
) |
|
|
(408 |
) |
|
|
(2,274 |
) |
|
|
(669 |
) |
|
|
(1,052 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
16,310 |
|
|
|
37,005 |
|
|
|
6,895 |
|
|
|
(3,351 |
) |
|
|
23,477 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
6,706 |
|
|
|
14,952 |
|
|
|
(524 |
) |
|
|
(3,427 |
) |
|
|
10,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
22,053 |
|
|
$ |
7,419 |
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
13,319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings Per Common Share Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share, basic (1)
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.58 |
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
Net income (loss) per share, diluted (1)
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
1.46 |
|
|
|
0.36 |
|
|
|
(0.11 |
) |
|
|
0.09 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding, basic
|
|
|
14,365,017 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
11,782,483 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted
|
|
|
14,390,337 |
|
|
|
14,009,533 |
|
|
|
14,513,227 |
|
|
|
14,512,892 |
|
|
|
16,973,554 |
|
|
Selected Operating Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
63.3 |
% |
|
|
66.4 |
% |
|
|
58.1 |
% |
|
|
54.2 |
% |
|
|
67.4 |
% |
Operating margin
|
|
|
28.2 |
% |
|
|
37.8 |
% |
|
|
12.5 |
% |
|
|
(4.2 |
)% |
|
|
35.7 |
% |
|
|
(1) |
The difference between the fair market value of our previously
outstanding Redeemable Preferred Stock at date of issue of
$21.1 million and the redemption price of
$32.5 million paid on March 14, 2006 with proceeds
from our initial public offering was charged to retained
earnings in March 2006 when the redemption occurred. This
$11.4 million adjustment is used to reduce net income to
arrive at income available to common stockholders for purposes
of calculating earnings per common basic and diluted
shares for the nine months ended June 30, 2006 in
accordance with EITF Topic D-42 The Effect on
the Calculation of Earnings per Share for the Redemption or
Induced Conversion of Preferred Stock. |
5
The table below summarizes our consolidated balance sheet as of
June 30, 2006 on an actual basis and on an as adjusted
basis to reflect the sale of 2,000,000 shares of common
stock that we are offering at a public offering price of
$16.50 per share, and the application of the estimated net
proceeds therefrom as described in Use of Proceeds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2006 | |
|
|
(unaudited) | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Actual | |
|
As Adjusted | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
|
|
$ |
63,614 |
|
|
$ |
94,099 |
|
Working capital
|
|
|
85,902 |
|
|
|
116,387 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
126,372 |
|
|
|
156,857 |
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
30,042 |
|
|
|
30,042 |
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
96,330 |
|
|
|
126,815 |
|
6
RISK FACTORS
You should carefully consider the risks described below,
together with all of the other information in this prospectus,
before deciding to invest in our common stock. If any of these
risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition or
results of operation may suffer. As a result, the trading price
of our common stock could decline and you could lose part or all
of your investment in our common stock.
Risks Related to Our Business and Industry
|
|
|
The highly cyclical nature of the semiconductor industry
could adversely affect our operating results. |
Our business and operating results depend to a significant
extent on capital expenditures by companies in the semiconductor
industry that purchase our ATE. Historically, the semiconductor
industry has been highly cyclical with recurring periods of
over-supply. These cycles typically have a disproportionately
negative impact on capital equipment manufacturers, including
providers of test systems like Eagle Test. In most cases, the
decrease in capital expenditures for test systems by our
customers is more pronounced than the downturn in the overall
semiconductor industry.
We believe that semiconductor industry downturns will likely
recur, and because they often occur very rapidly, we cannot
adequately foresee their timing and extent, or their effect on
customer orders and revenues. If we do not accurately predict
the timing or extent of a downturn, we may not adequately reduce
our operating expenses in light of decreased revenue, which will
adversely affect our financial performance, and potentially our
stock price. During the most recent industry downturn our net
revenue and net income decreased abruptly from
$111.2 million and $22.1 million, respectively, in
fiscal 2004 to $63.5 million and $7.4 million,
respectively, in fiscal 2005. During downturns we experienced,
and in the future we may experience:
|
|
|
|
|
decreased customer orders, test systems shipments and revenue; |
|
|
|
decreases in backlog; |
|
|
|
decreases in the ASPs of our test systems; |
|
|
|
delays in order commitments; |
|
|
|
lower operating margins; |
|
|
|
increases in order cancellations and customer-requested shipment
delays; |
|
|
|
excess production capacity; |
|
|
|
delays in collecting accounts receivable; and |
|
|
|
excessive inventory levels. |
As a result of these and other factors, industry downturns are
expected to negatively impact our business and financial
performance. Moreover, such downturns, or the speculation about
such downturns by investors or industry analysts, may have a
material adverse effect on our stock price.
|
|
|
Our quarterly operating results may fluctuate
significantly from period to period and this may cause our stock
price to decline. |
In the past we have experienced, and in the future we expect to
experience, fluctuations in revenues and results of operations
from quarter to quarter. In fiscal 2005, for instance, our net
revenue decreased from $20.2 million in the quarter ended
December 31, 2004 to $8.6 million in the quarter ended
March 31, 2005 and increased from $6.2 million in the
quarter ended June 30, 2005 to $28.5 million in the
quarter ended September 30, 2005. These fluctuations can be
caused by a variety of factors including:
|
|
|
|
|
rapid shifts in demand for, or acceptance of, our products as a
result of the cyclical nature of the semiconductor equipment
industry or otherwise, often resulting in sharp reductions in
equipment sales during industry downturns and increased
equipment sales during periods of industry recovery; |
7
|
|
|
|
|
the loss of a significant customer or reduced capital spending
by a customer; |
|
|
|
delays, cancellations or reschedulings, or other changes in the
timing or terms of product shipments; |
|
|
|
acceleration or postponement of existing customer order delivery
dates; |
|
|
|
delays in acceptance of products as a result of our failure to
meet customers specifications; |
|
|
|
the timing of our new product introductions, and market
acceptance of our new products and enhanced versions of our
existing products; |
|
|
|
our competitors announcements of new products, services or
technological innovations, which can, among other things, render
our products less competitive; |
|
|
|
competitive pressures resulting in lower ASPs for our test
systems; |
|
|
|
lower gross margins in any period due to changes in our product
mix or increased prices for components; |
|
|
|
our inability to quickly reduce our fixed costs or
managements decision to maintain headcount notwithstanding
decreased demand for our products; |
|
|
|
disruptions in our manufacturing or in our supply of components,
causing us to delay shipment of our products; and |
|
|
|
write-offs of excess or obsolete inventory and accounts
receivable that are not collectible. |
A significant portion of our revenue is derived from the sale of
a relatively small number of test systems. Accordingly, a
decline in the number, or change in the timing or terms, of the
test systems we sell from
quarter-to-quarter may
also cause significant changes in our results of operations.
This, in turn, would likely cause a decline in the market price
of our common stock.
We believe that
quarter-to-quarter
comparisons of our revenue and operating results are not
necessarily meaningful or an accurate indicator of our future
performance. Because of this difficulty in predicting future
performance, our results of operations may fall below the
expectations of securities analysts or investors in future
quarters. Our failure to meet these expectations would likely
cause a decline in the market price of our common stock.
|
|
|
We depend on a small number of customers for a significant
portion of our sales, and the loss of any of these customers
will adversely affect our revenue. |
A small number of customers has accounted for a significant
portion of our revenue in any particular period. In the nine
months ended June 30, 2006, sales to Texas Instruments
Incorporated and National Semiconductor Corporation accounted
for 51.4% and 10.2% of our net revenue, respectively, and sales
to our five largest customers accounted for an aggregate of
80.8% of our net revenue. In fiscal 2005, sales to Texas
Instruments Incorporated accounted for 44.3% of our net revenue,
and sales to our five largest customers accounted for an
aggregate of 66.9% of our net revenue. In fiscal 2004, sales to
National Semiconductor Corporation and Texas Instruments
Incorporated accounted for 36.1% and 31.9% of our net revenue,
respectively, and sales to our five largest customers accounted
for an aggregate of 79.2% of our net revenue. We expect that we
will continue to depend on a small number of customers to
account for a significant percentage of our revenue for the
foreseeable future. Our customers, including our most
significant customers, are not obligated by long-term contracts
to purchase our test systems, and may cancel orders with little
regard for potential penalties. If any of our large customers
reduces or cancels its purchases from us for any reason, it
could have an adverse effect on our revenue and results of
operations.
|
|
|
We face difficulty in obtaining new customers because of
the high cost of switching test equipment vendors in our
markets. |
Semiconductor companies typically select one vendors
systems for testing an entire product family of semiconductors,
and make substantial investments to obtain test systems and
ancillary equipment, and to
8
develop related test program software. Once a semiconductor
company has implemented a test system for a product family of
semiconductors, it is often difficult and costly to switch to
another vendors test system because the test system is
often part of the product specifications for a newly developed
device. Accordingly, unless our test systems offer substantial
performance or cost advantages that materially outweigh a
customers expense of switching to our test systems, it
will be difficult for us to achieve significant sales to that
customer once it has selected another vendors test system
for an application.
|
|
|
Our sales cycle is long, requires significant investment,
and may not result in additional sales. |
Our customers generally take considerable time to evaluate our
test systems, and many people are involved in the evaluation and
decision-making process. Our product sales cycle typically
ranges from six to nine months. Sometimes our sales cycle can be
much longer, particularly when the sales process involves
developing new test programs for our customers or the
introduction of new products. During the sales process, we
commit substantial time and financial resources to our sales
efforts prior to receiving any revenue. Despite these efforts,
we may never receive any revenue from such potential customers.
The length of time it takes for us to complete a sale and the
extent of our investment depends on many factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the capital expenditure budgets and capital equipment needs of
our customers; |
|
|
|
the willingness and ability of customers to incur the expense of
adopting new product platforms; |
|
|
|
the internal technical capabilities and sophistication of our
customers; |
|
|
|
the efforts and effectiveness of our sales force; and |
|
|
|
the need for and our success in demonstrating our technical and
manufacturing capabilities to meet our customers
requirements. |
In addition, if we do make a sale to a new customer, the
customer may purchase only one of our test systems, or may
evaluate a test systems performance for a lengthy period
of time before considering whether to purchase any additional
test systems from us. Variations in the length of the period
between purchases by new customers can cause our revenue and
results of operations to vary widely from period to period.
|
|
|
We face substantial competition that, among other things,
may adversely affect our sales and may lead to price
pressure. |
We face substantial competition in the ATE market throughout the
world. Our principal competitors include Credence Systems
Corporation, LTX Corporation and Teradyne, Inc. Some of these
competitors have greater financial, engineering, manufacturing
and marketing resources than we do. As a result, our competitors
may be able to respond more quickly to new or emerging
technologies or market developments by devoting greater
resources to the development, promotion and sale of products,
which could impair our revenue. Some of these competitors also
have broader product offerings, larger installed customer bases
and more extensive customer support capabilities than we do. We
expect our competitors to continue to improve the performance of
and support for their current products and to introduce new
products, technologies or services that could adversely affect
sales of our current and future products. In addition, other
test equipment companies that do not currently focus on our
target markets could choose to do so. We may not be able to
compete effectively with any new or current competitors, which
would have an adverse effect on our revenue and results of
operations.
Our competitors may also elect to reduce the prices of their
products in order to increase their market share or obtain new
customers, leading to a reduction in test system ASPs throughout
our industry. We may be required to react to these and other
competitive dynamics. Any decrease in the prices of our test
systems or any increase in the discounts granted to our
customers could adversely impact our growth, revenue and results
of operations.
9
|
|
|
We rely on a few key employees and our success depends on
our ability to hire and retain key personnel. |
Our future success depends in large part on the continued
service of our key executive officers, including Leonard Foxman,
our founder and Chief Executive Officer, Theodore Foxman, our
Chief Operating Officer, and Stephen J. Hawrysz, our Chief
Financial Officer. Leonard Foxman has managed us since our
inception and would be extremely difficult to replace. We are
also dependent on the continued service of our key research,
engineering, manufacturing, marketing and sales personnel, each
of whom possesses unique skills and experience. Although we have
employment and non-competition agreements with each of our
executive officers, these individuals or other key employees may
nevertheless leave us. Because these employees would be
difficult to replace, the loss of any of our key employees could
have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations. Also, to support our current operations
and future growth, we will need to attract and retain additional
qualified employees. Competition for qualified personnel in the
technology area is intense, and we operate in several geographic
locations where labor markets are particularly competitive.
In June 2006, the employment of our Vice President of Product
Development and the employment of our Vice President of Internal
Operations were terminated. We have received a Demand for
Arbitration from our former Vice President of Product
Development challenging the basis of his termination and
asserting the right to severance, health insurance and
equity-based
compensation. We believe his positions are without merit and
intend to defend these claims vigorously. Separately, we have
initiated litigation against this former employee with claims
including tortious interference with contractual relations and
misappropriation of company property. In addition, we have
received correspondence from counsel for our former Vice
President of Internal Operations making similar claims and we
cannot assure you that arbitration proceedings will not result
from his termination as well. We have recently hired individuals
to fill each of these positions. These newly hired officers will
need time to assimilate into the Company and there can be no
assurance that such officers will perform as expected.
Our future success depends to a significant extent on the
ability of our executive officers and other members of our
management team to operate effectively, both individually and as
a group. Our business may be harmed if we do not successfully
allocate responsibilities among our management team or if some
members of our management team do not succeed in their roles.
|
|
|
If we fail to maintain adequate internal control over
financial reporting, if we are unable to timely complete our
assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting, or if our independent registered public
accounting firm cannot attest to our assessment of our internal
control over financial reporting, we may be subject to
regulatory sanctions and a loss of public confidence and the
trading price of our stock could be negatively impacted. |
Effective internal reporting controls are necessary for us to
provide reliable financial reports and effectively detect and
prevent fraud. Pursuant to Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, under currently published SEC rules,
we will be required beginning with our fiscal year ending
September 30, 2007 to include in our annual report our
assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting. Furthermore, our registered independent
public accounting firm will be required to report on our
assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting and separately report on the effectiveness
of our internal control over financial reporting. Under rules
recently proposed by the SEC, we may not be required to complete
this assessment until our fiscal year ending September 30,
2008. We have not yet completed our assessment of the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.
If we fail to timely complete this assessment, or if our
independent registered public accounting firm cannot attest to
our assessment when required, we may be subject to regulatory
sanctions and a loss of public confidence. Also, the lack of
effective internal control over financial reporting may
adversely impact our ability to prepare timely and accurate
financial statements.
|
|
|
We have grown rapidly and if we fail to manage our growth,
our business will suffer. |
Although we commenced operations in 1976, over the past five
years we have experienced, and continue to experience, rapid
growth in our operations. This growth has included hiring key
personnel, relocating our manufacturing facility, entering
foreign markets and developing new customer relationships. We
anticipate
10
that further expansion of our operations will be required to
address potential growth in our customer base and market
opportunities. This expansion has placed, and is expected to
continue to place, a substantial strain on our management,
operational and financial resources. In order to manage future
growth, we will be required to improve existing, and implement
new, operating and management systems, procedures and controls.
We also need to hire, train and manage additional qualified
personnel. A significant factor in our growth has been a
substantial increase in customer demand for our products. If we
do not effectively manage our growth, including the addition and
training of new personnel, we will not adequately satisfy such
demand. In addition, the quality of our test systems or our
ability to manufacture and ship our test systems on a timely
basis could suffer. This could negatively impact our reputation,
revenue and results of operations and lead to order
cancellations or a decrease in order volume.
|
|
|
If we are not successful in developing new and enhanced
products, we will lose market share to our competitors and our
operating results will suffer. |
We operate in an industry that is characterized by evolving
industry standards and rapid technological advancements. To
remain competitive, we must design, develop and introduce in a
timely manner new test systems or improve our existing test
systems in order to meet the performance and price demands of
our customers and prospective customers. Our success in this
regard will depend on many factors, including our ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
successfully develop and commercialize innovative products that
are differentiated from our competitors offerings; |
|
|
|
properly and quickly identify customer needs and anticipate
technological advances and industry trends; |
|
|
|
quickly adjust to changing industry conditions and product
announcements by competitors; and |
|
|
|
establish manufacturing processes that will enable us to build
and timely deliver new or enhanced products to specification in
sufficient volumes. |
We must devote resources to research and development to remain
innovative and competitive with rapidly evolving industry
technologies and emerging trends. In light of the long product
development cycles inherent in our industry, development of new
products generally requires a substantial investment well before
commercial viability or the prospect of deriving any revenue
from new products. The future success of our new technologies,
products and services also depends on broad acceptance among our
customers. In addition, new methods of testing semiconductors
may be developed. These developments may render our products
uncompetitive or obsolete. If we fail to adequately predict our
customers needs and technological advances, we may invest
heavily in the research and development of products and services
that do not lead to significant revenue, or we may fail to
invest in research and development necessary to satisfy evolving
customer demands.
|
|
|
Products that do not meet customer specifications or that
contain defects could cause us to lose customers and
revenue. |
We must develop and deliver reliable customized hardware and
software to meet our customers specific ATE requirements.
The complexity and ongoing development of our products could
lead to design or manufacturing problems. If any of our products
fails to meet specifications, the customer may delay or reject
acceptance of the test system and the recognition of revenue
from these sales will be delayed or forfeited. Moreover, if any
of our products has reliability or quality problems, we may be
required to replace the test system or issue the customer an
equipment credit in accordance with the customers warranty
terms. If these quality problems occur, our reputation could be
damaged significantly and customers might be reluctant to buy
our products, which could result in a decline in revenue, an
increase in product returns, the loss of existing customers
and/or the failure to attract new customers.
|
|
|
You should not rely on our level of backlog as an
indication of our future revenues. |
Since customers typically cancel or delay their orders with
little regard for potential penalties, and since new order
volume may decrease very rapidly, our backlog, if any, at any
particular date is not necessarily indicative of our future
backlog or actual sales that may be generated for any succeeding
period. Any change
11
in our manufacturing capacity and the time it takes to ship our
products will affect our level of backlog. Historically, our
backlog levels have also fluctuated based on our customers
ordering patterns and our inability to predict order trends in
the semiconductor industry with any certainty. During an
industry downturn, our backlog could be substantially reduced or
eliminated. Accordingly, you should not rely on our level of
backlog as an indication of our future revenues.
|
|
|
We obtain some of the components and subassemblies
included in our test systems from a limited number of suppliers
and subcontractors, which may result in production delays, loss
of revenue or increased costs. |
We obtain some of the components and subassemblies included in
our test systems from a limited number of, or in some cases sole
source, suppliers and subcontractors with whom we do not have
long-term, or in some cases written, contracts. These suppliers
and subcontractors are under no obligation to supply our
requirements. This reliance gives us less control over the
manufacturing process and exposes us to significant risks.
Identifying and qualifying new or alternative sources of these
materials can be a lengthy and difficult process. From time to
time, we may be unable to obtain an adequate supply of
components or subassemblies. In addition, the lead time required
for shipments of some of our components or subassemblies can be
lengthy and such lead time may increase in periods of heightened
demand. We may also experience increases in the prices of these
components or subassemblies, delays in delivery and poor
component or subassembly quality. If we are unable to accurately
predict our component and subassembly needs, if our supply is
disrupted or delayed, if any of the components or subassemblies
on which we rely are discontinued due to obsolescence or
otherwise, or if we otherwise experience any other adverse
change in our relationships with these suppliers or
subcontractors, we would experience a delay in shipments of our
test systems, damage to our customer relationships, an increase
in our production costs and/or a reduction in our sales, any of
which could have an adverse effect on our revenue and results of
operations.
|
|
|
If we cannot accurately plan the production of products to
meet our customers demands, we could incur excess
inventory or miss sales opportunities. |
Due to the volatile nature of our industry, we cannot predict
with certainty future levels of purchase orders. In anticipation
of future orders, we typically order components and
subassemblies and build some inventory in advance of the receipt
of actual purchase orders. If we do not obtain orders as we
anticipate, or if orders are cancelled, we could have excess
inventory for a specific product that we would not be able to
return to our suppliers, potentially resulting in inventory
write-offs, which could have an adverse effect on our results of
operations. For example, in fiscal 2005, we experienced a period
of excess component inventory during an industry downturn and
due to our inability to adequately forecast an adverse change in
demand for our products. Alternatively, if we underestimate our
component and subassembly needs, we may not be able to meet the
demand for our test systems on a timely basis and we may miss
opportunities for additional sales of our test systems, which
could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and
customer relationships.
|
|
|
Our manufacturing activities are conducted at a single
facility, and any prolonged disruption in the operations of that
facility could have a material adverse effect on our
revenue. |
Once we receive subassemblies and other components from our
subcontractors and suppliers, we complete the production of all
of our test systems in our manufacturing facility located in
Buffalo Grove, Illinois. Any prolonged disruption in the
operations of our manufacturing facility, whether due to
technical or labor difficulties, destruction or damage as a
result of a fire or extreme weather conditions or any other
reason, could seriously harm our ability to satisfy our
customers order deadlines. If we cannot deliver our test
systems in a timely manner, our reputation, revenue and results
of operations could be adversely affected.
|
|
|
We have no experience with acquiring other companies and
our future efforts to do so may subject us to significant costs
without the realization of the anticipated benefits of those
acquisitions. |
As a public company, we believe we have greater opportunities to
make acquisitions of, or significant investments in,
complementary companies, products or technologies, although no
acquisitions or investments
12
are currently pending or planned. This is due to the fact that
we have additional available capital for these purposes, as well
as a market-determined value for our common stock. To date, our
management has had very little experience completing
acquisitions or managing the integration of acquisitions.
Accordingly, we cannot guarantee you that we will be able to
successfully complete or integrate any business, products,
technologies or personnel that we might acquire or seek to
acquire in the future, and our failure to do so could harm our
business. Furthermore, any future acquisitions, if completed,
would subject us to many risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties in integrating the products, operations or
personnel of acquired companies into our business; |
|
|
|
diversion of our managements attention from our ongoing
operations; |
|
|
|
additional expenses associated with amortization of acquired
assets or impairment of acquired goodwill; |
|
|
|
difficulties in maintaining uniform standards, controls,
procedures and policies; |
|
|
|
potential impairment of existing relationships with employees,
suppliers and customers as a result of the difficulties in
integration of new management personnel; and |
|
|
|
dilution to our stockholders in the event we issue stock to
finance an acquisition or increased leverage if we incur debt to
finance an acquisition. |
|
|
|
Economic, political and other risks associated with
international sales and operations, particularly in Asia, could
adversely affect our revenue. |
Because our products and services are sold worldwide, we are
subject to the risks associated with conducting business
internationally. The percentage of our net revenue shipped
outside the U.S. was 69.0% for the nine months ended
June 30, 2006, 53.8% in fiscal 2005, 78.4% in fiscal 2004
and 57.9% in fiscal 2003. We anticipate that international sales
will continue to account for a significant portion of our
revenue for the foreseeable future. Our international operations
subject us to many risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
economic and political instability; |
|
|
|
compliance with foreign and domestic laws and regulations; |
|
|
|
changes in foreign and domestic legal and regulatory
requirements or policies resulting in burdensome government
controls, tariffs, restrictions, embargoes or export license
requirements; |
|
|
|
longer payment cycles common in foreign markets; |
|
|
|
difficulties in staffing and managing our international
operations; |
|
|
|
less favorable foreign intellectual property laws making it more
difficult to protect our technology from appropriation by
competitors; |
|
|
|
potentially adverse tax treatment; |
|
|
|
difficulties with distributors; |
|
|
|
difficulties collecting our accounts receivable; and |
|
|
|
natural disasters. |
In particular, the economies of Asia have been highly volatile
in the past, resulting in significant fluctuations in local
currencies and other instabilities. In recent years, many
countries in Asia have experienced weakness in their currency,
banking and equity markets as a result of certain events,
including the occurrence of severe acute respiratory syndrome,
or SARS. These instabilities continue and may recur. Our
exposure to the business risks presented by the economies of
Asia will increase to the extent that we and our customers
continue to expand operations in that region. In particular, our
shipments to Malaysia accounted for 39.6% of our revenues for
the nine months ended June 30, 2006, 21.4% in fiscal 2005,
51.0%
13
in fiscal 2004 and 33.4% in fiscal 2003. Any instability in
Malaysia or elsewhere in the Asia Pacific region, including
those resulting from any additional outbreak of SARS or a
potential outbreak of avian influenza, could delay customer
acceptance of our products or prevent us from installing or
servicing our products sold in the affected region.
|
|
|
We could experience a decline in international sales due
to currency fluctuations. |
All of our international sales are denominated in
U.S. dollars. As a result, if the U.S. dollar rises in
relation to foreign currencies, our test systems will become
more expensive to customers outside the U.S. and less
competitive with systems produced by local competitors. These
conditions could adversely impact our international sales volume
or force us to lower our prices internationally. In the past,
there have been, and in the future there may be, significant
fluctuations in the exchange rates between the U.S. dollar
and the currencies of countries in which we do business. In
addition, competitive conditions in the future may require us to
enter into purchase orders denominated in foreign currencies.
While we have not entered into foreign currency hedging
arrangements in the past, we may do so in the future. We cannot
assure you that any hedging transactions we may enter into will
be effective or will not result in foreign exchange hedging
losses.
|
|
|
Accounting for employee stock options using the fair value
method could significantly reduce our net income. |
We have adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 123R Share-Based Payment
effective October 1, 2005, which requires us to expense
stock options in the income statement based on option grant date
fair value. We are using the Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model
to determine the fair value of stock options granted and will
amortize this amount to compensation expense as options vest and
have adopted the prospective method of transition as of the date
of adoption. See Notes 2 and 12 of Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this prospectus for a more
detailed presentation of accounting for stock-based compensation
plans. If we issue a significant option grant, or series of
option grants, the stock-based compensation expense related to
these grants may have a materially adverse effect on our results
of operations.
Risks Related to Intellectual Property
|
|
|
Third parties may claim we are infringing their
intellectual property rights, and we could be prevented from
selling our products or services, or suffer significant
litigation or licensing expenses, even if these claims have no
merit. |
Our competitive position is driven in large part by our
proprietary products, processes and services, such as
SmartPintm
and our floating resource architecture. Third parties, however,
may claim that we or our products, systems or operations are
infringing their intellectual property rights, and we may be
unaware of intellectual property rights of others that may cover
some of our assets, technology, products and services. Any
litigation regarding patents, trademarks, copyrights or other
intellectual property rights, even those without merit, could be
costly and time consuming, and divert our management and key
personnel from operating our business. The complexity of the
technology involved and inherent uncertainty and cost of
intellectual property litigation increases our risks. If any
third party has a meritorious or successful claim that we are
infringing its intellectual property rights, we may be forced to
change our products, services or manufacturing processes, which
may be costly or impractical. If we are unable to make such
changes to avoid infringing third party intellectual property
rights, we may be forced to enter into royalty or license
agreements. However, we may not be able to obtain royalty or
license agreements on terms acceptable to us, or at all, and we
may therefore be required to cease the infringing aspect of our
operations. This may require us to stop selling our products as
currently engineered, which could harm our competitive position.
We also may be subject to significant damages or injunctions
that prevent the further development of certain of our products
or services.
14
|
|
|
Third parties may infringe or design around our
intellectual property rights, and we may expend significant
resources enforcing our rights or suffer competitive
injury. |
Our success and competitive position depend in large part on our
ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property rights
protecting our products and services. We rely on a combination
of patents, copyrights, trademarks, service marks, trade
secrets, confidentiality provisions and licensing arrangements
to establish and protect our intellectual property and
proprietary rights. We may be required to spend significant
resources to establish, monitor and protect our intellectual
property rights. We may not be able to detect infringement and
we may lose our competitive position in the market before we do
so. If we fail to successfully protect our intellectual property
rights, or competitors design around our technology or develop
competing technologies, our competitive position could suffer,
which could harm our results of operations.
We own two patents. These patents or any new patents may not be
sufficient in scope or strength to provide us with a significant
competitive advantage, and the validity or scope of the patents
may be challenged by third parties. We may not be able to
develop additional proprietary technology that is patentable. If
we do file patent applications on additional technology, the
applications may not be allowed. Moreover, the scope of our
patents is limited, which could allow competitors to design
around the scope of our patents.
In addition to patent protection, we rely on trade secret
protection for our confidential and proprietary information and
technology. We routinely enter into confidentiality agreements
with our employees and other third parties. However, in the
event these agreements may be breached, we may not have adequate
available remedies. Our confidential and proprietary information
and technology might also be independently developed by or
otherwise become known by third parties, which may damage our
competitive position.
We have filed federal trademark applications to help protect
certain trademarks that we use in conjunction with our business,
including EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS (& design),
SMARTPIN, SIMULTEST, CHAMELEON, EAGLE VISION, PATTERN-BASED
TESTING and our Eagle logo. Our pending applications may not be
registered by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and
third parties may challenge the validity or scope of the
trademark applications or registrations.
Despite our proprietary rights, there can be no assurance that
others will not develop similar products, duplicate our products
or design around our products.
|
|
|
Our efforts to protect our intellectual property may be
less effective in some foreign countries where intellectual
property rights are not as well protected as in the United
States. |
We have not sought patent protection or registered our
trademarks outside the U.S., which may impair our ability to use
or protect our technology and brand in foreign jurisdictions.
Furthermore, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect
proprietary rights to as great an extent as do the laws of the
U.S. Many U.S. companies have encountered substantial
problems in protecting their proprietary rights against copying
or infringement in such countries, some of which are countries
in which we have sold and continue to sell our systems. There is
a risk that our means of protecting our proprietary rights may
not be adequate in these countries. Our competitors in these
countries may independently develop similar technology or
duplicate our test systems, even if unauthorized, thus likely
reducing our sales in these countries.
Risks Related to this Offering
|
|
|
The price of our common stock may be volatile. |
There has only been a public market for our common stock since
the completion of our initial public offering in March 2006. The
price of the common stock that will prevail in the market after
this offering may be higher or lower than the price you pay in
this offering, depending on many factors, some of which are
beyond our control and may not be related to our operating
performance. The trading prices of the common stock of our
publicly traded competitors in the ATE industry, and the trading
prices of publicly traded
15
companies in the semiconductor industry generally, have been
particularly volatile. We believe the trading price of our
common stock will be similarly volatile after this offering.
These fluctuations could cause you to lose part or all of your
investment in our shares of common stock. Beyond general
economic or market conditions and trends, factors affecting our
business and industry that could cause fluctuations include, but
are not limited to, the following:
|
|
|
|
|
our inability to accurately predict future downturns in the
semiconductor industry and scale our operations accordingly,
and, correspondingly, our ability to meet increased demand
during periods of industry rebound; |
|
|
|
new product introductions, which may require us to incur
additional costs in early production phases; |
|
|
|
significant volatility in the market price and trading volume of
ATE companies and other semiconductor equipment companies; |
|
|
|
announcements of technical innovations, new products or product
enhancements, strategic alliances or significant agreements by
us or by our competitors; |
|
|
|
catastrophic events; |
|
|
|
securing or losing a material customer or customers given our
significant customer concentration; |
|
|
|
sales or distributions of large blocks of our stock; or |
|
|
|
departures of key personnel. |
|
|
|
If a substantial number of shares become available for
sale and are sold in a short period of time, the market price of
our common stock could decline. |
We have only been a public company since March 2006. For the
three month period ended August 31, 2006, the average daily
trading volume of our common stock on the Nasdaq Global Market
has been less than 145,000 shares. If our existing
stockholders or their distributees sell substantial amounts of
our common stock in the public market, the market price of our
common stock could decrease significantly. The perception in the
public market that our existing stockholders might sell shares
of common stock could also depress the trading price of our
common stock.
Upon completion of this offering, we will have
22,655,283 shares of common stock outstanding, assuming no
exercise of the underwriters option to purchase additional
shares and assuming no exercise of options after June 30,
2006. Of our outstanding shares, 13,306,970 shares had been
subject to lock-up
agreements with the underwriters of our initial public offering
that expired on September 4, 2006. Subject to limitations
under federal securities laws, including in some cases the
holding period requirements and volume limitations of
Rule 144, these shares became eligible for sale in the
public market on September 4, 2006.
In connection with this offering, all directors, executive
officers, and certain significant stockholders other than the
Employee Stock Ownership Plan, have entered into new
lock-up agreements with
the underwriters of this offering. As a result of these
lock-up agreements,
9,824,308 shares of our common stock are again subject to
contractual restrictions on resale, through the date
90 days after the date of this prospectus.
The Employee Stock Ownership Plan is able to sell or distribute
its shares of our common stock under certain circumstances. We
currently anticipate that the Employee Stock Ownership Plan will
distribute 834,565 shares of our common stock to employees,
to be held in individual self-directed accounts. Other than this
anticipated distribution, we have agreed not to cause the
disposition of any shares of our common stock currently held by
the Employee Stock Ownership Plan prior to the date that is
90 days after the date of this prospectus, without the
prior written consent of the underwriters. In addition, we have
agreed not to cause the Employee Stock Ownership Plan to
transfer investment control over 834,565 shares of our
common stock to employees, or otherwise take any action that
would result in a transfer of investment control to employees,
until after December 1, 2006, thus preventing the sale of
these shares prior to such date. After the date of such transfer
of investment control to employees, and after the effective date
of a registration statement on
Form S-8 under the
Securities Act which we expect to file prior to such date to
register these shares, such shares will be generally available
for resale in the public market, except for 73,009 shares
of common stock held by executive officers that will be subject
to the lock-up
agreements described above.
16
The market price of shares of our common stock may drop
significantly if our existing stockholders sell a substantial
number of shares when the restrictions on resale lapse. A
decline in the price of shares of our common stock might impede
our ability to raise capital through the issuance of additional
shares of our common stock or other equity securities.
|
|
|
If securities or industry analysts do not regularly
publish research reports or financial forecasts about our
business, or if they issue an adverse opinion regarding us or
other companies in our industry, our stock price could
decline. |
The trading market for our common stock will be influenced by
the research reports and opinions that securities or industry
analysts publish about our business. Investors have numerous
investment opportunities and may limit their investments to
publicly traded companies that receive thorough research
coverage. If one or more analysts cease to cover us or fail to
publish reports in a regular manner, we could lose visibility in
the financial markets, which could cause a significant and
prolonged decline in our stock price due to lack of investor
awareness. If one or more of the analysts downgrade our stock or
comment negatively about our prospects or the prospects of other
companies operating in our industry, our stock price could
decline significantly.
|
|
|
Officers, directors and principal stockholders will
continue to have substantial control over us after this offering
and could limit your ability to influence the outcome of key
transactions, including a change of control. |
Our principal stockholders, directors and executive officers and
entities affiliated with them will beneficially own
approximately 47.5% of the outstanding shares of our common
stock after this offering. As a result, these stockholders will
significantly influence or control matters requiring approval by
our stockholders, including the election of directors and the
approval of mergers or other extraordinary transactions. The
interests of these stockholders may differ from yours and these
stockholders may vote in a way with which you disagree and which
may be adverse to your interests. This concentration of
ownership may have the effect of delaying, preventing or
deterring a change of control of our company, could deprive our
stockholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their
common stock as part of a sale of our company and might
ultimately affect the market price of our common stock.
Risks Related to Delaware Law and Our Charter Documents
|
|
|
Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and by-laws
may deter third parties from acquiring us. |
Our certificate of incorporation and by-laws contain provisions
that may make the acquisition of our company more difficult
without the approval of our board of directors, including the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
our board of directors is divided into three classes serving
staggered three-year terms; |
|
|
|
only our board of directors may call special meetings of our
stockholders; |
|
|
|
our stockholders may take action only at a meeting of our
stockholders and not by written consent; |
|
|
|
we have authorized undesignated preferred stock, the terms of
which may be established and shares of which may be issued
without stockholder approval and may be used in connection with
the adoption of a stockholder rights plan; |
|
|
|
stockholder approval of amendments of our certificate of
incorporation or by-laws require a vote of 75% of our
outstanding shares; |
|
|
|
vacancies on the board of directors may be filled only by the
directors; |
|
|
|
our directors may be removed only for cause by the affirmative
vote of the holders of 75% of the votes that all stockholders
would be entitled to cast in the election of directors; and |
|
|
|
we require advance notice for stockholder proposals. |
17
These anti-takeover defenses could discourage, delay or prevent
a transaction involving a change in control of our company.
These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make
it more difficult for you and other stockholders to elect
directors of your choosing and cause us to take other corporate
actions that you desire.
|
|
|
Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law
may delay, defer or prevent a change in control that our
stockholders might consider to be in their best
interests. |
We are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law which, subject to certain exceptions, prohibits
business combinations between a Delaware corporation
and an interested stockholder, which is generally
defined as a stockholder who becomes a beneficial owner of 15%
or more of a Delaware corporations voting stock, for a
three-year period following the date that such stockholder
became an interested stockholder absent prior approval of our
board of directors. Section 203 could have the effect of
delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control that our
stockholders might consider to be in their best interests.
18
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS AND PROJECTIONS
This prospectus contains forward looking statements. Forward
looking statements relate to future events or our future
financial performance. We generally identify forward looking
statements by terminology such as may,
will, should, expects,
plans, anticipates, could,
intends, target, projects,
contemplates, believes,
estimates, predicts,
potential or continue or the negative of
these terms or other similar words. These statements are only
predictions. We have based these forward looking statements
largely on our current expectations and projections about future
events and financial trends that we believe may affect our
business, financial condition and results of operations. The
outcome of the events described in these forward looking
statements is subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors
described in Risk Factors and elsewhere in this
prospectus. Accordingly, you should not rely upon forward
looking statements as predictions of future events. We cannot
assure you that the events and circumstances reflected in the
forward looking statements will be achieved or occur, and actual
results could differ materially from those projected in the
forward looking statements.
The forward looking statements made in this prospectus relate
only to events as of the date on which the statements are made.
We undertake no obligation to update any forward looking
statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on
which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of
unanticipated events.
This prospectus also contains market data related to our
business and industry. This market data includes projections
that are based on a number of assumptions. If these assumptions
turn out to be incorrect, actual results may differ from the
projections based on these assumptions. As a result, our markets
may not grow at the rates projected by these data, or at all.
The failure of these markets to grow at these projected rates
may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations and financial condition and the market price of our
common stock.
19
USE OF PROCEEDS
We estimate that the net proceeds of the sale of the common
stock that we are offering will be approximately
$30.5 million, or approximately $43.3 million if the
underwriters exercise in full their option to purchase
additional shares, after deducting underwriting discounts and
commissions and estimated offering expenses that we must pay. We
will not receive any of the proceeds of the sale of shares of
common stock by the selling stockholders. The selling
stockholders are entities affiliated with members of our senior
management and our directors. TA Associates, Inc. holds a
significant interest in us. One of our directors,
Mr. Child, is a managing director of TA Associates, Inc.
Foxman Family LLC is an entity controlled by our chief executive
officer in which our chief operating officer, among others, has
a pecuniary interest. See Principal and Selling
Stockholders.
We intend to use our net proceeds from this offering for general
corporate purposes, including working capital and possible
acquisitions and investments.
Management will have significant discretion in applying our net
proceeds from this offering. We currently have no agreements or
commitments with respect to any acquisitions or investments and
we do not currently have any acquisitions or investments
planned. Pending specific application of our net proceeds, we
plan to invest our net proceeds in government securities and
other short-term, investment-grade, marketable securities.
PRICE RANGE OF COMMON STOCK
Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq Global Market
under the trading symbol EGLT since our initial
public offering on March 8, 2006. Prior to that time, there
was no public market for our common stock. The following table
sets forth the high and low closing sales prices of our common
stock, as reported by the Nasdaq Global Market, for each of the
periods listed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2006 |
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Second Quarter (commencing March 8, 2006)
|
|
$ |
15.50 |
|
|
$ |
13.88 |
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
17.77 |
|
|
|
14.00 |
|
Fourth Quarter (through September 27, 2006)
|
|
|
19.47 |
|
|
|
12.33 |
|
The last reported sale price of our common stock on the Nasdaq
Global Market on September 27, 2006 was $17.11 per
share. As of June 30, 2006, we had 15 holders of record of
our common stock.
DIVIDEND POLICY
In connection with the series of transactions involving TA
Associates, we paid special cash dividends to all holders of our
common stock of $13.5 million in September 2003 and
$2.0 million in December 2003. We currently anticipate that
we will retain future earnings for the development, operation
and expansion of our business. Accordingly, we do not anticipate
declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable
future. Our board of directors will have discretion in
determining whether to pay dividends, which will depend upon our
financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements
and such other factors as the board of directors deems relevant.
20
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of
June 30, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
on an actual basis; and |
|
|
|
on an as adjusted basis to reflect the sale of
2,000,000 shares of common stock that we are offering at a
public offering price of $16.50 per share, and the
application of the estimated net proceeds therefrom as described
in Use of Proceeds. |
You should read the following table in conjunction with our
consolidated financial statements and related notes and
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations appearing elsewhere in
this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2006 | |
|
|
(unaudited) | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Actual | |
|
As Adjusted | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except | |
|
|
share and per share | |
|
|
data) | |
Capital lease obligations
|
|
$ |
706 |
|
|
$ |
706 |
|
Stockholders equity (deficit):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share;
10,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued or
outstanding, actual and as adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share,
90,000,000 shares authorized, 20,655,283 shares issued
and outstanding, actual; 90,000,000 shares authorized,
22,655,283 shares issued and outstanding, as adjusted(1)
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
138,899 |
|
|
|
169,364 |
|
Retained earnings (deficit)
|
|
|
(42,776 |
) |
|
|
(42,776 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
|
96,330 |
|
|
|
126,815 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capitalization
|
|
$ |
97,036 |
|
|
$ |
127,521 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Excludes 764,500 shares of our common stock issuable upon
exercise of outstanding stock options and 2,575,000 additional
shares of our common stock available for grant under our option
plan as of June 30, 2006, and assumes no exercise of stock
options after such date. |
21
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
The following selected consolidated financial and other data
should be read in conjunction with, and is qualified by
reference to, our consolidated financial statements and related
notes and Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations appearing
elsewhere in this prospectus. The data for the years ended
September 30, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and as of
September 30, 2004 and 2005 is derived from consolidated
financial statements audited by Ernst & Young LLP, an
independent registered public accounting firm, and included
elsewhere in this prospectus. The data for the years ended
September 30, 2001 and 2002 and as of September 30,
2002 and 2003 is derived from our consolidated financial
statements audited by Ernst & Young LLP that are not
included in this prospectus. The data as of September 30,
2001 is derived from our unaudited consolidated financial
statements that are not included in this prospectus. The data
for the nine months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006 and as of
June 30, 2006 is derived from our unaudited consolidated
financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. We
have prepared our unaudited consolidated financial information
on a basis consistent with our audited consolidated financial
statements. In the opinion of our management, our unaudited
consolidated financial statements include all adjustments,
consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a
fair presentation of those statements. Results for the nine
months ended June 30, 2006 are not necessarily indicative
of results expected for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2006, or for any other future period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
Year Ended September 30, | |
|
Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited) | |
Consolidated Statement of Net Income Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenue
|
|
$ |
37,550 |
|
|
$ |
25,918 |
|
|
$ |
55,766 |
|
|
$ |
111,210 |
|
|
$ |
63,477 |
|
|
$ |
34,954 |
|
|
$ |
87,791 |
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
12,711 |
|
|
|
8,556 |
|
|
|
20,457 |
|
|
|
37,337 |
|
|
|
26,596 |
|
|
|
16,000 |
|
|
|
28,605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit |
|
|
24,839 |
|
|
|
17,362 |
|
|
|
35,309 |
|
|
|
73,873 |
|
|
|
36,881 |
|
|
|
18,954 |
|
|
|
59,186 |
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
12,247 |
|
|
|
10,949 |
|
|
|
16,491 |
|
|
|
23,932 |
|
|
|
21,066 |
|
|
|
14,630 |
|
|
|
21,259 |
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
2,607 |
|
|
|
3,240 |
|
|
|
3,113 |
|
|
|
6,051 |
|
|
|
7,883 |
|
|
|
5,800 |
|
|
|
6,555 |
|
|
Write-off of offering expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
9,985 |
|
|
|
3,173 |
|
|
|
15,705 |
|
|
|
42,032 |
|
|
|
7,932 |
|
|
|
(1,476 |
) |
|
|
31,372 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
3,887 |
|
|
|
3,910 |
|
|
|
2,928 |
|
|
|
3,481 |
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
(599 |
) |
|
|
(384 |
) |
|
|
5,466 |
|
Other (income) and expense, net
|
|
|
(459 |
) |
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
(636 |
) |
|
|
(408 |
) |
|
|
(2,274 |
) |
|
|
(669 |
) |
|
|
(1,052 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
10,405 |
|
|
|
2,510 |
|
|
|
16,310 |
|
|
|
37,005 |
|
|
|
6,895 |
|
|
|
(3,351 |
) |
|
|
23,477 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
4,047 |
|
|
|
864 |
|
|
|
6,706 |
|
|
|
14,952 |
|
|
|
(524 |
) |
|
|
(3,427 |
) |
|
|
10,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
6,358 |
|
|
$ |
1,646 |
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
22,053 |
|
|
$ |
7,419 |
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
13,319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings Per Share Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share, basic (1)
|
|
$ |
0.44 |
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.58 |
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
Net income (loss) per share, diluted (1)
|
|
|
0.44 |
|
|
|
0.11 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
1.46 |
|
|
|
0.36 |
|
|
|
(0.11 |
) |
|
|
0.09 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding, basic
|
|
|
14,390,000 |
|
|
|
14,390,000 |
|
|
|
14,365,017 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
11,782,483 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted
|
|
|
14,390,000 |
|
|
|
14,390,000 |
|
|
|
14,390,337 |
|
|
|
14,009,533 |
|
|
|
14,513,227 |
|
|
|
14,512,892 |
|
|
|
16,973,554 |
|
Selected Operating Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
66.1 |
% |
|
|
67.0 |
% |
|
|
63.3 |
% |
|
|
66.4 |
% |
|
|
58.1 |
% |
|
|
54.2 |
% |
|
|
67.4 |
% |
Operating margin
|
|
|
26.6 |
% |
|
|
12.2 |
% |
|
|
28.2 |
% |
|
|
37.8 |
% |
|
|
12.5 |
% |
|
|
(4.2 |
)% |
|
|
35.7 |
% |
|
|
(1) |
The difference between the fair market value of our previously
outstanding Redeemable Preferred Stock at date of issue of
$21.1 million and the redemption price of
$32.5 million paid on March 14, 2006 with proceeds
from our initial public offering was charged to retained
earnings in March 2006 when the redemption occurred. This
$11.4 million adjustment is used to reduce net income to
arrive at income available to common stockholders for purposes
of calculating earnings per common basic and diluted
shares for the nine months ended June 30, 2006 in
accordance with EITF Topic D-42 The Effect on
the Calculation of Earnings per Share for the Redemption or
Induced Conversion of Preferred Stock. |
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
As of September 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2001 |
|
2002 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited) |
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
|
|
$ |
20,865 |
|
|
$ |
20,573 |
|
|
$ |
21,961 |
|
|
$ |
23,733 |
|
|
$ |
22,676 |
|
|
$ |
63,614 |
|
Working capital
|
|
|
23,563 |
|
|
|
25,375 |
|
|
|
18,919 |
|
|
|
39,276 |
|
|
|
41,617 |
|
|
|
85,902 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
35,495 |
|
|
|
43,505 |
|
|
|
50,852 |
|
|
|
91,752 |
|
|
|
66,171 |
|
|
|
126,372 |
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
890 |
|
|
|
706 |
|
Redeemable warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,718 |
|
|
|
3,266 |
|
|
|
2,667 |
|
|
|
|
|
Senior subordinated convertible notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,282 |
|
|
|
28,561 |
|
|
|
28,843 |
|
|
|
|
|
Series A convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65,000 |
|
|
|
65,000 |
|
|
|
65,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
|
25,083 |
|
|
|
27,043 |
|
|
|
(73,620 |
) |
|
|
(51,433 |
) |
|
|
(44,587 |
) |
|
|
96,330 |
|
23
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
You should read the following discussion in conjunction with
our consolidated financial statements and related notes
appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. In addition to
historical information, this discussion contains forward looking
statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions
that could cause actual results to differ materially from
managements expectations. Factors that could cause such
differences include those described in Risk Factors
and elsewhere in this prospectus.
Overview
We design, manufacture, sell and service high-performance ATE
for the semiconductor industry. Our test equipment addresses our
customers volume production needs and is designed to
enable our customers to achieve low overall
cost-of-test per
device. Our innovative products test analog, mixed-signal and RF
semiconductors. Semiconductors tested by our systems are
incorporated into a wide range of products in high-growth
markets, including digital cameras, MP3 players, cellular
telephones, video/multimedia products, automotive electronics,
computer peripherals, and notebook and desktop computers.
We were founded and began providing test solutions in 1976. Our
customers include semiconductor manufacturers, integrated device
manufacturers, or IDMs, fabless design companies, and assembly
and test subcontractors, including Allegro MicroSystems, Inc.,
Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., Guidant
Corporation, Intersil Corporation, National Semiconductor
Corporation, ON Semiconductor Corporation and Texas Instruments
Incorporated. Since October 1, 2003, we have delivered over
500 test systems to more than 50 customers worldwide. We
completed our initial public offering in March 2006.
Our business and operating results depend significantly on the
level of capital expenditures by companies in the semiconductor
industry. Historically, the semiconductor industry has been
highly cyclical with recurring periods of over-supply and
under-supply, which has resulted in wide fluctuations in demand
for our products and services. These demand fluctuations have
resulted in significant variations in our revenue, expenses and
results of operations in the periods presented. Fluctuations are
likely to continue in future periods.
Our business experienced significant growth in fiscal 2004 as
our net revenue increased to $111.2 million from
$55.8 million in fiscal 2003, an increase of
$55.4 million, or 99.4%, and our net income increased to
$22.1 million from $9.6 million in fiscal 2004, an
increase of $12.4 million, or 129.6%. In fiscal 2005, our
business experienced a slowdown during the downturn in the
semiconductor industry. Our net revenue decreased significantly
during fiscal 2005, to $63.5 million from
$111.2 million during fiscal 2004, a decrease of
$47.7 million, or 42.9%, and our net income in this period
decreased to $7.4 million from $22.1 million, a
decrease of $14.6 million, or 66.4%. Revenues in the fourth
quarter of fiscal 2005 increased sharply, and amounted to 44.9%
of the total revenue for the year, as the industry and our
business experienced a rebound. Our net revenue increased during
the nine months ended June 30, 2006, to $87.8 million
from $35.0 million during the same period in the prior
fiscal year, an increase of $52.8 million, or 151.2%.
Changes in industry conditions often occur very rapidly and can
be very difficult to predict. Thus, we cannot foresee the timing
and extent of such changes or their effect on our customer
orders and revenue with significant accuracy. In addition, these
cycles typically have a disproportionately negative impact on
capital equipment manufacturers, including providers of test
systems. As part of our strategy to address this volatility and
lack of visibility, we outsource a substantial portion of our
manufacturing functions to third party subcontractors. The
purpose of this strategic outsourcing model is to reduce our
fixed costs and working capital requirements, making our expense
structure more flexible during downturns. Outsourcing also
allows us to increase production rapidly to capitalize on market
opportunities during upturns. We believe our outsourcing
strategy provides us with the flexibility to respond more
rapidly to changes in industry conditions and demand for our
test systems.
Historically, a significant portion of our revenue in each
quarter and year has been derived from sales to relatively few
customers. While we seek to expand and diversify our customer
base, we expect our revenue to
24
continue to be derived from a small number of customers. In the
nine months ended June 30, 2006, sales to Texas Instruments
Incorporated and National Semiconductor Corporation accounted
for 51.4% and 10.2% of our net revenue, respectively, and sales
to our five largest customers accounted for an aggregate of
80.8% of our net revenue. In fiscal 2005, sales to Texas
Instruments Incorporated accounted for 44.3% of our net revenue,
and sales to our five largest customers accounted for an
aggregate of 66.9% of our net revenue. In fiscal 2004, sales to
National Semiconductor Corporation and Texas Instruments
Incorporated accounted for 36.1% and 31.9% of our net revenue,
respectively, and sales to our five largest customers accounted
for an aggregate of 79.2% of our net revenue.
With the exception of the United Kingdom and Japan, we market
and sell our products exclusively through our direct sales
organization, which consists of sales professionals, application
engineers (technical sales support), technical marketing and
sales personnel. In the United Kingdom, we utilize a combination
of direct sales representatives and independent distributors
while in Japan we use independent distributors. Our direct sales
force earns commissions based on the sales they generate. Our
distributors earn commissions based on sales of equipment
shipped into their regions or in some cases, we offer our
distributors discounts on our products for resale. A significant
majority of our sales is generated by our direct sales
organization and we expect to continue to expand our sales
organization in the future.
We do not have purchase contracts that require any of our
customers or distributors to continue to purchase our products,
and our customers or distributors could cease purchasing
products from us at any time. A delay in product orders or
acceptances or a cancellation by any of our large customers
could cause quarterly revenue to vary significantly. Our backlog
of orders is subject to order cancellations, accelerations,
changes and delays, and is not necessarily indicative of future
customer purchases or revenue streams.
During a given quarter, a significant portion of our revenue may
be derived from the sale of a relatively small number of test
systems. Our test systems range widely in average selling price,
depending upon many factors such as model, configuration and
level of testing resources sold with the system. Consequently, a
small change in the number or product mix of systems sold may
cause significant changes in our operating results. Thus, we do
not believe that
period-to-period
comparisons of our financial results are necessarily meaningful,
and they should not be relied upon as an indication of our
future performance.
In connection with recently becoming a public company, we expect
that we will incur significant additional expenses such as audit
fees, professional fees, increased directors and officers
insurance, board compensation, and expenses related to hiring
additional personnel and expanding our administrative functions.
Some of these expenses were not incurred by us as a private
company and are not included in our results of operations
through fiscal 2005. We began to incur certain of these expenses
during fiscal 2005 and 2004, and we expect that these expenses
will continue to increase.
Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
under currently published SEC rules, we will be required
beginning with our fiscal year ending September 30, 2007 to
include in our annual report our assessment of the effectiveness
of our internal control over financial reporting. Furthermore,
our registered independent public accounting firm will be
required to report on our assessment of the effectiveness of our
internal control over financial reporting and separately report
on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial
reporting. Under rules recently proposed by the SEC, we may not
be required to complete this assessment until our fiscal year
ending September 30, 2008. We have not yet completed our
assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting. If we fail to timely complete this
assessment, which we do not anticipate at this time, or if our
independent registered public accounting firm cannot attest to
our assessment when required, we may be subject to regulatory
sanctions and a loss of public confidence.
Net Revenue. Net revenue consists of sales of test
systems and individual test instrumentation boards, otherwise
known as resource boards, net of returns and allowances.
Substantially all of our net revenue is derived from sales of
our test systems. Net revenue from sales of individual resource
boards has historically not been significant. We expect that
this mix of net revenue will continue for the foreseeable
future. Net revenue is subject to both quarterly and annual
fluctuations as a result of the cyclical nature of the
semiconductor industry, as well as product mix and system
configuration.
25
Cost of Goods Sold. Cost of goods sold consists primarily
of manufacturing materials, outsourced manufacturing costs,
salaries and manufacturing-related overhead, which includes
provisions for excess and obsolete inventory reserves. We rely
on a limited number of subcontractors and suppliers to provide
key components of our products, some of which are sole-sourced.
We build products based on forecasts and customer backlog, and
purchase materials and supplies to support that demand. Since we
focus primarily on final assembly and test of our systems, we
are subject to variations in the cost of raw materials,
components and subsystems. Because we do not have long-term
fixed-price contracts with our suppliers, our costs could
fluctuate from
period-to-period.
Gross Profit. Our gross profit has varied from
period-to-period.
Factors that have affected and will continue to affect gross
profit in the future include product configuration, product
sales mix, manufacturing volume, manufacturing efficiencies,
excess and obsolete inventory reserves, pricing by competitors,
subcontractors and suppliers, and new product introductions.
Selling, General and Administrative. Selling, general and
administrative, or SG&A, expenses relate to compensation and
associated expenses for sales, marketing and applications
engineering personnel, sales commissions paid to sales
representatives and distributors, outside contractor expenses
and other sales and marketing program expenses. In addition,
SG&A expenses include travel and professional service
expenses, as well as salaries and related expenses for
administrative, finance, human resources and executive
personnel. SG&A expenses will increase as a result of
becoming a public company. We believe the incremental costs of
such items such as directors and officers insurance, investor
relations services, professional fees and other legal and
accounting compliance costs could exceed $1.5 million
annually, and we will also incur additional SG&A expenses
associated with improvements to our internal controls. SG&A
expenses may also increase in absolute dollars as we continue to
develop our sales and marketing efforts and expand our
administrative functions, and as a result of increased option
expenses related to adoption of changes in generally accepted
accounting principles. In addition, commission and variable
compensation expenses included in SG&A can fluctuate with
changes in sales volume and profitability.
Research and Development. Research and development, or
R&D, expenses consist primarily of compensation and related
expenses for personnel engaged in product development, as well
as expenses related to materials, outside contractors,
depreciation of equipment used in R&D, and other engineering
overhead expenses. R&D costs are expensed as incurred. We
believe our R&D expenses will generally increase in absolute
dollars as we continue to develop and improve our hardware and
software technologies.
Interest Expense. Interest expense consists of interest
on our debt and loans. The increase in interest expense
beginning in fiscal 2004 resulted from the issuance on
September 30, 2003 to TA Associates of $30.0 million
in principal amount of 12% senior subordinated convertible
notes due September 30, 2009. The senior subordinated
convertible notes held by TA Associates converted into
12% senior subordinated notes due September 30, 2009
and warrants to purchase 525,040 shares of our common
stock. These senior subordinated notes were repurchased with
proceeds from our initial public offering which was completed on
March 14, 2006 for an aggregate amount equal to
approximately $30.6 million.
Increase (Decrease) in Value of Warrants. Increase
(decrease) in value of warrants is a non-cash charge (benefit)
related to recording the increase (decrease) in the fair market
value of the common stock warrants issuable upon conversion of
the 12% senior subordinated convertible notes due
September 30, 2009. The warrants enable the holders to put
the warrants to us at any time after September 30, 2008 at
fair value, and thus the warrants are considered liability
instruments that are required to be accounted for under variable
accounting rules which require the warrants to be recorded at
fair value. This determination historically has been based upon
independent valuations. The holders of the warrants exercised
the warrants for common stock in connection with our initial
public offering which was completed on March 14, 2006, thus
we are no longer required to account for the warrants under the
variable accounting rules.
Other (Income) and Expense. Other (income) and expense
consists of income from cash, cash equivalents and marketable
securities, realized investment gains, losses and impairments,
and miscellaneous other income and expense.
26
Provision for Income Taxes. We account for income taxes
under the asset and liability method whereby the expected future
tax consequences of temporary differences between the book value
and the tax basis of assets and liabilities are recognized as
deferred tax assets and liabilities, using enacted tax rates in
effect for the year in which the differences are expected to be
recognized. A valuation allowance is provided if it is more
likely than not that some or all of the entire deferred tax
asset will not be realized.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
requires us to make estimates, assumptions and judgments that
affect the amounts reported in our financial statements and the
accompanying notes. We base our estimates on historical
experience and various other assumptions that we believe to be
reasonable. Although these estimates are based on our present
best knowledge of the future impact on us of current events and
actions, actual results may differ from these estimates,
assumptions and judgments.
We consider critical those accounting policies that
require our most subjective or complex judgments, which often
result from a need to make estimates about the effect of matters
that are inherently uncertain, and that are among the most
important of our accounting policies in the portrayal of our
financial condition and results of operations. These critical
accounting policies are: revenue recognition, valuation of
excess and obsolete inventory, accounting for warranty reserves,
determination of our allowance for sales returns and
uncollectables, and stock-based compensation.
Revenue Recognition. We derive revenue primarily from
sales of test systems and individual resource boards.
Substantially all of our revenue to date has been denominated in
United States dollars. Revenue related to test system sales is
recognized when:
|
|
|
|
|
we have a written sales agreement; |
|
|
|
delivery has occurred or services have been rendered; |
|
|
|
the price is fixed or determinable; and |
|
|
|
collectibility is reasonably assured. |
Installation services are generally part of the test system
sale. Revenue from test system sales is deferred until the test
system is delivered, installed and accepted at the customer
location.
When sales to a customer involve multiple elements, revenue is
recognized on the delivered element, provided that the
undelivered element is a standard product, there is a history of
acceptance of the product with the customer, and the undelivered
element is not essential to the customers application.
When a sale of a test system includes post contract customer
support, or PCS, revenue for the PCS is recognized ratably over
the PCS period. Revenue related to individual resource boards is
recognized upon shipment.
In a few instances we have entered into short-term rental
agreements with customers for the use of our test systems. We
recognize rental revenue ratably over the applicable rental
period. Rental revenue is included as a component of test system
sales and has been immaterial to date.
Inventory Reserves. We state our inventories at the lower
of cost or estimated market value, determined on a
first-in, first-out
method. We establish inventory reserves when conditions exist
that suggest inventory may be in excess of anticipated demand or
is obsolete based upon assumptions about future demand for test
systems or market conditions. We evaluate the ability to realize
the value of our inventory based on a combination of factors,
including forecasted sales or usage, estimated product
end-of-life dates,
estimated current and future market value and new product
introductions. Purchasing and alternative usage options are also
explored to mitigate obsolete inventory exposure. If actual
demand for test systems deteriorates or market conditions are
less favorable than those we project, additional inventory
reserves may be required.
We determine the valuation of excess and obsolete inventory by
making our best estimate considering the current quantities of
inventory on hand and our forecast of the need for this
inventory to support future sales of our test systems. We often
have limited information on which to base our forecasts. If
future sales differ from these forecasts, the valuation of
excess and obsolete inventory may change.
27
Warranty Reserves. Our test systems are sold with
warranty provisions that require us to remedy deficiencies in
quality or performance of our test systems. We are also subject
to laws and regulations in the various countries in which we
sell regarding vendor obligations to ensure product performance.
At the time we recognize revenue from a test systems sale,
we determine the reserve for the future cost of meeting our
obligations under the standard warranties and product
performance laws and regulations by considering our historical
experience with the costs of meeting these obligations. If the
future costs of meeting these obligations differ from our
historical experience, additional reserves for warranty
obligations may be required.
Allowance for Sales Returns and Uncollectables. We
determine our allowance for sales returns and uncollectables by
making our best estimate considering our historical accounts
receivable collection experience, current economic trends,
changes in customer payment terms and recent information that we
have about the current status of our accounts receivable
balances. If future conditions cause our collections experience
to change or if we later obtain different information about the
status of any or all of our accounts receivable, additional
allowances for sales returns and uncollectables may be required.
Stock-Based Compensation. Effective October 1, 2005,
we have adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standard
No. 123R Share Based Payment (SFAS 123R) which
amends SFAS 123 Accounting for Stock Based
Compensation, (SFAS 123), which requires us to
expense stock options based upon the fair market value on the
date of grant. We are amortizing the fair market value of
options granted over the vesting period of the options and we
are using the prospective method of adoption as defined under
SFAS 123R. Expense associated with stock options issued to
nonemployees/nondirectors is recorded in accordance with
SFAS 123.
For options issued prior to October 1, 2005, we accounted
for these options using the intrinsic value method in accordance
with Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, APB
No. 25. We had adopted the disclosure only provision of
SFAS 123 for options issued to employees and directors.
For all options issued after October 1, 2005, we are
recording compensation expense under the provisions of
SFAS 123R using the fair market value of the options
granted amortized over the vesting service period. Expense
recognized for the three and nine month periods ended
June 30, 2006 was $104,000 and $285,000, respectively.
Results of Operations
The following sets forth certain operating data as a percentage
of net revenue for the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net revenue
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
36.7 |
|
|
|
33.6 |
|
|
|
41.9 |
|
|
|
45.8 |
|
|
|
32.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
63.3 |
|
|
|
66.4 |
|
|
|
58.1 |
|
|
|
54.2 |
|
|
|
67.4 |
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
29.5 |
|
|
|
21.5 |
|
|
|
33.2 |
|
|
|
41.8 |
|
|
|
24.2 |
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
12.4 |
|
|
|
16.6 |
|
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
Write-off of offering expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
28.2 |
|
|
|
37.8 |
|
|
|
12.5 |
|
|
|
(4.2 |
) |
|
|
35.7 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
6.2 |
|
Other (income) and expense, net
|
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
(3.6 |
) |
|
|
(1.9 |
) |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
29.2 |
|
|
|
33.3 |
|
|
|
10.9 |
|
|
|
(9.6 |
) |
|
|
26.7 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
12.0 |
|
|
|
13.5 |
|
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(9.8 |
) |
|
|
11.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
17.2 |
% |
|
|
19.8 |
% |
|
|
11.7 |
% |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
15.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
The following sets forth our net revenue breakdown by geographic
region, in thousands and as a percentage of net revenue, during
the periods presented. Substantially all of our revenue to date
has been denominated in United States dollars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
Year Ended September 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
United States
|
|
$ |
23,503 |
|
|
|
42.1 |
% |
|
$ |
24,031 |
|
|
|
21.6 |
% |
|
$ |
29,295 |
|
|
|
46.2 |
% |
|
$ |
20,288 |
|
|
|
58.0 |
% |
|
$ |
27,219 |
|
|
|
31.0 |
% |
Malaysia
|
|
|
18,642 |
|
|
|
33.4 |
|
|
|
56,720 |
|
|
|
51.0 |
|
|
|
13,602 |
|
|
|
21.4 |
|
|
|
3,674 |
|
|
|
10.5 |
|
|
|
34,736 |
|
|
|
39.6 |
|
Other
|
|
|
13,621 |
|
|
|
24.5 |
|
|
|
30,459 |
|
|
|
27.4 |
|
|
|
20,580 |
|
|
|
32.4 |
|
|
|
10,992 |
|
|
|
31.5 |
|
|
|
25,836 |
|
|
|
29.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
55,766 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
111,210 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
63,477 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
34,954 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
87,791 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fiscal 2004 and for the nine months ended June 30, 2006,
our product sales had a significantly greater concentration of
customers in Malaysia than in other periods. This is primarily
due to the fact that our major customers had increased their
production in Malaysia, and as a result require additional
and/or replacement ATE in their Malaysian manufacturing
facilities. We believe that this concentration in Malaysia may
continue as our customers continue to focus operations and
facilities in the Asia Pacific Rim area, particularly Malaysia.
However, this will vary from year to year and from period to
period based upon our global customers needs at various
locations.
The following customers accounted for 10% or more of our net
revenue in one or more of the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
|
September 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
National Semiconductor Corporation
|
|
|
38.8 |
% |
|
|
36.1 |
% |
|
|
* |
% |
|
|
12.4 |
% |
|
|
10.2 |
% |
Texas Instruments Incorporated
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
31.9 |
|
|
|
44.3 |
|
|
|
35.5 |
|
|
|
51.4 |
|
Intersil Corporation
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
Comparison of Nine Months Ended June 30, 2006 and
2005 |
Net Revenue. Net revenue increased to $87.8 million
in the nine months ended June 30, 2006, an increase of
$52.8 million or 151.2% over the comparable period in the
preceding year. This increase was primarily due to a
$32.7 million increase in test system sales to Texas
Instruments Incorporated and a general increase in tester
shipments to semiconductor manufacturers who use our automated
test equipment.
Gross Profit. Gross profit was $59.2 million or
67.4% of net revenue in the nine months ended June 30, 2006
as compared to $19.0 million or 54.2% of net revenue for
the nine months ended June 30, 2005. Gross profit increased
as a percentage of net revenue due to increased sales and better
utilization of overhead costs and manufacturing personnel due to
higher volume production as compared to the prior period.
Additionally, gross profit as a percentage of net revenue
increased due to reversals of inventory reserves of
$0.5 million in the nine months ended June 30, 2006,
as compared to additional reserves of $1.8 million set up
in the same period of the prior fiscal year. The reduction in
inventory reserves in the current fiscal year was due to the
usage of inventory previously reserved for in fiscal 2005 being
greater than any additional reserves required in the current
period. Prior year reserves were established as a result of
lower visibility of demand for our products.
Selling, General and Administrative. SG&A expenses
were $21.3 million, or 24.2% of net revenue, in the nine
months ended June 30, 2006 and $14.6 million, or 41.9%
of net revenue, in the same period in the prior fiscal year, an
increase of $6.6 million. This increase was primarily due
to $3.3 million of additional commission, incentive
compensation and warranty accruals as a result of increased
system sales and operating
29
performance, $1.6 million in increased personnel costs
related to sales and service offices opened in Asia and Europe
in the past year, and $0.6 million of additional expenses
in connection with becoming a public company.
Research and Development. R&D expenses were
$6.6 million, or 7.5% of net revenue, in the nine months
ended June 30, 2006 and $5.8 million, or 16.6% of net
revenue, in the same period in the prior fiscal year, an
increase of $0.8 million. This increase was primarily due
to $1.4 million in additional personnel and related
facility costs for headcount, and additional depreciation
expense on increased equipment used in the development process,
offset in part by a $0.7 million decrease in materials used
in the product development process, resulting primarily from the
timing of prototype expenditures.
Interest Expense. Interest expense was $3.5 million
and $2.9 million for the nine months ended June 30,
2006 and 2005, respectively. The increase is due to a
$1.0 million writeoff of unamortized debt discount and a
$0.6 million redemption premium recorded on the senior
subordinated convertible notes which were repaid with the
proceeds of our initial public offering, offset by a reduction
in interest expense of $1.0 million due to repayment of
this instrument on March 14, 2006.
Increase (Decrease) in Value of Warrants. The increase in
value of warrants was $5.5 million for the nine months
ended June 30, 2006, compared to a decrease in value of
warrants of $0.4 million for the same period in the prior
fiscal year. The warrant valuation adjustment was due to the
change in the fair market value of the common stock warrants
because under certain circumstances we could be required to
purchase these after September 30, 2008 at fair market
value. These warrants were exercised and redeemed at the time of
completion of our initial public offering in the March 2006
quarter. Since the warrants are no longer outstanding at
June 30, 2006, there will be no further charges for changes
in the value of this instrument in future periods.
Other (Income) and Expense, Net. Other (income) expense,
net was income of $1.1 million and $0.7 million for
the nine months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The increase of $0.4 million is due to an increase of
$0.7 million in interest income from increased cash
equivalents and marketable securities balances primarily
resulting from cash generated by operations and cash of
$23.6 million retained from our initial public offering
completed March 14, 2006 offset by the gain of
$0.4 million realized in the March 2005 quarter upon the
sale of our former corporate headquarters facility.
Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes. Income tax expense
was $10.2 million, a 43.3% effective tax rate, in the nine
months ended June 30, 2006 and an income tax benefit of
$3.4 million, a 102.3% effective tax rate, in the same
period in the prior fiscal year. The increase in tax provision
of $13.6 million was due to an increase in pretax income of
$26.8 million and an increase in value of warrants of
$5.9 million, which is not tax deductible. In addition,
during the nine months ended June 30, 2005, the Company
filed its prior year tax returns and adjusted the current year
tax provision for actual deductions taken in those returns. The
tax effect of the deductions amounted to a $1.6 million tax
benefit and primarily related to additional extraterritorial
income exclusion and state income taxes different than the
amounts originally estimated. We believe our effective tax rate
will be closer to 36% in future periods since the warrants are
no longer outstanding.
|
|
|
Comparison of Years Ended September 30, 2005 and
2004 |
Net Revenue. Net revenue was $63.5 million in fiscal
2005 and $111.2 million in fiscal 2004, a decrease of
$47.7 million, or 42.9%. The significant decrease in net
revenue was due to reduced demand by our customers for our test
systems. In fiscal 2005, as compared to fiscal 2004, we
experienced $35.0 million and $7.3 million decreases
in net revenue from two of our largest customers, National
Semiconductor Corporation and Texas Instruments Incorporated,
respectively.
Cost of Goods Sold. Cost of goods sold was
$26.6 million in fiscal 2005 and $37.3 million in
fiscal 2004, a decrease of $10.7 million. The decrease was
primarily the result of decreased sales of our test systems.
30
Gross Profit. Gross profit was $36.9 million, or
58.1% of net revenue, in fiscal 2005 and $73.9 million, or
66.4% of net revenue, in fiscal 2004. The decrease in gross
profit as a percentage of net revenue was primarily due to
decreased sales and lower utilization of overhead costs and
manufacturing personnel due to lower volume production as
compared to fiscal 2004. Additionally, increased reserves of
$2.4 million, or 3.8% of net revenue, were recorded to
account for excess inventory on hand above our projected usage
based upon our forecasts.
Selling, General and Administrative. SG&A expenses
were $21.1 million, or 33.2% of net revenue, in fiscal 2005
and $23.9 million, or 21.5% of net revenue, in fiscal 2004.
SG&A expenses decreased $2.9 million, or 12.0%,
primarily due to $2.7 million in decreased sales
commissions as a result of decreased sales, and lower warranty
reserves also as a result of lower sales. These decreases were
offset in part by increased personnel cost of sales and service
offices opened in Suzhou, China; Basiano, Italy and Munich,
Germany.
Research and Development. R&D expenses were
$7.9 million, or 12.4% of net revenue, in fiscal 2005 and
$6.1 million, or 5.4% of net revenue, in fiscal 2004.
R&D expenses increased $1.8 million, or 30.3%,
primarily due to a $1.1 million increase in product
development materials. The remaining increase was due to
additional personnel and related facility costs for headcount
added in fiscal 2005, and additional depreciation expense on
equipment used in the development process.
Write-off of Offering Expenses. During fiscal 2004,
significant expenses were incurred related to preparing
documents and filings in preparation for a planned initial
public offering of common stock. These offering costs were being
deferred and were going to be offset against the proceeds of the
offering when completed. Due primarily to market conditions, our
initial public offering was delayed, resulting in
$1.9 million of expense of these deferred costs.
Interest Expense. Interest expense was $3.9 million
in fiscal 2005 and 2004 due to interest on the senior
subordinated convertible notes issued on September 30, 2003.
Increase (Decrease) in Value of Warrants. Decrease in
value of warrants was $0.6 million in fiscal 2005. Increase
in value of warrants was $1.5 million in fiscal 2004. These
amounts were due to recording the (decrease) increase in fair
market value of the common stock warrants that, under certain
circumstances, require us to purchase these warrants after
September 30, 2008. Because of this put feature, we are
required to account for the change in warrant value as a
liability.
Other (Income) and Expense, Net. Other (income) and
expense, net increased to income of $2.3 million for fiscal
2005 from $0.4 million in fiscal 2004, primarily due to
gains realized upon the liquidation of the marketable securities
portfolio, in accordance with our new investment policy. Our new
investment policy required us to liquidate our equity securities
and position our investment portfolio in investment grade
securities focused on preservation of principal. In addition, in
fiscal 2005, we realized a gain of $0.4 million upon the
sale of our former corporate headquarters facility.
Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes. Our income tax
provision was a benefit of $0.5 million, or a (7.6)%
effective tax rate, in fiscal 2005 and tax expense of
$15.0 million, or a 40.4% effective tax rate, in fiscal
2004. The decrease in tax provision of $15.5 million was
primarily a result of a decrease in pretax income of
$30.1 million. In addition, during fiscal 2005 we filed our
prior year tax returns and adjusted the current year tax
provision for actual deductions taken in those returns. The net
impact on the effective tax rate for 2005 was an additional
benefit of 23.0%, or $1.6 million, and primarily related to
additional extraterritorial income exclusion deduction and state
income taxes above the amounts originally estimated.
Furthermore, in fiscal 2005 we filed for tax method changes with
the Internal Revenue Service relating to inventory valuation.
Accrued taxes were adjusted to reflect the actual tax liability
based upon these tax method change filings and to reverse the
liability for tax positions of closed tax years. The net
reduction in the current year tax provision for accrued taxes in
fiscal 2005 was an additional benefit of 13.8%, or
$1.0 million.
31
|
|
|
Comparison of Years Ended September 30, 2004 and
2003 |
Net Revenue. Net revenue was $111.2 million in
fiscal 2004 and $55.8 million in fiscal 2003, an increase
of $55.4 million, or 99.4%. The significant increase in net
revenue was due to increased demand by our customers for our
test systems and due to $18.5 million and
$33.7 million increases in test system sales to two of our
largest customers, National Semiconductor Corporation and Texas
Instruments Incorporated, respectively. In addition, we began
generating revenue from our ETS-200T platform introduced in
fiscal 2004.
Cost of Goods Sold. Cost of goods sold was
$37.3 million in fiscal 2004 and $20.5 million in
fiscal 2003, an increase of $16.9 million. The increase in
cost of goods sold resulted primarily from increased test system
sales.
Gross Profit. Gross profit was $73.9 million, or
66.4% of net revenue, in fiscal 2004 and $35.3 million, or
63.3% of net revenue, in fiscal 2003. The increase in gross
profit as a percentage of net revenue was primarily due to
increased sales and better utilization of overhead costs and
manufacturing personnel due to higher volume production as
compared to fiscal 2003. In addition, in fiscal 2003, we
experienced additional manufacturing costs and inefficiencies
associated with the introduction of our
ETS-364 platform in
December 2002.
Selling, General and Administrative. SG&A expenses
were $23.9 million, or 21.5% of net revenue, in fiscal 2004
and $16.5 million, or 29.5% of net revenue, in fiscal 2003.
SG&A expenses increased $7.4 million, or 45.1%,
primarily due to increased sales, sales support and application
engineering personnel expenses of approximately
$3.0 million to support increased test system sales and
shipments, and $2.0 million in increased sales commissions
as a result of increased sales.
Research and Development. R&D expenses were
$6.1 million, or 5.4% of net revenue, in fiscal 2004 and
$3.1 million, or 5.6% of net revenue, in fiscal 2003.
R&D expenses increased $2.9 million, or 94.4%,
primarily due to an increase in R&D staffing levels,
resulting in higher compensation expenses and greater cost of
product development materials.
Write-off of Offering Expenses. During fiscal 2004,
significant expenses were incurred related to preparing
documents and filings in preparation for a planned initial
public offering of common stock. These offering costs were being
deferred and were going to be offset against the proceeds of the
offering when completed. Due primarily to market conditions, our
initial public offering was delayed, resulting in
$1.9 million of expense of these deferred costs. No similar
type expenses were incurred in fiscal 2003.
Interest Expense. Interest expense was $3.9 million
in fiscal 2004 due to interest on the senior subordinated
convertible notes issued on September 30, 2003. These notes
were not outstanding until the end of fiscal 2003.
Increase in Value of Warrants. Increase in value of
warrants was $1.5 million in fiscal 2004 due to recording
the increase in fair market value of the common stock warrants
that, under certain circumstances, require us to purchase these
warrants after September 30, 2008. Because of this put
feature, we are required to account for the change in the
warrant value as a liability.
Other (Income) and Expense, Net. Other (income) and
expense, net decreased to income of $408,000 for fiscal 2004
from income of $636,000 in fiscal 2003, primarily due to a
decrease in income from marketable securities. Other income for
fiscal 2004 and 2003 primarily relates to income from marketable
securities.
Provision for Income Taxes. Our provision for income
taxes was $15.0 million, a 40.4% effective tax rate, in
fiscal 2004 and $6.7 million, a 41.1% effective tax rate,
in fiscal 2003. The increase in tax provision of
$8.2 million was primarily a result of an increase in
pretax income of $20.7 million. The decrease in the
effective tax rate was primarily due to the utilization of the
extraterritorial income exclusion deduction and a lower state
tax rate, offset by the increase in value of warrants in fiscal
2004 of $1.5 million, which is not tax-deductible.
32
|
|
|
Quarterly Results of Operations |
The following table presents our unaudited quarterly results of
operations, in thousands, for each of our last eleven quarters
ended June 30, 2006. You should read the following table in
conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and
related notes contained elsewhere in this prospectus. We have
prepared the unaudited information on the same basis as our
audited consolidated financial statements. This table includes
all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring
adjustments, that we consider necessary for a fair presentation
of results of operations for the quarters presented. Results of
operations for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of
results for any future quarters or for a full year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept. 30, | |
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept. 30, | |
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net revenue
|
|
$ |
19,862 |
|
|
$ |
27,294 |
|
|
$ |
27,888 |
|
|
$ |
36,166 |
|
|
$ |
20,191 |
|
|
$ |
8,600 |
|
|
$ |
6,163 |
|
|
$ |
28,523 |
|
|
$ |
22,447 |
|
|
$ |
28,565 |
|
|
$ |
36,779 |
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
6,308 |
|
|
|
8,630 |
|
|
|
9,991 |
|
|
|
12,408 |
|
|
|
7,680 |
|
|
|
5,027 |
|
|
|
3,293 |
|
|
|
10,596 |
|
|
|
7,029 |
|
|
|
9,319 |
|
|
|
12,256 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
13,554 |
|
|
|
18,664 |
|
|
|
17,897 |
|
|
|
23,758 |
|
|
|
12,511 |
|
|
|
3,573 |
|
|
|
2,870 |
|
|
|
17,927 |
|
|
|
15,418 |
|
|
|
19,246 |
|
|
|
24,523 |
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
4,690 |
|
|
|
4,987 |
|
|
|
6,218 |
|
|
|
8,037 |
|
|
|
4,614 |
|
|
|
5,045 |
|
|
|
4,971 |
|
|
|
6,436 |
|
|
|
6,288 |
|
|
|
6,958 |
|
|
|
8,014 |
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
1,173 |
|
|
|
1,242 |
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
|
|
2,058 |
|
|
|
2,089 |
|
|
|
2,010 |
|
|
|
1,701 |
|
|
|
2,083 |
|
|
|
2,076 |
|
|
|
2,392 |
|
|
|
2,088 |
|
|
Write-off of offering expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
7,691 |
|
|
|
12,435 |
|
|
|
10,101 |
|
|
|
11,805 |
|
|
|
5,808 |
|
|
|
(3,482 |
) |
|
|
(3,802 |
) |
|
|
9,408 |
|
|
|
7,054 |
|
|
|
9,896 |
|
|
|
14,421 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
974 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
970 |
|
|
|
972 |
|
|
|
970 |
|
|
|
976 |
|
|
|
982 |
|
|
|
982 |
|
|
|
980 |
|
|
|
2,430 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
1,816 |
|
|
|
740 |
|
|
|
(588 |
) |
|
|
(420 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(420 |
) |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
(215 |
) |
|
|
2,191 |
|
|
|
3,275 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other (income) and expense
|
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(140 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
(418 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(1,605 |
) |
|
|
(157 |
) |
|
|
(315 |
) |
|
|
(582 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
5,040 |
|
|
|
10,864 |
|
|
|
9,750 |
|
|
|
11,351 |
|
|
|
5,025 |
|
|
|
(3,620 |
) |
|
|
(4,756 |
) |
|
|
10,246 |
|
|
|
4,040 |
|
|
|
4,506 |
|
|
|
14,932 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
2,704 |
|
|
|
4,588 |
|
|
|
3,647 |
|
|
|
4,013 |
|
|
|
1,970 |
|
|
|
(1,571 |
) |
|
|
(3,826 |
) |
|
|
2,903 |
|
|
|
2,165 |
|
|
|
2,733 |
|
|
|
5,260 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
2,336 |
|
|
$ |
6,276 |
|
|
$ |
6,103 |
|
|
$ |
7,338 |
|
|
$ |
3,055 |
|
|
$ |
(2,049 |
) |
|
$ |
(930 |
) |
|
$ |
7,343 |
|
|
$ |
1,875 |
|
|
$ |
1,773 |
|
|
$ |
9,672 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents our historical results for the
periods indicated as a percentage of net revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept. 30, | |
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
Sept. 30, | |
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
March 31, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net revenue
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
31.8 |
|
|
|
31.6 |
|
|
|
35.8 |
|
|
|
34.3 |
|
|
|
38.0 |
|
|
|
58.5 |
|
|
|
53.4 |
|
|
|
37.1 |
|
|
|
31.3 |
|
|
|
32.6 |
|
|
|
33.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
68.2 |
|
|
|
68.4 |
|
|
|
64.2 |
|
|
|
65.7 |
|
|
|
62.0 |
|
|
|
41.5 |
|
|
|
46.6 |
|
|
|
62.9 |
|
|
|
68.7 |
|
|
|
67.4 |
|
|
|
66.7 |
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
23.6 |
|
|
|
18.3 |
|
|
|
22.3 |
|
|
|
22.3 |
|
|
|
22.9 |
|
|
|
58.7 |
|
|
|
80.7 |
|
|
|
22.6 |
|
|
|
28.0 |
|
|
|
24.4 |
|
|
|
21.8 |
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
|
23.3 |
|
|
|
27.6 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
Write-off of offering expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
38.7 |
|
|
|
45.5 |
|
|
|
36.2 |
|
|
|
32.6 |
|
|
|
28.8 |
|
|
|
(40.5 |
) |
|
|
(61.7 |
) |
|
|
33.0 |
|
|
|
31.4 |
|
|
|
34.6 |
|
|
|
39.2 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
15.9 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
(2.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(4.9 |
) |
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
9.7 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other (income) and expense
|
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(4.8 |
) |
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
(5.6 |
) |
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
25.4 |
|
|
|
39.8 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
|
|
|
31.4 |
|
|
|
24.9 |
|
|
|
(42.1 |
) |
|
|
(77.2 |
) |
|
|
35.9 |
|
|
|
18.0 |
|
|
|
15.8 |
|
|
|
40.6 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
13.6 |
|
|
|
16.8 |
|
|
|
13.1 |
|
|
|
11.1 |
|
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
|
(18.3 |
) |
|
|
(62.1 |
) |
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
|
9.6 |
|
|
|
9.6 |
|
|
|
14.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
11.8 |
% |
|
|
23.0 |
% |
|
|
21.9 |
% |
|
|
20.3 |
% |
|
|
15.1 |
% |
|
|
(23.8 |
)% |
|
|
(15.1 |
)% |
|
|
25.7 |
% |
|
|
8.4 |
% |
|
|
6.2 |
% |
|
|
26.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Revenue. We experienced sequential quarterly revenue
growth in each of the quarters of fiscal 2004 as demand for our
test systems increased in response to industry demand. During an
industry-wide downturn, our results of operations declined
beginning in the quarter ended December 31, 2004 and the
decline continued in each of the quarters ended March 31,
2005 and June 30, 2005. Beginning in the quarter ended
September 30, 2005, our sales generally began to improve
primarily due to increasing demand for our test systems,
expansion of our customer base, and an upturn in the
semiconductor industry as our customers experienced increased
demand for their products such as power management devices used
in handheld consumer electronic products. Net revenue increased
in the quarter ended June 30, 2006 by $8.2 million or
28.8% when compared with the immediately preceding quarter. This
increase was a result of greater demand for our test systems
that we believe was based upon increased demand for our
customers products. While the business environment has
continued to improve for ATE providers, our quarterly net
revenue has varied based upon our major customers capital
expenditures, capacity requirements and test system ordering
patterns. Our relatively
33
low numbers of test systems shipped each quarter and our
customer concentration have caused significant variations in our
quarterly net revenue.
Gross Profit. Gross profit has generally trended higher
during overall industry upturns, as it did in the quarter ended
December 31, 2003 through the quarter ended
December 31, 2004, and again beginning in the quarter ended
September 30, 2005. This trend was the result of increased
sales and volume efficiencies in manufacturing and customer
orders for test systems with more profitable test system
configurations. Gross profit percentage decreased in each of the
quarters ended March 31, 2005 and June 30, 2005 during
the industry wide downturn, and due to the increase in reserves
for excess inventory, based upon projected usage. Gross profit
was 66.7% in the quarter ended June 30, 2006 and may
fluctuate based upon product mix and utilization of overhead
costs and manufacturing personnel.
Selling, General and Administrative. SG&A expenses
have generally increased in absolute dollars over time but have
fluctuated and will continue to fluctuate from quarter to
quarter as a percentage of net revenue. SG&A spending in
absolute dollars has trended upward as a result of our expansion
of our sales force, addition of application engineering
personnel and entry into new geographic territories. We intend
to add experienced sales personnel and applications engineers as
we expand our sales offices and the geographic regions that we
cover. However, sales commissions paid to employees and sales
distributors will fluctuate based upon the number and value of
test systems sold. We have added additional administrative
employees in response to and in anticipation of the growth of
our business and our becoming a public company. The SG&A
increase in the quarter ended June 30, 2006 was principally
due to increases in sales commission and variable compensation
expenses and warranty reserves as a result of the significant
increase in sales during the quarter and costs incurred as a
result of becoming a public company, which includes professional
services, incremental legal fees for regulatory compliance and
directors and officers insurance premiums.
Research and Development. Our research and development
expenses have fluctuated from quarter to quarter as a percentage
of net revenue, but have generally increased over time in
absolute dollars. Key drivers to R&D spend relate to
employee compensation, materials used in the development
process, facility costs and depreciation for R&D equipment.
Except for materials used in the development process, R&D
costs primarily trend with the number of employees devoted to
R&D. R&D material costs may fluctuate more significantly
from quarter to quarter based upon material usage related to
product development prototyping cycles. We believe our R&D
expenses will generally increase in absolute dollars as we
continue to develop and improve our hardware and software
technologies.
Our quarterly results of operations have varied in the past and
are likely to do so again in the future primarily due to the
cyclical nature of the semiconductor industry. As such, we
believe that
period-to-period
comparisons of our results of operations should not be relied
upon as an indication of future performance. In future periods,
the market price of our common stock could decline if our
revenues and results of operations are below the expectations of
analysts and investors. Factors that may cause our revenue and
results of operations to fluctuate include those discussed in
the Risk Factors section of this prospectus.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Since our inception we have financed our operations primarily
through cash generated from operations and our existing cash
balances. On March 14, 2006, we completed our initial
public offering, generating net proceeds to us of
$86.7 million, of which $63.1 million was used to
redeem our senior subordinated notes and redeemable preferred
stock. As of June 30, 2006, we had $63.6 million in
cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities.
Our balance in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
increased from $22.7 million as of September 30, 2005
to $63.6 million as of June 30, 2006. Operating
activities during the nine months ended June 30, 2006
provided cash of $19.4 million, due to income of
$13.3 million resulting primarily from sales of test
systems, an increase in value of warrants of $5.5 million
that did not require cash, and an increase in accounts payable
and accrued expenses of $10.9 million due to a standard lag
in payment on purchases used to support increased sales
activity. These increases in working capital were offset in part
by increased accounts receivables (net of deferred revenue) of
$5.5 million due to increased sales activity, and an
increase
34
in inventory of $4.9 million due to additional component
purchases,
work-in-process, and
finished goods to support anticipated increasing sales activity.
Financing activities generated cash of $86.7 million from
our initial public offering completed March 14, 2006, of
which $63.1 million was used to redeem $30.6 million
of senior subordinated notes and $32.5 million of
redeemable preferred stock.
Our balance in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
decreased slightly from $23.7 million as of
September 30, 2004, to $22.7 million as of
September 30, 2005. Operating activities during the twelve
months ended September 30, 2005 provided cash of
$5.0 million, due to income of $7.4 million resulting
primarily from sales of test systems, depreciation expense of
$2.2 million that did not require cash, and
$10.0 million of inventory reductions due to purchasing
less material than that used in product shipments. These
increases in working capital were offset in part by working
capital used for increased accounts receivables (net of deferred
revenue) of $1.1 million and a decrease in accounts
payable, accrued expenses and accrued compensation of
$10.9 million due to payments made to vendors and for
accrued expenses which were not as significant at
September 30, 2005 due to lower operating levels than
existed a year ago. Investing activities used cash to purchase
capital equipment of $7.1 million, which primarily
represented test and computer equipment, office furniture and
leasehold improvements purchased for new headquarter facilities
to which we relocated in January 2005, as well as new research
and development equipment for use in product and application
development.
Our balance in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
increased from $22.0 million as of September 30, 2003
to $23.7 million as of September 30, 2004. Operating
activities during fiscal 2004 provided cash of $8.4 million
primarily from net income of $22.1 million and from an
increase of $6.2 million in accounts payable and accrued
expenses due to a standard lag in payment on purchases used to
support increased sales activity. During this period there was
also an increase of $2.2 million in accrued compensation
due to increases in employee incentive plan accruals as a result
of improved operating performance that were not paid out until
December 2004. These items were offset by an increase in
inventory of $16.1 million due to additional component
purchases made to support anticipated increased sales activity
experienced in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2004 and an increase
in accounts receivable (net of deferred revenue) of
$4.3 million due to increased test system sales. Investing
activities used cash to purchase capital equipment of
$4.6 million, which primarily represented test and computer
equipment, and software purchased during the period for human
resources, CRM and customer service applications. Financing
activities used cash of $2.3 million primarily as a result
of a dividend of $2.0 million paid to our common
stockholders that was accrued at September 30, 2003.
Our balance in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
increased from $20.6 million as of September 30, 2002
to $22.0 million as of September 30, 2003. Operating
activities during fiscal 2003 provided cash of
$16.3 million primarily from net income of
$9.6 million. During this period there was also an increase
of $2.4 million in accrued compensation due to increases in
employee incentive plan accruals as a result of improved
operating performance that were not paid out until December
2003, and an increase in accrued income taxes of
$6.3 million due to federal and state income tax accruals
made at year end that were paid with final returns filed in
December 2003. These items were offset by an increase in
accounts receivable (net of deferred revenue) of $763,000 due to
increased test system sales. Investing activities used cash to
purchase capital equipment of $2.0 million, which primarily
represented computer equipment and test equipment used in
manufacturing, and research and development. Financing
activities used cash of $13.5 million resulting from the
redemption of common stock and dividend payments made to
stockholders of $95.0 million and $13.5 million,
respectively, offset in part by $65.0 million from the sale
of series A convertible preferred stock and
$30.0 million from the sale of senior subordinated
convertible notes to TA Associates. These securities were issued
in order to effect a recapitalization as of September 30,
2003.
35
Contractual Obligations
The following table describes our cash commitments, in
thousands, to settle contractual obligations as of June 30,
2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due in | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Less Than | |
|
|
|
More Than | |
|
|
Total | |
|
1 Year | |
|
1-3 Years | |
|
4-5 Years | |
|
5 Years | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Operating lease obligations
|
|
$ |
13,629 |
|
|
$ |
2,124 |
|
|
$ |
3,544 |
|
|
$ |
3,070 |
|
|
$ |
4,891 |
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
|
751 |
|
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
463 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase commitments(1)
|
|
|
10,197 |
|
|
|
10,197 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
24,577 |
|
|
$ |
12,607 |
|
|
$ |
4,007 |
|
|
$ |
3,072 |
|
|
$ |
4,891 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
The purchase commitments primarily represent the value of
purchase orders issued for raw materials and purchased services
that have been scheduled for fulfillment in the next six to
eight months. |
We believe our existing cash balance and marketable securities
will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for at
least the next twelve months. Our future capital requirements
will depend on many factors, including our rate of revenue
growth, the timing and extent of spending to support product
development efforts, the expansion of sales and marketing
activities, the timing of introductions of new products and
enhancements to existing products, the costs to ensure access to
adequate manufacturing capacity, and the continuing market
acceptance of our products. To the extent that funds generated
by this offering, together with existing cash, cash equivalents
and short-term investments balances and any cash from
operations, are insufficient to fund our future activities, we
may need to raise additional funds through bank lines of credit
or public or private equity or debt financing. Although we are
currently not a party to any agreement or letter of intent with
respect to potential investments in, or acquisitions of,
complementary businesses, products or technologies, we may enter
into these types of arrangements in the future, which could also
require us to seek additional equity or debt financing.
Additional funds may not be available on terms favorable to us,
or at all.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In November 2004, FASB issued SFAS No. 151,
Inventory Costs, an amendment of ARB No. 43,
Chapter 4. SFAS 151 clarifies that abnormal inventory
costs such as costs of idle facilities, excess freight and
handling costs, and wasted materials (spoilage) are
required to be recognized as current period costs. The
provisions of SFAS 151 are effective for fiscal year 2006.
Adoption of SFAS 151 did not have a material impact on our
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In December 2004, FASB issued FASB Staff Position
No. SFAS 109-a, Application of FAS 109 for
the Tax Deduction Provided to U.S. Based Manufacturers by
the American Job Creation Act of 2004, and FASB Staff
Position No. SFAS 109-b, Accounting and
Disclosure Guidance for the Foreign Earnings Repatriation
Provision within the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (Act) repeals
export tax benefits, transitions in a new tax deduction for
qualifying U.S. manufacturing activities and provides for
the repatriation of earnings from foreign subsidiaries at
reduced federal income tax rates. These two staff positions
provide accounting and disclosure guidance related to the
American Job Creation Act of 2004. The Act will have no effect
on our fiscal 2005 tax liability; however, we are evaluating
what impact of transitioning from an Export Tax incentive
benefit to a new tax deduction for U.S. Manufacturing
Activities will have on future years.
In May 2005, FASB issued SFAS No. 154,
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, which
requires the direct effects of voluntary accounting principle
changes to be retrospectively applied to prior periods
financial statements. SFAS 154 does not change the
transition provisions of any existing accounting pronouncements,
but would apply in the unusual instance that a pronouncement
does not include specific transition provisions. SFAS 154
maintains existing guidance with respect to accounting estimate
changes and corrections of errors, and is effective for us
beginning with fiscal year 2007. Adoption is not expected to
have a material impact on our financial position, results of
operation or cash flows.
36
In December 2004, FASB finalized SFAS No. 123R,
Share Based Payment, amending
SFAS No. 123. SFAS 123R requires us to expense
stock options based on grant date fair value in the income
statement. Further, SFAS 123R requires additional
accounting related to the income tax effects and additional
disclosure regarding the cash flow effects resulting from
share-based payment arrangements. We adopted SFAS 123R
effective October 1, 2005. Under SFAS 123R, we are
using the Black-Scholes
Option Pricing Model to determine the fair value of stock
options granted. This model uses such factors as the price of
the underlying shares at date of issuance, exercise price of the
option, the expected term of the option utilizing the simplified
method as set forth in SAB No. 107, a
risk-free interest rate
and an expected volatility rate based upon a peer group of
companies given no historical data for our own stock. The
resulting fair value will be amortized to expense as vesting
occurs. Since we used the minimum value method of measuring
equity share options for pro forma disclosure purposes under
SFAS 123, implementation of SFAS 123R will apply
prospectively to new awards after October 1, 2005. Expense
recognized as a result of adoption in the three and nine months
periods ended June 30, 2006 was $104,000 and $285,000,
respectively.
In June 2006, the FASB issued FIN 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes an interpretation of
FASB Statement No. 109, 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. This Interpretation also provides
guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and
penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and
transition. This Interpretation will become effective for the
Company during the first fiscal quarter of 2008. The Company is
still evaluating the impact of this Interpretation but does not
expect it to have a material impact on its financial condition
or results of operations.
Quantitative and Qualitative Information about Market Risk
In fiscal 2005 we adopted an investment strategy that has
eliminated investments in equity securities that we have held in
the past and limits our investments to government securities and
other short-term, investment-grade, marketable securities. This
revised investment policy is substantially more conservative
than prior practices and focuses on preservation of principal.
As of June 30, 2006, most of our investments represent
investment-grade securities focused on preservation of
principal, with interest rates that are reset every
7 to 28 days, and have a put option to convert to
cash within 2 to 5 days.
Our revenues and expenses are denominated in U.S. dollars.
In addition, our sales contracts are also denominated in
U.S. dollars. As a result, we have little exposure to
currency exchange risks. We do not currently enter into forward
exchange contracts to hedge exposure denominated in foreign
currencies or any other derivative financial instruments for
trading or speculative purposes. In the future, if we feel our
foreign currency exposure has increased, we may consider
entering into hedging transactions to help mitigate that risk.
37
BUSINESS
Overview
We design, manufacture, sell and service high-performance ATE
for the semiconductor industry. Our test equipment is designed
to address our customers volume production needs and to
lower their overall
cost-of-test per
device. Our innovative products test analog, mixed-signal and RF
semiconductors. Semiconductors tested by our systems are
incorporated into a wide range of products in high-growth
markets, including digital cameras, MP3 players, cellular
telephones, video/multimedia products, automotive electronics,
computer peripherals, and notebook and desktop computers.
Our test systems utilize our proprietary
SmartPintm
technology. This technology improves throughput and enables
customers to achieve low
cost-of-test by
increasing the rate of test per device and enabling multiple
devices to be tested simultaneously, or in parallel, on an
individual test system. Designed to be modular, flexible and
scalable, our test systems provide our customers with
cost-efficient, customized solutions. We believe our ATE
architecture offers significant test speed and precision,
leading to high production yields and a low overall
cost-of-test per
device. Accordingly, we believe our proprietary technology and
ATE architecture enable our customers to bring their high-volume
semiconductors to market at a low overall cost.
We were founded by Leonard Foxman, our Chief Executive Officer,
and began providing test solutions in 1976. Our customers
include semiconductor manufacturers, IDMs, fabless design
companies, and assembly and test subcontractors, including
Allegro MicroSystems, Inc., Fairchild Semiconductor
International, Inc., Guidant Corporation, Intersil Corporation,
National Semiconductor Corporation, ON Semiconductor Corporation
and Texas Instruments Incorporated. Since October 1, 2003,
we have delivered over 500 test systems to more than 50
customers worldwide. Since October 1, 2005, we have shipped
production test systems to the following new customers: Diodes
Shanghai Co., Ltd., Donghu Electronics, Infineon Technologies,
Microchip Technology, Myson Century Inc. and STMicroelectronics.
We completed our initial public offering on March 14, 2006.
Our global headquarters is located at our new manufacturing
facility in Buffalo Grove, Illinois. We operate sales, services
and engineering support facilities in the United States through
regional offices and globally through our offices in Korea,
Singapore, Taiwan, Italy, Germany, China, Malaysia and the
Philippines.
Industry Background
Semiconductor devices are the foundation of the modern
electronic world. The Semiconductor Industry Association, or
SIA, reports that worldwide semiconductor sales were
$227.5 billion in 2005, and expects sales to reach
$310.5 billion in 2008. The projected growth of
semiconductor sales reflects the continued proliferation of
semiconductors in a broad range of commercial and consumer
electronic products.
Semiconductors are typically divided into two broad categories,
digital and analog. Digital semiconductors, such as
microprocessors, digital signal processors, or DSPs, and memory
devices, are used to process and store data in a binary format
using electrical signals to represent the binary digits,
1 and 0. In contrast, analog
semiconductors, such as amplifiers, RF devices, voltage
regulators and other power management devices, are used to
measure, control and transform physical properties, such as
light, sound and movement, into a digital format by producing
electrical signals that have a continuous range of values.
Mixed-signal semiconductors contain both analog and digital
elements on a single device but are generally classified as
analog semiconductors.
Analog semiconductors are used in a wide and growing range of
products and applications. According to the SIA, the total
market for analog semiconductors is expected to grow from
$31.9 billion in 2005 to $46.8 billion in 2008, a
compound annual growth rate of 13.6% per year.
Semiconductor prices typically decline as new devices are
introduced and as devices advance through their product life
cycles. This price compression takes place against a backdrop of
increasing device complexity. Consequently, semiconductor
38
device manufacturers, especially those serving high-volume
markets, must continually seek cost reductions in all aspects of
their manufacturing process.
|
|
|
The Importance of Testing in Semiconductor Production; The
ATE Market |
The process of designing and manufacturing semiconductors is
complex and capital intensive. The wafer fabrication process, or
front-end process, involves numerous and repetitive
processing steps during which hundreds or even thousands of
copies of a device are formed simultaneously on a single wafer.
The subsequent testing and assembly of devices into packaged
products ready for sale is commonly referred to as the
back-end process.
Device testing is a critical part of the semiconductor
production process and is a significant component of the cost of
manufacturing semiconductors. Test equipment is typically used
in the back-end process where each device is often tested
several times to validate functional and electrical performance
prior to shipment. ATE is generally used in two steps in the
back-end semiconductor production process:
|
|
|
|
|
Wafer Probe Test. After wafer fabrication, a test system
performs electrical testing of individual devices while still in
wafer form for initial pass/fail verification by moving the
wafer into contact with a wafer probe card. Semiconductors are
tested at this stage to avoid the additional costs associated
with assembling, packaging and further testing of defective
semiconductors. |
|
|
|
Final Test. After the individual semiconductor devices,
called die, that fail the wafer probe test are discarded, the
remaining die are assembled into packages. Manufacturers then
test the packaged devices over a range of potential operating
conditions to measure their functionality against precise
performance specifications. Final test works to ensure that a
device meets the manufacturers quality standards prior to
shipping. |
In addition to identifying devices that do not function properly
in the back-end process, ATE also generates information that
semiconductor manufacturers use to improve the yield of their
overall production process and to assist in the semiconductor
design and development phase.
Demand for ATE is driven by increases in semiconductor unit
production, increases in the complexity of semiconductor devices
and the need to improve the overall cost-effectiveness of the
semiconductor manufacturing process. The worldwide market for
ATE was $3.8 billion in 2005, and is forecasted to grow to
$6.2 billion in 2008, representing a compound annual growth
rate of 18.2%, according to Gartner/ Dataquest.
Current Test Challenges
Device manufacturers have continually focused on manufacturing
and process improvements to satisfy the demand for smaller,
better performing and lower cost semiconductors. Technological
advances, such as smaller device geometries, higher transistor
density and the introduction of larger, 300 mm wafers, have
led to significant economies of scale in the front-end process
and a general decline in overall manufacturing cost per device.
However, as front-end costs have been decreasing, back-end
costs, of which testing costs can be the most significant
component, have not enjoyed the same rate of improvement. As a
result, test cost has become a growing percentage of overall
manufacturing cost and can be the most significant cost
associated with manufacturing a semiconductor, especially in the
case of high-volume devices. Consequently, semiconductor
manufacturers are aggressively pursuing strategies to reduce
their overall
cost-of-test.
In analyzing total
cost-of-test,
semiconductor manufacturers focus on the initial ATE purchase
price, equipment throughput, the range of products that can be
effectively tested, costs associated with test application
development, ability to upgrade, on-going maintenance and
training requirements, and the need for ancillary equipment and
floor space. Reducing the total
cost-of-test is an
important consideration for all device manufacturers, but is of
particular significance to vendors of high-volume, low-cost
devices for whom
39
overall manufacturing cost is a critical factor in the ability
to compete profitably. Significant challenges for device
manufacturers in achieving lower overall
cost-of-test include:
|
|
|
|
|
Need for High Throughput Testing. A test systems
throughput, or the number of devices that can be tested on a
single test system in a given period of time, is a principal
driver of cost-of-test.
Improving throughput allows semiconductor manufacturers to meet
increased capacity demands with fewer test systems, and
consequently less ancillary equipment. The most effective method
of increasing test throughput is to test multiple devices
simultaneously on the same test system, or in parallel, on
multiple test sites. The benefits are lower overall capital
expenditures and less required floor space for a given increment
of capacity. Although this multi-site, parallel test approach is
widely employed for high volume production of digital and memory
devices, it has proved challenging for analog and mixed-signal
device testing due to the nature of the electrical properties of
analog devices and the current architecture of many analog and
mixed-signal test systems. |
|
|
|
Demand for Greater Testing Accuracy and Repeatability.
The percentage of functioning devices per production run, known
as yield, is a key measurement in determining the cost of
semiconductor manufacturing. While yield losses can occur at
multiple points during the manufacturing process, yield can be
particularly affected during the testing process when
functioning, or good, devices are deemed
bad by test equipment incapable of making high
precision measurements. Since lower yields have a direct impact
on profitability, semiconductor manufacturers seek test
equipment capable of highly accurate, repeatable results.
Greater precision increases the likelihood that good devices
will pass and defective devices will fail. In multi-site
testing, test accuracy and repeatability can be compromised when
electrical signals from a device failure from one site influence
the test results at another site. This occurs in conventional
test systems because the test instrumentation connected to each
DUT is electrically linked by a common signal and power pathway,
known as a common ground pathway, in the test system. For this
reason, semiconductor manufacturers seek test solutions capable
of producing precise, repeatable results and that minimize
undesired interaction between devices undergoing simultaneous
multi-site test. |
|
|
|
Demand for Scalable, Flexible Solutions. ATE providers
have traditionally offered test systems that emphasize solutions
for the most advanced semiconductors, such as those with high
digital pin counts and high operating frequencies. The
challenges associated with testing these complex devices have
resulted in test systems that are increasingly expensive to
acquire, operate and maintain. Often, the functionality of these
test systems greatly exceeds the test requirements for many
low-priced, high-volume devices and cannot be scaled down in a
cost-effective manner to address the specific requirements of
these particular devices. In other cases, the test equipment
offered at lower prices has proven incapable of providing the
multi-site, parallel test capability required to achieve high
throughput. Due to the lack of flexibility in traditional ATE
architecture, semiconductor manufacturers require test equipment
with the capability to cost-effectively scale functionality to
meet the test requirements of a wide range of devices. |
|
|
|
High Cost of Changing Test Platforms. Although more
cost-effective test platforms may be available for testing many
devices, the costs associated with migrating, or switching, to a
new platform are often significant enough to cause semiconductor
manufacturers to stay with their current, less efficient, test
platforms. The switching costs associated with replacing an
existing test solution include the capital expense of the new
test system, the cost of developing and integrating new test
programs and associated hardware, the expense associated with
investment in ancillary hardware and other accessories, and the
re-training and facility improvements necessary to support the
new ATE environment. In addition, switching costs decrease the
overall efficiency of the test process due to the increased time
required for engineering and production staff to evaluate and
validate new test systems. These high switching costs often make
semiconductor manufacturers reluctant to switch to a new test
platform, despite the new platforms ability to provide
higher throughput and lower
cost-of-test. |
40
Our Solution
Our products are designed to enable our customers to achieve low
overall cost-of-test
per device. We believe our test systems deliver increased test
throughput for high-volume, price-sensitive semiconductors in
the analog, mixed-signal and RF markets. We offer test systems
that enable our customers to achieve a high level of test
accuracy and repeatability, and our flexible system architecture
can be easily reconfigured and adapted to meet our
customers current and evolving testing needs. By focusing
on low cost-of-test per
device and based on informal feedback from customers, we believe
that our test systems offer customers a competitive overall test
solution that enables them to lower their semiconductor
production costs and improve their profit opportunity. The
aspects of our solution that facilitate low
cost-of-test include:
Increased Throughput. Our test systems are designed to
enable our customers to improve throughput, which lowers total
cost-of-test. We
improve throughput in the following manner:
|
|
|
|
|
Our proprietary
SmartPintm
technology shortens the time required to complete the test
routine for each individual device.
SmartPintm
technology enables high-speed, sequential subtests in which the
test instrumentation completes an entire range of test
parameters without software intervention or the time consuming
task of opening and closing relays. In addition, with onboard
DSP processing technology,
SmartPintm
eliminates the need for data and test results to cross long
signal paths in order to be collected and analyzed. |
|
|
|
Our test systems optimize simultaneous, or parallel, testing
across multiple sites on the same test system. We refer to this
capability as
SimulTesttm.
Our architecture enables test routine replication across
multiple sites by dedicating signal sourcing and measurement
resources, for current and voltage, and local signal processing
to each pin on the DUT. This permits one test system to
effectively test multiple devices simultaneously, which is
critical for cost-efficient, multi-site, parallel testing. |
Improved Yield with Precision and Repeatability. Our
proprietary technology and product architecture are designed to
achieve test precision and repeatable results in order to
deliver higher yields. We believe our solution improves yield in
the following ways:
|
|
|
|
|
Our equipment allows customers to perform tests with a high
degree of precision by narrowing the range of test tolerances,
or guard bands. Reduced guard bands improve yield by allowing
device manufacturers to measure closer to the established
performance limits of the device. |
|
|
|
The analog resource boards in our test systems are designed with
independent computer interfaces, power supplies and independent
ground connections that eliminate the need for a shared
communication and electrical pathway. By avoiding the use of a
common ground pathway, the test results from one device are
isolated and avoid undesirable interactions with devices
undergoing simultaneous test within the same test system. |
Scalable and Flexible Architecture. Our test system
architecture is designed to enable our customers to quickly and
cost-effectively upgrade or reconfigure their test systems as
their testing needs evolve. Our architecture offers the
following benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
Our test instruments, or resource boards, provide dedicated
functionality and capability, which allow customers to tailor
their test system capabilities to the specific testing needs of
their devices. Our ATE is designed utilizing modular hardware
and off-the-shelf
electrical components that allow us to develop new features at
the resource board level in a short time period. Our
architecture also enables customers to upgrade their test system
capability by simply adding another board or replacing an
existing board within an existing test system. This is a more
cost efficient and less time consuming approach than replacing
the entire test system, as is required by many competing systems. |
|
|
|
A majority of our analog resource boards can be employed in any
of the test platforms we offer, allowing our customers to
utilize identical hardware across our entire product line. This
approach offers compatibility across a wide range of products,
as well as easy replacement and support of individual resource
boards. In addition, our entire test system product line
operates under a uniform |
41
|
|
|
|
|
software environment, allowing customers to move seamlessly to
different test system types by utilizing a common operating
environment. |
Lower Switching Costs. We have developed a proprietary,
adaptable interface that enables our test systems to operate
using other vendors DUT boards, as well as earlier
generations of our DUT boards, which is a significant advantage
to us as our customers testing needs change. This
proprietary architecture, which we call
Chameleontm
technology enables customers to easily migrate from some
competing test platforms or earlier generations of our own
product line, to a newer and more cost-effective Eagle Test
solution. Our test systems are designed to offer customers a
low-cost and time-saving option for migrating test platforms.
During the sales process, prospective and existing customers
generally engage in an evaluation process in which they compare
the costs and test results, such as yield and repeatability, of
their current test solution against our proposed test solution.
The customers current test solution may consist of a test
system provided by one of our competitors, such as Credence
Systems Corporation, LTX Corporation or Teradyne, Inc., a test
system internally developed by the customer, or one of our
previous generation test systems. An important consideration in
the comparative evaluation process is the overall
cost-of-test, which
includes factors such as the number of devices to be tested, the
total test system acquisition cost, the amount of required floor
space, test time and the number of test systems required, and
also considers system flexibility, upgradeability and
maintenance costs. Customers often share with us their
conclusions from their comparative evaluation of the
cost-of-test of their
current test solution versus our proposed test solution. This
feedback, together with our experience with customers selecting
our test solution after employing this evaluation process,
supports our belief that our test systems often provide a low
cost-of-test, as
compared to the customers current test solution. We
believe that in most cases in which a customer decides to switch
to our proposed test solution, the customer has concluded that
the cost of switching to a new test platform is outweighed by
the reduction in the overall
cost-of-test. In
addition, customers also consider other relevant factors, such
as service and technical support capabilities, brand awareness,
financial viability and production capacity.
Our test systems are currently not designed to address the test
requirements of semiconductors with large digital content, such
as memory devices or microprocessors, which are typically tested
by more costly test systems with different capabilities.
Our Growth Strategy
Our objective is to strengthen our position as a leading
provider of semiconductor test solutions. Key elements of our
strategy include:
|
|
|
|
|
Innovate to Enable Low Overall
Cost-of-Test. We
will continue to offer technologically advanced products and
services that improve efficiency and provide superior
performance. We intend to leverage our test system technology
and architecture to further enable multi-site, parallel testing,
higher throughput and greater test precision, while offering
customers the flexibility to upgrade and reconfigure existing
test systems as their testing needs evolve. We plan to continue
to engage in research and development activities to extend our
SmartPintm,
SimulTesttm
and
Chameleontm
technologies and other proprietary technologies to enable our
customers to achieve the highest return on their investment and
decrease their overall
cost-of-test. |
|
|
|
Focus on High-Volume, Cost Sensitive Devices. We focus on
delivering test systems for high-volume, high-performance
analog, mixed-signal, and RF devices. These devices are used in
a broad and growing range of high-volume consumer products such
as cellular telephones, computers, digital cameras, MP3 players
and automotive electronics. Decreasing the
cost-of-test will
become increasingly important to device manufacturers competing
in these markets as their products experience reductions in
ASPs. We believe our focused approach enables us to better serve
these markets than vendors who compete across a broader range of
markets. |
|
|
|
Increase Our Market Share within Our Targeted Markets. We
will continue to seek opportunities to increase sales to
existing and new customers by expanding the quantity and types
of devices that we are capable of testing, including devices
that our customers and prospective customers currently test on |
42
|
|
|
|
|
competitors test systems. In addition, we plan to
penetrate new production sites within our customers
overall manufacturing operations. We believe that we can gain
market share from our competitors and obtain new business as new
customers seek to reduce
cost-of-test across
their product lines. We intend to gain share within customer
segments that we have not traditionally targeted, such as
fabless device manufacturers and test and assembly contractors.
Finally, we intend to continue to expand our geographic presence
which grew significantly with the opening of five new offices in
Asia and Europe in fiscal 2005, and we intend to continue to
make additional investments in our sales, marketing and service
operations in these markets. |
|
|
|
Expand Our Addressable Market by Broadening Test
Capabilities. Through new product enhancements and expanded
customer focus, we have recently begun to expand our addressable
markets to include test solutions for other mid to
low-complexity semiconductors such as discrete devices, data
converters and automotive products. We believe that our
demonstrated expertise and proven value proposition in the
analog, mixed-signal and RF device markets which are
characterized by high-volume and cost-sensitive products, such
as power and battery management devices, should enable us to
compete effectively in these newer markets which present similar
cost-of-test challenges. |
|
|
|
Maintain Profitable Growth Through Our Flexible Business
Model. We outsource a substantial portion of our subassembly
manufacturing functions to third parties, and focus our
manufacturing efforts on final test, assembly and integration.
This allows us to be flexible during industry downturns while
maintaining the quality of our products. In addition, our
modular system architecture is designed to allow us to offer new
products and enhancements in a short period of time and at low
incremental cost. These strategies provide us with a flexible
business model and better enable us to respond to the cyclical
changes in our industry. |
Products
We design, manufacture, sell and service a family of
high-performance test systems that test analog, mixed-signal and
RF semiconductors. Our current products are designed to provide
our customers with the optimal level of test performance and
functionality for their particular testing needs. The following
table sets forth our current product offerings, their features
and the devices tested by each product.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion | |
|
|
|
Complex | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Analog | |
|
Digital | |
|
RF | |
|
Multi-Site | |
|
Power | |
|
RF and | |
|
and Video | |
|
|
|
Mixed- | |
|
Precision | |
|
|
Test System |
|
Channels | |
|
Pins | |
|
Ports | |
|
Capability | |
|
Management | |
|
Wireless | |
|
Processing | |
|
Automotive | |
|
Signal | |
|
Linear | |
|
Discretes | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
ETS-600
|
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
ETS-364
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
ETS-300
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
ETS-200
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
|
|
|
|
ETS-200T
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü |
|
ETS-600 and
ETS-364. Introduced
in 2001, the ETS-600 and
ETS-364 offer our
highest performance analog, mixed-signal and RF test platforms
across a broad range of semiconductors. The systems were
designed to maximize throughput capability by enabling
SimulTesttm
multi-site testing for up to 64 sites, through our
SmartPintm
technology, our highest digital capabilities, and our custom
designed RF6000 architecture. The RF6000 is a resource board and
accessory to the ETS-600 or ETS-364 that enables the tester to
simultaneously source and measure RF signals across multiple RF
devices in a fully calibrated environment through the use of a
proprietary RF Source Distribution Module. This functionality
allows users to distribute RF source signals simultaneously to
multiple device ports and calibrate each port to ensure that
each port receives the precise desired RF signal to each device.
The RF6000s unique measurement capabilities are achieved
through the use of RF signal down converters per
port, which allow users to simultaneously measure the RF signal
output of each RF device under test. These key features minimize
RF
43
device test times in multi-site applications by avoiding
unnecessary switching between RF signal source and measurement
functions while maintaining the signal integrity needed in an RF
test environment.
The ETS-600 delivers our highest level of performance and
functionality with up to 256 digital pins, over 480 analog
channels, and up to 32 RF ports. The
ETS-364 delivers up to
128 digital pins, over 240 analog channels, and up to 16 RF
ports. The ETS-364 was
designed to be fully compatible with the ETS-600 test system.
Utilizing a common DUT interface and software command structure,
the ETS-600 and ETS-364
offer customers a natural migration path between medium and
large-scale, multi-site testing.
ETS-300 and
ETS-200. We introduced the
ETS-300 and ETS-200 in
1998 as low-cost, high-performance analog and mixed-signal test
systems. The ETS-300
delivers up to 32 digital pins and over 240 analog channels.
This system offers
SimulTesttm
multi-site testing with up to 32 site capability. The
ETS-300 is an
attractive solution for analog applications and applications
requiring less significant digital capabilities for testing
devices such as switching regulators, power factor controllers,
and various automotive devices.
The ETS-200 serves a similar market, but delivers up to 16
digital pins and up to 120 analog channels of throughput. The
ETS-200 offers
SimulTesttm
multi-site testing with up to 16 site capability. The ETS-200 is
intended for targeted applications such as operational
amplifiers, low dropout regulators, and other analog
applications, and/or applications requiring limited digital
capabilities. The ETS-200 was designed to be fully compatible
with the ETS-300 test
system. Utilizing a common DUT interface and software command
structure, the ETS-300
and ETS-200 offer customers a scalable migration path for
multi-site, analog applications.
ETS-200T. We introduced the ETS-200T in 2003 to test
specific types of semiconductors known as a Field Effect
Transistors, or FETs. The ETS-200T delivers high throughput with
up to 16 site testing capability and a custom designed software
environment to make FET program development easy and effective.
Since its introduction, the 200T has received positive early
customer acceptance for its unique ability to test these devices
in highly parallel applications.
ATE operating software is required to design and run test
routines, and to record and analyze the results of such test
routines. Our Eagle Vision software is a feature-rich,
user-friendly software platform, designed to help our customers
rapidly develop test programs on our platforms. For example, our
plotting tools facilitate quick and easy graphing of response
data. Our automatic code generation tools help programmers avoid
incorrect entries and our point-and-click status screens allow
easy monitoring and adjustment of test system settings. The
production environment offers numerous data aggregation options
and supports multiple data output formats. Our software includes
user-friendly tools for generation and analysis of test data
that are enabled by simple point-and-click operations.
We have developed our Eagle Vision software as the uniform
operating environment for all of our various test platforms.
This approach reduces our customers overall cost of ATE
ownership by reducing the employee training and platform
set-up time usually
associated with bringing new test platforms on line. Eagle
Vision, when combined with our
Chameleontm
device interface hardware, provides our customers with a
compatible test system upgrade path, allowing our customers to
migrate devices to our new platforms without abandoning their
investment in their existing Eagle Test systems and associated
software and device interface hardware.
Technology
SmartPintm.
Our patented
SmartPintm
technology enables our products to generate and measure both
current and voltage signals at each device pin. Furthermore, our
SmartPintm
technology enables digital signal processing to be performed
locally at each pin, which eliminates the need to move test data
through a common signal bus for processing, thereby decreasing
processing time, reducing interference and improving accuracy
and yield. In addition to these features,
SmartPintm
technology provides the capability to generate multiple signals
of various ranges, which allows our customers to execute a full
set of test routines with a single starting signal, eliminating
the time required for additional software programming commands.
In this
44
way,
SmartPintm
technology optimizes simultaneous, or parallel, testing across
multiple sites on the same test system. We refer to this
capability as
SimulTesttm.
Chameleontm.
Our
Chameleontm
technology provides interoperability among different test
platforms by allowing test application hardware from one test
system to be used on another test system.
Chameleontm
provides hardware compatibility among our various test
platforms, as well as with test hardware from some of our
competitors test platforms.
Pattern-Based
Testingtm.
Our Pattern-Based
Testingtm
is enabled by our
SmartPintm
technology in conjunction with our Eagle Vision software. In
Pattern-Based
Testingtm,
predetermined digital and analog waveforms are presented to a
DUT in a time synchronized sequence. Pattern-Based
Testingtm
technology provides the capability to simultaneously capture and
analyze both analog and digital waveforms that are emitted from
the DUT, thus reducing device test times and permitting
increased throughput and lower
cost-of-test.
Floating Resources. Our test platform architecture
provides electrical separation between disparate test sites on
the same piece of test equipment by eliminating the need for our
test instrumentation resources to access power or move signals
across a common electrical pathway. Because our floating
resources have independent ground connections, interference
normally associated with a common ground pathway is minimized,
allowing each devices results to remain isolated from the
results of other adjacent sites. This leads to better test
accuracies and fewer devices failing due to
device-to-device errors.
Sales and Marketing
With the exception of the United Kingdom and Japan, we market
and sell our products exclusively through our direct sales
organization, which consists of sales professionals, application
engineers (technical sales support), technical marketing and
sales personnel. In the United Kingdom, we utilize a combination
of direct sales representatives and distributors while in Japan
we use direct distributors. Our account managers oversee and
manage our worldwide sales activity. As of June 30, 2006,
we had 75 people in sales, marketing and applications, including
17 direct sales representatives, who provide account management,
sales administration and technical sales support. Because we
focus on the development of long-term relationships with major
customers, the large majority of our sales and technical sales
support personnel is located in close proximity to key customer
sites. For foreign customers, this support is typically provided
through one of our foreign subsidiaries. As of June 30,
2006 we had 38 foreign personnel providing sales, service and
applications support to our foreign customers.
Our customers generally undertake an extensive evaluation of new
test technology prior to adopting such technology. We work with
potential customers with the goal of offering them a superior
solution for their test requirements. In typical situations, our
applications engineers are required to develop a custom test
program designed to demonstrate our equipments performance
and capability to address the customers specific needs. In
cases involving existing customers, we typically work closely
with their respective product development and production groups
to help maximize the utility of our test systems throughout
their organization and to align our product development efforts
with their anticipated test requirements.
We employ a sales model that emphasizes reducing the
customers total
cost-of-test per device
rather than the acquisition cost of the individual test system.
We demonstrate how a customers test costs can be reduced
by utilizing our products in lieu of competitors test
systems.
We believe that strong service and support are critical to
providing an overall lower
cost-of-test solution.
In addition to our applications engineering support staff, we
maintain a global network of service personnel who seek to
maximize test system up-time. We also offer services to enable
our customers to maintain and effectively use our test systems,
and to enhance our customer relationships. Our standard product
warranty includes coverage of hardware products for one year
from the date of purchase and warrants against defects in
design, materials and workmanship. In order to minimize system
down-time in the event of a service requirement, we typically
ship a replacement product for any non-functional standard
equipment within 24 hours of the service request. We also
offer our customers additional support after the warranty period
in the form of maintenance contracts or extended warranties.
45
Customers
We target analog, mixed-signal and RF semiconductor
manufacturers and related companies that serve a broad range of
market segments. Since October 1, 2003, we have delivered
over 500 test systems to more than 50 customers. Our customers
include many of the worlds leading semiconductor
manufacturers, IDMs, fabless design companies, and assembly and
test subcontractors. Companies that use our systems include:
|
|
|
|
|
Agape Packaging Mfg. Co. Ltd.
Allegro MicroSystems, Inc.
AMI Semiconductor, Inc.
Amkor Technology, Inc.
ASE Electronics (M) Sdn. Bhd.
Carsem Sdn. Bhd
Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. |
|
Guidant Corporation
HANA Semiconductor (Ayutthaya) Co., Ltd.
Hewlett-Packard Company
International Rectifier Corporation
Intersil Corporation
Jiangsu Changjiang Electronics Technology Co.,
Ltd.
Microchip Technology Incorporated |
|
Microsemi Integrated Products
Myson Century Inc.
National Semiconductor Corporation
NS Electronics Bangkok Ltd
O2MICRO, Inc.
ON Semiconductor Corporation
STATS ChipPAC Ltd.
Texas Instruments Incorporated
Unitive Electronics, Inc. |
Our customers have historically been semiconductor device
manufacturers, but our customer base has expanded to include
assembly and test subcontractors, such as STATS ChipPAC Ltd. and
ASE Electronics (M) Sdn. Bhd. Semiconductor manufacturers and
fabless semiconductor companies utilize these subcontractors to
provide incremental capacity and to lower their fixed production
costs. We believe that these companies represent a significant
opportunity for the ATE industry.
For the nine months ended June 30, 2006, two customers,
Texas Instruments Incorporated and National Semiconductor
Corporation, accounted for 51.4% and 10.2%, respectively, of our
net revenue. For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005,
Texas Instruments Incorporated accounted for 44.3% of our net
revenue. For fiscal 2004, two customers, National Semiconductor
Corporation and Texas Instruments Incorporated, accounted for
36.1% and 31.9%, respectively, of our net revenue. These
customers are the only customers who have accounted for 10% or
more of our net revenue during these periods. We expect that a
small number of customers will continue to represent a
significant portion of our net revenue for the foreseeable
future. Sales to customers in the United States accounted for
approximately 42.1%, 21.6% and 46.2% of net revenue for the
years ended September 30, 2003, 2004 and 2005,
respectively. Sales to customers in Malaysia accounted for
approximately 33.4%, 51.0% and 21.4% of net revenue for the
fiscal years ended September 30, 2003, 2004 and 2005,
respectively. Sales to customers in other locations accounted
for approximately 24.5%, 27.4% and 32.4% of net revenue for the
fiscal years ended September 30, 2003, 2004 and 2005,
respectively.
Manufacturing and Assembly
Our test platforms consist of standard products that we custom
configure based on each customers specific needs. A large
portion of our subassembly manufacturing is outsourced to
contract manufacturers for printed circuit board fabrication,
automated assembly and the supply of machine parts. Our major
contract manufacturers include Millennium Electronics, Inc. and
Universal Electronics, Inc., both of which manufacture printed
circuit board assemblies, including surface mount and
through-hole technologies, for us, and Sentral
Assemblies & Components, which manufactures cable
assemblies and power supplies for us. We contract with these
manufacturers on an individual purchase order basis and do not
have long term contracts with them. We believe this selected
outsourcing strategy provides us with the flexibility to respond
more rapidly to changes in industry conditions or demand for our
test systems. We perform mechanical assembly, subassembly
testing operations and final systems integration at our Illinois
manufacturing facility in order to ensure quality. We focus on
quality assurance by monitoring the various stages of the
manufacturing process to identify areas for improvement and
manage potential manufacturing issues. We recently expanded our
manufacturing capacity to meet increased customer demand and
believe that our current manufacturing capacity positions us
favorably to respond to an upturn in our industry.
46
Although our products consist mainly of standard components and
prefabricated parts manufactured to our specifications, some
components and subassemblies are purchased from a limited number
of suppliers or sole source suppliers. Our major suppliers
include Arrow Electronics, Inc. and Future Electronics, both of
which provide us with electronic components and integrated
circuits, as well as Pickering Electronics Limited, which
provides us with relays, switches and integrated circuits, and
South Bay Circuits, which provides us with printed circuit
boards. We work closely with our suppliers to plan our inventory
procurement in quantities that will minimize our inventory
risks; however, we cannot be certain that shortages will not
develop in the future. We purchase components and subassemblies
through separate purchase orders and do not currently have any
long-term purchase contracts with our suppliers. We believe our
ability to procure components and subassemblies is a key
determinant of our ability to provide our customers with quality
products on a timely basis and we continue to evaluate
alternative sources for the supply of our inventory.
Research and Development
Our continued commitment to research and development and the
timely introduction of new products, features and upgrades are
integral to maintaining our competitive position. Our research
and development efforts seek to address new opportunities and
demands within our customer base and the industry. Our efforts
are focused on the design of test systems that lower the overall
cost-of-test for
semiconductor companies. We concentrate on advancements in
electrical performance, software tools, parallel test efficiency
and test system resource density. We also focus on the design of
modular hardware for rapid implementation of new features and a
uniform software platform for operating compatibility across our
entire line of test systems. This strategy reduces our overall
product development cycles and development costs and maximizes
our research and development resources. Our research and
development activities are directed by individuals with
significant expertise and industry experience. As of
June 30, 2006, we had 54 employees dedicated to research
and development.
Our research and development organization is segmented into
specific product development groups, including mixed-signal,
high performance data converters and automotive products,
discrete components and RF products, which provides highly
dedicated focus for the investigation of new technical
opportunities in our target markets, and the development of
solutions specifically targeted at those opportunities.
We leverage our engineering efforts by utilizing standard
components whenever possible. We generally avoid the use of
customized components, such as Application-Specific Integrated
Circuits, or ASICs, when implementing functionality because it
is easier to adapt standard semiconductor designs to changing
requirements. This also eliminates high engineering risks and
costs associated with ASIC design. We use standard PCs with
Microsoft Windows as the main control computer of our test
systems. The strategy of using industry standard products has
proven successful, allowing us to leverage the significant
investments made by the largest companies in the technology
field, with minimal cost to us.
Our expenditures for research and development for the nine
months ended June 30, 2006 were $6.6 million,
representing 7.5% of net revenue. Our historical research and
development expenditures for fiscal 2005, 2004 and 2003 were
$7.9 million, $6.1 million and $3.1 million,
respectively, representing 12.4%, 5.4% and 5.6% of net revenue
in each of the respective fiscal years.
Competition
We face substantial competition in the ATE market throughout the
world. Our principal competitors include Credence Systems
Corporation, LTX Corporation and Teradyne, Inc., all of which
are major manufacturers of ATE for the analog, mixed-signal and
RF markets, in addition to other markets in which we do not
compete. Based on public disclosures made by these competitors,
we believe that they seek to serve our target markets with the
following products: Credence Systems Corporation ASL
3000RF; Teradyne, Inc. Flex; LTX
Corporation Fusion CX. Some of our competitors
products that test analog, mixed-signal and RF semiconductors
have higher digital pin counts than our products, and
accordingly may be considered to have a greater functional
testing range and the ability to test types of devices that our
products do not test. Accordingly, a customer that manufactures
high-end digital semiconductors, for example, as well as analog,
mixed-signal or RF devices, may be more inclined to purchase a
test system from one of our competitors. We
47
believe, based on the published report of an independent
industry research organization, that our competitors named above
each have a larger share of our addressable market than we do.
Additionally, some of our competitors, including those named
above, have greater brand recognition and greater financial,
engineering, manufacturing and marketing resources than we do.
As a result, our competitors may be able to respond more quickly
to new or emerging technologies or market developments by
devoting greater resources to the development, promotion and
sale of products. Some of our competitors also have broader
product offerings, larger installed customer bases and more
extensive customer support capabilities than we do. We expect
our competitors to continue to improve the performance of and
support for their current products and to introduce new
products, technologies or services that could adversely affect
sales of our current and future products. In addition, other
test companies that do not currently focus on our target markets
could choose to do so.
We believe the primary competitive factors in the analog,
mixed-signal, discrete and RF ATE markets are the overall
cost-of-test, test
accuracy, throughput, yield and support infrastructure. We
believe we compete favorably with respect to each of these
factors in the markets that we address. Based on our experience
in marketing our products in competition against those of our
competitors, we believe we are a very strong competitor within
the analog, mixed-signal markets and discrete, and also an
effective competitor in the RF market. However, in contrast to a
number of our competitors, we do not compete for opportunities
to test primarily digital semiconductors, such as memory devices
or microprocessors, where more costly test systems with
different capabilities are required to compete effectively.
Intellectual Property
Our success depends in large part on our proprietary technology.
We rely on a combination of patents, copyrights, trademarks,
service marks, trade secrets, confidentiality provisions and
licensing arrangements to establish and protect our proprietary
rights. We own two U.S. patents. These patents will expire
in approximately 17 years. While these patents are
important and relate to some of our distinct technology, we have
relied primarily on our trade secrets and copyright protection
as well as confidentiality provisions to protect our
intellectual property.
There are always risks that third parties may claim that we are
infringing upon their intellectual property rights and we could
be prevented from selling our products or services, or suffer
significant litigation or licensing expenses as a result of
these claims. In addition, third parties may infringe or design
around our intellectual property rights, and we may expend
significant resources enforcing our rights or suffer competitive
injury with adverse effects on our results of operations. Our
efforts to protect our intellectual property rights may be less
effective in some foreign countries where intellectual property
rights are not as well protected as in the U.S. For
additional, important information, review the information set
forth in Risk Factors Risks Related to
Intellectual Property.
Employees
As of June 30, 2006, we had approximately 282 full time
employees. Of our total employees, 54 were dedicated to research
and development and 75 were dedicated to sales, marketing and
applications. None of our employees located in the United States
is represented by a union. Our employees in Europe are
represented by workers councils. We believe our
relationships with our employees are good.
Facilities
Our corporate headquarters are currently located in Buffalo
Grove, Illinois, which we relocated to in January 2005, and
where we lease approximately 96,000 square feet of
commercial space under a lease that expires in 2015. We use this
space for our principal sales, engineering, customer service and
administrative purposes. The facility was designed by us
specifically to maximize our engineering, system design and
manufacturing capabilities and to accommodate future growth. The
facility provides substantially increased production capability
from our previous headquarters facility, and has dedicated
laboratory environments for research and development.
48
We also lease additional offices in Santa Clara,
California; Tempe, Arizona; Bedford, New Hampshire; Dallas,
Texas; Singapore; Gyeonggi-Do, Korea; Hsinchu City, Taiwan;
Munich, Germany; Basiano, Italy; Melaka, Malaysia; Alabang, The
Philippines; and Suzhou, China. We perform various activities,
including sales, customer service, training, research and
development and applications engineering in some or all of these
offices. We do not anticipate significant difficulty in
obtaining lease renewals or alternate space as needed, although
obtaining renewals or alternate space on acceptable terms cannot
be assured. We also, in addition, own a residence in Vernon
Hills, Illinois principally used for travel purposes by
out-of-town employees.
Legal Proceedings
In the normal course of our business, we may be a party to legal
proceedings. We are not currently a party to any material legal
proceedings.
Backlog
Our backlog, calculated on the basis of unfilled purchase orders
with a firm delivery date for all products and services, was
$27.3 million at June 30, 2006, compared with
$10.8 million at June 30, 2005. Since customers may
cancel or delay their orders with little regard for potential
penalties, and since new order volume may decrease very rapidly,
our backlog at any particular date is not necessarily indicative
of our future backlog or actual sales that may be generated for
any succeeding period. In the past, our test systems have
generally shipped within two or three months from the time we
receive a customers purchase order, and we expect at least
85% of our backlog as of June 30, 2006 to ship prior to the
end of September 2006. Any change in our manufacturing capacity
and the time it takes to ship our products will affect our level
of backlog. Historically, our backlog levels have also
fluctuated based on our customers ordering patterns and
our inability to predict order trends in the semiconductor
industry with any certainty.
49
MANAGEMENT
Executive Officers, Directors and Key Employees
The following table sets forth information regarding our current
executive officers, directors and key employees, including their
ages as of June 30, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Age | |
|
Position |
|
|
| |
|
|
Executive Officers and Directors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leonard A. Foxman
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
Chief Executive Officer, President and Director |
Theodore D. Foxman
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
Chief Operating Officer, Executive Vice President and Director |
Stephen J. Hawrysz
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
Jack E. Weimer
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
Chief Technical Officer and Vice President of Technical Solutions |
Michael C. Child(2)(3)
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
Director |
Ross W. Manire(1)(2)
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
Director |
William H. Gibbs(1)(2)(3)
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
Director |
David B. Mullen(1)(3)
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
Director |
Other Key Employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James M. Bolotin
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
Controller/Chief Accounting Officer |
Dale R. Buxton
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
Vice President/Asia |
John Connell
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
Vice President/Manufacturing Engineering |
Daniel Faia
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
Vice President/North America |
Adam B. Plummer
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
Vice President/Information Technology |
Stanley B. Semuskie
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
Vice President/Customer Service |
Rene J. Verhaegen
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
Vice President/Europe |
|
|
(1) |
Member of the audit committee. |
|
(2) |
Member of the compensation committee. |
|
(3) |
Member of the nominating and corporate governance committee. |
Leonard A. Foxman. Mr. Foxman, our founder, has
served as a director and as our Chief Executive Officer and
President since 1976. Additionally, Mr. Foxman currently
oversees our global sales effort. Mr. Foxman began his
career in 1964 with Teletype Corporation, a wholly owned
subsidiary of Western Electric (later Lucent-Bell Laboratories),
where he served for ten years as an electrical engineer. At
Teletype, Mr. Foxman was responsible for designing custom
semiconductors for use in communications equipment. After
leaving Teletype, Mr. Foxman worked as an applications
engineer for Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc.,
from June 1974 until August 1976, where he was responsible for
assisting existing and potential customers with the use and
application of Fairchild products. Leonard Foxman is the father
of Theodore Foxman. Mr. Foxman holds a B.S. in
Bioengineering from the University of Illinois.
Theodore D. Foxman. Mr. Foxman has served as a
director since October 2003, and as our Chief Operating Officer
and Executive Vice President since June 2001 with responsibility
for overseeing all aspects of our internal operations, including
manufacturing, purchasing, legal affairs, information
technology, corporate administration and customer service.
Mr. Foxman joined us in December 1999 as an Account
Specialist with responsibility for acting as the headquarters
liaison for customer accounts. In October 2000, he became
Corporate Counsel and Human Resources Manager with
responsibility for overseeing our legal affairs and personnel
matters. Prior to joining us, Mr. Foxman worked as a legal
clerk for the law firm of Beerman, Swerdlove, Woloshin, Baresky,
Becker, Genin & London. Theodore Foxman is the son of
Leonard Foxman. Mr. Foxman holds a B.S. Microbiology from
the University of Wisconsin and a J.D. from the DePaul College
of Law.
50
Stephen J. Hawrysz. Mr. Hawrysz has served as our
Chief Financial Officer since March 2004. From November 1999 to
March 2004, he served as the Chief Financial Officer of
Participate Systems, Inc., a privately held software and
services company. From August 1990 to May 1999, Mr. Hawrysz
was Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Westell
Technologies, Inc., a publicly held telecommunications equipment
manufacturer. From September 1989 to August 1990, he served as
Assistant Controller at Wisconsin Central Transportation LTD.
Prior to that, from June 1980 to September 1989,
Mr. Hawrysz served as a public accountant with Arthur
Andersen LLP in the Utilities and Telecommunications audit
division. Mr. Hawrysz is a Certified Public Accountant with
a B.S. in Accounting from the University of Illinois.
Jack E. Weimer. Mr. Weimer has served as our Chief
Technical Officer and Vice President of Technical Solutions with
responsibility for overseeing system architectural design, new
product definition and engineering strategy since March 2004.
From April 2002 to February 2004, he served as Director of
Product Marketing with responsibility for system architectural
design and new product definition. From October 1988 to April
2002, Mr. Weimer served as our Manager of Engineering where
he oversaw all aspects of product development, including
software, electrical and mechanical design. From June 1984 to
September 1992, he served as our Manager of Applications
Engineering and from December 1980 to June 1984, he served as a
Manager in our test department. Mr. Weimer holds degrees
from Valparaiso Technical Institute and Trinity International
University.
Michael C. Child. Mr. Child has served as a director
since October 2003. Since July 1982, Mr. Child has been
employed by TA Associates, Inc., a private equity investment
firm, where he currently serves as a Managing Director.
Mr. Child holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the
University of California at Davis and an M.B.A. from the
Stanford Graduate School of Business.
Ross W. Manire. Mr. Manire has served as a director
since June 2004. Since September 2002, Mr. Manire has
served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Clearlinx
Network Corporation, a wireless telecommunications
infrastructure company. From September 2000 to June 2002, he
served as President of the Enclosure Systems Division of
Flextronics International, a global electronic manufacturing
services company. From March 1999 until September 2000,
Mr. Manire served as President and Chief Executive Officer
of Chatham Technologies, Inc., a global manufacturer of
electronic enclosures and integrated systems for the
telecommunications industry. From August 1991 until December
1998, Mr. Manire worked for U.S. Robotics and after
its merger with U.S. Robotics, 3Com Corporation, during
which tenure he served as Senior Vice President, Operations and
Chief Financial Officer of U.S. Robotics, as Senior Vice
President and General Manager of the Network Systems Division,
and then as Senior Vice President of the Carrier Systems
Division of 3Com Corporation. Mr. Manire has also served as
a consultant to the controllers department of Amoco
Corporation, and was a partner in the entrepreneurial services
group of Arthur Young (now Ernst & Young).
Mr. Manire currently serves on the board of directors and
audit committee of Zebra Technologies Corporation and is on the
board of trustees and executive committee of Davidson College.
Mr. Manire is a Certified Public Accountant with an M.B.A.
from the University of Chicago and a B.A. in Economics from
Davidson College.
William H. Gibbs. Mr. Gibbs has served as a director
since February 2006. From January 1998 to present he has served
as President of Parafix Management, a company specializing in
corporate turnarounds and restructurings, and from September
2001 to present he has served as President of Houston Ventures,
LLC, a private firm primarily investing in small technology
related companies. From November 1985 to January 1998,
Mr. Gibbs served as Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of
the board of directors of DH Technology, Inc., a manufacturer of
point of sale and bar code printers and smart card systems.
Mr. Gibbs currently serves on the board of directors of
Remec, Inc. and Fargo Electronics, Inc. Mr. Gibbs holds a
B.S.E.E. degree from the University of Arkansas and is a
graduate of General Electrics Management Program.
David B. Mullen. Mr. Mullen has served as a director
since February 2006. From December 2002 to present he has served
as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
NAVTEQ Corporation, a provider of digital map information for
automotive navigation systems, mobile navigation devices and
Internet-based mapping applications. From August 1997 to
September 2002, he served as Chief Financial Officer of
Allscripts Healthcare Solutions, Inc., a healthcare technology
firm. From 1995 to 1997, Mr. Mullen
51
served as Chief Financial Officer of Enterprise Systems, a
publicly-held healthcare software company. Earlier he held
several top management positions with CCC Information Services,
a software and information services company serving the
insurance industry, and spent a number of years in the audit and
systems consulting practices of Ernst & Young LLP.
Mr. Mullen holds a M.B.A. from the Wharton School at the
University of Pennsylvania and a bachelors degree from
Princeton University.
James M. Bolotin. Mr. Bolotin has served as our
Controller and Chief Accounting Officer since July 2004. From
August 2001 to July 2004, he served as the Chief Financial
Officer of R.S. Owens & Co., a privately held awards
manufacturer. From January 1998 to August 2001, Mr. Bolotin
was the Chief Financial Officer of North American Bear Co., a
privately held toy manufacturer. From October 1987 to January
1998, he worked for U.S. Robotics and after its merger with
U.S. Robotics, 3Com Corporation, during which tenure he
served as Assistant Controller, as Corporate Controller, and
then as Manufacturing Operations Controller. Prior to that, from
September 1984 to October 1987, Mr. Bolotin served as a
public accountant with Pannell Kerr Forster. Mr. Bolotin is
a Certified Public Accountant with an M.B.A. from Northwestern
University and a B.S. in Accounting from Marquette University.
Dale R. Buxton. Mr. Buxton has served as our
Singapore-based Vice President/ Asia since September 2002 with
responsibility for managing our sales, applications and customer
service efforts in Asia. Prior to joining us, Mr. Buxton
concurrently served as the Business Manager for the Credence ATE
product line in Southeast Asia and Technical Sales Manager for
the TMT product line for Credence Systems Corporation from April
1999 to August 2002. Prior to Credence Systems Corporation
acquiring TMT, Inc., Mr. Buxton served as International
Sales Manager for TMT, Inc. From July 1996 to April 1999, he was
employed by LTX Corporation as an Account Manager and
subsequently the Business Development Manager for Chinese,
Japanese and Korean accounts. Mr. Buxton holds a diploma
from the Department of Defense Language School for Korean
Language Studies, a B.S. in Finance from Touro College, a Master
of Japanese Business Studies from Chaminade University, and a
Certificate of Advanced Study in international management with a
concentration in Mandarin Chinese from the American Graduate
School of International Management.
John Connell. Mr. Connell has served as our Vice
President/Manufacturing Engineering since October 2005 with
responsibilities for the direct management of all aspects of
manufacturing engineering and engineering services, including
test engineering, component engineering, sustaining engineering,
CAD design, production engineering, quality assurance and
documentation services. From April 2004 to October 2005, he
served as our Director of Engineering Services with
responsibilities for several engineering disciplines and
documentation services. From December 2002 to April 2004,
Mr. Connell worked in the engineering design department at
Westell Technologies, Inc. a publicly held telecommunications
equipment manufacturer. From April 1992 to December 2002,
Mr. Connell worked at U.S. Robotics, and after its
merger with U.S. Robotics, 3Com Corporation as the
Engineering Services Manager. From February 1984 to April 1992,
Mr. Connell worked at Teradyne, Inc. in both the test
engineering and engineering services areas. Mr. Connell
holds degrees from Roosevelt University and DeVry Institute of
Technology.
Daniel Faia. Mr. Faia has served as our Vice
President/ North America since March 2006 with responsibility
for managing our sales, applications and customer service
efforts in North America. From April 2004 to March 2006, he
served as our Vice President/Eastern U.S. Sales where he
held responsibility for managing the sales and applications
engineering efforts in the Eastern U.S. and Texas. Prior to
joining us, Mr. Faia was employed by Teradyne, Inc. in
various sales and product marketing positions from March 1997 to
April 2004. From March 1989 to March 1997, Mr. Faia was
employed by Raytheon Co. where he held positions in Test
Engineering and Design Engineering of Automated Test Equipment.
Mr. Faia holds a B.S. in Computer Engineering from
Wentworth Institute of Technology in Boston, Massachusetts.
Adam B. Plummer. Mr. Plummer has served as our Vice
President/Information Technology since July 2003 with
responsibility for all IT and Business Technology activities. In
his role, Mr. Plummer oversees multiple departments that
handle IT needs for all our domestic and international offices,
including corporate security. In addition, Mr. Plummer is
responsible for the identification and execution of Business
Technology initiatives aimed at applying enterprise technology
solutions to meet our business needs. Prior to joining us,
Mr. Plummer served as a Technical Architect for Risetime,
Inc. from December 2002 to July 2003. Prior to
52
that, Mr. Plummer served as a Technical Manager for
BroadVision, Inc. from March 2000 to June 2002, and held a
similar position with Metamor Technologies, Ltd. from June 1996
to March 2000. Mr. Plummer holds a B.S. in Computer Science
from the Engineering School at the University of Illinois in
Urbana-Champaign.
Stanley B. Semuskie. Mr. Semuskie has served as our
Vice President/Customer Service since July 2006 with
responsibility for the worldwide delivery of services including
equipment installations, maintenance, training, call center,
logistics management and customer satisfaction. Prior to joining
us, Mr. Semuskie was employed by Credence Systems for 15
years, working in various service management positions including
regional management for Asia, Eastern U.S. and Europe. Since
1999, Mr. Semuskie held the positions of Director of North
American Field Service Operations and Director of Worldwide
Field Service Operations. Prior to joining Credence,
Mr. Semuskie spent 14 years at Tektronix, Inc. working in
various technical and management positions. Mr. Semuskie
holds a B.A. degree from Salve Regina University and a Diploma
from DeVry Institute of Technology.
Rene J. Verhaegen. Mr. Verhaegen has served as our
Vice President/ Europe since January 2004 with responsibility
for managing our sales and customer service efforts in Europe.
Prior to joining us, Mr. Verhaegen was employed by Credence
Systems Corporation (and its predecessor Semiconductor Test
Systems) from May 1987 to October 1993 and held the positions of
Marketing Manager and Vice President of European Operations. In
October 1993, Mr. Verhaegen was a member of a group that
acquired the European operations from Credence Systems
Corporation and formed a new entity called Credence Europa with
these operations. Mr. Verhaegen became the Chairman and
President of Credence Europa until it was sold back to Credence
Systems Corporation in August 2000. Mr. Verhaegen then
resumed his employment with Credence Systems Corporation until
November 2003 and held the positions of General Manager/
European Field Operations and Senior Director NA East Field
Operations. Mr. Verhaegen was also employed by Teradyne,
Inc. for 11 years, in various sales and marketing
positions. Mr. Verhaegen holds a B.S. in Electronic
Engineering from the Rijkshogere Technische School in Hasselt,
Belgium.
Board of Directors
We currently have six directors, two of whom,
Messrs. Leonard and Theodore Foxman, were nominated and
elected as directors under board composition provisions of a
stockholders agreement, and one of whom, Mr. Child, was
nominated and elected under board composition provisions of our
certificate of incorporation. The board composition provisions
of the stockholders agreement and our certificate of
incorporation terminated upon the closing of our initial public
offering. There are no further contractual obligations regarding
the election of our directors. Our directors hold office until
their successors have been elected and qualified or until the
earlier of their resignation or removal.
Our board of directors is divided into three classes with
members of each class of directors serving for staggered
three-year terms. The board of directors consists of two
Class I directors (Messrs. Leonard Foxman and Mullen),
two Class II directors (Messrs. Theodore Foxman and
Gibbs) and two Class III directors (Messrs. Child and
Manire), whose terms expire at the annual meetings of
stockholders held in 2007, 2008 and 2009, respectively. Our
classified board could have the effect of making it more
difficult for a third party to acquire control of us.
Leonard Foxman, our Chief Executive Officer and President, and
Theodore Foxman, our Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice
President, each serves as a member of our board of directors.
Leonard Foxman is the father of Theodore Foxman.
Board Committees
Our board of directors has established an audit committee, a
compensation committee and a nominating and corporate governance
committee. The composition and functioning of all of our
committees complies with the rules of the SEC and the Nasdaq
Stock Market that are currently applicable to us, and we intend
to comply with additional requirements to the extent that they
become applicable to us.
53
Audit Committee. Ross W. Manire, Chairman, William H.
Gibbs and David B. Mullen currently serve on the audit
committee. The audit committees responsibilities include,
but are not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
appointing, approving the compensation of, and assessing the
independence of our independent auditor; |
|
|
|
overseeing the work of our independent auditor, including the
receipt and consideration of certain reports from the
independent auditor; |
|
|
|
resolving disagreements between management and our independent
auditor; |
|
|
|
pre-approving auditing and permissible non-audit services, and
the terms of such services, to be provided by our independent
auditor; |
|
|
|
reviewing and discussing with management and the independent
auditors our annual and quarterly financial statements and
related disclosures; |
|
|
|
coordinating the oversight of our internal control over
financial reporting, disclosure controls and procedures and code
of business conduct and ethics; |
|
|
|
discussing our risk management policies; |
|
|
|
establishing policies regarding hiring employees from the
independent auditor and procedures for the receipt and retention
of accounting related complaints and concerns; |
|
|
|
meeting independently with our independent auditors and
management; and |
|
|
|
preparing the audit committee report required by SEC rules to be
included in our proxy statements. |
Our board of directors has determined that each of
Messrs. Manire, Gibbs and Mullen qualifies as an
audit committee financial expert as defined under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the applicable rules of
the Nasdaq Stock Market. In making its determination, our board
considered the nature and scope of the experiences and
responsibilities each of Messrs. Manire, Gibbs and Mullen
has previously had with reporting companies.
Messrs. Manire, Gibbs and Mullen are
independent for audit committee purposes under the
applicable rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market and the SEC.
Compensation Committee. Michael C. Child, Chairman, Ross
W. Manire and William H. Gibbs currently serve on the
compensation committee. The compensation committees
responsibilities include, but are not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
annually reviewing and approving corporate goals and objectives
relevant to compensation of our chief executive officer; |
|
|
|
evaluating the performance of our chief executive officer in
light of such corporate goals and objectives and determining the
compensation of our chief executive officer; |
|
|
|
determining the compensation of our other executive officers; |
|
|
|
overseeing an evaluation of our senior executives; |
|
|
|
overseeing and administering our incentive-based compensation
plans and equity-based plans; and |
|
|
|
reviewing and making recommendations to the board with respect
to director compensation. |
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. William H.
Gibbs, Chairman, Michael C. Child and David B. Mullen currently
serve on the nominating and corporate governance committee. The
nominating and corporate governance committees
responsibilities include, but are not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
developing and recommending to the board criteria for board and
committee membership; |
|
|
|
establishing procedures for identifying and evaluating director
candidates including nominees recommended by stockholders; |
|
|
|
identifying individuals qualified to become board members; |
|
|
|
establishing procedures for stockholders to submit
recommendations for director candidates; |
54
|
|
|
|
|
recommending to the board the persons to be nominated for
election as directors and to each of the boards committees; |
|
|
|
developing and recommending to the board a set of corporate
governance guidelines; and |
|
|
|
overseeing the evaluation of the board and management. |
Director Compensation
Directors who are also our employees receive no additional
compensation for their services as directors. Our non-employee
directors each receive an annual fee from us of $15,000. In
addition, we pay our non-employee directors a fee of $1,000 for
each board meeting they attend and $500 for each committee
meeting they attend. Each member of the audit committee receives
an additional annual fee of $7,500, and each member of our other
committees receives an additional annual fee of $2,500.
Non-employee directors also are reimbursed for reasonable
expenses incurred in connection with attending board and
committee meetings. However, a director who is affiliated with
TA Associates, Inc. will forego board and board committee
compensation, including the equity compensation described below,
for so long as TA Associates, Inc. beneficially owns more than
10% of our common stock.
Upon election to the board of directors, non-employee directors
are granted an option to purchase 10,000 shares of our
common stock, which is fully vested at the time of grant, and an
option to purchase 10,000 shares of our common stock,
which vests in equal installments over three years.
Additionally, non-employee directors receive, on the fifth
business day after each annual meeting of our stockholders, an
annual option grant of 5,000 shares that vests in equal
installments over four years. The exercise price of these stock
options will be equal to the fair market value of the common
stock on the date of grant as determined by our board of
directors. The vesting of these stock options will accelerate
upon a change of control of Eagle Test.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation
None of our executive officers serves as a member of the board
of directors or compensation committee, or other committee
serving an equivalent function, of any other entity that has one
or more of its executive officers serving as a member of our
board of directors or compensation committee. None of the
current members of our compensation committee has ever been an
employee of Eagle Test.
55
Executive Compensation
The following summarizes the compensation earned during the last
three fiscal years by our chief executive officer and our four
other most highly compensated executive officers who were
serving as executive officers on September 30, 2005 and
whose total compensation exceeded $100,000. We refer to these
individuals as our named executive officers.
Summary Compensation Table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Compensation | |
|
Long Term Compensation | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards | |
|
Payouts | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted | |
|
Securities | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock | |
|
Underlying | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Base | |
|
|
|
Other Annual | |
|
Awards | |
|
Options | |
|
LTIP Payouts | |
|
All Other | |
Name and Principal Position |
|
Year | |
|
Salary ($) | |
|
Bonus ($) | |
|
Compensation ($) | |
|
($) | |
|
(#) | |
|
($) | |
|
Compensation ($) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leonard Foxman,
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
142,500 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer, |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
347,337 |
|
|
|
560,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
President and Director |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
72,200 |
|
|
|
42,200 |
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Theodore Foxman,
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
400,000 |
|
|
|
115,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Operating Officer, |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
397,764 |
|
|
|
640,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
|
|
* |
(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
President and Director |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen J Hawrysz,
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
190,000 |
|
|
|
77,500 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
2004 |
(3) |
|
|
93,442 |
|
|
|
66,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jack E. Weimer,
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
62,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Technical Officer |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
148,698 |
|
|
|
180,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
98,753 |
|
|
|
275,251 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven R.
Dollens(4),
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
62,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vice President of |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
220,242 |
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Development |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
166,905 |
|
|
|
238,309 |
|
|
|
153,517 |
(5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Excludes benefits and perquisites received by the named
executive officers that do not exceed the lesser of $50,000 or
10% of any such named executive officers annual
compensation. |
|
|
(1) |
Represents (i) a contribution of $16,702 made by us for the
benefit of Mr. Foxman to the Money Purchase Pension Plan,
(ii) a contribution of $20,000 made by us for the benefit
of Mr. Foxman to the Profit Sharing Plan, (iii) a
contribution of $3,298 made by us for the benefit of
Mr. Foxman to the Employee Stock Ownership Plan, and
(iv) payment of $2,200 for automobile expenses. Does not
include $1,450,000 paid to Mr. Foxman by Pacific Support
Group, Partners. See Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions Transactions with Pacific Support
Group, Partners. |
|
(2) |
Does not include $1,012,500 paid to Mr. Foxman and
immediate family members living in his household by Pacific
Support Group, Partners. See Certain Relationships and
Related Transactions Transactions with Pacific
Support Group, Partners. |
|
(3) |
Represents partial year compensation as Mr. Hawryszs
employment commenced March 1, 2004. |
|
(4) |
Mr. Dollens employment terminated June 21, 2006. |
|
(5) |
Represents (i) sales commission earned of $112,737,
(ii) a contribution of $16,702 made by us on behalf of
Mr. Dollens to the Money Purchase Pension Plan,
(iii) a contribution of $20,000 made by us on behalf of
Mr. Dollens to the Profit Sharing Plan, (iv) a
contribution of $3,298 made by us on behalf of Mr. Dollens
to the Employee Stock Ownership Plan, and (v) a payment of
$780 for automobile expenses. |
|
|
|
Option Grants in Last Fiscal Year |
There were no individual grants of stock options to any of the
named executive officers during fiscal 2005.
56
|
|
|
Option Exercises in Last Fiscal Year and Fiscal Year End
Option Values |
The following table sets forth information regarding the number
and value of unexercised options held by each of the named
executive officers as of September 30, 2005. There was no
public market for our common stock as of September 30,
2005. Accordingly, amounts described in the following table
under the heading Value of Unexercised
In-the-Money Options at
Fiscal Year End are determined by multiplying the number
of shares underlying the options by the difference between our
initial public offering price of $15.50 per share and the
per share option exercise price. None of our named executive
officers or directors exercised options in fiscal 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities | |
|
Value of unexercised In- | |
|
|
Underlying Unexercised | |
|
The-Money Options at | |
|
|
Options at Fiscal Year End | |
|
Fiscal Year End | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Name |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Unexercisable | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Unexercisable | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Leonard Foxman
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Theodore Foxman
|
|
|
31,250 |
|
|
|
43,750 |
|
|
|
287,500 |
|
|
|
402,500 |
|
Jack E. Weimer
|
|
|
23,438 |
|
|
|
46,562 |
|
|
|
153,906 |
|
|
|
291,094 |
|
Stephen J. Hawrysz
|
|
|
29,167 |
|
|
|
50,833 |
|
|
|
219,792 |
|
|
|
370,208 |
|
Steven R. Dollens(1)
|
|
|
41,667 |
|
|
|
78,333 |
|
|
|
295,833 |
|
|
|
524,167 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Mr. Dollens options were forfeited in connection with
the termination of his employment on June 21, 2006. |
Employee Benefit Plans
|
|
|
2003 Stock Option and Grant Plan |
Our 2003 Stock Option and Grant Plan, or 2003 Option Plan, was
adopted by our board of directors and approved by our
stockholders in September 2003. We reserved 983,790 shares
of our common stock for the issuance of awards under the 2003
Option Plan, as amended.
The 2003 Option Plan is administered by either a committee of at
least two directors appointed by our board of directors, or by
our full board of directors. The administrator of the 2003
Option Plan has full power and authority to select the
individuals to whom awards will be granted, to make any
combination of awards to participants, to accelerate the
exercisability or vesting of any award, to provide substitute
awards and to determine the specific terms and conditions of
each award, subject to the provisions of the 2003 Option Plan.
The 2003 Option Plan permits us to make grants of incentive
stock options, non-qualified stock options, restricted stock
awards and unrestricted stock awards to officers, employees,
directors, consultants and other key persons. Stock options
granted under the 2003 Option Plan have a maximum term of ten
years from the date of grant and incentive stock options have an
exercise price of no less than the fair market value of the
common stock on the date of grant.
In the event of a merger, sale of assets or dissolution of Eagle
Test, or a similar sale event in which all awards
are not assumed or substituted by the successor entity, all
stock options and the 2003 Option Plan will terminate upon the
effective time of such sale event following an exercise period.
Restricted stock shall be treated as provided in the relevant
award agreement. In the event of a sale event in which awards
are assumed or substituted by the successor entity, then such
award shall become fully vested and exercisable in the event a
grantees employment or service relationship is terminated
within eighteen months following the sale event by Eagle Test or
by a successor entity without cause or by the
grantee for good reason, as such terms are defined
in the 2003 Option Plan.
In connection with the adoption of our 2006 Stock Option and
Incentive Plan, which is discussed in detail below, our board of
directors determined not to grant any further awards under the
2003 Option Plan.
|
|
|
2006 Stock Option and Incentive Plan |
Our 2006 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, or 2006 Option Plan,
was adopted by our board of directors and approved by our
stockholders in February 2006. The 2006 Option Plan permits us
to make grants of
57
incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options, stock
appreciation rights, deferred stock awards, restricted stock
awards, unrestricted stock awards, and dividend equivalent
rights. We reserved 2,600,000 shares of our common stock
for the issuance of awards under the 2006 Option Plan. This
number is subject to adjustment in the event of a stock split,
stock dividend or other change in our capitalization. Generally,
shares that are forfeited or canceled from awards under the 2006
Option Plan also will be available for future awards. As of
June 30, 2006, 25,000 options had been granted under the
2006 Option Plan.
The 2006 Option Plan is administered by either a committee of at
least two non-employee directors, or by our full board of
directors. The administrator of the 2006 Option Plan has full
power and authority to select the participants to whom awards
will be granted, to make any combination of awards to
participants, to accelerate the exercisability or vesting of any
award and to determine the specific terms and conditions of each
award, subject to the provisions of the 2006 Option Plan.
All full-time and part-time officers, employees, non-employee
directors and other key persons (including consultants and
prospective employees) are eligible to participate in the 2006
Option Plan, subject to the discretion of the administrator.
There are certain limits on the number of awards that may be
granted under the 2006 Option Plan. For example, no more than
1,100,000 shares of stock may be granted in the form of
stock options or stock appreciation rights to any one individual
during any one-calendar-year period.
The exercise price of stock options awarded under the 2006
Option Plan may not be less than the fair market value of the
common stock on the date of the option grant and the term of
each option may not exceed ten years from the date of grant. The
administrator will determine at what time or times each option
may be exercised and, subject to the provisions of the 2006
Option Plan, the period of time, if any, after retirement,
death, disability or other termination of employment during
which options may be exercised.
To qualify as incentive options, stock options must meet
additional federal tax requirements, including a $100,000 limit
on the value of shares subject to incentive options which first
become exercisable in any one calendar year, and a shorter term
and higher minimum exercise price in the case of certain large
stockholders.
Automatic grants of stock options are made to our non-employee
directors under the 2006 Option Plan. Each non-employee
director, except any director associated with TA Associates,
will automatically be granted upon his or her election to the
board, a non-qualified stock option to acquire
10,000 shares of common stock which becomes exercisable
immediately, and an additional non-qualified option to acquire
10,000 shares of common stock which becomes exercisable in
equal installments over three years. In addition, following the
completion of this offering, each non-employee director who is
serving as a director of the company on the fifth business day
after each annual meeting of stockholders will automatically be
granted on such day a non-qualified option to acquire
5,000 shares of common stock which becomes exercisable in
equal installments over four years. The exercise price of each
of these non-qualified options will be equal to the fair market
value of the common stock on the date of grant as determined by
our board of directors. These non-qualified options will expire
ten years from the date of grant. The administrator also may
make discretionary grants of non-qualified options to
non-employee directors.
Stock appreciation rights may be granted under our 2006 Option
Plan. Stock appreciation rights allow the recipient to receive
the appreciation in the fair market value of our common stock
between the exercise date and the date of grant. The
administrator determines the terms of stock appreciation rights,
including when such rights become exercisable and whether to pay
the increased appreciation in cash or with shares of our common
stock, or a combination thereof.
Restricted stock may be granted under our 2006 Option Plan.
Restricted stock awards are shares of our common stock that vest
in accordance with terms and conditions established by the
administrator. The administrator will determine the number of
shares of restricted stock granted to any employee. The
administrator may impose whatever conditions to vesting it
determines to be appropriate. For example, the administrator may
set restrictions based on the achievement of specific
performance goals. Shares of restricted stock that do not vest
are subject to our right of repurchase or forfeiture.
Deferred and unrestricted stock awards may be granted under our
2006 Option Plan. Deferred stock awards are units entitling the
recipient to receive shares of stock paid out on a deferred
basis, and subject to
58
such restrictions and conditions, as the administrator shall
determine. Our 2006 Option Plan also gives the administrator
discretion to grant stock awards free of any restrictions.
Dividend equivalent rights may be granted under our 2006 Option
Plan. Dividend equivalent rights are awards entitling the
grantee to current or deferred payments equal to dividends on a
specified number of shares of stock. Dividend equivalent rights
may be settled in cash or shares and subject to other
conditions, as the administrator shall determine.
Unless the administrator provides otherwise, our 2006 Option
Plan does not allow for the transfer of awards and only the
recipient of an award may exercise an award during his or her
lifetime.
In the event of a merger, sale or dissolution of Eagle Test, or
a similar sale event, all stock options and stock
appreciation rights granted under the 2006 Option Plan will
automatically become fully exercisable, all other awards granted
under the 2006 Option Plan will become fully vested and
non-forfeitable and awards with conditions and restrictions
relating to the attainment of performance goals may become
vested and non-forfeitable in connection with a sale event in
the administrators discretion. In addition, upon the
effective time of any such sale event, the 2006 Option Plan and
all awards will terminate unless the parties to the transaction,
in their discretion, provide for appropriate substitutions or
assumptions of outstanding awards.
No awards may be granted under the 2006 Option Plan after
February 2016. In addition, our board of directors may amend or
discontinue the 2006 Option Plan at any time and the
administrator may amend or cancel any outstanding award for the
purpose of satisfying changes in law or for any other lawful
purpose. No such amendment may adversely affect the rights under
any outstanding award without the holders consent. Other
than in the event of a necessary adjustment in connection with a
change in the companys stock or a merger or similar
transaction, the administrator may not reprice or
otherwise reduce the exercise price of outstanding stock options
or stock appreciation rights. Further, amendments to the 2006
Option Plan will be subject to approval by our stockholders if
the amendment (i) increases the number of shares available
for issuance under the 2006 Option Plan, (ii) expands the
types of awards available under, the eligibility to participate
in, or the duration of, the plan, (iii) materially changes
the method of determining fair market value for purposes of the
2006 Option Plan, (iv) is required by the Nasdaq National
Market rules, or (v) is required by the Internal Revenue
Code to ensure that incentive options are tax-qualified.
We have established and maintained a Profit Sharing Plan for our
eligible employees. Eligible employees are defined as those who
have completed one year of service and have attained the
age 21. We may make an annual discretionary contribution to
the Profit Sharing Plan for the benefit of these employees.
Employees are fully vested after achieving five years of
service. Our Profit Sharing Plan is intended to constitute a
qualified plan under Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue
Code and its associated trust is intended to be exempt from
federal income taxation under Section 501(a) of the
Internal Revenue Code.
|
|
|
Money Purchase Pension Plan |
We have established and maintained a Money Purchase Pension Plan
for our eligible employees. Eligible employees are defined as
those who have completed one year of service and have attained
the age 21. We make annual contributions to the Money
Purchase Pension Plan based on a fixed formula for the benefit
of these employees. Employees are fully vested after achieving
five years of service. Our Money Purchase Pension Plan is
intended to constitute a qualified plan under
Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code and its
associated trust is intended to be exempt from federal income
taxation under Section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code.
|
|
|
Employee Stock Ownership Plan |
We have established and maintained an Employee Stock Ownership
Plan for our eligible employees. Eligible employees are defined
as those who have completed one year of service and have
attained the age 21. We make an annual discretionary
contribution to the Employee Stock Ownership Plan in the form of
59
shares of our common stock for the benefit of these employees.
The assets of the Employee Stock Ownership Plan are invested
primarily in our common stock. Employees are fully vested after
achieving five years of service. In the event of an
employees death, total and permanent disability or
attainment of normal retirement age (62), all amounts credited
to such employees account become fully vested.
Distributions of an employees benefit may be made in cash
or shares of our common stock, or both. Employees may demand
however that their accounts benefit will be distributed
only in the form of shares of our common stock. Our Employee
Stock Ownership Plan is intended to constitute a qualified plan
under Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code and its
associated trust is intended to be exempt from federal income
taxation under Section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Agreements with Executive Officers
On September 30, 2003, we entered into employment
agreements with Messrs. Leonard Foxman and Theodore Foxman.
These agreements are automatically renewed upon the completion
of the initial one-year term for successive one-year periods
until either we or the officer gives 30 days prior written
notice of intent not to extend. Leonard Foxmans and
Theodore Foxmans employment agreements call for the
payment of $350,000 and $400,000 in annual base salary,
respectively, and rights to participate in bonus plans, standard
insurance plans, such as life, accidental death and
dismemberment, short-term disability and long-term disability
insurance, and retirement benefits, such as the Profit Sharing
Plan, the Money Purchase Pension Plan and the Employee Stock
Option Plan described earlier, all as generally available to our
executives. The agreements require them to refrain from
competing with us and from hiring our employees for a period of
five years following the termination of their employment with us
for any reason. Their employment agreements also each provide
for severance payments to the officer in the event his
employment with us is terminated as a result of his disability.
In addition, in the case of termination by an officer for good
reason, or by us without cause, the officer will receive 100%
salary continuation for a period of three years from the date of
termination and the partially employer-subsidized continuation
of group health plan benefits for the same period. On
August 31, 2006, we entered into an agreement with each of
Messrs. Leonard Foxman and Theodore Foxman, in which we agreed
to extend their current employment agreements until
December 31, 2006 in order to permit the Company to
complete its development of a compensation plan for its
executive officers.
We also entered into similar employment agreements with
Messrs. Hawrysz and Weimer, who pursuant to their
respective agreements are to be paid an annual base salary of
$190,000 and $200,000, respectively. Each of these agreements is
similar in all material respects to the employment agreements
described above, except that each of these agreements requires
the officer to refrain from competing with us and from hiring
our employees for a period of two years following the
termination of the officers employment agreement for any
reason. Additionally, in the case of termination by an officer
for good reason, or by us without cause, the officer will
receive continuation of his salary at a rate of 50% of his base
salary for a period of two years from the date of termination
and partially employer- subsidized continuation of group health
plan benefits for twelve months following the date of
termination.
|
|
|
Non-Competition Agreement |
In addition to the non-competition provisions contained in
Mr. Leonard Foxmans employment agreement with us, as
an inducement to TA Associates to invest in us and in
consideration of the redemption of his stock by us in connection
with TA Associates investment in us, we entered into a
non-competition agreement with Mr. Leonard Foxman wherein
Mr. Foxman agreed to refrain from competing with us and
from hiring our employees for a period ending on the later of
September 30, 2008 or two years following the termination
of his employment with us for any reason.
60
Limitation of Liability and Indemnification
As permitted by the Delaware General Corporation Law, we have
adopted provisions in our certificate of incorporation and
by-laws to be in effect at the closing of this offering that
limit or eliminate the personal liability of our directors.
Consequently, a director will not be personally liable to us or
our stockholders for monetary damages or breach of fiduciary
duty as a director, except for liability for:
|
|
|
|
|
any breach of the directors duty of loyalty to us or our
stockholders; |
|
|
|
any act or omission not in good faith or that involves
intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law; |
|
|
|
any unlawful payments related to dividends or unlawful stock
repurchases, redemptions or other distributions; or |
|
|
|
any transaction from which the director derived an improper
personal benefit. |
These limitations of liability do not alter director liability
under the federal securities laws and do not affect the
availability of equitable remedies such as an injunction or
rescission.
In addition, our by-laws provide that:
|
|
|
|
|
we will indemnify our directors, officers and, in the discretion
of our board of directors, certain employees to the fullest
extent permitted by the Delaware General Corporation
Law; and |
|
|
|
we will advance expenses, including attorneys fees, to our
directors and, in the discretion of our board of directors, to
our officers and certain employees, in connection with legal
proceedings, subject to limited exceptions. |
We have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our
directors and our executive officers. These agreements provide
that we will indemnify each of our directors and executive
officers to the fullest extent permitted by law and advance
expenses to each indemnitee in connection with any proceeding in
which indemnification is available.
We also maintain a general liability insurance which covers
certain liabilities of our directors and officers arising out of
claims based on acts or omissions in their capacities as
directors or officers, including liabilities under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Insofar as indemnification
for liabilities arising under the Securities Act may be
permitted to directors, officers, or persons controlling the
registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions, we have been
informed that in the opinion of the SEC such indemnification is
against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act and is
therefore unenforceable.
These provisions may discourage stockholders from bringing a
lawsuit against our directors for breach of their fiduciary
duty. These provisions may also have the effect of reducing the
likelihood of derivative litigation against directors and
officers, even though such an action, if successful, might
otherwise benefit us and our stockholders. Furthermore, a
stockholders investment may be adversely affected to the
extent we pay the costs of settlement and damage awards against
directors and officers pursuant to these indemnification
provisions. We believe that these provisions, the
indemnification agreements and the insurance are necessary to
attract and retain talented and experienced directors and
officers.
At present, there is no pending litigation or proceeding
involving any of our directors or officers where indemnification
will be required or permitted. We are not aware of any
threatened litigation or proceeding that might result in a claim
for such indemnification.
61
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
Arrangements with TA Associates
General. In September 2003, TA Associates purchased
3,436 shares of our series A convertible preferred
stock for a total purchase price of $65.0 million. TA
Associates also purchased $30.0 million in principal amount
of 12% senior subordinated convertible notes due
September 30, 2009. Michael C. Child, one of our directors,
is a Managing Director of TA Associates, Inc.
In 2003, our founding family and then controlling stockholders,
Leonard and Theodore Foxman, determined that it would be prudent
to diversify a portion of the stockholders net worth
represented by their ownership interest in Eagle Test. Leonard
and Theodore Foxman sought a financial partner that would
facilitate the achievement of these objectives, as well as
provide additional industry knowledge and expertise to help
Eagle Test execute its business plan. After meeting with several
potential purchasers and selecting TA Associates, an
unaffiliated private equity firm, Leonard and Theodore Foxman,
on behalf themselves and the minority stockholders, and
representatives of TA Associates negotiated the acquisition by
TA Associates of a 62.8% interest in our equity. At that time,
we had no debt and only one class of common stock outstanding.
As a result of these negotiations, Leonard and Theodore Foxman
and several minority stockholders agreed to sell
8,993,752 shares of common stock back to us, representing
the 62.8% stake, for $95.0 million. We obtained the
$95.0 million needed to pay for the shares of common stock
sold by Leonard and Theodore Foxman and others by borrowing
$30.0 million of senior subordinated convertible debt from
TA Associates and issuing shares of series A convertible
preferred stock (convertible into 8,590,248 shares of
common stock and redeemable preferred stock having a liquidation
preference of $32.5 million) to TA Associates for
$65.0 million, as negotiated by Leonard and Theodore Foxman
and TA Associates.
Our recapitalization created a priority of $30.0 million
for the senior subordinated convertible notes. In addition, the
shares of series A convertible preferred stock issued to TA
Associates in the recapitalization had a number of rights
superior to those of our common stock, including, among others,
a $65.0 million preference on certain liquidity events, a
$32.5 million priority payment on an initial public
offering or sale event, and a right to convert into common stock
on a one-for-one basis.
Series A Convertible Preferred Stock. Prior to our
initial public offering, our certificate of incorporation
contained customary provisions relating to the series A
convertible preferred stock regarding liquidation and sale
preference, voting rights and required approvals of certain
transactions, among others. Upon the completion of our initial
public offering, all of the shares of series A convertible
preferred stock converted into an aggregate of
8,590,248 shares of our common stock and 3,436 shares
of our redeemable preferred stock. All of the shares of
redeemable preferred stock were immediately redeemed for an
aggregate of $32.5 million.
As discussed above, in our recapitalization in September 2003,
TA Associates agreed to provide equity capital with a value of
$65.0 million in the form of series A convertible
preferred stock. The terms of the series A convertible
preferred stock entitled TA Associates to a preferential payment
of $32.5 million through the redemption of the redeemable
preferred stock, plus 8,590,248 shares of common stock, in
connection with our initial public offering. We believe that TA
Associates specified that this security be structured as
convertible preferred stock that converts into redeemable
preferred stock and common stock in connection with an initial
public offering in order to avoid treatment of the
$32.5 million payment as dividend rather than a return of
capital.
Convertible Notes; Warrants. The note purchase agreement
executed in connection with the issuance of the senior
subordinated convertible notes to TA Associates contained
covenants, events of default and other customary provisions.
Upon the completion of our initial public offering, the senior
subordinated convertible notes held by TA Associates converted
into senior subordinated notes in the principal amount of
$29.995 million and warrants to
purchase 525,040 shares of our common stock. The
senior subordinated notes were repurchased for
$31.3 million, representing $29.995 million of
principal, a 2% redemption premium in accordance with the note
purchase agreement and $0.7 million in accrued and unpaid
interest, with proceeds from our initial public offering. The
warrants were issued and had an exercise price of
62
$0.01 per share. TA Associates exercised the warrants for
common stock in connection with our initial public offering. TA
Associates agreed to exercise the warrants because we and the
underwriters requested that they do so in order to simplify our
capital structure as a public company. See Description of
Capital Stock Warrants.
As discussed above, in our recapitalization in September 2003,
TA Associates agreed to loan us $30.0 million in the form
of senior subordinated convertible notes. The terms of the
senior subordinated convertible notes required us to grant to TA
Associates warrants to purchase 525,040 shares of
common stock for nominal consideration, and we agreed to these
terms. We believe that TA Associates specified that the
instruments evidencing this arrangement would be senior
subordinated convertible notes having a principal amount of
$30.0 million convertible into senior subordinated notes
having a principal amount of $29.995 million and the
warrants to purchase 525,040 shares of common stock
because a separate note and warrant arrangement would have given
rise to original issue discount on the separate note, while
convertible notes are not subject to the original issue discount
rules.
Stockholders Agreement
In connection with the investment in us by TA Associates, we
entered into a stockholders agreement, dated as of
September 30, 2003, with TA Associates, and Leonard and
Theodore Foxman, both of whom are directors, executive officers
and significant stockholders, and Jack E. Weimer, who is an
executive officer. The purpose of the stockholders agreement was
to govern the relationship among the parties to the agreement.
The stockholders agreement provided, among other things, the
terms on which our securities held by these stockholders were to
be transferred and voted. The stockholders agreement contained
customary transfer restrictions, rights of first refusal and
co-sale, preemptive rights and voting obligations. For example,
our common stockholders that are a party to this agreement were
restricted from making certain transfers of their shares without
the prior consent of TA Associates, and TA Associates was
restricted from transferring its shares to any of our
competitors. The stockholders agreement also enabled TA
Associates to require all of the other stockholders to
participate in a sale event in which it elects to participate. A
sale event was defined as a negotiated transaction
whereby at least a majority of the shares of our stock held by
TA Associates vote to sell substantially all of our assets, sell
a sufficient amount of our common stock to trigger a change of
control of us or cause us to merge with any non-affiliate. These
provisions, as well as most other provisions, of the
stockholders agreement terminated upon the closing of our
initial public offering. However, there are three material
provisions of the stockholders agreement that survived the
closing of our initial public offering. In particular, the
surviving provisions include our covenant to indemnify TA
Associates, including its associated investment funds, subject
to exceptions, for damages, expenses or losses arising out of,
based upon or by reason of any third party or governmental
claims relating to their status as a security holder, creditor,
director, agent, representative or controlling person of us, or
otherwise relating to their involvement with us. This covenant
continues until the expiration of the applicable statute of
limitations. In addition, we have covenanted to reimburse TA
Associates up to an annual limit of $40,000 for costs and
expenses incurred in connection with its ongoing investment in
us, which covenant also survived the closing of our initial
public offering. Pursuant to this obligation, in fiscal year
2004 and 2005 we paid TA Associates $5,057 and $11,329,
respectively. Lastly, we have covenanted to obtain and maintain
directors and officers liability insurance coverage of at
least $10.0 million per occurrence, covering, among other
things, violations of federal or state securities laws. We were
required to increase the coverage to at least $15.0 million
per occurrence in connection with our initial public offering,
and this covenant survived the closing of our initial public
offering.
Management Rights Agreement
In connection with TA Associates investment in us, we
entered into a management rights agreement, dated as of
September 30, 2003, with TA Associates. Under the terms of
this agreement, TA Associates was entitled to consult with and
advise us on significant business issues, submit business
proposals or suggestions to our senior management and to call a
meeting with senior management to discuss such proposals or
suggestions, and to inspect our facilities and examine our books
and records, subject to customary
63
confidentiality restrictions on the use of such information. We
did not pay any fees to, or receive any fees from, TA Associates
in connection with these arrangements. The agreement terminated
upon the closing of our initial public offering.
Registration Rights Agreement
In connection with the investment in us by TA Associates, we
entered into a registration rights agreement, dated as of
September 30, 2003, with TA Associates, Leonard and
Theodore Foxman and Jack E. Weimer. Pursuant to this agreement,
under certain circumstances these stockholders are entitled to
require us to register their shares of common stock under the
securities laws for resale. See Description of Capital
Stock Registration Rights.
Redemption of Common Stock; Special Dividend
We used the $95 million of aggregate proceeds from the sale
of our series A convertible preferred stock and
12% senior subordinated convertible notes to TA Associates
to redeem shares of common stock, at a price of $10.56 per
share, from Leonard Foxman, Foxman Family LLC, Eagle Test
Systems, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan, Jack E. Weimer and
Steven R. Dollens as set forth below. The members of Foxman
Family LLC are ten trusts for the benefit of Theodore Foxman and
his descendants, of which Theodore Foxman is trustee and which
trusts collectively have a 62.5% economic interest in Foxman
Family LLC, and six trusts for the benefit of Mrs. Robin
Cleek and her descendants, of which Mrs. Cleek is trustee,
and which trusts collectively have a 37.5% economic interest in
Foxman Family LLC. Leonard Foxman is the manager of Foxman
Family LLC, and is the father of both Theodore Foxman and Robin
Cleek. The price paid in the redemption of our existing
stockholders shares was determined by arms-length
negotiations with TA Associates, and reflects our
pre-transaction capital structure, which did not include any
indebtedness. Also, in connection with TA Associates
investment in us, we paid special dividends to such individuals
and entities as set forth below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
Aggregate | |
|
Aggregate Amount | |
Holder |
|
Shares Redeemed | |
|
Redemption Price | |
|
of Special Dividends | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Leonard Foxman
|
|
|
4,576,350 |
|
|
$ |
48,339,484 |
|
|
$ |
7,909,755 |
|
Foxman Family LLC
|
|
|
2,885,938 |
|
|
|
30,483,843 |
|
|
|
4,988,048 |
|
Employee Stock Ownership Plan
|
|
|
1,390,943 |
|
|
|
14,692,385 |
|
|
|
2,404,105 |
|
Jack E. Weimer
|
|
|
127,748 |
|
|
|
1,349,373 |
|
|
|
220,797 |
|
Steven R. Dollens
|
|
|
12,773 |
|
|
|
134,915 |
|
|
|
22,076 |
|
Loans to Officers and Directors
Leonard Foxman borrowed an aggregate principal amount of $58,500
pursuant to two loans from us in 1999 to partially fund the
purchase of an automobile. These loans bore interest at a rate
of 5.0% per annum. On September 29, 2003,
Mr. Foxman satisfied these loans in full by repaying an
aggregate of $71,130, representing the total principal and
interest outstanding under these loans on such date, which
amount was the largest amount outstanding under the loans.
Mr. Foxman currently has no loans outstanding from us.
Transactions with Pacific Support Group, Partners
We entered into an Amended and Restated Contract Services
Agreement with Pacific Support Group, Partners on April 1,
2003, whereby Pacific Support Group, Partners agreed to provide
us with consulting, management and support services. Pacific
Support Group, Partners is controlled by Leonard Foxman and
Theodore Foxman, and owned by Leonard Foxman and Theodore Foxman
and other immediate family members. All of these services were
provided by Leonard Foxman and Theodore Foxman. We paid $476,000
to Pacific Support Group, Partners in fiscal 2003. This
agreement was terminated during fiscal 2003. In fiscal 2003,
Leonard Foxman received payments from Pacific Support Group,
Partners in the aggregate of $1.5 million, and Theodore
Foxman and his immediate family members living in his household
received payments from Pacific Support Group, Partners in the
aggregate of $1.0 million. The source of the funds
64
used for payments made by Pacific Support Group to Leonard
Foxman and to Theodore Foxman and his immediate family members
in fiscal 2003, was payments we made to Pacific Support Group in
fiscal 2003 and payments we made to the predecessor of Pacific
Support Group in prior fiscal years.
We currently have no agreements or arrangements with Pacific
Support Group, Partners. The services formerly provided by this
entity are generally no longer required and to the limited
extent they may be needed, they will be performed by our
employees.
Indemnification and Employment Agreements
We have agreed to indemnify our directors and officers in
certain circumstances. See Management
Limitation of Liability and Indemnification. We have also
entered into employment agreements and non-competition
agreements with our executive officers. See
Management Agreements with Executive
Officers.
65
PRINCIPAL AND SELLING STOCKHOLDERS
The following table sets forth information with respect to the
beneficial ownership of our common stock, as of June 30,
2006, and as adjusted to reflect the sale of common stock
offered by us and the selling stockholders in this offering, for:
|
|
|
|
|
each beneficial owner of more than 5% of our outstanding common
stock; |
|
|
|
each of our named executive officers; |
|
|
|
each of our directors; |
|
|
|
all of our executive officers and directors as a group; and |
|
|
|
the selling stockholders. |
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules
of the SEC. In computing the number of shares beneficially owned
by a person and the percentage ownership of that person, shares
of common stock subject to options or warrants held by that
person that are currently exercisable or exercisable within
60 days of June 30, 2006 are deemed outstanding, but
are not deemed outstanding for computing the percentage
ownership of any other person. These rules generally attribute
beneficial ownership of securities to persons who possess sole
or shared voting power or investment power with respect to such
securities. Except as otherwise indicated, all of the shares
reflected in the table are shares of common stock and all
persons listed below have sole voting and investment power with
respect to the shares beneficially owned by them, subject to
applicable community property laws. Percentage ownership
calculations are based on 20,655,283 shares outstanding as
of June 30, 2006.
We have granted the underwriters an option, exercisable not
later than 30 days after the date of the underwriting
agreement, to purchase up to an aggregate of 825,000 shares
if the underwriters sell more than 5,500,000 shares in
connection with this offering. Information in the following
table assumes that the underwriters do not exercise this option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beneficial Ownership | |
|
|
|
Beneficial Ownership | |
|
|
Prior to Offering | |
|
|
|
After Offering | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
Shares | |
|
|
Name and Address of |
|
Beneficially | |
|
|
|
Being | |
|
Beneficially | |
|
|
Beneficial Owner (1) |
|
Owned | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Offered | |
|
Owned | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
TA Associates Funds(2)
|
|
|
9,115,288 |
|
|
|
44.1 |
% |
|
|
2,500,000 |
|
|
|
6,615,288 |
|
|
|
29.2 |
% |
Leonard A. Foxman(3)
|
|
|
4,941,937 |
|
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
|
|
3,941,937 |
|
|
|
17.4 |
|
Foxman Family LLC(4)
|
|
|
3,361,562 |
|
|
|
16.3 |
|
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
|
|
2,361,562 |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
Theodore D. Foxman(5)
|
|
|
54,986 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,986 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Eagle Test Systems, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan(6)
|
|
|
834,565 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
834,565 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
Jack E. Weimer(7)
|
|
|
153,032 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
153,032 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Stephen J. Hawrysz(8)
|
|
|
72,651 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,651 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Michael C. Child(9)
|
|
|
9,115,288 |
|
|
|
44.1 |
|
|
|
2,500,000 |
|
|
|
6,615,288 |
|
|
|
29.2 |
|
Ross W. Manire(10)
|
|
|
17,083 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,083 |
|
|
|
* |
|
William H. Gibbs(11)
|
|
|
11,528 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,528 |
|
|
|
* |
|
David B. Mullen(12)
|
|
|
11,528 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,528 |
|
|
|
* |
|
All executive officers and directors as a group
(8 persons)(13)
|
|
|
14,334,428 |
|
|
|
68.8 |
% |
|
|
3,500,000 |
|
|
|
10,834,428 |
|
|
|
47.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
* |
Represents less than 1% of the outstanding shares of common
stock. |
|
|
(1) |
Except as otherwise indicated, addresses are c/o Eagle Test
Systems, Inc., 2200 Millbrook Drive, Buffalo Grove, IL 60089.
The address of TA Associates, Inc. and Mr. Child is
c/o TA Associates, Inc., High Street Tower,
Suite 2500, 125 High Street, Boston, MA 02110. |
66
|
|
(2) |
Amounts shown reflect the aggregate number of shares of common
stock held by TA IX L.P., TA/Atlantic and Pacific IV L.P.,
TA Strategic Partners Fund A L.P., TA Strategic
Partners Fund B L.P., TA Investors LLC and
TA Subordinated Debt Fund, L.P. (collectively, the TA
Associates Funds). |
|
|
Investment and voting control of the TA Associates Funds is held
by TA Associates, Inc. No stockholder, director or officer of TA
Associates, Inc. has voting or investment power with respect to
our shares of common stock held by the TA Associates Funds.
Voting and investment power with respect to such shares is
vested in a three-person investment committee consisting of the
following employees of TA Associates: Messrs. Michael C.
Child, C. Kevin Landry and P. Andrews McLane. Mr. Child is
a Managing Director of TA Associates, Inc., the manager of the
general partner of TA IX L.P. and TA Subordinated Debt
Fund L.P.; the manager of TA Investors LLC; and the general
partner of TA/Atlantic and Pacific IV L.P., TA Strategic
Partners Fund A L.P. and TA Strategic Partners Fund B
L.P. Mr. Child has been a member of our board of directors
since October 2003. See Note 9 below. |
|
(3) |
Includes 3,361,562 shares held by Foxman Family LLC prior
to this offering, of which Leonard Foxman is the manager.
Leonard Foxman has voting and investment power with respect to
the shares held of record by Foxman Family LLC and is the father
of Theodore Foxman and Robin Cleek. Leonard Foxman has no
economic interest in Foxman Family LLC. The members of Foxman
Family LLC are ten trusts for the benefit of Theodore Foxman and
his descendants, of which Theodore Foxman is the trustee and
which trusts collectively have a 62.5% economic interest in
Foxman Family LLC, and six trusts for the benefit of
Mrs. Robin Cleek and her descendants, of which
Mrs. Cleek is the trustee and which trusts collectively
have a 37.5% economic interest in Foxman Family LLC. Also
includes 834,565 shares held by the Employee Stock
Ownership Plan, of which Leonard Foxman is the trustee, which
position has shared voting and sole investment power in
connection with certain matters with respect to such shares.
Leonard Foxman disclaims beneficial ownership of such shares,
except to the extent of 29,404 shares which he holds as a
participant in the Employee Stock Ownership Plan. |
|
(4) |
See Note 3 above. |
|
(5) |
Includes 48,438 shares subject to options that are
immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of
June 30, 2006. Also includes 6,548 shares Theodore
Foxman holds as a participant in the Employee Stock Ownership
Plan. Does not include 3,361,562 shares held by Foxman
Family LLC, in which trusts for the benefit of Theodore Foxman
and his descendants have a 62.5% economic interest, but over
which Theodore Foxman does not have voting or investment power.
Theodore Foxman is the trustee of such trusts. |
|
(6) |
Leonard Foxman is the trustee of the Employee Stock Ownership
Plan and has shared voting and sole investment power in
connection with certain matters with respect to the shares held
by such plan. Presently, shares of our common stock held by the
trustee as part of the Employee Stock Ownership Plan assets are
voted by the trustee. The trustee shares this voting power with
the Employee Stock Ownership Plan participants, who are entitled
to direct the trustee as to the manner in which all shares
allocated to their respective accounts will be voted with
respect to all matters subject to a shareholder vote. Common
stock held by the Employee Stock Ownership Plan on behalf of
executive officers are reported in the Employee Stock Ownership
Plans and the trustees common stock ownership
listing as well as in the common stock ownership listings for
the respective executive officers and for executive officers and
directors as a group. |
|
(7) |
Includes 39,479 shares subject to options that are
immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of
June 30, 2006. Also includes 36,906 shares which
Mr. Weimer holds as a participant in the Employee Stock
Ownership Plan, over which he has shared voting power. |
|
(8) |
Includes 47,500 shares subject to options that are
immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of
June 30, 2006. Also includes 151 shares which Mr. Hawrysz
holds as a participant in the Employee Stock Ownership Plan,
over which he has shared voting power. |
|
(9) |
Mr. Child is a managing director of TA Associates, Inc. and
may be considered to have beneficial ownership of TA Associates,
Inc.s interest in us. Mr. Child disclaims beneficial
ownership of all such shares. Mr. Child has been a member
of our board of directors since October 2003. See Note 2
above. |
|
(10) |
Includes 17,083 shares subject to options that are
immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of
June 30, 2006. |
|
(11) |
Includes 11,528 shares subject to options that are immediately
exercisable within 60 days of June 30, 2006. |
|
(12) |
Includes 11,528 shares subject to options that are immediately
exercisable within 60 days of June 30, 2006. |
|
(13) |
Includes 175,556 shares subject to options that are
immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of
June 30, 2006, 834,565 shares held in the Employee
Stock Ownership Plan. |
67
DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STOCK
General
Our authorized capital stock consists of 90,000,000 shares
of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, and
10,000,000 shares of undesignated preferred stock, par
value $0.01 per share. The following description of our
capital stock is intended as a summary only and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to our second amended and restated
certificate of incorporation and amended and restated by-laws,
which are filed as exhibits to the registration statement, of
which this prospectus forms a part. We refer in this section to
our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation as
our certificate of incorporation, and we refer to our amended
and restated by-laws as our
by-laws.
As of June 30, 2006, there were 20,655,283 shares of
our common stock outstanding held by 15 stockholders of
record and options to purchase 764,500 shares of our common
stock under our stock option plans.
Common Stock
The holders of our common stock are entitled to one vote for
each share held on all matters submitted to a vote of the
stockholders. The holders of our common stock do not have any
cumulative voting rights. Holders of our common stock are
entitled to receive proportionally any dividends declared by our
board of directors, subject to any preferential dividend rights
of any outstanding preferred stock.
In the event of our liquidation or dissolution, holders of our
common stock are entitled to share ratably in all assets
remaining after payment of all debts and other liabilities,
subject to the prior rights of any outstanding preferred stock.
Holders of our common stock have no preemptive, subscription,
redemption or conversion rights.
Preferred Stock
Our board of directors is authorized, without action by the
stockholders, to designate and issue up to
10,000,000 shares of preferred stock in one or more series.
The board of directors can fix the rights, preferences and
privileges of the shares of each series and any of its
qualifications, limitations or restrictions. Our board of
directors may authorize the issuance of preferred stock with
voting or conversion rights that could adversely affect the
voting power or other rights of the holders of common stock. The
issuance of preferred stock, while providing flexibility in
connection with possible future financings and acquisitions and
other corporate purposes could, under certain circumstances,
have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in
control of our company and might harm the market price of our
common stock.
Our board of directors will make any determination to issue such
shares based on its judgment as to our companys best
interests and the best interests of our stockholders. We have no
current plans to issue any shares of preferred stock.
Registration Rights
We entered into a registration rights agreement, dated as of
September 30, 2003, with TA Associates, Leonard
Foxman, Foxman Family LLC, Eagle Test Systems, Inc. Employee
Stock Ownership Plan and Jack E. Weimer.
Demand Registration Rights. At any time, subject to
exceptions, TA Associates has a right to demand that we
file a registration statement covering the offer and sale of our
stock held by it and its affiliates. After the completion of
this offering, affiliates of TA Associates will own
6,615,288 shares of our common stock. If we are eligible to
file a registration statement on
Form S-3,
TA Associates has the right to demand that we file a
registration statement on
Form S-3 so long
as the aggregate amount of securities to be sold under the
registration statement exceeds $500,000. We have the ability to
delay the filing of a registration statement under specified
conditions, such as for a period of time following the effective
date of a prior registration statement or if we are in
possession of material nonpublic information that it would not
be in our best interests to disclose. We are not obligated to
file a registration statement on
Form S-1 on more
than three
68
occasions and are not obligated to file a registration statement
on Form S-3 more
than twice in any
12-month period. This
offering will not count toward these limits.
Piggyback Registration Rights. All parties to the
registration rights agreement have piggyback registration
rights. Under these provisions, if we register any securities
for public sale, including pursuant to any stockholder initiated
demand registration, these stockholders will have the right to
include their shares in the registration statement, subject to
customary exceptions. The underwriters of any underwritten
offering will have the right to limit the number of shares
having registration rights to be included in the registration
statement, and piggyback registration rights are also subject to
the priority rights of stockholders having demand registration
rights in any demand registration.
Expenses of Registration. We will pay all registration
expenses, other than underwriting discounts and commissions,
related to any demand or piggyback registration.
Indemnification. The registration rights agreement
contains customary cross-indemnification provisions, pursuant to
which we are obligated to indemnify the selling stockholders in
the event of material misstatements or omissions in the
registration statement attributable to us, and they are
obligated to indemnify us for material misstatements or
omissions attributable to them.
Certain Anti-Takeover Provisions of Our Certificate of
Incorporation and By-laws
Our certificate of incorporation and by-laws includes a number
of provisions that may have the effect of delaying, deferring or
discouraging another party from acquiring control of us and
encouraging persons considering unsolicited tender offers or
other unilateral takeover proposals to negotiate with our board
of directors rather than pursue non-negotiated takeover
attempts. These provisions include the items described below.
Board Composition and Filling Vacancies. In accordance
with our certificate of incorporation, our board is divided into
three classes serving staggered three-year terms, with one class
being elected each year. Our certificate of incorporation also
provides that directors may be removed only for cause and then
only by the affirmative vote of the holders of 75% or more of
the shares then entitled to vote at an election of directors.
Furthermore, any vacancy on our board of directors, however
occurring, including a vacancy resulting from an increase in the
size of our board, may only be filled by the affirmative vote of
a majority of our directors then in office even if less than a
quorum.
No Written Consent of Stockholders. Our certificate of
incorporation provides that all stockholder actions are required
to be taken by a vote of the stockholders at an annual or
special meeting, and that stockholders may not take any action
by written consent in lieu of a meeting. This limit may lengthen
the amount of time required to take stockholder actions and
would prevent the amendment of our by-laws or removal of
directors by our stockholders without holding a meeting of
stockholders.
Meetings of Stockholders. Our by-laws provide that only a
majority of the members of our board of directors then in office
may call special meetings of stockholders and only those matters
set forth in the notice of the special meeting may be considered
or acted upon at a special meeting of stockholders. Our by-laws
limit the business that may be conducted at an annual meeting of
stockholders to those matters properly brought before the
meeting.
Advance Notice Requirements. Our by-laws establish
advance notice procedures with regard to stockholder proposals
relating to the nomination of candidates for election as
directors or new business to be brought before meetings of our
stockholders. These procedures provide that notice of
stockholder proposals must be timely given in writing to our
corporate secretary prior to the meeting at which the action is
to be taken. Generally, to be timely, notice must be received at
our principal executive offices not less than 90 days nor
more than 120 days prior to the first anniversary date of
the annual meeting for the preceding year. The notice must
contain certain information specified in the
by-laws.
Amendment to By-laws and Certificate of Incorporation. As
required by the Delaware General Corporation Law, any amendment
of our certificate of incorporation must first be approved by a
majority of our board of directors, and if required by law or
our certificate of incorporation, thereafter be approved by a
majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote on the
amendment, and a majority of the outstanding
69
shares of each class entitled to vote thereon as a class, except
that the amendment of the provisions relating to stockholder
action, directors, limitation of liability and the amendment of
our by-laws and certificate of incorporation must be approved by
not less than 75% of the outstanding shares entitled to vote on
the amendment, and not less than 75% of the outstanding shares
of each class entitled to vote thereon as a class. Our by-laws
may be amended by the affirmative vote of a majority vote of the
directors then in office, subject to any limitations set forth
in the by-laws; and may also be amended by the affirmative vote
of at least 75% of the outstanding shares entitled to vote on
the amendment, or, if the board of directors recommends that the
stockholders approve the amendment, by the affirmative vote of
the majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote on the
amendment, in each case voting together as a single class.
Undesignated Preferred Stock. Our certificate of
incorporation provides for 10,000,000 authorized shares of
preferred stock. The existence of authorized but unissued shares
of preferred stock may enable our board of directors to render
more difficult or to discourage an attempt to obtain control of
us by means of a merger, tender offer, proxy contest or
otherwise. For example, if in the due exercise of its fiduciary
obligations, our board of directors were to determine that a
takeover proposal is not in the best interests of us or our
stockholders, our board of directors could cause shares of
preferred stock to be issued without stockholder approval in one
or more private offerings or other transactions that might
dilute the voting or other rights of the proposed acquirer or
insurgent stockholder or stockholder group. In this regard, our
certificate of incorporation grants our board of directors broad
power to establish the rights and preferences of authorized and
unissued shares of preferred stock. The issuance of shares of
preferred stock could decrease the amount of earnings and assets
available for distribution to holders of shares of common stock.
The issuance may also adversely affect the rights and powers,
including voting rights, of these holders and may have the
effect of delaying, deterring or preventing a change in control
of us.
Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate Law
We are subject to the provisions of Section 203 of the
Delaware General Corporation Law. In general, Section 203
prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation from engaging in
a business combination with an interested
stockholder for a three-year period following the time
that this stockholder becomes an interested stockholder, unless
the business combination is approved in a prescribed manner. A
business combination includes, among other things, a
merger, asset or stock sale or other transaction resulting in a
financial benefit to the interested stockholder. An
interested stockholder is a person who, together
with affiliates and associates, owns, or did own within three
years prior to the determination of interested stockholder
status, 15% or more of the corporations voting stock.
Under Section 203, a business combination between a
corporation and an interested stockholder is prohibited unless
it satisfies one of the following conditions:
|
|
|
|
|
before the stockholder became interested, the board of directors
approved either the business combination or the transaction
which resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested
stockholder; |
|
|
|
upon consummation of the transaction which resulted in the
stockholder becoming an interested stockholder, the interested
stockholder owned at least 85% of the voting stock of the
corporation outstanding at the time the transaction commenced,
excluding for purposes of determining the voting stock
outstanding, shares owned by persons who are directors and also
officers, and employee stock plans, in some instances; or |
|
|
|
at or after the time the stockholder became interested, the
business combination was approved by the board of directors of
the corporation and authorized at an annual or special meeting
of the stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least
two-thirds of the outstanding voting stock which is not owned by
the interested stockholder. |
Nasdaq Global Market Listing
Our common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Global Market under the
trading symbol EGLT.
Transfer Agent and Registrar
The transfer agent and registrar for our common stock is
American Stock Transfer & Trust Company.
70
SHARES ELIGIBLE FOR FUTURE SALE
Future sales of substantial amounts of common stock in the
public market, or the perception that such sales may occur,
could adversely affect the prevailing market price of our common
stock. Because some shares of common stock will not be available
for sale shortly after this offering as a result of the
contractual and legal restrictions on resale described below,
sales of substantial amounts of common stock in the public
market after these restrictions lapse could adversely affect the
prevailing market price and our ability to raise equity capital
in the future.
Upon completion of this offering, we will have outstanding
22,655,283 shares of common stock, assuming no exercise of
outstanding options after June 30, 2006. Of these shares,
the 6,500,000 shares sold in our initial public offering,
and all of the 5,500,000 shares sold in this offering will
be freely tradeable without restriction or further registration
under the Securities Act, except for any shares purchased by
affiliates, as that term is defined in Rule 144
under the Securities Act.
Shares acquired by affiliates and the remaining
9,806,970 shares held by existing stockholders prior to our
initial public offering are restricted securities as
that term is defined in Rule 144. Restricted securities may
be sold in the public market only if registered or if they
qualify for an exemption from registration under Rule 144
or 701 under the Securities Act, which rules are summarized
below.
Employee Benefit Plans
As of June 30, 2006, options to purchase a total of
764,500 shares of our common stock were outstanding, of
which options to purchase 276,461 shares were vested. We
have filed a registration statement with the SEC covering the
shares of common stock reserved for issuance under our 2003
Option Plan and 2006 Option Plan. As a result, subject to
vesting provisions, when awards under these stock incentive
plans are exercised, the resulting shares will be freely
tradable under the Securities Act, except that shares purchased
by affiliates, as that term is defined in
Rule 144, would be subject to the limitations and
restrictions that are described below.
Our Employee Stock Ownership Plan will not sell any of its
shares of our common stock in this offering. The Employee Stock
Ownership Plan is able to sell or distribute its shares of our
common stock under certain circumstances. We currently
anticipate that the Employee Stock Ownership Plan will
distribute 834,565 shares of our common stock to employees,
to be held in individual self-directed accounts. Other than this
anticipated distribution, we have agreed not to cause the
disposition of any shares of our common stock currently held by
the Employee Stock Ownership Plan prior to the date that is 90
days after the date of this prospectus, without the prior
written consent of the underwriters. We have also agreed not to
cause the Employee Stock Ownership Plan or its successor to
transfer investment control over such shares to employees, or
otherwise take any action that would result in a transfer of
investment control to employees, until after December 1,
2006, thus preventing the sale of these shares prior to such
date. After the date of such transfer of investment control to
employees, and after the effective date of a registration
statement on
Form S-8 under the
Securities Act which we expect to file prior to such date to
register all of the 834,565 shares of common stock
distributed by the Employee Stock Ownership Plan, such shares
will be generally available for resale in the public market,
except for the 73,009 shares of common stock held by
executive officers that will be subject to the
lock-up agreements
described below.
Lock-Up Agreements
All directors, executive officers, and significant stockholders
other than the Employee Stock Ownership Plan have entered into
lock-up agreements
under which they have agreed not to directly or indirectly
transfer, dispose of, or hedge any shares of our common stock,
or securities convertible into or exchangeable for shares of our
common stock until a date that is at least 90 days after
the date of this prospectus. Transfers or dispositions can be
made sooner:
|
|
|
|
|
by gift, will or intestate succession to immediate family
members; and |
|
|
|
to any trust for the direct or indirect benefit of the
transferor or his or her immediate family; |
71
provided in each case that the recipient of those shares agrees
to be bound by the foregoing restrictions for the duration of
the lock-up period. In
addition, transfers or dispositions can be made sooner with the
prior written consent of the underwriters.
In addition, we have agreed that, without the prior written
consent of the underwriters, we will not, directly or
indirectly, offer, sell or dispose of, or enter into any swap or
derivatives transaction with respect to, any shares of our
common stock, any security convertible into or exchangeable for
shares of our common stock until a date that is at least
90 days after the date of this prospectus. In addition, we
have agreed not to cause the Employee Stock Ownership Plan to
transfer investment control over shares of our common stock to
employees until after December 1, 2006, thus preventing the
sale of these shares prior to such date. Our agreement with the
underwriters provides, however, that we may, without such
consent:
|
|
|
|
|
grant options pursuant to our currently existing stock plans. |
Rule 144
In general, under Rule 144 as currently in effect, a person
who has beneficially owned shares of our common stock for at
least one year, including an affiliate, would be entitled to
sell in brokers transactions or to market
makers, within any three-month period, a number of shares that
does not exceed the greater of:
|
|
|
|
|
1% of the number of shares of our common stock then outstanding,
which will equal approximately 226,553 shares immediately
after this offering; or |
|
|
|
the average weekly trading volume in our common stock on the
Nasdaq Global Market during the four calendar weeks preceding
the filing of a notice on Form 144 with respect to such
sale. |
Sales under Rule 144 are generally subject to the
availability of current public information about us.
Rule 144(k)
Under Rule 144(k), a person who is not deemed to have been
an affiliate of ours at any time during the 90 days
preceding a sale, and who has beneficially owned the shares
proposed to be sold for at least two years, is entitled to sell
such shares without having to comply with the manner of sale,
public information, volume limitation or notice filing
provisions of Rule 144. Therefore, unless otherwise
restricted, 144(k) shares may be sold immediately
upon the completion of this offering.
Rule 701
In general, under Rule 701, any of our employees,
directors, officers, consultants or advisors who before
March 14, 2006 purchased shares from us in connection with
a compensatory stock or option plan or other written agreement,
or who purchased shares from us after that date upon the
exercise of options granted before that date, are eligible to
resell such shares in reliance on Rule 144.
Registration Rights
Upon completion of this offering, the holders of at least
10,641,535 shares of our common stock will be eligible to
certain rights with respect to the registration of such shares
under the Securities Act. See Description of Capital
Stock Registration Rights. Upon the
effectiveness of a registration statement covering these shares,
the shares would become freely tradable.
72
UNDERWRITING
We and the selling stockholders are offering the shares of
common stock described in this prospectus through a number of
underwriters. Banc of America Securities LLC, Lehman Brothers
Inc. and Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. are acting as joint
book-running managers for this offering and as representatives
for the underwriters listed below. Under the underwriting
agreement, which is filed as an exhibit to the registration
statement relating to this prospectus, each of the underwriters
named below, has agreed to purchase in the offering the number
of shares of common stock shown opposite its name below:
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriters |
|
Number of Shares | |
|
|
| |
Banc of America Securities LLC
|
|
|
1,925,000 |
|
Lehman Brothers Inc.
|
|
|
1,650,000 |
|
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
|
|
|
1,100,000 |
|
A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc.
|
|
|
412,500 |
|
Canaccord Adams Inc.
|
|
|
412,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
5,500,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
The underwriting agreement provides that the underwriters
obligations to purchase shares of common stock depend on the
satisfaction of the conditions contained in the underwriting
agreement, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the obligation to purchase all of the shares of common stock
offered hereby (other than shares of common stock covered by the
option to purchase additional shares as described below) if any
of the shares is purchased; |
|
|
|
the representations and warranties made by us and the selling
stockholders to the underwriters are true; |
|
|
|
there is no material change in the financial markets; and |
|
|
|
we and the selling stockholders deliver customary closing
documents to the underwriters. |
Option to Purchase Additional Shares
We have granted the underwriters an option exercisable for
30 days after the date of the underwriting agreement, to
purchase, from time to time, in whole or in part, up to an
aggregate of 825,000 shares at the public offering price
less underwriting discounts and commissions. This option may be
exercised if the underwriters sell more than
5,500,000 shares in connection with this offering. To the
extent that this option is exercised, each underwriter will be
obligated, subject to certain conditions, to purchase its pro
rata portion of these additional shares based on the
underwriters percentage underwriting commitment in the
offering as indicated in the table at the beginning of this
Underwriting section.
Commissions and Expenses
The following table summarizes the underwriting discounts that
we and the selling stockholders will pay. These amounts are
shown assuming both no exercise and full exercise of the
underwriters option to purchase additional shares. The
underwriting fee is the difference between the public offering
price and the amount the underwriters pay to purchase the shares
from the selling stockholders and us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
Per | |
|
| |
|
|
Share | |
|
No Exercise | |
|
Full Exercise | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Paid by Eagle Test
|
|
$ |
0.9075 |
|
|
$ |
1,815,000 |
|
|
$ |
2,563,688 |
|
Paid by the selling stockholders
|
|
$ |
0.9075 |
|
|
$ |
3,176,250 |
|
|
$ |
3,176,250 |
|
The underwriters have advised us that they propose to offer the
shares of common stock directly to the public at the public
offering price presented on the cover page of this prospectus,
and to selected dealers, who
73
may include the underwriters, at the public offering price less
a selling concession not in excess of $0.5445 per share.
After the offering, the underwriters may change the offering
price and other selling terms.
We estimate that the total expenses of this offering, including
registration, filing and listing fees, printing fees and legal
and accounting expenses, but excluding underwriting discounts,
will be approximately $700,000. We will pay all costs and
expenses of this offering, including expenses of the selling
stockholders pursuant to the registration rights agreement
described under Description of Capital Stock
Registration Rights.
Lock-Up Agreements
We, all of our directors and executive officers, and significant
holders of our outstanding stock other than the Employee Stock
Ownership Plan have agreed that, without the prior written
consent of Banc of America Securities LLC and Lehman Brothers
Inc., we and they will not directly or indirectly, sell, offer,
contract or grant any option to sell (including without
limitation any short sale), pledge, swap, hedge, transfer,
establish an open put equivalent position, or otherwise dispose
of any shares of common stock, options or warrants to acquire
shares of common stock, or securities exchangeable or
exercisable for or convertible into shares of our common stock,
or publicly announce an intention to do any of the foregoing,
for a period of 90 days from the date of this prospectus
other than permitted transfers or in connection with this
offering and shares issued pursuant to employee benefit plans,
qualified stock option plans or other employee compensation
plans or pursuant to the exercise of currently outstanding
options, warrants or rights. We have also agreed not to file or
cause to be filed a registration statement with respect to the
registration of shares of common stock or securities
convertible, exercisable or exchangable into common stock,
during this 90-day period, other than any registration statement
on Form S-8.
The Employee Stock Ownership Plan is able to sell or distribute
its shares of our common stock under certain circumstances. We
currently anticipate that the Employee Stock Ownership Plan will
distribute 834,565 shares of our common stock to employees,
to be held in individual self-directed accounts. Other than this
anticipated distribution, we have agreed not to cause the
disposition of any shares of our common stock currently held by
the Employee Stock Ownership Plan prior to the date that is
90 days after the date of this prospectus, without the
prior written consent of the underwriters. In addition, we have
agreed not to cause the Employee Stock Ownership Plan or its
successor to transfer investment control over 834,565 shares of
our common stock to employees, or otherwise take any action that
would result in a transfer of investment control to employees,
until after December 1, 2006, thus preventing the sale of
these shares prior to such date. After the date of such transfer
of investment control to employees, and after the effective date
of a registration statement on Form S-8 under the
Securities Act which we expect to file prior to such date to
register these shares, such shares will be generally available
for resale in the public market, except for 73,009 shares of
common stock held by executive officers that will be subject to
the lock-up agreements described above.
The 90-day restricted period described in the preceding two
paragraphs will be extended if:
|
|
|
|
|
during the last 17 days of the 90-day restricted period we
issue an earnings release or announce material news or a
material event relating to us occurs; or |
|
|
|
prior to the expiration of the 90-day restricted period, we
announce that we will release earnings results during the 16-day
period beginning on the last day of the 90-day period, |
in which case the restrictions described in the preceding
paragraph will continue to apply until the expiration of the
18-day period beginning
on the issuance of the earnings release or the occurrence of the
material news or material event.
Banc of America Securities LLC and Lehman Brothers Inc., in
their sole discretion, may release the common stock and other
securities subject to the lock-up agreements described above in
whole or in part at any time with or without notice. When
determining whether or not to release common stock and other
securities from lock-up
agreements, Banc of America Securities LLC and Lehman Brothers
Inc. will consider, among other factors, the holders
reasons for requesting the release, the number of shares of
common stock and other securities for which the release is being
requested and market conditions at the time.
Indemnification
We have agreed to indemnify the underwriters against liabilities
relating to the offering, including liabilities under the
Securities Act and liabilities arising from breaches of the
representations and warranties contained in the underwriting
agreement, and to contribute to payments that the underwriters
may be required to make for these liabilities.
74
Stabilization, Short Positions and Penalty Bids
The underwriters may engage in stabilizing transactions, short
sales, syndicate covering transactions, and penalty bids or
purchases for the purpose of pegging, fixing or maintaining the
price of our common stock, in accordance with Regulation M
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934:
|
|
|
|
|
A short position involves sales by the underwriters of shares in
excess of the number of shares the underwriters are obligated to
purchase, which creates a syndicate short position. The short
position may be either a covered short position or a naked short
position. In a covered short position, the number of shares
involved in the sales by the underwriters is not greater than
the number of shares that they may purchase by exercising their
option to purchase additional shares. In a naked short position,
the number of shares involved is greater than the number of
shares in their option to purchase additional shares. The
underwriters may close out any short position by either
exercising their option to purchase additional shares and/or
purchasing shares in the open market. |
|
|
|
Stabilizing transactions permit bids to purchase common stock so
long as the stabilizing bids do not exceed a specified maximum. |
|
|
|
Syndicate covering transactions involve purchases of the common
stock in the open market after the distribution has been
completed in order to cover syndicate short positions. In
determining the source of shares to close out the short
position, the underwriters will consider, among other things,
the price of shares available for purchase in the open market as
compared to the price at which they may purchase shares through
their option to purchase additional shares. If the underwriters
sell more shares than could be covered by their option to
purchase additional shares, creating a naked short position, the
position can only be closed out by buying shares in the open
market. A naked short position is more likely to be created if
the underwriters are concerned that there could be downward
pressure on the price of the shares in the open market after
pricing that could adversely affect investors who purchase in
the offering. |
|
|
|
Penalty bids permit the underwriters to reclaim a selling
concession from a syndicate member when the common stock
originally sold by the syndicate member is purchased in a
stabilizing or syndicate covering transaction to cover syndicate
short positions. |
These stabilizing transactions, syndicate covering transactions
and penalty bids may raise or maintain the market price of our
common stock or prevent or slow a decline in the market price of
our common stock. As a result, the price of our common stock may
be higher than the price that might otherwise exist in the open
market. These transactions may be effected on the Nasdaq
National Market or otherwise and, if commenced, may be
discontinued at any time.
Neither we nor any of the underwriters makes any representation
or prediction as to the direction or magnitude of any effect
that the transactions described above may have on the price of
our common stock. In addition, neither we nor the underwriters
makes any representation that the underwriters will engage in
these stabilizing transactions or that any transaction, once
commenced, will not be discontinued without notice.
Stamp Taxes
If you purchase shares of common stock offered in this
prospectus, you may be required to pay stamp taxes and other
charges under the laws and practices of the country of purchase,
in addition to the offering price listed on the cover page of
this prospectus.
Electronic Distribution
A prospectus in electronic format may be made available on
Internet sites or through other online services maintained by
one or more of the underwriters and/or selling group members
participating in this offering, or by their affiliates. In those
cases, prospective investors may view offering terms online and,
depending upon the particular underwriter or selling group
member, prospective investors may be allowed to place orders
online. The underwriters may agree with us to allocate a
specific number of shares for sale to
75
online brokerage account holders. Any such allocation for online
distributions will be made by the underwriters on the same basis
as other allocations.
Other than the prospectus in electronic format, information
contained in any other web site maintained by an underwriter or
selling group member is not part of this prospectus or the
registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part,
has not been approved and/or endorsed by us and should not be
relied on by investors in deciding whether to purchase any
shares of common stock. The underwriters and selling group
members are not responsible for information contained in web
sites that they do not maintain.
European Economic Area
Each underwriter intends to comply with all applicable laws and
regulations in each jurisdiction in which it acquires, offers,
sells or delivers shares of our common stock or has in its
possession or distributes this prospectus or any other material.
In relation to each Member State of the European Economic Area
which has implemented the Prospectus Directive, which we refer
to as a Relevant Member State, with effect from and including
the date on which the Prospectus Directive is implemented in
that Relevant Member State, an offer of shares of our common
stock to the public may not be made in that Relevant Member
State prior to the publication of a prospectus in relation to
the shares which has been approved by the competent authority in
that Relevant Member State or, where appropriate, approved in
another Relevant Member State and notified to the competent
authority in that Relevant Member State, all in accordance with
the Prospectus Directive, except that, with effect from and
including the date of implementation of the Prospectus Directive
by a Relevant Member State, an offer of shares to the public in
that Relevant Member State may be made at any time:
|
|
|
(a) to legal entities which are authorised or regulated to
operate in the financial markets or, if not so authorised or
regulated, whose corporate purpose is solely to invest in
securities; |
|
|
(b) to any legal entity which has two or more of
(1) an average of at least 250 employees during the last
financial year; (2) a total balance sheet of more than
43,000,000 and
(3) an annual net turnover of more than
50,000,000, as
shown in its last annual or consolidated accounts; or |
|
|
(c) in any other circumstances which do not require the
publication by us of a prospectus pursuant to Article 3 of
the Prospectus Directive. |
For the purposes of this provision, the expression an
offer of shares to the public in relation to any
securities in any Relevant Member State means the communication
in any form and by any means of sufficient information on the
terms of the offer and the securities to be offered so as to
enable an investor to decide to purchase or subscribe the
securities, as the same may be varied in that Member State by
any measure implementing the Prospectus Directive in that Member
State and the expression Prospectus Directive means Directive
2003/71/ EC and includes any relevant implementing measure in
each Relevant Member State.
No prospectus (including any amendment, supplement or
replacement thereto) has been prepared in connection with the
offering of the shares our common stock that has been approved
by the Autorité des marchés financiers or by the
competent authority of another State that is a contracting party
to the Agreement on the European Economic Area and notified to
the Autorité des marchés financiers; no shares have
been offered or sold and will be offered or sold, directly or
indirectly, to the public in France except to investors we refer
to as Permitted Investors consisting of persons licensed to
provide the investment service of portfolio management for the
account of third parties, qualified investors (investisseurs
qualifiés) acting for their own account and/or investors
belonging to a limited circle of investors (cercle restreint
dinvestisseurs) acting for their own account, with
qualified investors and limited circle of
investors having the meaning ascribed to them in
Articles L. 411-2, D. 411-1, D. 411-2, D. 734-1, D. 744-1,
D. 754-1 and D. 764-1 of the French Code Monétaire et
Financier and applicable regulations thereunder; none of this
prospectus or any other materials related to the offering or
information contained therein relating to our common stock has
been released, issued or distributed to the public in France
except to Permitted Investors; and the direct or indirect resale
to the public in France of any shares acquired by any Permitted
Investors may be made only as
76
provided by Articles L. 411-1, L. 411-2, L. 412-1 and L.
621-8 to L. 621-8-3 of the French Code Monétaire et
Financier and applicable regulations thereunder.
Each underwriter acknowledges and agrees that:
|
|
|
(i) it has not offered or sold and will not offer or sell
shares of our common stock other than to persons whose ordinary
activities involve them in acquiring, holding, managing or
disposing of investments (as principal or as agent) for the
purposes of their businesses or who it is reasonable to expect
will acquire, hold, manage or dispose of investments (as
principal or agent) for the purposes of their businesses where
the issue of the shares would otherwise constitute a
contravention of Section 19 of the Financial Services and
Markets Act 2000, or the FSMA, by the Issuer; |
|
|
(ii) it has only communicated or caused to be communicated
and will only communicate or cause to be communicated an
invitation or inducement to engage in investment activity
(within the meaning of Section 21 of the FSMA) received by
it in connection with the issue or sale of the shares in
circumstances in which Section 21(1) of the FSMA does not
apply to us; and |
|
|
(iii) it has complied and will comply with all applicable
provisions of the FSMA with respect to anything done by it in
relation to the shares in, from or otherwise involving the
United Kingdom. |
This document is only being distributed to and is only directed
at the following, which we collectively refer to as the relevant
persons: (i) persons who are outside the United Kingdom or
(ii) to investment professionals falling within
Article 19(5) of the Financial Services and Markets Act
2000 (Financial Promotion) Order 2005, which we refer to as the
Order or (iii) high net worth entities, and other persons
to whom it may lawfully be communicated, falling within
Article 49(2)(a) to (d) of the Order. The shares of
our common stock are only available to, and any invitation,
offer or agreement to subscribe, purchase or otherwise acquire
such shares will be engaged in only with, relevant persons. Any
person who is not a relevant person should not act or rely on
this document or any of its contents.
The offering of shares of our common stock has not been cleared
by the Italian Securities Exchange Commission (Commissione
Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa, or CONSOB) pursuant to
Italian securities legislation and, accordingly, has represented
and agreed that our common stock may not and will not be
offered, sold or delivered, nor may or will copies of this
prospectus or any other documents relating to our common stock
be distributed in Italy, except (i) to professional
investors (operatori qualificati), as defined in
Article 31, second paragraph, of CONSOB
Regulation No. 11522 of July 1, 1998, as amended,
which we refer to as Regulation No. 11522, or
(ii) in other circumstances which are exempted from the
rules on solicitation of investments pursuant to
Article 100 of Legislative Decree No. 58 of
February 24, 1998, which we refer to as the Financial
Service Act and Article 33, first paragraph, of CONSOB
Regulation No. 11971 of May 14, 1999, as amended.
Any offer, sale or delivery of shares of our common stock or
distribution of copies of the this prospectus or any other
document relating to the shares in Italy may and will be
effected in accordance with all Italian securities, tax,
exchange control and other applicable laws and regulations, and,
in particular, will be: (i) made by an investment firm,
bank or financial intermediary permitted to conduct such
activities in Italy in accordance with the Financial Services
Act, Legislative Decree No. 385 of September 1, 1993,
as amended, which we refer to as the Italian Banking Law,
Regulation No. 11522, and any other applicable laws
and regulations; (ii) in compliance with Article 129
of the Italian Banking Law and the implementing guidelines of
the Bank of Italy; and (iii) in compliance with any other
applicable notification requirement or limitation which may be
imposed by CONSOB or the Bank of Italy.
Any investor purchasing shares of our common stock in the
offering is solely responsible for ensuring that any offer or
resale of the shares it purchased in the offering occurs in
compliance with applicable laws and regulations.
This prospectus and the information contained therein are
intended only for the use of its recipient and, unless in
circumstances which are exempted from the rules on solicitation
of investments pursuant to Article 100 of the Financial
Service Act and Article 33, first paragraph, of CONSOB
Regulation No. 11971
77
of May 14, 1999, as amended, is not to be distributed, for
any reason, to any third party resident or located in Italy. No
person resident or located in Italy other than the original
recipients of this document may rely on it or its content.
Italy has only partially implemented the Prospectus Directive,
the provisions under the heading European Economic
Area above shall apply with respect to Italy only to the
extent that the relevant provisions of the Prospectus Directive
have already been implemented in Italy.
Insofar as the requirements above are based on laws which are
superseded at any time pursuant to the implementation of the
Prospectus Directive, such requirements shall be replaced by the
applicable requirements under the Prospectus Directive
Relationships
The underwriters may in the future perform investment banking
and advisory services for us from time to time for which they
may in the future receive customary fees and expenses. The
underwriters may, from time to time, engage in transactions with
or perform services for us in the ordinary course of their
business. We currently have no agreements or commitments with
respect to any such transactions or services.
78
LEGAL MATTERS
Goodwin Procter
LLP, Boston,
Massachusetts has passed upon the validity of the shares of
common stock offered hereby. Legal matters relating to this
offering will be passed upon for the underwriters by Wilson
Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C.
EXPERTS
The consolidated financial statements and schedule of Eagle Test
Systems, Inc. and its subsidiaries as of September 30, 2005
and 2004, and for each of the three years in the period ended
September 30, 2005, appearing in this prospectus and the
registration statement have been audited by Ernst &
Young LLP, independent registered public accounting firm, as set
forth in their reports thereon appearing elsewhere herein, and
are included in reliance upon such reports given on the
authority of such firm as experts in accounting and auditing.
WHERE YOU CAN FIND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
We have filed with the SEC a registration statement on
Form S-1 under the
Securities Act with respect to the shares of common stock we and
the selling stockholder are offering by this prospectus. This
prospectus does not contain all of the information included in
the registration statement. For further information pertaining
to us and our common stock, you should refer to the registration
statement and to its exhibits. Whenever we make reference in
this prospectus to any of our contracts, agreements or other
documents, the references are not necessarily complete, and you
should refer to the exhibits attached to the registration
statement for copies of the actual contract, agreement or other
document.
We are subject to the informational requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and file annual, quarterly and
current reports, proxy statements and other information with the
SEC. You can read our SEC filings, including the registration
statement, over the Internet at the SECs website at
www.sec.gov. You may also read and copy any document we file
with the SEC at its public reference facility at
100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549.
You may also obtain copies of the documents at prescribed rates
by writing to the Public Reference Section of the SEC at 100 F
Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC
at 1-800-SEC-0330 for
further information on the operation of the public reference
facilities.
79
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unaudited Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-2 |
|
|
|
|
|
F-3 |
|
|
|
|
|
F-4 |
|
|
|
|
|
F-5 |
|
Audited Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FF-1 |
|
|
|
|
|
FF-2 |
|
|
|
|
|
FF-3 |
|
|
|
|
|
FF-4 |
|
|
|
|
|
FF-5 |
|
|
|
|
|
FF-6 |
|
F-1
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
ASSETS |
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
9,976 |
|
|
$ |
37,914 |
|
|
Marketable securities
|
|
|
12,700 |
|
|
|
25,700 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $1,240 and $1,393
|
|
|
9,202 |
|
|
|
19,897 |
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
17,707 |
|
|
|
22,601 |
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
3,426 |
|
|
|
5,969 |
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
1,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
53,559 |
|
|
|
113,957 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
12,135 |
|
|
|
11,723 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
477 |
|
|
|
692 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
66,171 |
|
|
$ |
126,372 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (DEFICIT) |
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$ |
1,523 |
|
|
$ |
7,901 |
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
3,419 |
|
|
|
8,606 |
|
|
Accrued compensation and related liabilities
|
|
|
3,103 |
|
|
|
4,414 |
|
|
Accrued income taxes
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
4,004 |
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
2,881 |
|
|
|
2,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
11,942 |
|
|
|
28,055 |
|
Long-term liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, less current portion
|
|
|
29,484 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
Redeemable warrants
|
|
|
2,667 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
1,272 |
|
|
|
1,110 |
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
429 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term liabilities
|
|
|
33,816 |
|
|
|
1,987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A convertible preferred stock, par value
$0.01 per share, 3,437 shares authorized and
3,436 shares issued as of September 30, 2005, no
shares authorized, issued, or outstanding as of June 30,
2006
|
|
|
65,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity (deficit):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share no shares
authorized, issued or outstanding as of September 30, 2005
and 10,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued or
outstanding as of June 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share, 15,495,325 and
90,000,000 shares authorized as of September 30, 2005
and June 30, 2006, respectively; 5,396,248 and
20,655,283 shares outstanding as of September 30, 2005
and June 30, 2006, respectively
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
Additional paid in capital
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
138,899 |
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(44,665 |
) |
|
|
(42,776 |
) |
|
Deferred stock compensation expense
|
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
|
(44,587 |
) |
|
|
96,330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
$ |
66,171 |
|
|
$ |
126,372 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
F-2
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF NET INCOME
(LOSS) AND
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, | |
|
Nine Months Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
|
(Unaudited) | |
Net revenue
|
|
$ |
6,163 |
|
|
$ |
36,779 |
|
|
$ |
34,954 |
|
|
$ |
87,791 |
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
3,293 |
|
|
|
12,256 |
|
|
|
16,000 |
|
|
|
28,605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
2,870 |
|
|
|
24,523 |
|
|
|
18,954 |
|
|
|
59,186 |
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
4,971 |
|
|
|
8,014 |
|
|
|
14,630 |
|
|
|
21,259 |
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
1,701 |
|
|
|
2,088 |
|
|
|
5,800 |
|
|
|
6,555 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
(3,802 |
) |
|
|
14,421 |
|
|
|
(1,476 |
) |
|
|
31,372 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
982 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
2,928 |
|
|
|
3,481 |
|
Other (income) and expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from marketable securities
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
(615 |
) |
|
|
(381 |
) |
|
|
(1,097 |
) |
|
Investment impairments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(384 |
) |
|
|
5,466 |
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
(288 |
) |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before taxes
|
|
|
(4,756 |
) |
|
|
14,932 |
|
|
|
(3,351 |
) |
|
|
23,477 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
(3,826 |
) |
|
|
5,260 |
|
|
|
(3,427 |
) |
|
|
10,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(930 |
) |
|
$ |
9,672 |
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
13,319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share, basic
|
|
$ |
(0.17 |
) |
|
$ |
0.47 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share, diluted
|
|
$ |
(0.17 |
) |
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
|
$ |
(0.11 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding, basic
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
20,651,934 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
11,782,483 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
20,937,003 |
|
|
|
14,512,892 |
|
|
|
16,973,554 |
|
Comprehensive income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(930 |
) |
|
$ |
9,672 |
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
13,319 |
|
|
Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of taxes
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(873 |
) |
|
$ |
9,672 |
|
|
$ |
185 |
|
|
$ |
13,319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) available to common stockholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(930 |
) |
|
$ |
9,672 |
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
13,319 |
|
Retained earnings adjustment for redemption of redeemable
preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,430 |
) |
Net income allocated to preferred stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) available to common stockholders
|
|
$ |
(930 |
) |
|
$ |
9,672 |
|
|
$ |
29 |
|
|
$ |
1,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
F-3
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended | |
|
|
June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Unaudited) | |
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
13,319 |
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
(used in) operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,443 |
|
|
|
2,253 |
|
|
|
Investment impairments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
Realized (gain) loss on sale of marketable securities
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
(246 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accretion of discount and redemption premium on long-term debt
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
1,752 |
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
(384 |
) |
|
|
5,466 |
|
|
|
Non cash compensation related to stock options
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
285 |
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
3,495 |
|
|
|
(2,705 |
) |
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
15,480 |
|
|
|
(10,695 |
) |
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
3,762 |
|
|
|
(4,894 |
) |
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
(387 |
) |
|
|
(1,328 |
) |
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(239 |
) |
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(5,175 |
) |
|
|
6,378 |
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
(9,423 |
) |
|
|
5,187 |
|
|
|
|
Accrued compensation and related liabilities
|
|
|
(4,369 |
) |
|
|
1,311 |
|
|
|
|
Accrued income taxes
|
|
|
(6,694 |
) |
|
|
3,237 |
|
|
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
(1,833 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
(4,125 |
) |
|
|
19,377 |
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of marketable securities
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(13,000 |
) |
|
Sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
659 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(5,654 |
) |
|
|
(1,840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(5,021 |
) |
|
|
(14,840 |
) |
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,595 |
) |
|
Payments of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
(184 |
) |
|
Redemption of redeemable preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32,500 |
) |
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
23,401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(9,228 |
) |
|
|
27,938 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
17,303 |
|
|
|
9,976 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$ |
8,075 |
|
|
$ |
37,914 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed
consolidated financial statements.
F-4
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
(Unaudited)
Eagle Test Systems, Inc. (the Company) designs, manufactures,
sells, and services automated test equipment (ATE) for the
semiconductor industry. The Companys test systems test
analog, mixed-signal, and RF (Radio Frequency) semiconductor
devices. Semiconductor designers and manufacturers worldwide use
semiconductor test systems to test devices at different stages
during the manufacturing process. These tested devices are
incorporated into a wide range of products, including digital
cameras, MP3 players, cellular telephones, video/multimedia
products, automotive electronics, computer peripherals, and
notebook and desktop computers. The Company is headquartered in
Buffalo Grove, Illinois, where the Company develops and
manufactures its test systems. The Company operates in one
industry segment: the design, manufacture and marketing of
automated test equipment. The Company also maintains various
offices worldwide for sales, service and research to support its
customer base directly. The operations of, and net investment
in, foreign subsidiaries are not material.
|
|
2. |
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies |
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly
owned foreign subsidiaries. All significant intercompany
transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements have been prepared by the Company in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
for interim financial information and the instructions to
Form 10-Q and
Rule 10-01 of
Regulation S-X.
Accordingly, the accompanying condensed statements do not
include all of the information and footnotes required by
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
for complete financial statements. The accompanying unaudited
condensed consolidated financial information should be read in
conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements
and notes thereto for the year ended September 30, 2005,
included in the Companys Prospectus as part of the
Registration Statement on
Form S-1- File
No. 333-130521,
filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission
effective on March 8, 2006.
|
|
|
Preparation of Financial Statements and Use of
Estimates |
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements have been prepared by the Company and reflect all
adjustments, which, in the opinion of management, are necessary
for the fair statement of the results. The preparation of
consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the
reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of
contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the
financial statements and the reported amounts of income and
expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results can differ
from those estimates.
|
|
|
Unaudited Interim Results |
The accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of
June 30, 2006, and the condensed consolidated statements of
net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss) and condensed
consolidated statements of cash flows for the three and nine
months ended June 30, 2005 and 2006 are unaudited. The
unaudited interim condensed financial statements have been
prepared on the same basis as the annual financial statements
and, in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments,
which include only normal recurring adjustments, necessary to
present fairly the Companys financial position and results
of operations
F-5
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
and cash flows for the three and nine months ended June 30,
2005 and 2006. The financial data and other information
disclosed in these notes to financial statements related to the
three and nine month periods are unaudited. The results for the
three and nine months ended June 30, 2006 are not
necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the
year ending September 30, 2006, or for any other interim
period or for any other future year.
Effective October 1, 2005, the Company adopted Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123R
Share Based Payment which was finalized in December
2004 and amended SFAS No. 123 Accounting for
Stock Based Compensation. Accordingly, the Company records
compensation expense using the fair value of options granted
over the vesting service period on a straight-line basis
including those options that are subject to graded vesting.
Under SFAS 123R the Company uses the Black Scholes Option
Pricing Model to determine the fair value of the options
granted. This model uses such factors as the market price of the
underlying shares at date of issuance, exercise price of the
option, the expected term of the option, which is approximately
six years, utilizing the simplified method as set forth in Staff
Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 107, a risk free
interest rate range of approximately 4.5% to 4.8% and an
expected volatility rate range of approximately 54% to 56% based
upon a peer group of companies given no historical data for the
Companys own stock. The resulting fair value of $1,822 for
options granted thus far in fiscal 2006 will be amortized to
expense as vesting occurs, which is over approximately four
years. Since we used the minimum value method of measuring
equity share options for pro forma disclosure purposes under
SFAS No. 123, implementation of 123R applies
prospectively to new awards after October 1, 2005. Expense
recognized as a result of adoption for the three and nine months
ended June 30, 2006 was $104 ($101 net of taxes) or
$0.00 per basic and diluted share and $285 ($247 net
of taxes) or $0.02 per basic and $0.01 per diluted
share, respectively.
Prior to October 1, 2005, the Company accounted for stock
options issued to employees under the Companys stock
option plan using the intrinsic value method in accordance with
Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion
No. 25,Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees and
generally recognized no expense .The Company adopted the
disclosure-only provision of SFAS No. 123, for options
issued to employees and directors for periods prior to
October 1, 2005.
Inventories consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Raw materials
|
|
$ |
7,683 |
|
|
$ |
6,790 |
|
Work-in-process
|
|
|
1,865 |
|
|
|
7,698 |
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
7,434 |
|
|
|
5,965 |
|
Inventory at customers under purchase orders
|
|
|
725 |
|
|
|
2,148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
17,707 |
|
|
$ |
22,601 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys policy is to establish inventory reserves
when conditions exist that suggest inventory may be in excess of
anticipated demand or is obsolete based upon assumptions about
future demand for products or market conditions. The Company
regularly evaluates the ability to realize the value of its
inventory based on a combination of factors including the
following: forecasted sales or usage, estimated product
end-of-life dates,
estimated current and future market value and new product
introductions. Purchasing and alternative usage options are also
explored to mitigate obsolete inventory exposure. When recorded,
reserves are intended to reduce the carrying value of inventory
to its net realizable value. Inventory
F-6
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
of $17,707 is stated net of inventory reserves of $9,082 as of
September 30, 2005. Inventory of $22,601 is stated net of
inventory reserves of $8,253 as of June 30, 2006. If actual
demand for products deteriorates or market conditions are less
favorable than those the Company projects, additional inventory
reserves may be required.
|
|
4. |
Initial Public Offering |
On March 14, 2006, the Company completed an initial public
offering to sell 6,130,000 shares of common stock to the
public at an offering price of $15.50 per share. The
initial public offering resulted in net proceeds of
$86.7 million. Of the net proceeds, $30.6 million was
used to redeem the Companys senior subordinated debt
outstanding and $32.5 million was used to redeem the
Companys redeemable preferred stock outstanding just prior
to the offering. The Company retained the remaining
$23.6 million in net proceeds for working capital and
general corporate purposes. The following summarizes the impacts
the initial public offering had on the Companys capital
structure, financial position and results of operations.
On March 14, 2006, in connection with the Companys
initial public offering, a Second Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation was filed with the State of
Delaware that was adopted by the stockholders prior to the
initial public offering that implemented the following changes
to the Companys capital stock:
Change in Authorized Shares The Companys
Articles of Incorporation were amended to increase the
authorized capital stock of the Company from
15,502,199 shares of capital stock consisting of:
(i) 15,495,325 shares of common stock, par value
$0.01 per share; (ii) 3,437 shares of
Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, par value
$0.01 per share (Series A Convertible Preferred
Stock); and (iii) 3,437 shares of Redeemable Preferred
Stock, par value $0.01 per share (Redeemable Preferred
Stock) to 100,000,000 shares of capital stock consisting of
(i) 90,000,000 shares of common stock, par value
$0.01 per share, and (ii) 10,000,000 shares of
undesignated preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share.
In connection with the initial public offering,
3,436 shares of Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
held by investment funds managed by TA Associates (collectively,
the Investors) were converted into 8,590,247 shares of
common stock and 3,436 shares of Redeemable Preferred
Stock. The conversion resulted in $43,930 being reclassified to
the capital accounts of the Company based upon a valuation
performed at the time of issuance of the Series A
Convertible Preferred Stock. As discussed below, the Redeemable
Preferred Stock was redeemed with a portion of the proceeds from
the initial public offering.
In addition, prior to the initial public offering, the Investors
exercised $0.01 per share common stock warrants for
525,040 shares of common stock resulting from the
conversion of the Senior Subordinated Convertible Notes.
At June 30, 2006, the Company has reserved 3,559,500
unissued shares of its common stock for possible issuance under
the Companys 2003 Stock Option and Grant Plan and 2006
Stock Option and Incentive Plan.
|
|
|
Series A Convertible Preferred Stock/ Redeemable
Preferred Stock |
Upon the conversion of all of the Series A Convertible
Preferred Stock, a portion of the proceeds from the initial
public offering was used to redeem all of the shares of the
Redeemable Preferred Stock for $32,500. The difference between
the fair market value of the Redeemable Preferred Stock at date
of issuance
F-7
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
of $21,070 and the redemption price of $32,500, or $11,430, was
charged to retained earnings in accordance with
EITF 98-5 Accounting for Convertible
Securities with Beneficial Conversion Features or Contingently
Adjustable Conversion Ratios.
|
|
|
Senior Subordinated Convertible Notes/ Senior Subordinated
Notes |
In connection with the completion of the Companys initial
public offering on March 14, 2006, the 12% Senior
Subordinated Convertible Notes were converted into $29,995 in
12% Senior Subordinated Notes and 525,040 of $0.01 common
stock warrants. As discussed above the common stock warrants
were exercised by the Investors. The Senior Subordinated Notes
were repurchased from the Investors with a portion of the
proceeds from the initial public offering for $29,995, along
with the payment of a 2% early redemption premium of $600. The
unamortized debt discount of $1,033 from the original issue of
the 12% Senior Subordinated Convertible Notes was charged
to interest expense in March, 2006 in connection with recording
the note conversion and redemption.
Prior to the exercise of the common stock warrants in connection
with the initial public offering, the warrants enabled the
Investors to put the warrants to the Company at fair value at
any time after September 30, 2008. The warrants were
thereby considered liability instruments and recorded at fair
value based upon independent valuations. The change in the value
of the warrants was a decrease of $384 for the nine months ended
June 30, 2005, and an increase of $5,466 for the nine
months ended June 30, 2006, and the changes in the fair
value were recorded in the income statement as other (income)
expense. The warrants were exercised by the Investors on
March 14, 2006 in connection with the Companys
initial public offering and the carrying value of $8,133 was
reclassified to stockholders equity.
Long-term debt consists of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
June 30, | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Senior Subordinated Convertible Notes, net of discount of $1,157
at September 30, 2005
|
|
$ |
28,843 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
|
890 |
|
|
|
706 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
29,733 |
|
|
$ |
706 |
|
Less current portion of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
(249 |
) |
|
|
(258 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
29,484 |
|
|
$ |
448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As discussed above in Note 4, the Senior Subordinated
Convertible Notes converted into Senior Subordinated Notes on
March 14, 2006 and were repurchased from the Investors with
a portion of the proceeds from the initial public offering.
The Company adopted EITF Issue No. 03-6,
Participating Securities and the Two
Class Method under FASB Statement No. 128, Earnings
Per Share from October 1, 2004. The EITF is
applicable for all fiscal periods commencing on or after
March 31, 2004 and requires the use of the two-class method
to compute basic EPS for companies with participating
convertible securities. The Series A Convertible
F-8
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Preferred Stock was converted and the Redeemable Preferred Stock
was redeemed in connection with the Companys initial
public offering and therefore, for periods ended after
March 14, 2006, the two-class computation method is no
longer applicable.
Basic net income per common share is computed by dividing net
income (loss) available to common stockholders by the
weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the
period. Diluted income per common share reflects the maximum
dilution that would have resulted from the assumed exercise of
Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, warrants, and stock
options, as applicable, and is computed by dividing net income
(loss) available to common stockholders by the weighted-average
number of common shares and all dilutive securities outstanding
unless the computation is anti-dilutive.
A reconciliation between basic and diluted earnings per share
(EPS) is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, | |
|
Nine Months Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(930 |
) |
|
$ |
9,672 |
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
13,319 |
|
Basic EPS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained earnings adjustment for conversion of redeemable
preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,430 |
)* |
|
|
Net income allocated to convertible preferred shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) available to common stockholders
|
|
|
(930 |
) |
|
|
9,672 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
1,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
20,651,934 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
11,782,483 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income (loss) per common share
|
|
$ |
(0.17 |
) |
|
$ |
0.47 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted EPS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend on redeemable preferred stock as converted
|
|
$ |
** |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,234 |
) |
|
$ |
(406 |
) |
|
|
Warrant value adjustment
|
|
|
** |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(384 |
) |
|
|
** |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) available to common stockholders
|
|
$ |
(930 |
) |
|
$ |
9,672 |
|
|
$ |
(1,542 |
) |
|
$ |
1,483 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
20,651,934 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
11,782,483 |
|
|
Plus impact of convertible preferred stock and warrants and
stock options, as applicable
|
|
|
** |
|
|
|
285,069 |
|
|
|
9,116,644 |
|
|
|
5,191,071 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted common shares
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
20,937,003 |
|
|
|
14,512,892 |
|
|
|
16,973,554 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted net income (loss) per common share
|
|
$ |
(0.17 |
) |
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
|
$ |
(0.11 |
) |
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
The difference between the fair market value of the Redeemable
Preferred Stock at date of issue of $21,070 and the redemption
price of $32,500 was charged to retained earnings in March 2006,
when the redemption occurred. This adjustment is used to reduce
net income to arrive at income available to common stockholders
for purposes of calculating earnings per common share in
accordance with EITF |
F-9
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
Topic D-42 The Effect on the Calculation of
Earnings per Share for the Redemption or Induced Conversion of
Preferred Stock. |
|
|
** |
This element of the diluted EPS computation is not applicable
since the impact on the computation would be anti-dilutive. |
We account for income taxes under the asset and liability method
whereby the expected future tax consequences of temporary
differences between the book value and the tax basis of assets
and liabilities are recognized as deferred tax assets and
liabilities, using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in
which the differences are expected to be recognized. The
Companys effective tax rate will vary to the extent items
used to derive book taxable income are not deductible for income
tax purposes. The Companys income tax benefit was
$3.8 million for a 80.4% effective tax rate, and
$3.4 million for a 102.3% effective tax rate for the three
and nine-month periods ended June 30, 2005, respectively.
During the three months ended June 30, 2005, the Company
filed its prior year tax returns and adjusted the current year
tax provision for actual deductions taken in those returns. The
tax effect of the deductions amounted to a $1.6 million tax
benefit and primarily related to additional extraterritorial
income exclusion and state income taxes different than the
amounts originally estimated. The Companys income tax
expense was $5.3 million for a 35.2% effective tax rate,
and $10.2 million for a 43.3% effective tax rate for the
three and nine-month periods ended June 30, 2006,
respectively. The primary reason for the difference in the
effective tax rates for these periods is due to the increase in
value of warrants of $5.5 million in the nine months ended
June 30, 2006, which is not tax deductible. Since the
warrants were exercised by the Investors on March 14, 2006
in connection with the Companys initial public offering,
there was no warrant charge in the three months ended
June 30, 2006.
In June 2006, the FASB issued FIN 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes an interpretation of
FASB Statement No. 109, 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. This Interpretation also provides
guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and
penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and
transition. This Interpretation will become effective for the
Company during the first fiscal quarter of 2008. The Company is
still evaluating the impact of this Interpretation but does not
expect it to have a material impact on its financial condition
or results of operations.
The Company adopted the 2003 Stock Option and Grant Plan and the
2006 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the Plans), which provide
for the issuance of incentive and nonqualified common stock
options to employees, directors, and consultants of the Company.
The Board of Directors has reserved 3,339,500 shares of
common stock to be issued in conjunction with these Plans. The
term of the options shall be no more than 10 years from the
date of grant. Options granted under the Plans generally vest in
periods between one and four years, as determined by the Board
of Directors. During the year ended September 30, 2005 and
for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2006, the
Company issued stock options under the Plans.
F-10
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Companys stock option activity for the nine months
ended June 30, 2006 under the Plans is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
Outstanding | |
|
Average | |
|
|
Options | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Outstanding at September 30, 2005
|
|
|
703,111 |
|
|
$ |
8.29 |
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
10.84 |
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(13,750 |
) |
|
|
6.73 |
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(274,861 |
) |
|
|
8.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at June 30, 2006
|
|
|
764,500 |
|
|
$ |
9.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company adopted SFAS No. 123R effective
October 1, 2005. A summary of the status of the
Companys non-vested stock options issued
post-SFAS 123R implementation, as of June 30, 2006,
and changes for the nine month period ended June 30, 2006,
is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
|
|
Grant-Date | |
Non-Vested Options |
|
Options | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Non-vested at September 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
5.21 |
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(47,639 |
) |
|
|
3.69 |
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested at June 30, 2006
|
|
|
302,361 |
|
|
$ |
5.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2006, there was $1,536 of total unrecognized
compensation costs related to the stock-based compensation
granted under the Plans. This cost is expected to be amortized
over a weighted-average service period of 3.4 years. The
fair value of the related stock-based compensation expense
recorded for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2006
was $104 and $285, respectively.
The following table summarizes information about all stock
options outstanding for the Company as of September 30,
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding | |
|
Options Vested | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
|
Average | |
|
Average | |
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
Number | |
|
Remaining | |
|
Exercise | |
|
Number | |
|
Exercise | |
Exercise Price |
|
Outstanding | |
|
Life | |
|
Price | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
$6.00 - $ 7.00
|
|
|
319,500 |
|
|
|
8.41 |
|
|
$ |
6.32 |
|
|
|
122,833 |
|
|
$ |
6.25 |
|
$8.00 - $10.00
|
|
|
383,611 |
|
|
|
8.83 |
|
|
$ |
9.92 |
|
|
|
132,257 |
|
|
$ |
10.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
703,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
255,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-11
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table summarizes information about all stock
options outstanding for the Company as of June 30, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding | |
|
Options Vested | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
|
Average | |
|
Average | |
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
Number | |
|
Remaining | |
|
Exercise | |
|
Number | |
|
Exercise | |
Exercise Price |
|
Outstanding | |
|
Life | |
|
Price | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
$6.00 - $7.00
|
|
|
309,500 |
|
|
|
8.08 |
|
|
$ |
6.56 |
|
|
|
151,531 |
|
|
$ |
6.45 |
|
$8.00 - $10.00
|
|
|
240,000 |
|
|
|
8.33 |
|
|
$ |
9.46 |
|
|
|
100,208 |
|
|
$ |
9.88 |
|
$11.00 - $13.00
|
|
|
190,000 |
|
|
|
9.64 |
|
|
$ |
12.58 |
|
|
|
24,722 |
|
|
$ |
11.40 |
|
$14.00 - $16.00
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
9.83 |
|
|
$ |
15.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
764,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
276,461 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total intrinsic value of options outstanding and total
options vested as of June 30, 2006 was $3,634 and $1,628,
respectively.
|
|
9. |
Commitments and Contingencies |
The Companys sales agreements indemnify its customers for
any expenses or liabilities resulting from claimed infringements
of patents, trademarks, or copyrights of third parties. The
terms of these indemnification agreements are generally
indefinite after execution of the agreement. The maximum amount
of potential future indemnification is unlimited. However, to
date, the Company has not paid any claims or been required to
defend any lawsuits with respect to any claim.
From time to time, the Company may have certain contingent
liabilities that arise in the ordinary course of its business
activities. The Company accrues contingent liabilities when it
is probable that future expenditures will be made and such
expenditures can be reasonably estimated. In the opinion of
management, there are no pending claims of which the outcome is
expected to result in a material adverse effect on the financial
position, results of operations, or cash flows of the Company.
The Companys systems are sold with warranty provisions
that require the Company to remedy deficiencies in quality or
performance of its products over a period ranging from 12 to
24 months. The policy of the Company is to establish
warranty reserves at the time revenue is recognized at levels
that represent the estimate of costs that will be incurred to
fulfill those warranty requirements.
The following table shows the details of the product warranty
accrual:
Product Warranty Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months | |
|
|
Ended June 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Balance at beginning of period
|
|
$ |
1,271 |
|
|
$ |
563 |
|
|
Warranty expenditures
|
|
|
(1,142 |
) |
|
|
(727 |
) |
|
Provisions for warranty
|
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
$ |
570 |
|
|
$ |
823 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-12
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Eagle Test Systems, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Eagle Test Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
September 30, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated
statements of net income and comprehensive income,
stockholders equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of
the three years in the period ended September 30, 2005.
These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. We were not engaged to perform an
audit of the Companys internal control over financial
reporting. Our audit included consideration of internal control
over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not
for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of
the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, and evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of Eagle Test Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries
at September 30, 2005 and 2004, and the consolidated
results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the
three years in the period ended September 30, 2005 in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
As described in Note 9, the Company adopted new rules
relating to earnings per share calculations in fiscal 2005.
Those rules also required prior year calculations to be restated.
/s/ Ernst & Young
LLP
Chicago, Illinois
November 15, 2005
FF-1
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except shares and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
ASSETS |
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
17,303 |
|
|
$ |
9,976 |
|
|
|
Marketable securities
|
|
|
6,430 |
|
|
|
12,700 |
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowances, of $1,220 and $1,240
|
|
|
23,535 |
|
|
|
9,202 |
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
27,666 |
|
|
|
17,707 |
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
9,703 |
|
|
|
3,426 |
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
84,795 |
|
|
|
53,559 |
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
6,633 |
|
|
|
12,135 |
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
477 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
91,752 |
|
|
$ |
66,171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (DEFICIT) |
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$ |
6,877 |
|
|
$ |
1,523 |
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
18,884 |
|
|
|
3,419 |
|
|
|
Accrued compensation and related liabilities
|
|
|
6,361 |
|
|
|
3,103 |
|
|
|
Accrued income taxes
|
|
|
8,206 |
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
5,191 |
|
|
|
2,881 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
45,519 |
|
|
|
11,942 |
|
|
Long-term liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, less current portion
|
|
|
28,561 |
|
|
|
29,484 |
|
|
|
Redeemable warrants
|
|
|
3,266 |
|
|
|
2,667 |
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
1,272 |
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term liabilities
|
|
|
32,666 |
|
|
|
33,816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A convertible preferred stock, par value
$0.01 per share, 3,437 shares authorized and
3,436 shares issued as of September 30, 2004 and
September 30, 2005
|
|
|
65,000 |
|
|
|
65,000 |
|
|
Stockholders equity (deficit):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share, 15,195,325 and
15,495,325 shares authorized as of September 30, 2004
and 2005, respectively; 5,396,248 outstanding as of
September 30, 2004 and 2005
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
Additional paid in capital
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(52,084 |
) |
|
|
(44,665 |
) |
|
|
Deferred stock compensation expense
|
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
621 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
|
(51,433 |
) |
|
|
(44,587 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
$ |
91,752 |
|
|
$ |
66,171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
FF-2
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF NET INCOME AND COMPREHENSIVE
INCOME
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net revenue
|
|
$ |
55,766 |
|
|
$ |
111,210 |
|
|
$ |
63,477 |
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
20,457 |
|
|
|
37,337 |
|
|
|
26,596 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
35,309 |
|
|
|
73,873 |
|
|
|
36,881 |
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
16,491 |
|
|
|
23,932 |
|
|
|
21,066 |
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
3,113 |
|
|
|
6,051 |
|
|
|
7,883 |
|
|
Write-off of offering expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
15,705 |
|
|
|
42,032 |
|
|
|
7,932 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
3,887 |
|
|
|
3,910 |
|
Other (income) and expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from marketable securities
|
|
|
(502 |
) |
|
|
(438 |
) |
|
|
(2,017 |
) |
|
Investment impairments
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
(599 |
) |
|
Other (income) and expense, net
|
|
|
(152 |
) |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
(275 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes
|
|
|
16,310 |
|
|
|
37,005 |
|
|
|
6,895 |
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
|
6,706 |
|
|
|
14,952 |
|
|
|
(524 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
22,053 |
|
|
$ |
7,419 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share, basic
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.58 |
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share, diluted
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding, basic
|
|
|
14,365,017 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted
|
|
|
14,390,337 |
|
|
|
14,009,533 |
|
|
|
14,513,227 |
|
Comprehensive Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
22,053 |
|
|
$ |
7,419 |
|
|
Unrealized gain/(loss) on marketable securities, net of taxes
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realized net gain on marketable securities, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(621 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
$ |
9,882 |
|
|
$ |
22,157 |
|
|
$ |
6,798 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
FF-3
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
(DEFICIT)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
|
|
|
Common Stock | |
|
Retained | |
|
Additional | |
|
Stock | |
|
Other | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
Earnings | |
|
Paid In | |
|
Compensation | |
|
Comprehensive | |
|
Stockholders | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
Amount | |
|
(Deficit) | |
|
Capital | |
|
Expense | |
|
Income | |
|
Equity (Deficit) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance at September 30, 2002
|
|
|
14,390,000 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
26,798 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
239 |
|
|
$ |
27,043 |
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,604 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,604 |
|
Dividends paid and declared ($1.08 per share)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,545 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,545 |
) |
Recapitalization
|
|
|
(8,993,752 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(94,994 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(95,000 |
) |
Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of taxes of $185
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2003
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(74,137 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
517 |
|
|
$ |
(73,620 |
) |
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,053 |
|
Recapitalization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation expense related to issuance of stock
options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
(210 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation expense related to stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of taxes of $69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2004
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
$ |
54 |
|
|
$ |
(52,084 |
) |
|
$ |
156 |
|
|
$ |
(180 |
) |
|
$ |
621 |
|
|
$ |
(51,433 |
) |
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,419 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,419 |
|
Compensation expense related to stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
Reclassification adjustment for realized gain on marketable
securities, net of taxes $(450)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(621 |
) |
|
|
(621 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2005
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
$ |
54 |
|
|
$ |
(44,665 |
) |
|
$ |
156 |
|
|
$ |
(132 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(44,587 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
FF-4
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended September 30, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
22,053 |
|
|
$ |
7,419 |
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
(used in) operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
677 |
|
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
2,169 |
|
|
|
Investment impairments
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
Realized (gain) loss on sale of marketable securities
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
(227 |
) |
|
|
(1,616 |
) |
|
|
Gain on sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(247 |
) |
|
|
Accretion of discount on long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
(599 |
) |
|
|
Non cash compensation related to stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(762 |
) |
|
|
(4,194 |
) |
|
|
7,246 |
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(2,922 |
) |
|
|
(15,556 |
) |
|
|
14,333 |
|
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(527 |
) |
|
|
(16,133 |
) |
|
|
9,959 |
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
(133 |
) |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
(390 |
) |
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(153 |
) |
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(375 |
) |
|
|
2,746 |
|
|
|
(5,354 |
) |
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
2,159 |
|
|
|
11,233 |
|
|
|
(15,465 |
) |
|
|
|
Accrued compensation and related liabilities
|
|
|
2,446 |
|
|
|
2,190 |
|
|
|
(3,258 |
) |
|
|
|
Accrued income taxes
|
|
|
6,344 |
|
|
|
(421 |
) |
|
|
(7,439 |
) |
|
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
3,486 |
|
|
|
(2,310 |
) |
|
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
16,349 |
|
|
|
8,403 |
|
|
|
4,953 |
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of marketable securities
|
|
|
(9,149 |
) |
|
|
(1,131 |
) |
|
|
(12,700 |
) |
|
Proceeds from the sales of investments
|
|
|
12,951 |
|
|
|
10,835 |
|
|
|
6,957 |
|
|
Sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
659 |
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(2,022 |
) |
|
|
(4,614 |
) |
|
|
(7,055 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
1,780 |
|
|
|
5,090 |
|
|
|
(12,139 |
) |
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(294 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Payments of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(141 |
) |
|
Common stock redemption
|
|
|
(95,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt
|
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock
|
|
|
65,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
(13,500 |
) |
|
|
(2,045 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
(13,534 |
) |
|
|
(2,339 |
) |
|
|
(141 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
4,595 |
|
|
|
11,154 |
|
|
|
(7,327 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
1,554 |
|
|
|
6,149 |
|
|
|
17,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$ |
6,149 |
|
|
$ |
17,303 |
|
|
$ |
9,976 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
2,700 |
|
|
$ |
3,628 |
|
|
Income tax refunds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,266 |
) |
|
Income taxes paid
|
|
|
2,017 |
|
|
|
19,673 |
|
|
|
2,932 |
|
|
Dividends declared but not paid
|
|
|
2,045 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,031 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
FF-5
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
Eagle Test Systems, Inc. (the Company) designs, manufactures,
sells, and services automated test equipment (ATE) for the
semiconductor industry. The Companys test systems test
analog, mixed-signal, and RF (Radio Frequency) semiconductor
devices. Semiconductor designers and manufacturers worldwide use
semiconductor test systems to test devices at different stages
during the manufacturing process. These tested devices are
incorporated into a wide range of products, including digital
cameras, MP3 players, cellular telephones, video/multimedia
products, automotive electronics, computer peripherals, and
notebook and desktop computers. The Company is headquartered in
Buffalo Grove, Illinois, where the Company develops and
manufactures its test systems. The Company also maintains
various offices worldwide for sales, service, and research to
support its customer base directly. The operations of, and net
investment in, foreign subsidiaries are not material.
|
|
2. |
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies |
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
the Company and its wholly owned foreign subsidiaries. All
significant intercompany transactions and balances have been
eliminated in consolidation.
|
|
|
Preparation of Financial Statements and Use of
Estimates |
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been
prepared by the Company and reflect all adjustments, which, in
the opinion of management, are necessary for the fair statement
of the results. The preparation of consolidated financial
statements in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and
liabilities as of the date of the financial statements and the
reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting
periods. Actual results can differ from those estimates.
Revenue is recognized by the Company when persuasive evidence of
an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred or services have
been rendered, the sellers price is fixed or determinable,
and collectibility is reasonably assured.
The Company derives revenue primarily from test system sales.
Revenue related to systems sales is recognized when:
(i) the Company has a written sales agreement;
(ii) delivery has occurred or services have been rendered;
(iii) the price is fixed or determinable; and
(iv) collectibility is reasonably assured. If installation
services are part of a system sale, test system revenue is
deferred until the system is delivered, installed, and accepted
by the customer.
When a sale to a customer involves multiple elements, such as a
test system and extra system components or spare parts that are
standard product and not essential to the function of the test
system configuration, revenue is recognized on the extra system
components or spare parts when title passes to the customer upon
shipment. When a sale of a test system includes postcontract
customer support (PCS), revenue for the PCS is recognized
ratably over the PCS period.
In a few instances, the Company has entered into short-term
rental agreements with customers for the use of its systems. The
Company recognizes rental revenue ratably over the applicable
rental period. Rental revenues are included as a component of
product sales and have been immaterial to date.
FF-6
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
Shipping and Handling Costs |
Shipping and handling costs related to the delivery of systems
are expensed as incurred and classified as cost of goods sold in
the consolidated statements of net income and comprehensive
income.
The Companys systems are sold with warranty provisions
that require the Company to remedy deficiencies in quality or
performance of its products over a period ranging from 12 to
24 months. The policy of the Company is to establish
warranty reserves at the time revenue is recognized at levels
that represent the estimate of costs that will be incurred to
fulfill those warranty requirements.
|
|
|
Research and Development Costs |
Research and development costs consist primarily of compensation
and related costs for personnel as well as costs related to
materials, outside contractors, equipment depreciation, and
other engineering overhead costs. All research and development
costs are expensed as incurred.
The Company recognizes deferred income taxes based on the
expected future tax consequences of differences between the
financial statement basis and the tax basis of assets and
liabilities, calculated using enacted tax rates in effect for
the year in which the differences are expected to be reflected
in the tax return. Research and development tax credits are
recognized for financial reporting purposes to the extent that
they can be utilized in the tax return.
|
|
|
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Marketable Securities |
The Company considers all highly liquid investments that are
readily convertible to cash and that have remaining maturities
of three months or less when purchased to be cash and cash
equivalents. Marketable securities consist of debt and equity
securities that are classified as available-for-sale. Securities
available for sale include corporate common stocks trading on a
major exchange, corporate and governmental obligations with
various contractual maturity dates, variable rate demand notes
(VRDNs) and auction rate securities. Governmental obligations
include U.S. government, state, municipal, and federal
agency securities. Market fluctuations in marketable securities
are reflected in other comprehensive income unless a market
decline is considered to be other than temporary. The Company
records unrealized impairment losses of other-than-temporary
impairments in investments if the market value of an investment
remains significantly below cost for more than six consecutive
months and the decline is considered permanent. Realized gains
and losses on sales of marketable securities are determined
based on average cost.
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost
determined on the first in, first out method, and include
materials, labor, and manufacturing overhead.
Inventories at customers under purchase orders represents
systems that have been shipped under the terms of a customer
purchase order, but have not yet qualified for revenue
recognition as the systems had not been accepted as of the
balance sheet date.
FF-7
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
Property and equipment is recorded at cost. The Company provides
for depreciation and amortization on the straight-line method
over the estimated useful lives of the related assets. Equipment
includes internally manufactured systems used for testing
components and engineering and applications development
equipment. Repairs and maintenance costs that do not extend the
lives of property and equipment are expensed as incurred.
The Company accounts for stock options issued to employees under
the Companys stock option plan using the intrinsic value
method in accordance with Accounting Principles Board
(APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued
to Employees. The Company has adopted the disclosure-only
provision of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock
Based Compensation, for options issued to employees and
directors. Expense associated with stock options issued to
nonemployees/nondirectors is recorded in accordance with
SFAS No.123.
Had the Company accounted for its stock options issued in
accordance with SFAS No. 123, pro forma net income and
pro forma net income per share for the three years ended
September 30, 2005, would have been as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
As reported
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
22,053 |
|
|
$ |
7,419 |
|
Stock-based compensation expense, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Pro forma stock-based compensation expense, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73 |
) |
|
|
(113 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income attributable to common stockholders
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
21,998 |
|
|
$ |
7,334 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Pro forma net income per share attributable to common
stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.57 |
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.35 |
|
Net income per share attributable to common stockholders as
reported
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.58 |
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.36 |
|
The pro forma disclosure is not likely to be indicative of pro
forma results which may be expected in future years because of
the fact that options vest over several years; pro forma
compensation expense is recognized as the options vest, and
additional awards may also be granted.
Under SFAS No. 123, the fair value of each option is
estimated on the date of the grant based on the minimum value
pricing model method assuming, among other things, a risk-free
interest rate ranging from 3.53% to 4.23%, no dividend yield,
expected volatility of 0% (as the Company is privately held),
and an expected life of seven years. The weighted-average fair
value of the options granted during the years ended
September 30, 2004 and 2005, were $1.16 and $0.11 per
share respectively.
In December 2004, the FASB finalized SFAS No. 123R,
Share Based Payment, amending
SFAS No. 123, effective for nonpublic entities as of
the beginning of the first annual reporting period that begins
after December 15, 2005, and for public entities as of the
beginning of the first interim reporting
FF-8
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
period for the fiscal year that begins after June 15, 2005.
SFAS 123R requires the Company to expense stock options
based on grant date fair value in the income statement. Further,
SFAS 123R requires additional accounting related to the
income tax effects and additional disclosure regarding the cash
flow effects resulting from share-based payment arrangements.
Under SFAS 123R, the Company must determine the appropriate
fair value model to be used for valuing share-based payments,
the amortization method for compensation cost and the transition
method to be used at date of adoption. The Company is evaluating
the requirements of SFAS 123R and has not determined the
impact implementation will have on the results of operations and
earnings per share.
|
|
|
Fair Value of Financial Instruments |
As of September 30, 2004 and 2005, certain of the
Companys financial instruments, which include cash and
cash equivalents, accounts receivable and accounts payable,
approximate their fair values due to their short maturities. As
of September 30, 2004 and 2005, the Senior Subordinated
Convertible Notes had an approximate fair value of $34,225, and
$33,200, respectively, which values were based upon an
independent valuation obtained by the Company.
|
|
|
Recent Accounting Pronouncements |
In November 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued SFAS No. 151,
Inventory Costs, an amendment of ARB No. 43,
Chapter 4. SFAS 151 clarifies that abnormal inventory
costs such as costs of idle facilities, excess freight and
handling costs, and wasted materials (spoilage) are
required to be recognized as current period costs. The
provisions of SFAS 151 are effective for fiscal year 2006.
The Company does not expect SFAS 151 to have a material
impact on the financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In December 2004, FASB issued FASB Staff Position
No. SFAS 109-a, Application of FAS 109 for
the Tax Deduction Provided to U.S. Based Manufacturers by
the American Job Creation Act of 2004, and FASB Staff
Position No. SFAS 109-b, Accounting and
Disclosure Guidance for the Foreign Earnings Repatriation
Provision within the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.
The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (Act) repeals
export tax benefits, transitions in a new tax deduction for
qualifying U.S. manufacturing activities and provides for
the repatriation of earnings from foreign subsidiaries at
reduced federal income tax rates. These two staff positions
provide accounting and disclosure guidance related to the
American Job Creation Act of 2004. The Act will have no effect
on the Companys fiscal 2005 tax liability; however, the
Company is evaluating what impact of transitioning from an
Export Tax incentive benefit to a new tax deduction for
U.S. Manufacturing Activities will have on future years.
In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154,
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, which requires
the direct effects of voluntary accounting principle changes to
be retrospectively applied to prior periods financial
statements. SFAS 154 does not change the transition
provisions of any existing accounting pronouncements, but would
apply in the unusual instance that a pronouncement does not
include specific transition provisions. SFAS 154 maintains
existing guidance with respect to accounting estimate changes
and corrections of errors, and is effective for the Company
beginning with fiscal year 2007. Adoption is not expected to
have a material impact on our financial position, results of
operation or cash flows.
During fiscal 2005, the Company liquidated its portfolio of
marketable securities and invested the proceeds in highly liquid
investments to implement a new investment policy approved by the
Board of Directors. The new investment policy institutes more
conservative liquidity and preservation of capital focus to
protect investments from severe economic conditions and drastic
shifts in interest rates. At September 30,
FF-9
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
2005, the Companys marketable securities were invested in
VRDNs and auction rate securities issued with a major agency
with ratings of AA/AAA and interest rates reset every 7 to
28 days. The VRDNs have a put option back to the financial
institution remarketing agent that provides for liquidity within
2 to 5 days and these instruments trade at par value. Since the
put option is not with the original issuer, the VRDNs are
classified as marketable securities available for sale. The
auction rate securities trade at a par value of one dollar and
can be liquidated at par with no more than 5 days notice.
Since the securities that back these securities have maturities
in excess of 90 days from balance sheet date, they are
classified as marketable securities available for sale.
The market value and amortized cost of marketable securities as
of the dates indicated are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Unrealized | |
|
Market | |
|
|
Cost | |
|
Gains | |
|
(Losses) | |
|
Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
September 30, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government Debt
|
|
$ |
2,975 |
|
|
$ |
359 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,334 |
|
|
Corporate Equities
|
|
|
2,076 |
|
|
|
728 |
|
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
2,776 |
|
|
Other
|
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
5,359 |
|
|
$ |
1,118 |
|
|
$ |
(47 |
) |
|
$ |
6,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government Debt
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Corporate Equities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
1,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,700 |
|
|
Variable rate demand notes
|
|
|
11,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturities of government debt and auction rate securities are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Less than 1 year
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
1 - 5 Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 - 10 Years
|
|
|
3,334 |
|
|
|
|
|
Over 10 Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,334 |
|
|
$ |
12,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The realized gains, losses, and interest are included in income
from marketable securities in the consolidated statements of net
income and comprehensive income. Unrealized gains and losses are
reflected as a separate component of accumulated other
comprehensive income and are included in stockholders
equity (deficit), net of tax.
Interest and dividend income and realized gains from sales of
marketable securities are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Interest income
|
|
$ |
307 |
|
|
$ |
141 |
|
|
$ |
331 |
|
Dividend income
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Net realized gains from sales of marketable securities
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
1,616 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from marketable securities
|
|
$ |
502 |
|
|
$ |
438 |
|
|
$ |
2,017 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FF-10
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
The Company recognized impairment losses on marketable
securities of $18, $9, and $18 in fiscal 2003, 2004, and 2005,
respectively.
Inventories consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Raw materials
|
|
$ |
7,879 |
|
|
$ |
7,683 |
|
Work-in-process
|
|
|
7,310 |
|
|
|
1,865 |
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
8,749 |
|
|
|
7,434 |
|
Inventory at customers under purchase orders
|
|
|
3,728 |
|
|
|
725 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
27,666 |
|
|
$ |
17,707 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys policy is to establish inventory reserves
when conditions exist that suggest inventory may be in excess of
anticipated demand or is obsolete based upon assumptions about
future demand for products or market conditions. The Company
regularly evaluates the ability to realize the value of its
inventory based on a combination of factors including the
following: forecasted sales or usage, estimated product
end-of-life dates,
estimated current and future market value, and new product
introductions. Purchasing and alternative usage options are also
explored to mitigate obsolete inventory exposure. When recorded,
reserves are intended to reduce the carrying value of inventory
to its net realizable value. Inventory of $27,666 is stated net
of inventory reserves of $5,727 as of September 30, 2004.
Inventory of $17,707 is stated net of inventory reserves of
$9,082 as of September 30, 2005. If actual demand for
products deteriorates or market conditions are less favorable
than those the Company projects, additional inventory reserves
may be required.
|
|
5. |
Property and Equipment |
Property and equipment is summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30 | |
|
Depreciable | |
|
|
| |
|
Life | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
(in Years) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Land
|
|
$ |
72 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Building improvements
|
|
|
811 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,575 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Equipment
|
|
|
7,345 |
|
|
|
10,672 |
|
|
|
3-5 |
|
Office furniture
|
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
1,636 |
|
|
|
5-7 |
|
Software
|
|
|
783 |
|
|
|
952 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,197 |
|
|
|
17,123 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(3,564 |
) |
|
|
(4,988 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
6,633 |
|
|
$ |
12,135 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company reviews property and equipment for impairment
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the
carrying amount of assets may not be recoverable. Recoverability
is measured by comparison of the carrying amount to the future
undiscounted net cash flows the assets are expected to generate.
If such assets are considered to be impaired, the impairment to
be recognized is measured by the
FF-11
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
amount by which the carrying amount of these assets exceeds the
fair value of the assets. There have been no impairments of
long-lived assets in the years ended 2003, 2004, or 2005.
During the year ended September 30, 2005, the Company
purchased certain office furniture under a capital lease. The
cost of such office furniture and related accumulated
depreciation was $1,031 and $106 respectively as of
September 30, 2005.
Depreciation expense was $677, $1,270, and $2,169, for the years
ended September 30, 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively.
Depreciation expense for office furniture under capital lease
was $106 for the year ended September 30, 2005.
|
|
6. |
Stockholders Equity and Preferred Stock |
On December 31, 2003, the Board of Directors met and
approved the following changes to the Companys capital
stock:
|
|
|
Change in Authorized Shares The Companys
Articles of Incorporation were amended to increase the
authorized capital stock of the Company from 14,874 shares
to 15,202,199 shares and authorized common shares from
20,000,000 shares with no par value to
15,195,325 shares with a par value of $.01 per share. |
|
|
Stock Dividend Declared a common stock split in the
form of a stock dividend. The common shares were split on a
2,500:1 basis for common shares outstanding at December 2,
2003. |
In May 2005, the Company amended the Articles of Incorporation
to increase the authorized capital stock of the Company from
15,202,199 shares to 15,502,199 shares consisting of:
(i) 15,495,325 shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per
share, and (ii) 6,874 shares of preferred stock, par
value $0.01 per share.
As noted above, the Company is authorized to issue
15,502,199 shares of capital stock consisting of:
(i) 15,495,325 shares of Common Stock, par value
$0.01 per share; (ii) 3,437 shares of
Series A Convertible Preferred Stock, par value
$0.01 per share (Convertible Preferred Stock); and
(iii) 3,437 shares of Redeemable Preferred Stock, par
value $0.01 per share (Redeemable Preferred Stock).
The rights, preferences, and privileges of the common stock are:
Dividends No dividend may be paid with
respect to common stock until payment of preferential dividends
is made to holders of Redeemable Preferred Stock should any
Redeemable Preferred Stock be issued and outstanding.
Additionally, any Convertible Preferred Stock shall be entitled
to any common stock dividend on an as converted basis.
Voting rights The holders of common stock are
entitled to one vote per share and as long as any shares of
Convertible Preferred Stock are issued and outstanding, shall
vote together with the holders of Convertible Preferred Stock as
a single class.
|
|
|
Reserved Shares of Common Stock |
At September 30, 2005, the Company has reserved 983,790
unissued shares of its common stock for possible issuance under
a stock-based compensation plan. In addition, at
September 30, 2005, the Company has reserved
8,590,248 shares and 525,040 shares of its common
stock for issuance relating to the possible
FF-12
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
conversion of the Convertible Preferred Stock and for possible
issuance relating to warrants issuable upon conversion of the
Senior Subordinated Convertible Notes (Notes) respectively.
|
|
|
Series A Convertible Preferred Stock |
The Company has designated 3,437 of its shares of authorized
Preferred Stock as Convertible Preferred Stock.
Voting Generally, the Convertible Preferred
Stock will be entitled to one vote per share on an as converted
basis and will vote together with the common stockholders except
related to the following items where the Convertible Preferred
Stock will vote as a separate class: (i) election of three
board members of the Company, (ii) declaration or payment
of dividends on any shares other than the Convertible Preferred
Stock, (iii) alteration of the designations, preferences,
or powers of the Convertible Preferred Stock, (iv) issuance
of equity or equity-related securities ranking senior to or on
parity with the Convertible Preferred Stock, (v) amendment,
modification, or repeal of any provisions of the Companys
Articles of Incorporation or bylaws, and (vi) effectuation
of any merger, acquisition, liquidating event, or asset sale or
incurrence of indebtedness over $500,000.
Dividends The holders of Convertible
Preferred Stock are entitled to any common stock dividends on an
as converted basis.
Preference The holders of Convertible
Preferred Stock are entitled to a preference of $18,925 per
share outstanding plus any declared and unpaid dividends prior
to any payments to common stockholders in any liquidation or
sale of the Company.
Redemption The holders of Convertible
Preferred Stock at any time after September 30, 2009, may
elect to cause redemption of up to 50% of the then-outstanding
shares of the Convertible Preferred Stock by a majority vote.
After September 30, 2010, the holders of Convertible
Preferred Stock may elect to cause redemption of up to 100% of
the then-outstanding shares of Convertible Preferred Stock by a
majority vote.
Conversion Rights At any time after issuance
upon written election of a majority of the holders of
Convertible Preferred Stock, these holders can elect to convert
each share of Convertible Preferred Stock into 2,500 shares
of common stock and one share of Redeemable Preferred Stock,
subject to certain adjustments as defined. In addition, all
shares of Convertible Preferred Stock shall automatically be
converted into an aggregate of 8,590,248 shares of common
stock and an aggregate of 3,436 shares of Redeemable
Preferred Stock, subject to certain adjustments as defined, upon
the effectiveness of an underwritten public offering in which
the aggregate proceeds to the Company are in excess of $60,000
and the initial public offering price is at least two times the
initial purchase price of the Convertible Preferred Stock shares
(as adjusted to reflect any stock splits or similar
adjustments). Additionally, such proceeds from the offering must
be used or designated to redeem all shares of the Redeemable
Preferred Stock at an aggregate value of $32,500.
|
|
|
Redeemable Preferred Stock |
The Company has designated 3,437 shares of its authorized
Preferred Stock as Redeemable Preferred Stock. As of
September 30, 2004 and 2005, no shares of Redeemable
Preferred Stock were outstanding.
Voting The Redeemable Preferred Stock holders
will be entitled to only vote as a separate class to elect 1
(one) board member to the Companys Board of
Directors. The Redeemable Preferred Stock holders will have no
other voting rights except as required by law.
Dividends The holders of Redeemable Preferred
Stock shall be entitled to a 5% cumulative annual dividend,
compounded quarterly for amounts unpaid from issuance.
FF-13
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
Preference The holders of Redeemable
Preferred Stock shall be entitled to a preference of
$9,459 per share outstanding plus any accumulated and
unpaid dividends prior to any payments to common stockholders in
any liquidation or sale of the Company.
Redemption The holders of Redeemable
Preferred Stock at any time after September 30, 2009, may
elect to cause redemption of up to 50% of the then-outstanding
shares of the Redeemable Preferred Stock by a majority vote.
After September 30, 2010, the Redeemable Preferred
Stock-holders may elect to cause redemption of up to 100% of the
then-outstanding shares of the Redeemable Preferred Stock by a
majority vote. The Redeemable Preferred Stock is also required
to be redeemed in conjunction with any initial public offering
meeting the conditions discussed above.
|
|
7. |
Investment by TA Associates |
On September 30, 2003, investment funds managed by TA
Associates (collectively referred to as the Investors) purchased
3,436 shares of Convertible Preferred Stock for $65,000.
The Company also issued Notes to the Investors aggregating
$30,000, bearing annual interest of 12%, which mature
September 30, 2009. From the date of issuance, at the
option of the holders, the Notes are convertible into:
(i) Senior Subordinated Notes aggregating $29,995 (plus
accrued and unpaid interest), bearing annual interest of 12%,
and maturing September 30, 2009, and (ii) redeemable
warrants to purchase 525,040 shares of common stock at
a price of $0.01 per share. The allocated fair value of the
warrants has been accounted for as a discount of $1,718 on the
Notes and is being amortized to interest expense over the term
of the notes. As the warrants enable the holders to put the
warrants to the Company at fair value at any time after
September 30, 2008, the warrants are considered liability
instruments and recorded at fair value based on independent
valuations. As of September 30, 2004 and 2005, the common
stock warrants were revalued based upon independent valuations.
The change in the value of the warrants was an increase of
$1,548 for 2004 and a decrease of $599 for 2005, (total value of
$3,266 and $2,667 at September 30, 2004 and 2005,
respectively), and a corresponding expense or income for the
increase or decrease in fair market value was recorded in the
financial statements as other (income) expense.
The entire proceeds from the Convertible Preferred Stock and
Notes were used to redeem 8,993,752 shares of common stock
on September 30, 2003, for $95,000.
After the above transaction was completed on September 30,
2003, all of the remaining 5,396,248 shares of
$0.0004 par value common stock were redesignated as common
stock with no par value. The transaction with the Investors did
not result in new basis accounting pushed down to the Company.
Long-term debt consists of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Senior Subordinated Convertible Notes, net of discounts of
$1,439 and $1,157 at September 30, 2004 and 2005,
respectively
|
|
$ |
28,561 |
|
|
$ |
28,843 |
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
890 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
28,561 |
|
|
$ |
29,733 |
|
Less current portion of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(249 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
28,561 |
|
|
$ |
29,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital lease obligations of $828 represent capital leases of
furniture and is secured by the underlying furniture purchased.
FF-14
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
As discussed in Note 7, the Notes were issued in connection
with the redemption of common stock. The Notes bear interest at
12%, payable quarterly, and are due on September 30, 2009.
The Notes are convertible at the option of the holder into
12% Senior Subordinated Notes and redeemable warrants to
purchase 525,040 shares of common stock at a price of
$0.01 per share, which are exercisable at the option of the
holder until September 30, 2013. The value of the Notes is
net of $1,718 allocated proceeds assigned to the warrants as a
discount, which is being amortized to interest expense over the
life of the debt. The warrants expire on September 30, 2013.
The Company adopted EITF Issue No. 03-6,
Participating Securities and the Two
Class Method under FASB Statement No. 128, Earnings
Per Share from October 1, 2004. The EITF is
applicable for all fiscal periods commencing on or after
March 31, 2004 and requires the use of the two-class method
to compute basic EPS for companies with participating
convertible securities. Accordingly, basic earnings per share
for the comparative period of fiscal 2004 has been restated to
conform to the guidance in EITF Issue No. 03-6. The EITF
does not have a material impact on the basic earnings per share
for fiscal 2003.
Basic net income per common share is computed by dividing net
income attributable to common stock by the weighted-average
number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted
income per common share reflects the maximum dilution that would
have resulted from the assumed exercise of convertible preferred
stock, warrants, and stock options, as applicable, and is
computed by dividing net income by the weighted-average number
of common shares and all dilutive securities outstanding.
A reconciliation between basic and diluted earnings per share
(EPS) is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net income
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
22,053 |
|
|
$ |
7,419 |
|
Basic EPS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocated to convertible preferred shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,544 |
) |
|
|
(4,557 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income available to common shareholders
|
|
|
9,604 |
|
|
|
8,509 |
|
|
|
2,862 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common share outstanding
|
|
|
14,365,017 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income per share
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.58 |
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted EPS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend on Redeemable Preferred stock as converted
5% cumulative
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,656 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,656 |
) |
|
|
Warrant value adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
(599 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income available to common shareholders
|
|
$ |
9,604 |
|
|
$ |
20,397 |
|
|
$ |
5,164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
14,365,017 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
|
5,396,248 |
|
|
Plus impact of convertible preferred stock and warrants and
stock options, as applicable
|
|
|
25,320 |
|
|
|
8,613,285 |
|
|
|
9,116,979 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted common shares
|
|
|
14,390,337 |
|
|
|
14,009,533 |
|
|
|
14,513,227 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted EPS
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*For fiscal 2004, the assumed exercise of warrants is
anti-dilutive.
FF-15
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
The components of the provision (benefit) for income taxes
consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$ |
5,682 |
|
|
$ |
15,433 |
|
|
$ |
(5,400 |
) |
|
State
|
|
|
1,786 |
|
|
|
3,866 |
|
|
|
(1,920 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current
|
|
|
7,468 |
|
|
|
19,299 |
|
|
|
(7,320 |
) |
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
(580 |
) |
|
|
(3,476 |
) |
|
|
5,013 |
|
|
State
|
|
|
(182 |
) |
|
|
(871 |
) |
|
|
1,783 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred
|
|
|
(762 |
) |
|
|
(4,347 |
) |
|
|
6,796 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income tax expense
|
|
$ |
6,706 |
|
|
$ |
14,952 |
|
|
$ |
(524 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliations of the U.S. federal statutory rate to the
Companys effective tax rates are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Federal statutory rate
|
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
State income taxes, net of federal income tax effect
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
Capital loss carryover
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
Research and development tax credits
|
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
(1.8 |
) |
Nondeductible increase (decrease) in value of warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
Extraterritorial income exclusion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
Provision to return adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23.0 |
) |
Reduction in tax accrual
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13.8 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate
|
|
|
41.1 |
% |
|
|
40.4 |
% |
|
|
(7.6 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the year ended September 30, 2005, the Company filed
its prior year tax returns and adjusted the current year tax
provision for actual deductions taken in those returns. The net
impact on the effective tax rate for 2005 was a benefit of 23%.
The tax effect of the deductions amounted to $1,577 and
primarily related to additional extraterritorial income
exclusion and state income taxes above the amounts originally
estimated.
Additionally, the Company filed for tax method changes with the
Internal Revenue Service during the year ended
September 30, 2005. Accrued taxes were adjusted to reflect
the actual tax liability based on these filings and to reverse
the liability relating to tax positions of closed tax years. The
net reduction in accrued taxes amounted to $968.
FF-16
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
The temporary differences that created the deferred tax assets
and (liabilities) are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for accounts receivable
|
|
$ |
491 |
|
|
$ |
491 |
|
|
Impairment losses on marketable securities
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
Inventory valuation reserves
|
|
|
2,304 |
|
|
|
2,027 |
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
6,132 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
872 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
|
10,134 |
|
|
|
3,426 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
(753 |
) |
|
|
(1,272 |
) |
|
Unrealized gain on marketable securities
|
|
|
(431 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(1,184 |
) |
|
|
(1,272 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$ |
8,950 |
|
|
$ |
2,154 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11. |
Employee Benefit Plans |
|
|
|
Employee Stock Ownership Plan |
The Company has an Employee Stock Ownership Plan
(ESOP) which covers substantially all employees of the
Company and is subject to the provisions of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The
Companys annual contribution to the ESOP is discretionary.
The Companys contributions to the ESOP are allocated to
individual participant accounts which vest on completion of an
employees fifth year of qualifying service. For the year
ended September 30, 2003, approximately $50 was expensed
for the ESOP contribution. For the years ended
September 30, 2004 and 2005, no amount was expensed for the
ESOP contribution. Distributions from the ESOP are made in
accordance with the terms of the ESOP Trust Agreement and
may be in the form of cash or shares of Company common stock.
The ESOP owned 834,565 shares of common stock at
September 30, 2003, 2004, and 2005.
The Company has established a profit-sharing plan, which is a
discretionary, defined-contribution plan. Under the
profit-sharing plan, the Company expensed approximately $871,
$520, and $287 for the years ended September 30, 2003,
2004, and 2005, respectively. Eligible employees are defined as
those who have completed one year of service and have attained
the age of 21. Employees are fully vested after achieving five
years of service.
The Company also has a pension plan which is a
defined-contribution plan, which also allows for additional
discretionary contributions. Under the pension plan, the Company
expensed approximately $863, $520, and $170 for the years ended
September 30, 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively. Eligible
employees are defined as those who have completed one year of
service and have attained the age of 21. Employees are fully
vested after achieving five years of service.
FF-17
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
In September 2003, the Company adopted the 2003 Stock Option and
Grant Plan (the Plan), which provides for the issuance of
incentive and nonqualified common stock options to employees,
directors, and consultants of the Company. The Board of
Directors has reserved 983,790 shares of common stock to be
issued in conjunction with the Plan. The term of the options
shall be no more than 10 years from the date of grant.
Options granted under the Plan generally vest in periods between
one and four years, as determined by the Board of Directors. As
of September 30, 2003, the Board of Directors had not
granted any stock options under the Plan, and there were no
options outstanding as of that date.
During the years ended September 30, 2004 and 2005, the
Company issued stock options under the Plan. In accordance with
APB No. 25, the Company has recorded the difference between
the exercise price and the fair value as determined by an
independent valuation of the common stock on the date of grant
as deferred compensation totaling $210 and is amortizing such
deferred compensation on a straight-line basis over the vesting
periods of the options. Expense recognized during the years
ended September 30, 2004 and 2005, totaled $30 and $48,
respectively. If the fair value method had been applied, the
Company would have recognized compensation costs of $121 and
$188 for the year ended September 30, 2004 and 2005,
respectively.
The Companys stock option activity for the years ended
September 30, 2004 and 2005 under the Plan is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding | |
|
Weighted Average | |
|
|
Options | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Outstanding at September 30, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
664,500 |
|
|
$ |
8.37 |
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at September 30, 2004
|
|
|
664,500 |
|
|
$ |
8.37 |
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
45,000 |
|
|
|
7.33 |
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(6,389 |
) |
|
|
10.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at September 30, 2005
|
|
|
703,111 |
|
|
$ |
8.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes information about all stock
options outstanding for the Company as of September 30,
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding | |
|
Options Vested | |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Weighted- | |
|
Weighted- | |
|
|
|
Weighted- | |
Exercise | |
|
Number | |
|
Average | |
|
Average | |
|
Number | |
|
Average | |
Price | |
|
Outstanding | |
|
Remaining Life | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Exercise Price | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
$6.00-$7.00 |
|
|
|
319,500 |
|
|
|
8.41 |
|
|
$ |
6.32 |
|
|
|
122,833 |
|
|
$ |
6.25 |
|
|
$8.00-$10.00 |
|
|
|
383,611 |
|
|
|
8.83 |
|
|
$ |
9.92 |
|
|
|
132,257 |
|
|
$ |
10.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
703,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
255,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FF-18
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
13. |
Concentration of Credit Risk |
The Company has a concentration of sales with certain major
semiconductor manufacturers that individually represent more
than 10% of total revenue. Sales to these major semiconductor
manufacturers were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended | |
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
National Semiconductor Corporation
|
|
|
38.8 |
% |
|
|
36.1 |
% |
|
|
* |
|
Texas Instruments Incorporated
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
31.9 |
|
|
|
44.3 |
% |
Intersil Corporation
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58.8 |
% |
|
|
68.0 |
% |
|
|
44.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Major semiconductor manufacturer companies comprise a
significant portion of the Companys trade receivables. As
of September 30, 2004, two customers (National
Semiconductor and Texas Instruments) comprised approximately 56%
of the Companys trade receivables balance. As of
September 30, 2005, two customers (Intersil and Texas
Instruments) comprised approximately 49% of the Companys
trade receivables balance.
Financial instruments, which potentially subject the Company to
concentrations of credit risk, are cash equivalents, marketable
securities, and accounts receivable. All of the Companys
cash equivalents and marketable securities are held by major
financial institutions. Deposits held with financial
institutions may exceed the amount of insurance provided on such
deposits. Concentration of credit risk with respect to accounts
receivable is limited to certain customers to whom the Company
makes substantial sales. To reduce its credit risk, the Company
routinely assesses the financial strength of its customers. The
Company does not require collateral although the Company obtains
letters of credit on sales to certain foreign customers. An
allowance for doubtful accounts is maintained at a level
management believes is sufficient to cover potential credit
losses based on past collection history and specific risks
identified among uncollectible accounts. Accounts receivable are
charged off against the allowance for doubtful accounts when it
determines that the receivable will not be collected.
FF-19
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
14. |
Other Comprehensive Income |
Comprehensive income is comprised of two components, net income
and other comprehensive income. The components of other
comprehensive income, and related tax effects were as follows
for the fiscal year ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Change in net unrealized holdings gains (losses)
on marketable securities, net of tax of $238, $160,
and $0 in 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively
|
|
$ |
358 |
|
|
$ |
240 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Less adjustment for net gain (loss) on investments
included in net income, net of tax of $53, $91,
and $450 in 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
621 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income, net of taxes
|
|
$ |
278 |
|
|
$ |
104 |
|
|
$ |
(621 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15. |
Industry and Geographic Segment Information |
The Company operates in one industry segment: the design,
manufacture, and marketing of automated test equipment for the
semiconductor industry that is used to test analog,
mixed-signal, and radio frequency devices.
The Company markets its products and related services to
customers mainly through a direct sales force. Revenues are
attributed to geographic areas based on the country in which the
customer is domiciled.
The Companys revenues are generated from sales into the
following geographic regions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended September 30 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
United States
|
|
$ |
23,503 |
|
|
$ |
24,031 |
|
|
$ |
29,295 |
|
Malaysia
|
|
|
18,642 |
|
|
|
56,720 |
|
|
|
13,602 |
|
Other
|
|
|
13,621 |
|
|
|
30,459 |
|
|
|
20,580 |
|
Substantially all of the Companys long-lived assets are
located in the United States.
FF-20
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
16. |
Commitments and Contingencies |
The Company has operating and capital lease commitments for
certain facilities and equipment. Minimum lease payments under
noncancelable leases are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Operating | |
|
Capital | |
|
|
Leases | |
|
Leases | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
2006
|
|
$ |
2,119 |
|
|
$ |
286 |
|
2007
|
|
|
2,048 |
|
|
|
286 |
|
2008
|
|
|
1,780 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
2009
|
|
|
1,584 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
2010
|
|
|
1,574 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
5,857 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments
|
|
$ |
14,962 |
|
|
|
967 |
|
Less amount representing interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Present value of capital lease obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
890 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total rental expense for fiscal 2003, 2004, and 2005 was $529,
$780, and $1,840, respectively.
Contingencies
The Companys sales agreements indemnify its customers for
any expenses or liabilities resulting from claimed infringements
of patents, trademarks, or copyrights of third parties. The
terms of these indemnification agreements are generally
indefinite after execution of the agreement. The maximum amount
of potential future indemnification is unlimited. However, to
date, the Company has not paid any claims or been required to
defend any lawsuits with respect to any claim.
From time to time, the Company may have certain contingent
liabilities that arise in the ordinary course of its business
activities. The Company accrues contingent liabilities when it
is probable that future expenditures will be made and such
expenditures can be reasonably estimated. In the opinion of
management, there are no pending claims of which the outcome is
expected to result in a material adverse effect on the financial
position, results of operations, or cash flows of the Company.
FF-21
EAGLE TEST SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
The following table shows the details of the product warranty
accrual:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Warranty Activity |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2002
|
|
$ |
220 |
|
|
Warranty expenditures
|
|
|
(605 |
) |
|
Provision for warranty
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2003
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
Warranty expenditures
|
|
|
(862 |
) |
|
Provision for warranty
|
|
|
1,633 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2004
|
|
|
1,271 |
|
|
Warranty expenditures
|
|
|
(1,416 |
) |
|
Provision for warranty
|
|
|
708 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at September 30, 2005
|
|
$ |
563 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17. |
Related Party Transactions |
In 2003, the Company entered into a service agreement to utilize
the services of Pacific Support Group Partners (PSG), a company
owned and controlled by two individuals who are officers,
directors, and significant stockholders of the Company. Under
the terms of this service agreement, PSG provided the Company
with consulting, management, and support services. Total fees
paid to PSG included in selling, general, and administrative
expenses were $476 for the year ended September 30, 2003.
Prior to September 30, 2003, the service agreement with PSG
was terminated.
|
|
18. |
Write-off of Offering Expenses |
During fiscal 2004, the Company incurred significant expenses
related to preparing documents and filings in preparation for a
planned initial public offering of its common stock. These
offering costs, which primarily include legal, accounting,
consulting, and printing fees, were being deferred and were
going to be offset against the proceeds of the offering when
completed. Due primarily to market conditions, the Company
experienced delays in moving forward with an initial public
offering and ultimately terminated the original filing of
its S-1 due to
on-going unfavorable conditions. Accordingly, due to the delays
in the process, the Company expensed the deferred costs of the
offering in fiscal 2004.
FF-22
5,500,000 Shares
Common Stock
Prospectus
September 27, 2006
Joint Book-Running Managers
|
|
|
Banc of America Securities LLC |
Lehman Brothers |
Deutsche Bank Securities |
|
|
A.G. Edwards |
Canaccord Adams |